I think it does take multiple scripts to get good

[GonnaBeFamous]

At first I thought you could just do a one or two scripts and just rewrite them over and over and they became great.

Now that I'm starting on my 4th, its amazing how the dialogue and flow comes to me compared to the first 2. Even my 3rd one was difficult(I could only write a couple pages a day with tons of free time because it was mentally draining).

I guess it's true that you have to write more then one or 2 scripts to "get it".

This is assuming your a NEW writer. Most Previous novelist probably can get a good script going on their 2nd draft of their first script since they know proper "storytelling".

[aspiringwriter]

I'm a NEW writer as well and I will admit I have lots to learn and I am greatful to have people here who are willing to help, and suggest ideas... I guess it's a good thing to have others around suggesting ideas when sometimes you might overlook the simple things...

[GonnaBeFamous]

I'm a NEW writer as well and I will admit I have lots to learn and I am greatful to have people here who are willing to help, and suggest ideas... I guess it's a good thing to have others around suggesting ideas when sometimes you might overlook the simple things...

Yeah it's nice. I'm extremely new to writing. I never even knew what a screenplay was until april of this year and I've written 2 comedies, one horror, and am starting an action film.

I'm not implying that you can't have a decent first or 2nd script, I think my 2nd script is a OK story. But I think in order to have a script get a grade A you almost can't do that by your 2nd script unless your an experienced writer. Even then you'll still need critiquing.

[aspiringwriter]

Gonnabefamous I hear you!!! I didn't start writing screenplays until earlier this year and thought it was going to be easier instead of writing novels... I have a hard time with description and showing... I've read a few books on screenwriting and even taken looks at different screenplays, and they are ALL different... I think that confuses me more, and would love MORE than anything to have a mentor to guide me along, but then again that's a perfect world...

Oh well... *sigh* Guess i'll keep plugging away!!

[GonnaBeFamous]

Gonnabefamous I hear you!!! I didn't start writing screenplays until earlier this year and thought it was going to be easier instead of writing novels... I have a hard time with description and showing... I've read a few books on screenwriting and even taken looks at different screenplays, and they are ALL different... I think that confuses me more, and would love MORE than anything to have a mentor to guide me along, but then again that's a perfect world...

Oh well... *sigh* Guess i'll keep plugging away!!

heh, I thought the same thing about screenplays vs novels. Novels are easier in the sense that you can babble on and you don't have to be so darn witty to the point. However they are also A LOT longer. A screenplay is only equivalent to what 60 to 90 book pages word wise compared to 200+. Me personally I'm visual and not very poetic and love movies so Ill stick with screenplays.

[Optimus]

It works differently for everyone.

[preyer]

novels are a different beast, true, but if you broke them down by removing all the 'literature', you have a lot less there. also, you're free to write extended scenes and transitions... but, you're also *required* to do those in a lot of cases. that is, i think there's something about seeing it on screen that make a person more able to fill in the blanks between scenes. books just contain all those 'deleted scenes' that a movie editor would have cut for flow even at the slight risk of continuity.

i think there are also slight variances in the storytelling method between novels and scripts, though they may be pretty subtle. some are flat-out major, like having to combine certain novel characters into one character for a movie. something more subtle would be writing a scene for the book that otherwise would be cut for the movie, yet that scene adds a little different complexion to things.

the freedom of novels is also a curse. probably the same is true of scripts, where you'd love to go off on a tangent with some side-plot, but know it's just too long. just starting this screenwriting thing, i can tell already i'll have to make a lot of concessions to the characters in particular and scrap some sideplots i'd have explored in a novel ('explored' here being mandatory to bulking up a novel :)). it's a trade-off. the thing i think i will miss the most is the internal conversations a character has with huimself. guess that's what they make v.o.'s for, but it's not the same.

[GonnaBeFamous]

novels are a different beast, true, but if you broke them down by removing all the 'literature', you have a lot less there. also, you're free to write extended scenes and transitions... but, you're also *required* to do those in a lot of cases. that is, i think there's something about seeing it on screen that make a person more able to fill in the blanks between scenes. books just contain all those 'deleted scenes' that a movie editor would have cut for flow even at the slight risk of continuity.

i think there are also slight variances in the storytelling method between novels and scripts, though they may be pretty subtle. some are flat-out major, like having to combine certain novel characters into one character for a movie. something more subtle would be writing a scene for the book that otherwise would be cut for the movie, yet that scene adds a little different complexion to things.

the freedom of novels is also a curse. probably the same is true of scripts, where you'd love to go off on a tangent with some side-plot, but know it's just too long. just starting this screenwriting thing, i can tell already i'll have to make a lot of concessions to the characters in particular and scrap some sideplots i'd have explored in a novel ('explored' here being mandatory to bulking up a novel :)). it's a trade-off. the thing i think i will miss the most is the internal conversations a character has with huimself. guess that's what they make v.o.'s for, but it's not the same.


