How do you weed the practical and useful advise in story notes from the meaningless feather flapping of an egotistical reader? And, how do you know if your friends and family are blowing smoke when they praise your work?
Unk brought up a valid point on my last post when he discussed how writers must be their own story's expert, especially when it comes to talking to people in production who would pressure you to make changes that may or may not work. It's true. We must know our characters, stories, symbolism, foreshadowing, etc. so well that we don't even need to process the cause and ripple effect of any change. We'll just know. Right then. Right there. The moment the change is proposed.
But a post on Wordplay the other day brings up the opposite scenario. A writer repeatedly asks his friend for story notes but the revisions never address the flaws, issues, or questions that the reader identifies. Is that because the writer really is his own expert and knows the reader's comments aren't valid? Or, does this writer have rose colored earlobes, listening for validation instead of constructive remarks?
What I'm about to say will annoy a few writers but I believe this to be one of the greatest mistakes amateur screenwriters can make. Asking your great aunt Martha to read your script is fine, but her comments are probably useless. Non-filmmaking friends don't understand structure, rhythm, or dialogue as well as someone who has been a reader, screenwriter, director or producer for umpteen years. Aunt Martha may know her stuff, but that's the exception. More likely, she'll have a similar euphoric pride in your script that you had when you finished your very first screenplay and immediately assumed it was ready to send to every studio in the golden state.
I'm not being cynical here. I'm being pragmatic. There comes a point when a writer ought not need anyone else to tell him what's wrong with his script. That's not to say he doesn't need story notes - that's the way of the business - but he either knows exactly what is wrong or knows it works and any changes will be based on preference, budget, set pieces, location, improvisation, the director's niece wanting a role, whatever.
The trailer for the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie included a clip where the Will Turner character tells the ship's crew that he's not leaving the cannibal island without Jack Sparrow. Then Jack appears on the beach pursued by a hundred cannibals to which Will says "Never mind, let's go." Funny clip. But when I went to see the film, I sat there watching the events that led up that scene and realized that Will Turner would never say "never mind, let's go" because he'd gone to the island for one purpose - to get an item from Jack that would save the life of his true love. He wouldn't say "never mind, let's go" because that would be like saying "never mind, I'll just let my true love hang".
You know you genuinely love movies when you get a nervous twinge in your stomach waiting for a moment you're sure won't work. To my great relief, when the line arrived, it was different. I found out later that the line in the trailer was a result of a blown take. Orlando Bloom said "never mind, let's go" meaning "never mind, let's shoot this again" or "never mind, let's get on with it".
That was a teeny tiny change that may have looked inconsequential to many people but the writers would have known that the line would totally undermine the character's heroism and credibility to the viewer. Writers - people who own the stories - will catch these things, or at least they should.
So, again, how do you weed the practical and useful advise in story notes from the meaningless feather flapping of an egotistical reader? It's something inside the writer's heart, head, soul, or gut that either sounds an alarm that says "yeah, that would work better" or tells you the reader skimmed the story or just doesn't get it.
Knowing if somebody pegs a problem in your story is kind of like the way a mother knows if her own child is lying. It's your kid. You know. Sure, he can get one past you once in awhile, but you've taken care of him his entire life so when somebody tattles on him, you have a sense about whether or not the accusation could possibly be true. When somebody else's kid is lying, you might know. You might not.
Both situations depend on the circumstances but like writers, some parents are in denial. "No, Mr. Police Officer, my kid with the marijuana tattoo and bloodshot eyes who goes by the nickname 'Roach' has never smoked dope. He doesn't even eat meat because his body is a temple." Yeah, well, maybe it's just a tofu temple and you don't know him as well as you think.
You should know. It's your story.
Showing posts with label story notes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label story notes. Show all posts
Friday, June 20, 2008
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Execution of Bad Ideas
Ever see something so obviously wrong in a screenplay that you wonder why everyone else doesn't see it? This occurs with readers all the time, especially if the reader has spotted this same issue over and over. He may feel like it's too no-brainer to even write in his notes and yet he must. Some bad ideas are just that blatant.
I know someone who reads for screenwriting competitions including the Nicholl. She sees so many screenplays that when something goes wrong, it jumps out at her. For example, if a character changes mid-story, she'll go back and re-read where's she's been so far, just to make sure she didn't miss what led up to the change, his motive, some subtext somewhere, or something, ANYTHING, that would explain or validate such an abrupt change in character. She reads so many screenplays that now and then, she does miss something but usually, the writer is just executing a bad idea.
