For me as a reader, when I am evaluating projects \u2013 and especially in evaluating another writer \u2013 subject matter is very important. Quality of writing aside, the choice of what that writer has decided to invest a year\u2019s time (or thereabout) into can tell me a lot about that individual \u2013 and whether or not I am going to fight for that writer\u2019s cause. Even if the quality of prose is outstanding, if the subject matter is bizarre or fundamentally not commercially viable, I won\u2019t recommend it. There probably are some readers who will \u2013 but, for me, at the end of the day, we\u2019re trying to write films. Movies. Movies that will be seen, hopefully, by millions of people. Bizarre, obscure subject matter doesn\u2019t generally translate into millions of viewers. So, I would then wonder if the small, obscure subject matter wouldn\u2019t be better served in another format \u2013 story, novel, play. And, then, that decision would reflect upon my opinion of the writer: why wasn\u2019t this writer aware enough to know that he was really writing a play or a novel and not a film? <\/p>\n
So, it begs the question, what\u2019s worth writing about?<\/p>\n
\u201cCinematic\u201d<\/strong> \u201cCinematic\u201d contains two unmistakable elements that work together hand in hand: the vessel of story illuminates the human experience in a way that\u2019s larger than life. The \u201clarger than life\u201d component for me is key to filmmaking because a theatrical screening of a film is literally physically larger than life, the actors themselves are somehow superhuman (which is why we call them \u201cstars\u201d), the production takes large sums of money to put together and an army of people working behind the scenes to create, produce, and deliver this content to the public. Movies are larger than life. And all good stories on some level illuminate the human experience. They touch us in ways we\u2019ve never been touched before. They make us feel the best and worst parts of ourselves. They make us laugh, they make us cry \u2013 they make us feel. In a way that is emotionally resonant and connecting, they remind us what it is to be human.<\/p>\n \u201cHigh Concept\u201d <\/strong> If you can sum up the whole spirit, genre, tone and idea of something in a few words, or a title, then it is very likely the project is extremely high concept. The industry likes high-concept projects because they can get on the phone and rally people in ten seconds. High concept pieces tend to be easier to sell and easier to market. <\/p>\n I tend to love high concept scripts \u2013 so long as there\u2019s good writing to support them. <\/p>\n Mass Communication<\/strong> I read a script not too long ago wherein at page 80 the female protagonist *poof* disappeared \u2013 and a male protagonist reappeared. I read for about 10 pages before I flipped back and was very confused about what had happened to the woman. I liked the female protagonist, she was interesting, I was invested in her. I did not like it, on page 60, there was seemingly a completely new protagonist, a man about whom I knew absolutely nothing and had no investment. This new character appeared to be her brother. So, I flipped forward, and my female protagonist never returned. I was hopelessly confused. Miffed, I kept reading. It was only well after page 100 that I finally understood that the protagonist had had a sex change, took on a male identity (that of her own \u201cbrother\u201d), and was now living as a man. However, since this wasn\u2019t explained clearly on the page, I was lost. And, also, thought, \u201cWhat the hell?\u201d There was absolutely nothing in the previous 60 pages that motivated or established the protagonist to need a sex change. The story itself didn\u2019t really require her to have a sex change. So I felt as though I had been evacuated into another movie. I just felt that this subject matter was so incredibly obscure and bizarre \u2013 to what end? I didn\u2019t get it at all, and I didn\u2019t feel this type of material would have any broad appeal. Despite the fact that the writing was relatively good, I didn\u2019t recommend this project because of the incredibly bizarre, contrived and unrelatable subject matter that hadn\u2019t been properly established enough in order to motivate those extraordinary circumstances. <\/p>\n Work To Win Over the Reader<\/strong> Some writers have an intuitive, innate sense of what makes a compelling story. Some writers do not. If you are a writer that does not have an innate sense of externalized dramatic conflict with life-or-death stakes, then study up. Teach yourself by studying other films. Learn how to compensate for your weaknesses. Pitch ideas to your writing colleagues and get feedback. It makes me very sad when I read a project that a writer has obviously worked very hard on only to think, \u201cWhat the hell?