Only one of my four scripts have I even THOUGHT about using V.O for the character to himself. Do not use it to try and tell a story, use it as reflection in ACT 2 and only ONCE (if you use it earlier you might piss off the reader ;) ). That IMO, of course.

[GonnaBeFamous]

It works differently for everyone.

So you saying there is people out there that for the very first script they wrote(assuming NO novel or storytelling experience except for reading a book on screenplays) was able to make a good story? I know one guy claimed he did on this board recently, but he also never said if he had writtennovels or a bookload of short stories. I'm sure he did, he just didn't mention that tidbit. :)

[Mac H.]

So you saying there is people out there that for the very first script they wrote(assuming NO novel or storytelling experience except for reading a book on screenplays) was able to make a good story?

It's impossible to be sure. No matter what example we have, you could always argue that they had storytelling experience talking around a campfire....

And yes, I know of a few (extreme) examples were the first script a person ever wrote got made into a feature-length, cinema released film. I can't think of any examples where it's happened, though, without the script being substantially worked on.

(The example I'm thinking of is Rabbit Proof Fence. (Nominated for a Golden Globe) Doris Pilkington wrote the original script in under 2 weeks. She then re-wrote it as a book, and Christine Olsen re-wrote the screenplay. I suspect that Christine had a bigger task on her hands than a re-write)

And there are also examples of people who have won the lottery after buying only a single ticket....

Mac

[Optimus]

So you saying there is people out there that for the very first script they wrote(assuming NO novel or storytelling experience except for reading a book on screenplays) was able to make a good story?

Yes.

[TheRuleofThirds]

I've never had any experience writing novels. I hate books. Very, very occasionally do I read for the fun of it. Lately, I've read Screenwriting 434 and a book about the Battle of Little Bighorn and barely read 100 pages in them. After all this talk of how books are like screenplays with deleted scenes, I'll probably never be able to read a novel again. But there are a lot of good stories found in books, so I don't know.

[NikeeGoddess]

Originally Posted by GonnaBeFamous
So you saying there is people out there that for the very first script they wrote(assuming NO novel or storytelling experience except for reading a book on screenplays) was able to make a good story?



Yes.

best known example: Sylvester Stallone - Rocky

[GonnaBeFamous]

You can never prove how much writing someone does, because they may have done some just never got it published. Thats my point.

TheRuleOfThirds, I hear you. I think reading novels is bad if you want to learn screenplays since they are so different. You want to read scripts if you want to write them. :)

[JustinoXXV]

So you saying there is people out there that for the very first script they wrote(assuming NO novel or storytelling experience except for reading a book on screenplays) was able to make a good story? I know one guy claimed he did on this board recently, but he also never said if he had writtennovels or a bookload of short stories. I'm sure he did, he just didn't mention that tidbit. :)

I think Simon Kinburg's first script got him attention when he was just a film student. That script would eventually become Mr. and Mrs. Smith.

[aspiringwriter]

I know the industry standard is 120 pages...but what if it's longer??? What if it takes that long to tell a GOOD story with character development??

[StephieM]

"I know the industry standard is 120 pages...but what if it's longer??? What if it takes that long to tell a GOOD story with character development??"

If it takes longer than 120 pages to tell your story, then there is a problem. Many screenwriters have successfully written GOOD screenplays with great characters in less than 120 pages.

There are very few movies that go over 120 minutes.

As for the other subject on books and scripts. I LOVE books. In cases where movies have been made from books, the book is ALWAYS better. Look what happend to "Dreamcatcher". They tore that story to shreds. I was very disappointed.

Off subject question...

Has the movie "The Davinci Code" come out yet? How long is it going to take to make that movie?

Steph

[dpaterso]

When adapting a novel into a screenplay, what you leave out is as important as what you leave in. Only the dramatic parts should make it to the screen. If you trim the fluff but don't have enough dramatic parts left over then you make up something interesting and insert it into the screenplay, even if it didn't appear in the novel.

A GOOD story with character development doesn't necessarily have to be a LONG story. If your screenplay is longer than 120 pages... heck, if it's longer than 110 pages... trim the fluff.

-Derek
Derek's Web Page - stories, screenplays, novels, insanity. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57/scripts.htm)

[Mac H.]

I know the industry standard is 120 pages...but what if it's longer??? What if it takes that long to tell a GOOD story with character development??Why would a movie theatre halve their income showing a single 4-hour movie when they could show two 2-hour movies ?

And that's before we get to the size of the average movie goer's bladder....

Mac

[JustinoXXV]

2 hours is about as long as you can get people to stay in the movie theatres. If your movie is too long, the audience will walk out (not mentioning the fact the theaters would taking up time in which they have show other movies).

And put yourself in the seat of the reader. You have a ton of scripts to read. Are you really looking forward to reading a 160 page script, or will you simply just pass it over? (It's going to be passed over).

[Joe Calabrese]

Very, very few movies are over 120 pages or minutes.

Every film out in the theatres this week or in the past few weeks (except The Island and I can't see why) are under 120 minutes. Even Speilberg's epic War of the Worlds is at 116 minutes.

