Feb
16
How important are format and style?
Filed Under Free Content, Story Basics | 3 Comments
The first step for many aspiring screenwriters is to purchase a piece of pricey screenwriting software.
Some call it retail therapy.
You are not a screenwriter until you have made that sacrifice, until you have invested money in your career, right?
I call it a waste of $250.
Your first draft should be a quick and dirty braindump. “Don’t get it right, get it written,” dixit Art Arthur.
Of course, it has its advantages to write your first draft in some sort of a script format. See it as an exercise in format and style, plus you have a rough idea of the screen time.
However, for this they have invented free MS Word templates, style sheets or even better: Celtx.
Format and style are totally irrelevant.
If you are fiddling to get the wording of your action right, to make your characters sound like ‘real people’, to come up with really cool visuals, you are wasting your time.
If this is your first draft, nobody will ever see it, except your story editor or script consultant. And if the first script feedback is all about format, style, dialogue and scene construction, you haven’t given the editor the right brief.
Or perhaps you should change editors.
You should be working on that story, which currently may not even be a story yet. If McKee’s statistics are right, ninety percent of what you have written will go. Won’t make it to the screen. At least not for this film.
Now, because of my emphasis on story, it may seem as if I think the presentation of the screenplay is less important.
But can you afford to shop around an excellent story but scripted in a way that looks sloppy and rushed?
Of course you can’t.
I was talking about early drafts.
Once you are sending a script for consideration to producers, studios or talent, it has to be immaculate. Nothing must distract from a smooth read.
Your formatting has to be completely in line with the standards of the country (Letter format if you’re based in the US, A4 elsewhere), the company (if it’s a major studio) or even the person (if it’s, say, Spielberg) you are sending the script to.
Why am I so paranoid about this?
Because others are.
Imagine this: a reader or executive has just read an ‘okay’ story. But it was a terrific read: an elegantly flowing script, no typos, great style, a fast read with “lots of white”.
Your script is next.
Your story is on par with the previous one, but by page 10 this reader has found three typos, a couple of “we see”’s and some awkward sluglines.
Your story may have had the same potential. Yes, it could have been produced for less money and audiences might have loved the movie better.
Still, you’re out.
The other writer might have been equally talented; he was more professional. If you want to play with the pros, you’ll have to be ready to write fast, re-write fast, and keep the same level of professionalism. If you can’t even get that first spec script right – which they know you have laboured over for years – you’re not up for the challenge.
And guess what: in the books of this reader, producer or company, not just your script but even you may be history. They probably have a sufficient amount of fresh offerings every day so they feel perfectly happy to bar you from ever submitting anything ever again.
If you are serious about earning six or seven figure fees in your new career, prove it. Before you send out your script, invest a few hundred dollars in having it read and polished by a pro.
Now…
Did you just realise your script has gone out to more than one company? Like… all of them?
Bad format and style can kill your career.
Better start thinking about a cool ‘nom de plume’.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Oct
12
Just Ad Words
Filed Under Newsletters | Leave a Comment
No post in September as I had other matters to attend to (photo). If you want the whole story, you may have to brush up on your Dutch.
You may be set in your writing ways and happy with your Underwood or whatever other writing tool you are perusing. In that case you better skip to the DVD Commentary section. Otherwise, here are some tips to save you the money and frustration I sacrificed on my way to stardom.
Being a decent citizen, a few years ago I replaced my pirate version of Final Draft with a legit copy, hoping the bugs would go. Now I believe it was the equivalent of going to see THE DA VINCI CODE in the cinema. I was caught in the trap of some excellent marketing. But what should you expect from a screenwriting package? Let’s put things in perspective.
The last time I checked, Final Draft cost AUD$569, or roughly the same as the entire Microsoft Office Suite. All that, while some simple MS Word macros or style sheets can achieve what Final Draft does? Plus: you have the wildest flexibility in terms of backups, tracking changes, spell-checking, saving online etc. If you don’t have MS Office or you hate Bill G.: OpenOffice. Free.
If you’re really dying to part with your money on a script package, explore Movie Magic Screenwriter (formerly: Screenwriter 2000). Cheaper than Final Draft and better value for money in my view.
But why pay? A new, totaly FREE piece of software is called Celtx. Still in its infancy but growing rapidly, with a smart development team behind it and community-oriented.
Celtx intends to go a lot further than just the screenwriting bits: it aims at becoming the central command post for your film’s entire project management. If they manage to stay afloat, it may well become a filmmakers’ software of choice.