Lucy has an interesting post about conflicting story notes. One of her blog readers quotes polar opposite comments on the same script from the same company. Clearly, if one reader says your characters have solid direction and the other says the characters are all over the place with no direction, one of them is mistaken.
Maybe. Maybe not.
How can they possibly both be correct? My theory is that sometimes readers think the story has lost direction when it takes a short sidestreet. Maybe the sidestreet is for comic relief, character development or suspense, but whatever the reason, the reader got lost. Some readers will jump right back into the story and some will be left wandering around waiting for a conclusion to the sidestreet. Sorry. But that's not just about inexperienced readers. It's a writing issue, too.
Recently, while viewing my latest Netflix rental, I puzzled over a scene that left me cold. It was well acted, had great timing and was beautifully shot but something wasn't right. I just didn't know what. At the end of the film, I went back and watched that scene over several times. Still no idea what was wrong with it. So, I started the film over.
This time, I had the big picture and knew the theme and conclusion right out of the gate. When I arrived at the scene in question, it was an easy diagnosis. The scene didn't belong there. It didn't belong anywhere. It was a brilliantly executed but really bad idea.
I've seen this problem before in my own writing and in screenplays I'm asked to critique. When I mention that something doesn't work, the retort is usually about what an awesome scene it is or how well it's written or how funny it is. All of that may be true, but there's a bad idea in there. That doesn't mean the scene is bad or the writer is bad but this particular idea? No workie. And, no matter how genius the execution is, it's still a bad idea.
Anything that takes away from the story is a bad idea, even if it's well done. Among its many crimes against the screenplay, a bad idea may slow momentum, contradict character, weaken the story or simply confuse the reader or viewer to a point of no return.
If I tell a story about my lazy secretary who keeps dropping calls because she's too busy checking her MySpace, I don't need to throw in a bargain pair of shoes I found on my lunch break. It may be a fascinating sidestreet about the shoes, especially if Wanda Sikes got in a fight with Chuck Norris over the same pair or Brad Pitt was in the store trying on lingerie, but the shoes don't move my secretary story along. However, if the secretary found my receipt and then faked an injury to take the afternoon off to go shoe shopping herself, it might demonstrate what a good for nothing she is.
Taking sidestreets is not a bad idea in the writing process. It allows the creative mind to go out and play. It may help build the story in the writer's mind, help him get to know his characters better, or allow him to explore some story options. It may even make the writer realize he needs to go in a whole 'nother direction. But writing a scene doesn't mean it has a place in the story. Some sidestreets bring something fresh to the story. Others are a wrong turn and will make the story wander, stall, or die a slow and painful death. It's the writer's job to sort out which sidestreet is which.
Why can't we spot our own bad ideas? We can. But, sometimes, especially if the scene is well done, it becomes about ownership and identifying with what we've written. That's our DNA on the page. Maybe the trick here is that once an idea is out on the table, it needs to take on its own identity so any criticism or attack is on the idea, not the person who came up with it.
None of this means that readers don't make mistakes. Some storynotes are spot on. Others are out of line. Maybe the reader is learning, having a bad day or just found out his wife had an affair with the pool boy. Who knows? We should. Don't run off and make changes solely based on something a reader said. But, be open to the possibility that a reader may identify a well executed bad idea.
I know someone who reads for screenwriting competitions including the Nicholl. She sees so many screenplays that when something goes wrong, it jumps out at her. For example, if a character changes mid-story, she'll go back and re-read where's she's been so far, just to make sure she didn't miss what led up to the change, his motive, some subtext somewhere, or something, ANYTHING, that would explain or validate such an abrupt change in character. She reads so many screenplays that now and then, she does miss something but usually, the writer is just executing a bad idea.
Lucy has an interesting post about conflicting story notes. One of her blog readers quotes polar opposite comments on the same script from the same company. Clearly, if one reader says your characters have solid direction and the other says the characters are all over the place with no direction, one of them is mistaken.
Maybe. Maybe not.
How can they possibly both be correct? My theory is that sometimes readers think the story has lost direction when it takes a short sidestreet. Maybe the sidestreet is for comic relief, character development or suspense, but whatever the reason, the reader got lost. Some readers will jump right back into the story and some will be left wandering around waiting for a conclusion to the sidestreet. Sorry. But that's not just about inexperienced readers. It's a writing issue, too.