[aspiringwriter]

I understand the industry standard is 120 minutes....For instance THE AVIATOR is well over 120 minutes... and so on...yes there are exceptions and yes it's hard to keep people in a theater for more than two hours... Maybe I should re-phrase my question or start over...the screenplay i'm working on isn't designed for the theater, it's designed for a mini-series because there are like over 50 years to cover...that's my story and i'm sticking to it :)

As far as having too much fluff, yes you can have too much. What if it's relevant to the story? I know everyone has different opinions and that's fine :) I was only curious b/c i've seen movies well over 120 minutes....

[Joe Calabrese]

Mini Series. Now that's a horse of a different color.

Keep in mind a few things. A five part, 1 hr each, mini series is in fact less than four hours of actual running time, once you take out the commercials, credits, recaps from previous night's episode, etc...

TV is also paced much differently than film and as such the one minute rule doesn't play true. A hour hour show like West Wing, uses a shooting script that is around 50 pages or so. You can see the timing difference.

Last year's mini series "Revelations" was in fact a 140 page script, and was padded out during filming and post to hit that 5 hour mark.

Second and not to discourage you, please write it out and keep it under your pillow for the future, but a mini series is ten times harder to sell than a film, because of limited production and distribution. Most are based on novels, plays, and other secondary sources or Historical epics of very famous events or people and then there is budget. If costs more than 50 million to make, it probably won't for TV. If you can't get the major networks to buy it your pretty much out of luck. Even cable is dificult at best. Nearly all TV releated properties come from stufdio assignements and very very rarely does a spec get sold, especially from a newbie.

Again, write it out and keep it safe for when you make it big.

[Joe Calabrese]

Let me add something else.

The page per minute rule is an estimated theory at best.

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King is a 148 page script, but considering the extended directors cut (which has material from the script) it ran over 250 minutes.

In an interview the director of National Treasure said the first rough cut of the film was almost four hours long, yet I know the script was 126 pages long.

Most films are shot in various ways, with different timing and added scenes during production that make the film much longer or shorter than the original script would imply by page count alone.

120 pages can give you anywhere from a 90 minute film all the way up to 3 hours, depending how it is shot, edited and such.

We are giving the rule of 120 pages not because it ends up being two hours, but because it gives the filmmaker the option to make it anywhere around two hours long. It gives them room to make it the best they can.

[aspiringwriter]

Thank you Joe....I wasn't quite sure if 120 pages meant 120 minutes of screen-time...The screenplay i'm working on, like I said spans 50 years, but once i'm done with it and edit, it might get changed... I'm not discouraged by any means...this gives me more reason to write it... :)

[MrJayVee]

Last year I was hired to write a horror script. The script came out right around 102 pages. By the time they went into production, about 12-15 pages were cut (for budgetary reasons). That gave them approximately an 88-page script as shooting started. The director's cut of the movie came out at 110 minutes. It's since been trimmed down to 95 minutes (which I feel is perfect for this type of story/movie). So many variables go into the "page per minute" rule. Just write a good script, try to keep it under 120 pages...and you'll be fine.

[aspiringwriter]

I think I can do that....But how do you trim down a story that spans 50 years??? Can it be done?

[GonnaBeFamous]

Last year I was hired to write a horror script. The script came out right around 102 pages. By the time they went into production, about 12-15 pages were cut (for budgetary reasons). That gave them approximately an 88-page script as shooting started. The director's cut of the movie came out at 110 minutes. It's since been trimmed down to 95 minutes (which I feel is perfect for this type of story/movie). So many variables go into the "page per minute" rule. Just write a good script, try to keep it under 120 pages...and you'll be fine.



Horros are a whole different breed. My horror film is going to be 86pages and its full of 9 murders spaced over multiple locations, 2 suspects, 2 party scene sequences, etc. Say Hi to brittany murphy in the hills for me!

[GonnaBeFamous]

Aspiringwriter, I think it could be done by talking in the present for the opening scene, then going back. Thats what I'm doingwith my 2nd script. The past is extremely relevant but I don't go back to the past till a certain event comes up that causes meto have to ponder the back. I wouldn't start off with the past first. Thats a quick way to bore everyone. I know I tune out the minute I see the past instead of the future starting the move, but thats just me, maybe thats the wrong approach, but it didn't work for MY script.

[aspiringwriter]

GonnaBeFamous, that's what I'm doing now...I've started the story in the present and will go back some...Not sure how to incorporate flashbacks, but i'm sure there is a way to do it... PM me if you want to and we can talk about it some... I don't think this is the correct thread to be talking about it...(Not sure where it would go...)

[GonnaBeFamous]

Just in case I'm wrongI'll say it here.

In my book they suggest starting the slugline with INT. LOCATION - DAY (FLASHBACK) if you have multiple scenes.

What I'm doing since I dont have that option in my software I just use the subheading

SUPER: "1995"

That tells the reader that on screen it will say 1995. Besides you want to do that anyways to let your viewer of the movie know it takes place. A simple flashback is probably not appropriate in mine or your scripts anyways.