Now, if you believe that any of the above will help you writing better scripts, you have fallen prey to the Film Industry’s Greatest Con. These are all just word processors with serious formatting limitations. Jazzed-down versions of MS Word if you wish.
Here is my advice for the cash-poor: don’t spend a cent on script formatting and save your money for software that helps you with the hard work. Instead labour on the story using Dramatica Pro, John Truby’s Blockbuster or best of all: Powerstructure.
I prefer the last one, as it distinguishes itself from the others in pretty much the same way MM Screenwriter does among the script software. Powerstructure has immense flexibility, allows you to write full scenes, just one liners, or whatever in between you feel comfortable with.
You can customise it to your own favourite structure, be it three acts, sequences or Vogler’s THE HERO’S JOURNEY, then export directly to a text file or into whatever script software you use. If you’re a member of that circle of writers who first write their entire first draft before starting to outline, you can import your existing script to reshape its structure. Admitted, I’ve had a few quirks doing that but the PS support team helped me out.
Powerstructure makes a lot of sense, as it works in the way most movie decision makers think. It is being distributed by the wonderful guys at WriteBrain, where you can download a trial version.
Even better than burning your money on software: give it to a human story/script editor who could really make a difference for you. 
DVD COMMENTARY: McCABE AND MRS MILLER
I found a downright great commentary on this unsung masterpiece by writer/director Robert Altman, in which Warren Beatty opens a whorehouse in the Old West.
Although thirty-five years old, this movie could be seen today alongside the razorsharp doco THE CORPORATION and – to a lesser extent – AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH. It ultimately tackles corporatisation and if you wish globalisation within the genre of the western. And as the commentary puts it: Altman won’t give you a John Wayne type of Western hero. No. Warren Beatty’s protagonist will shoot you in the back if his life depends on it.
The voice recording of this commentary track is so crystal clear you can literally hear producer David Foster’s watch ticking in the background as he explains why every man and his dog in Hollywood wants to work with this director. I agree: Altman has a vision and integrity that is so rare you won’t even find it with masters like Scorsese. Unlike the latter, Altman will NEVER make ‘one for the Studio’.
My favourite bits are the account of Leonard Cohen’s musical collaboration, Altman’s hilarious tirade about western’s big hats and the master’s view on dialogue:
“The dialogue in these kinds of films [...] is part of the character [...]. It is not the words that are important. [...] That’s too related to theater, where you [...] advance plot with the words. When you have close-ups of people and faces [...], it’s just better that the words come from the moment or from the actors themselves.”
Altman makes this statement in the context of Beatty’s soliloquies in the film. He asked Beatty to mumble to himself inaudibly before actually delivering the crucial lines in soliloquy. As a result, the audience is used to the character talking to himself in a more or less natural way. And here is the mark of a good commentary: the director sharing with us his struggles to make the movie work.
DVD COMMENTARY: ANTZ
Recently I consulted to a team of comedy writers, which was a completely new and refreshing experience to me. As I’m not a comedy expert, I focused on the (lack of) drama in the script and afterwards the writers were happy enough about the outcome to hire me again for a look at the next stage.
Comedies that don’t work often still work on the scene level but they have issues with the overall story arc. Situations and dialogue may be absolutely hilarious. If there’s no dramatic undercurrent, the audience WILL switch off.
I found a quote on the commentary of ANTZ that makes the exact same point about the input from Jeffrey Katzenberg (photo), who was uncredited producer (and the “K” in Dreamworks SKG):
“We added a lot of comedy kind of after the fact. It’s one of the things that Jeffrey Katzenberg really pushes hard: get the drama to work because if you’re rely on the comedy, you’re gonna loose the audience’s interest in the characters. So sure enough we really focused on the drama and afterwards we [...] ended up upping just the silliness of it, the humor of it.”
This charming animation, in which Woody Allen voices the neuroses of the ant “Z”, dates from the turbulent days when Dreamworks went head to head with Disney’s A BUG’S LIFE. Ironically it was Katzenberg who had sealed the deal between Pixar and Disney.
Directors Johnson and Darnell don’t deliver by far the cutthroat commentary we’re used to hear from the Pixar guys, but they do give some insight in their struggles during the development. Notably their work on the character of Princess Bala (Sharon Stone) and her relationship with the protagonist are interesting from a story point of view.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