Recently, while viewing my latest Netflix rental, I puzzled over a scene that left me cold. It was well acted, had great timing and was beautifully shot but something wasn't right. I just didn't know what. At the end of the film, I went back and watched that scene over several times. Still no idea what was wrong with it. So, I started the film over.
This time, I had the big picture and knew the theme and conclusion right out of the gate. When I arrived at the scene in question, it was an easy diagnosis. The scene didn't belong there. It didn't belong anywhere. It was a brilliantly executed but really bad idea.
I've seen this problem before in my own writing and in screenplays I'm asked to critique. When I mention that something doesn't work, the retort is usually about what an awesome scene it is or how well it's written or how funny it is. All of that may be true, but there's a bad idea in there. That doesn't mean the scene is bad or the writer is bad but this particular idea? No workie. And, no matter how genius the execution is, it's still a bad idea.
Anything that takes away from the story is a bad idea, even if it's well done. Among its many crimes against the screenplay, a bad idea may slow momentum, contradict character, weaken the story or simply confuse the reader or viewer to a point of no return.
If I tell a story about my lazy secretary who keeps dropping calls because she's too busy checking her MySpace, I don't need to throw in a bargain pair of shoes I found on my lunch break. It may be a fascinating sidestreet about the shoes, especially if Wanda Sikes got in a fight with Chuck Norris over the same pair or Brad Pitt was in the store trying on lingerie, but the shoes don't move my secretary story along. However, if the secretary found my receipt and then faked an injury to take the afternoon off to go shoe shopping herself, it might demonstrate what a good for nothing she is.
Taking sidestreets is not a bad idea in the writing process. It allows the creative mind to go out and play. It may help build the story in the writer's mind, help him get to know his characters better, or allow him to explore some story options. It may even make the writer realize he needs to go in a whole 'nother direction. But writing a scene doesn't mean it has a place in the story. Some sidestreets bring something fresh to the story. Others are a wrong turn and will make the story wander, stall, or die a slow and painful death. It's the writer's job to sort out which sidestreet is which.
Why can't we spot our own bad ideas? We can. But, sometimes, especially if the scene is well done, it becomes about ownership and identifying with what we've written. That's our DNA on the page. Maybe the trick here is that once an idea is out on the table, it needs to take on its own identity so any criticism or attack is on the idea, not the person who came up with it.
None of this means that readers don't make mistakes. Some storynotes are spot on. Others are out of line. Maybe the reader is learning, having a bad day or just found out his wife had an affair with the pool boy. Who knows? We should. Don't run off and make changes solely based on something a reader said. But, be open to the possibility that a reader may identify a well executed bad idea.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Story Mechanics
Alex Epstein has a great post today about story notes and the difference between getting them from readers and getting them from writers. Either it's a really good post or my history of restoring vintage Mustangs has skewed my opinion of his analogy.
Sunday, March 11, 2007
A Coverage Conundrum
I read a lot of produced screenplays. These past couple of weeks, I've also perused screenplays on Zoetrope and Triggerstreet and tried to get into the whole online screenwriting feedback thing. I won't post my work on those boards but I thought maybe if I reviewed some screenplays, I'd learn to better identify problem areas in my own writing. I tried these forums a couple of years ago but I figured I was just too much of a newbie. Turns out, I'm just a lousy reviewer.
I do read for friends now and then even though I'm not any good at it, but they don't care. My notes pretty much consist of comments like "the wife's dialogue was dead before she was" or "no way I'm buying the reveal". Friends can say those things to each other, but you can't talk that way to strangers on Zoetrope and Triggerstreet. When I'm reading Zoetrope and Triggerstreet screensplays, I can't stop reading to get clarification, ask the writer a question or email a smart remark. It's no fun and eventually, I just stop reading.
I know. Shut up. It gets worse.
I won't finish reading an awful screenplay. I can't. I won't. I don't care if you think I'm a poor mentor. If I start a screenplay on Zoetrope or Triggerstreet and it's clear this person is clueless, I'm done. Not fair you say? I was an immature writer once? True. But I wasn't writing screenplays and posting them on the internet. I don't want to waste a couple of hours reading crap. I don't. Life is short and on top of that, I don't want to spend MORE time writing story notes that (a) the writer is not going to understand anyway (b) will only hurt the writer's feelings and (c) will convince the writer that he is persecuted and I'm an idiot.
