Quoted from spesh2k Most first drafts I write are finished around a week, including my feature that was produced out in Australia recently. Especially if it's based on my own original idea rather than writing for a producer. But of course, there's rewrites... and more rewrites. Five years of rewrites for the produced feature, though it was the first draft that got attention. I've read some of your shorts, Dustin, so I know you're a capable writer, and for a first draft, this isn't that bad though I second Reaper with some of the dialogue (not all of it) - but especially within the first 10 pages. It comes off at first as one of those self-aware retro 80s style flicks (the severing of the baby arm was really over the top) - kind of like Machete or Hobo With a Shotgun. But going by the rest of the script, I don't think that was intended. I'm sure you'll smooth this one out. I hear you on the tempo of writing a script... I'll try to get at least 5 pages done in a day, but sometimes, I'll be in the zone and I'll spend several days straight without sleep knocking out 20-30 and sometimes more pages at a time. Anyway, it's always great to hear a fellow writer getting work produced, so keep us updated! -- Michael

The actor has one hand so I have to show how it happened. Or maybe he could just be born that way... but then it's explaining about it later that becomes a problem. So I have to show it early... the only way I feel that it can be done in a script like this is dramatically and violently.



The one film should be out summer next year... the Birth of a Psycho one is still in the balance. I'm onto the third producer with it now and a verbal deal is down, but... you know. I also have a short that's being produced. Hoping to pick up some producer points too along the way. Who knows.

Thanks for looking in and good luck with your own stuff.

I don't want to absorb much more of your time or mine on this discussion. But the issue never was how long you spent on the script. The issue is this: why tell people right at the top of the thread that you only spent 8 days? I was merely trying to help you out by letting you know that that info will discourage people from opening your script.

Let me be frank: I was thinking of going back to your script that I started a month ago but did not have time to read because I was busy...the story with the neanderthals. I opened this thread because I couldn't remember the other script's name. But when I saw the 8 day thing, it discouraged me from wanting to read either script.

That's useful information to you.

Look, you might think 8 days is a long time to write a script. Maybe for you it is. But you might want to read some interviews with pro writers. None of them write a script in 8 days. None. Their scripts go through the rigor of several weeks of research, sometimes months; then a first draft that might take 6 to 8 weeks; then several rewrites.

Maybe you can do all that in 8 days. I don't discount that possibility. It's not the point. The point is when someone browsing the threads here sees an amateur writer has posted a script he wrote in 8 days, he is less likely to open the story. Is that the result you want?

Kev - my point was about your logic. You say it may discourage people, but then people have taken a look.

There are numerous scripts out there written in a week (Rocky #1).

Writers write in different way. Reasearch can take ages; story outline can take ages, but once stuff like that is complete, a first draft can easily be done in a week if that's how you write. I don't think you have valid grounds to dismiss material based on how long it took to write.

My point about US budgets is perfectly valid, because it is related to the pitch, and the pitch here is bang-on. It's not like 'I wrote an aimless piece of rubbish in 3 minutes'. This is correctly pitched at the market it's aimed for -- why have an issue based on the time spent writing it? Would you be happier if Dustin typed slower? It's a first draft - it'll get re-written - if it gets produced the writing time at that stage will be longer. And then you'll be happy.

Simon, that some people have looked at the script shows nothing. The question is does saying it was written in 8 days mean fewer people will open the script. I say it does, and I know for a fact it cost one view: mine. That means there are likely others.

I've read Rocky. It's a brilliant script, supposedly written in a weekend. And I don't believe that for one second. That's urban legend. That script is carefully constructed.

But that's all off the point. I believe Dustin when he says he wrote it in 8 days. I wrote one in November in 2 weeks and I took weekends off. It's in Nicholls now.

The issue is simply whether including that info at the top of thread is useful. Whether it encourages or discourages people to open the script.

And finally, please don't say I dismissed the material, because clearly I did not. I have made no comment at all on the material, since I did not read it, and I am open to the possibility that it is as brilliant as Dustin claims it is. All I am saying is that in a world of limited hours, and with a forum of many scripts, why would I pick the one written in 8 days to read?

Quoted from KevinLenihan I've read Rocky. It's a brilliant script, supposedly written in a weekend. And I don't believe that for one second. That's urban legend. That script is carefully constructed.

It's myths like this that misguide amateur screenwriters - Stallone had either worked on this idea for a long time beforehand, or this had gone through a few rewrites -

I'm sure the casting meeting may have spurred Stallone to 'polish' or rewrite this in a week.

A very talented screenwriter, who knows a particular subject inside out and has years of experience under their belt, could presumably, knock out a script in a week. But that would be a very focused and productive week . . .

Eoin

I'm with Kevin here. When I see comments like "I just spit this one out in a couple of hours/days" whatever, I never read the script, unless the writer says something like "I really would like some feedback on this one before I start to rewrite. I like this script and I want to turn it into the best it can be". Then I will help out, but I'm not going to spend my spare time reading vomit drafts for fun. not even shorts.

I can't see how it matters. I read a script and make a decision on the script, not on the type of input.

I don't see why Rocky wasn't done in a short time. Apparetnly it was filmed in 28 days - short time isn't always bad time.

