screenwriting

The fine art of interpreting notes

Maximum Z adventure, analysis, feedback, notes, pulp fiction, screenwriting, script, self-confidence, westerns, writing
Not those kinds of notes
Oops. Wrong kind of notes.

It still needs some work, but the latest draft of the outline for the pulpy adventure is done, so it’s headed to the back-burner for now as focus shifts to rewriting/polishing the western.

I’ve been very fortunate the past few weeks to have received some high-quality notes for it, which includes a wide spectrum of suggestions of how it could be improved.

As expected, some have merit and some don’t (and this includes some professional comments), as well as a few changes not even originally considered. Each one gets serious consideration, but it all comes down to what I think works best for the story.

When I first started, I would assume every note I got was coming from somebody who knew better than me, but then there’d be so many changes/edits that the script was getting away from what I wanted it to be.

You and only you know what your script is supposed to be like. There will be many notes accompanying each subsequent draft. Don’t automatically think each one is right, but don’t immediately dismiss it either.

Ask yourself “Does this note help make my script better?” If so, how? If not, why not? If you’re not sure, look at it from both sides. Don’t rush just to get it over with. This requires a lot of thought, patience and attention.

It’s also important to not let your pride get in the way of the story. What’s more important – keeping your ego intact or making the story as good as it can be?

It took a while, but I eventually learned to trust my instincts to the point that I can now identify what I consider good notes and not-so-good notes, which has really made a difference in helping both me and my writing improve.

Something awfully familiar about this – OR – Already seen it

Maximum Z adventure, editing, movies, outlines, pages, plot, plot points, pulp fiction, reading, screenwriting, sequence, spec, story, storytelling, structure, subplot, The Matrix, writing
Not exactly the same, but mighty darn familiar
Whoa.

I was THIS CLOSE to being done with the latest version of the outline for the pulpy adventure spec when my writer’s sense starting tingling.

“Something’s still not right!” screamed out my internal editor.

What? That couldn’t be possible, could it? I’d spent the past few weeks being oh-so-meticulous in reorganizing sequences, working out subplots and connecting story points. How in the names of Walter Gibson and Lester Dent could there be a problem?

I looked at the outline with a more critical eye.

Opening sequence – check.
Intro of hero, establish his world – check.
Hero’s world drastically changes while raising central question of the story – check.
Complications ensue – check.
Midpoint where hero becomes fully committed to achieving his goal (accompanied by reminder of the central question) – check.

Wait. Back that up a little. To right between the “Complications” and “Midpoint” parts.

Hokey smokes, there it was. Cue the flashing red light bulb (with optional klaxon).

Two consecutive sequences just way too similar to each other. This is what’s been bothering me.

No doubt about it. One of ’em has to go. Probably the first one. You’d think it would be no big deal to just go in and change it.

And you’d be kinda/sorta wrong.

The events that happen during these two sequences are vital to the story, so the outcome needs to stay the same. The tough part now is figuring out how to change the “what happens” in that first one so not only is it unique enough unto itself, but also falls neatly into the overall structure of the story.

As always, a daunting task. For now. But potentially solvable given some time and exploration of possible alternatives.

I cannot stress enough the importance of why you should outline your story before even considering starting on pages, and being extremely thorough about it while you do. This is where you get all the heavy lifting done by figuring everything out. Where it’s a lot easier to identify the cracks in the foundation. Where it might take you a few passes to realize what works and what doesn’t.

Then again, this is how I do it, so your approach may be totally different. But speaking for myself, I prefer to go back in and fine-tune a couple of scene descriptions consisting of one to two sentences, rather than labor my way through several pages, then have to totally junk them because they’re not working.

So my focus for the time being is fixing this, then going through the whole outline a few more times, making adjustments where necessary, until I think it’s done/ready for conversion into pages.

-Got to see JURASSIC WORLD and INSIDE OUT last week. Both very enjoyable, but for very different reasons. Of the two, I’m more interested in seeing INSIDE OUT again, mostly for the writing and storytelling aspects.

Regrettably, still haven’t seen MAD MAX: FURY ROAD yet. Of all the summer releases, this feels like the one that must be seen on the big screen. Will do what I can to rectify that.

An impression most memorable

Maximum Z Blazing Saddles, networking, relationships, screenwriting, writing

I had the good fortune to connect with another local writer a few weeks ago. We met for a casual chat over drinks and discussed the usual stuff: our writing backgrounds and experiences, what we like to write, and so on.

I love this kind of stuff (both the networking and the discussion) and genuinely enjoy hearing the stories of others writers.

As we started to wrap things up, she commented on how nice it was to meet me and how inspiring and motivational my attitude was, which totally caught me off-guard.