I probably won't finish reading a mediocre screenplay. Why? Because I WRITE mediocre screenplays. Even if I finish reading one, it would then take hours to write story notes pointing out what doesn't work, where the story breaks down, and explaining what needs to be done. I'm still doing that on my OWN work. And, as a mediocre writer, I'd be giving my input based on what? My expert knowledge? And I got that WHERE?
Sure, there are simple inconsistencies, unanswered questions, and little problems that it doesn't take a genius to point out (friends do that for each other all the time) but that's not what Zoetrope and Triggerstreet are about. They don't want a quick note or two. They want comprehensive reviews and these reviews are time consuming and require commitment. My commitment is in putting every free hour I have into my screenplay revisions.
I may not even finish reading a really good screenplay. What kind of story notes can I possibly write other than pointing out a minor thing here and there? Again, that's not what they want on Zoetrope and Triggerstreet. I'm not a story consultant. Besides, what I really want to write is "you're a much better screenwriter than I am so would you please take a look at my mediocre screenplay and offer ME some advice?"
So, basically, I'll help friends, but I don't think I'm able to do these other kinds of reviews.
A professional screenwriter once told me that a writer should know his story so well that feedback from others is superfluous. I wonder if that isn't part of the reason (among many) I rarely ask for anyone to read my own work. I don't want to waste people's time. Plus I'm territorial, possessive, and all those other ugly writer stereotypes. Yet, I know inwardly we all think somebody out there must know something we don't or have some secret we're missing.
By the way, I did solicit input on my Nicholl entry from a small group of trusted people. While I got a few helpful comments, overall I didn't learn very much. Why? Well, I wish I could tell you that the screenplay was so tight and well crafted that there wasn't much to say. But the truth is that most of my readers never got around to finishing it.
Imagine that.
I do read for friends now and then even though I'm not any good at it, but they don't care. My notes pretty much consist of comments like "the wife's dialogue was dead before she was" or "no way I'm buying the reveal". Friends can say those things to each other, but you can't talk that way to strangers on Zoetrope and Triggerstreet. When I'm reading Zoetrope and Triggerstreet screensplays, I can't stop reading to get clarification, ask the writer a question or email a smart remark. It's no fun and eventually, I just stop reading.
I know. Shut up. It gets worse.
I won't finish reading an awful screenplay. I can't. I won't. I don't care if you think I'm a poor mentor. If I start a screenplay on Zoetrope or Triggerstreet and it's clear this person is clueless, I'm done. Not fair you say? I was an immature writer once? True. But I wasn't writing screenplays and posting them on the internet. I don't want to waste a couple of hours reading crap. I don't. Life is short and on top of that, I don't want to spend MORE time writing story notes that (a) the writer is not going to understand anyway (b) will only hurt the writer's feelings and (c) will convince the writer that he is persecuted and I'm an idiot.
I probably won't finish reading a mediocre screenplay. Why? Because I WRITE mediocre screenplays. Even if I finish reading one, it would then take hours to write story notes pointing out what doesn't work, where the story breaks down, and explaining what needs to be done. I'm still doing that on my OWN work. And, as a mediocre writer, I'd be giving my input based on what? My expert knowledge? And I got that WHERE?
Sure, there are simple inconsistencies, unanswered questions, and little problems that it doesn't take a genius to point out (friends do that for each other all the time) but that's not what Zoetrope and Triggerstreet are about. They don't want a quick note or two. They want comprehensive reviews and these reviews are time consuming and require commitment. My commitment is in putting every free hour I have into my screenplay revisions.
I may not even finish reading a really good screenplay. What kind of story notes can I possibly write other than pointing out a minor thing here and there? Again, that's not what they want on Zoetrope and Triggerstreet. I'm not a story consultant. Besides, what I really want to write is "you're a much better screenwriter than I am so would you please take a look at my mediocre screenplay and offer ME some advice?"
So, basically, I'll help friends, but I don't think I'm able to do these other kinds of reviews.
A professional screenwriter once told me that a writer should know his story so well that feedback from others is superfluous. I wonder if that isn't part of the reason (among many) I rarely ask for anyone to read my own work. I don't want to waste people's time. Plus I'm territorial, possessive, and all those other ugly writer stereotypes. Yet, I know inwardly we all think somebody out there must know something we don't or have some secret we're missing.
By the way, I did solicit input on my Nicholl entry from a small group of trusted people. While I got a few helpful comments, overall I didn't learn very much. Why? Well, I wish I could tell you that the screenplay was so tight and well crafted that there wasn't much to say. But the truth is that most of my readers never got around to finishing it.
Imagine that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)