John August maintains he wrote Charlie and the Choc factory in three weeks ... I don't see why you would judge it based on the time it takes to write it, instead of the quality of it.

If it's badly written 'cos it's rushed, then that's the issue - if it's just written quickly as that's the style of the writer - then there's no issue.

I didn't say it's an issue, just agreeing with Kevin that I don't read scripts when I see the writer saying it was written in this short amount of time. Something for the writer to consider when saying things like that. If it doesn't affect whether you read a script or not that's fine. All I'm saying is that in this case, there are at least two people that won't read it because of the writer's statement that it was churned out in just 8 days. That is all.  

Kevin... the Neanderthal script has taken me 6 months so far. Completely different thing. In regards to this script I have a lifetime of research to fall back on. I know the people, the way things work, and the things these people do and say.

I have at least, if you count from the ages 13 to 26 (when I straightened my life out) 13 years worth of research. It's like a doctor writing a medical drama will find it easier than a writer without any medical background. If a doctor wrote a medical drama in a week this would be comparable to you or I taking a couple of years. I apologise if you do have medical training, just assuming you don't. I have 13 years of experience dealing with the lowest people in the country. From kids homes to jail, to the high life.

So this script has had 13 years of research, a couple of days to pull the story together and then a week to write a viable first draft... so technically, it's taken longer than most scripts do.

Remind me of the name of the neanderthal script...that was the one In wanted to look at. My thinking had been that if I liked the script, I might approach you privately to exchange reads. If I liked it. That, to be honest, had been part of my thinking when I opened the thread.

Again, how long you took to write or to think about writing this script is not relevant. The issue is telling people you only spent 8 days with it. Nothing is gained by telling that, and you potentially lose readers.

Quoted from Eoin It's myths like this that misguide amateur screenwriters - Stallone had either worked on this idea for a long time beforehand, or this had gone through a few rewrites - I'm sure the casting meeting may have spurred Stallone to 'polish' or rewrite this in a week. A very talented screenwriter, who knows a particular subject inside out and has years of experience under their belt, could presumably, knock out a script in a week. But that would be a very focused and productive week . . . Eoin

I can seriously believe that Rocky was penned in a week. What's so great about it? It's a standard story, told over and over again.

What Rocky had going for it was 1976. No internet, no computer games (worth playing)... all people had to look forward to were films. A tale of a struggling nobody a lot of people could relate to in those days. Also boxing was a bigger deal back then and so were kung fu films. Fight scene at the end... people are just too easy.

I don't see Rocky as being a great script... it just came at the right time.

Kevin... the script is called Adm & Eiv.

I'll also say that as it stands I'm far happier with this script that has taken 8 days, than I am the script that has taken me 6 months so far.

Rocky is an intricately crafted script. I would not have understood that before, but in the last couple of years that I've spent writing and studying story, I can recognize the precision of that story.

Will check out the other one since I had already started it.

I agree with you in a sense that Rocky came at the right time, but (maybe because I'm from Philly) for different reasons. Rocky pretty much set the standard for underdog films, especially for sports. I thought the script was fantastic. There are many stories about how long the script took -- Stallone wrote it with a pen on yellow lined paper. He pitched the idea, showed the script, but it was rewritten (upon request) several times.

It's good to see your getting some bites from producers (I've been on a roll lately myself) but I'm in agreement with some other people on this thread concerning the amount of time it took to write it.

Why mention it only took 8 days? It kind of feels like unnecessary bragging. It's not something I would tell somebody off the bat, especially when pitching it to a producer (maybe I'd tell them after they read it and commented on it).

It's like if I hear a film was made for 20 k. I'm probably going to skip past it because it's most likely shit. Most films made with budgets that low ARE shit. But when I see a movie (like Bellflower or Prime) and THEN find out what the budget was, it's like "Holy shit, this movie was made for ONLY so and so dollars?"

Not to say your 8-day script is complete shit, because it's not. But right off the bat, it puts the idea in someone's head that it could be garbage.

Some of your feedback on the actual script itself may have been different had you not mentioned it took 8 days - it gives the reader a preconceived notion when and if they choose to give it a look.

I'm glad you have people looking at your work (I've read other things you've written and you're definitely a capable writer) but it sounds like you're using your achievements in self defense when the main question was - Why even mention the script was written in 8 days in the first place? I feel like that question wasn't really answered - it just simply feels like "Look what I can do!" or "Look Ma, no hands!" Followed by a list of your achievements to defend the quality of your 8-day script when in fact, half the people who commented on this thread didn't even read it yet. Which is unfair for you.

Just a thought, I don't want it to seem like I'm being a dick or anything, I think you're a cool cat and I dig your ambition as a writer. Keep up the good work!

Quoted Text John August maintains he wrote Charlie and the Choc factory in three weeks ... I don't see why you would judge it based on the time it takes to write it, instead of the quality of it.

This isn't the point. Most likely, he had a 3 week deadline anyway to bang out the draft.

But you don't market the script by saying that it was only written in so-and-so amount of time. It puts a preconceived notion inside somebody's mind who hasn't YET opened the script. It may lower one's expectations or even keep one from reading it.

Most of the comments are judging Dustin's script based on the "8-day" mention - and most of these people who have commented didn't even read the script yet.