I was just being nice (as is my way), and, like a lot of people, tend to get excited and a little animated when I talk about screenwriting.

Apparently that’s a good thing.

But why be anything but nice? I always marvel at when another writer recounts how somebody they met with did not portray themselves in a positive light, bragging about themselves or their “accomplishments”.

One of those constantly-repeated pieces of advice for when you’re starting out is that when you meet someone working in the industry, you should present yourself as someone who would be pleasant to work with (followed up by actually acting that way, of course).

This also applies to when you meet somebody else in a face-to-face scenario. Amazingly, not a lot of people are going to be interested if your favorite subject is you.

A lot of this business is built on relationships. “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know,” right?

If you found about a project where someone’s looking for a certain kind of writer, and you know two who fit the bill exactly, but one’s kind of a jerk, wouldn’t you be more likely to recommend the other one?

You’re going to meet all kinds of people along the way of developing your career. You want to make a good first impression and have people think of you in the best possible light.

Think of it this way: Would you rather be remembered because people liked what they saw in you, or because they didn’t?

A whole lot of something out of an almost-nothing

Maximum Z adventure, blog, books, consultant, editing, outlines, pulp fiction, rewrite, screenwriting, spec, writing
An apt metaphor if ever there was one
An apt metaphor if ever there was one

A bit of a snag had developed in the rewriting of outline for the pulpy adventure spec. A certain aspect of the story had proven to be too simple, as in “not complicated enough” or “lame half-assed, last-second placeholder”.

It was also falling short in terms of overall pulpy-ness.

Seeing as how this is supposed to be a rousing tale sprinkled with elements of mystery and intrigue, it just wasn’t happening.

I won’t totally jettison a story, but rather see what changes, small or drastic, can be implemented in order to get things back on track.

I don’t know how it is for other writers, but sometimes I’ll go over a previous draft, hit a word or phrase that originally didn’t hold much significance, and all of a sudden it triggers a whole new realm of possibilities. Call it the “How did I not see that before?” syndrome.

In this case, it was a character’s name. This set off the auto-immediate response of “Hmm. What if…?”

Cue the heavenly chorus.

Suffice to say, now it’s back for yet another take on the draft, but this time going into it armed with a whole new batch of ideas.

-Time for a couple of book plugs!

Friend of the blog Justin Sloan has a new book coming out this weekend – Military Veterans in Creative Careers: Interviews with our Nation’s Heroes. Some great stuff in there, including quality interviews with men and women who’ve served in the armed forces and are now working in creative fields.

If you’re looking for a little guidance on your journey to becoming a working writer, then take a look at Notes to Screenwriters by Vicki Peterson and Barbara Nicolosi, who also run the Catharsis script consulting service.

And….scene.

Maximum Z analysis, blog, consultant, feedback, networking, pie, research, screenwriting, script, writing

truman gif

I first came up with the idea of doing interviews with professional script readers and consultants just about a year ago. I was curious about how they got into this, what they looked for when reading a client’s script, and what a writer could do to develop their craft.

And of course, their favorite kind of pie.

Based on my activity in social media and having heard them on a few writing/screenwriting podcasts, I could only think of a handful of consultants.

But the more research I did, the more consultants I found and contacted, asking if they’d be interested in taking part. The number of interviews was growing exponentially. Responses were overwhelmingly positive, with many excited to be involved (with a few opting to decline for their own reasons).

What I thought would be a fun 5-week lark of a project soon snowballed into a 10-month undertaking of monumental proportions. I started with five names, and ended up with 50. Fifty. 5-0. That’s a lot.

Some of you might be wondering what I got out of this. It’s just something I’m interested in. A fascinating subject that also happens to apply to something I want to do for a living. Nobody offered me free coverage, nor did I ask, because this is how most of these folks make a living, and it would be just plain rude and tacky to ask. I’ll also admit right here that a whopping three out of the fifty offered a discount on their rates in gratitude.

As someone who has used consultants in the past, I’ve been very fortunate in getting extremely helpful feedback that’s made a big difference in making my scripts better. Hopefully other writers can connect with any of the consultants in these interviews and have the same experience.

There are those who are against the idea of using consultants, with some claiming it’s just a scam designed for the sole purpose of separating you from your money. No doubt there are some out there that fall into this category, but most tend to be legitimate. Since there are so many to choose from, I’ve always recommended good old-fashioned comparison shopping; do your research and go with the one that works best for you.

Right now it feels kind of weird to not have to worry about editing and assembling an interview to be posted next week. I’ve got a few ideas for what to do next, but for now am going to enjoy the slower pace and return my focus to developing my own material.

Naturally, I’ll be using a consultant for feedback when the need arises.

Thanks for reading.