\u201d I would just love to ask them why. Why did they spend so much time writing something that isn\u2019t going to help them or their career? I can only assume it\u2019s because they don\u2019t yet know what will help them. But, don\u2019t despair \u2013 you can learn!<\/p>\n The Living Story<\/strong> However, it was really well written: I laughed, I cried (twice), and \u2013 I\u2019m not ashamed to admit it \u2013 after that, I saw Oscars for this writer. With the right nurturance, that project could be a very funny but moving drama that could win awards. A road trip movie doesn\u2019t automatically have huge dramatic stakes \u2013 but the writer of this project was able to create those stakes through the characters and in making specific choices. With my very positive notes on this project, I would be surprised if this project doesn\u2019t get to the quarterfinals (I\u2019ll let you know). <\/p>\n It is an odd thing to read a script that takes on a life of its own. These characters hang about me like ghosts in a dense fog. I carry them with me. They feel like long lost friends. It is very rare to read something that comes to life in such a way. It is very rare to read something that is so touching, so emotionally compelling, or that sparks so vividly. This is what every reader seeks out: a script we can fight for. Something to believe in. Something that gives us hope \u2013 both for our own writing and the creative process overall. <\/p>\n Watch Out for \u201cSlice of Life\u201d<\/strong> Do Not Wrap a Stage Play in a Bow and Call It a Film<\/strong> Part of that larger than life quality comes from the fact that the camera moves. We want to see the camera move because we want to be taken to places that we probably wouldn\u2019t go in our daily life. If your story takes place at one bar and one apartment, that sounds to me like a stage play. Write it as a play. Conversely, if within the first 10 pages of your story, your character is in Siberia, China, and Monte Carlo (such as James Bond might be), then it\u2019s not a play. It\u2019s a movie. This is also why TV comedies are moving away from the multi-camera format and toward the single camera. It\u2019s hard to just have people talking on one set and keep that interesting. In the modern world, we tend to get around more than just the living room, and our stories should reflect that. <\/p>\n I once read a project that was set in New York at a bar, and most of the story (like 80%) took place at the bar. People were talking at a bar. There was some light chit-chat, some light flirtation \u2013 but absolutely nothing that resembled a movie in any regard. I was really baffled why that person even thought their idea was cinematic. Frankly, my own daily life is much more interesting to me than that story was. <\/p>\n Do Your Research: Don\u2019t Write Something That\u2019s Already Been Produced<\/strong> It\u2019s Not \u201cNew\u201d \u2013 It\u2019s \u201cFresh\u201d<\/strong> We\u2019re not working to write something new. We\u2019re working to illuminate the human experience in a way that is fresh, feels new, and is unique to us, to our experience, to our voice. <\/p>\n I personally don\u2019t want to read old material (something I\u2019ve seen or read before) that is written in an old way. I absolutely need the writer to bring something new, fresh or unique to the table. The newness could be in terms of subject matter, character, plotting, device, tone. Yet, something about the project has to have some sparkle. <\/p>\n There is no shame in writing a reinterpretation of something that\u2019s been made already. In fact, now that I\u2019ve seen more movies, I\u2019ve come to believe that most movies are actually remakes. Most new releases are actually reinterpretations of classic films from generations gone by. Just as many books are reinterpretations of other stories. But, if you\u2019re going to do a reinterpretation, then personalize it, make it fresh and current and relevant to today\u2019s audiences. <\/p>\n My biggest complaint in this area is seeing a retelling of a story we\u2019ve seen a million times over. I read a lot of scripts that very easily fall into the \u201cLaw and Order\u201d field. There is some type of detective story, and we get an investigation, but it never rises above the bar set by \u201cLaw and Order,\u201d which has been on the air now for 20 years. If you\u2019re going to write an investigative thriller that involves the police or district attorneys, it has to offer more on the character side and also on the investigative side than we already get free on the TV every week. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" For me as a reader, when I am evaluating projects \u2013 and especially in evaluating another writer \u2013 subject matter is very important. Quality of writing aside, the choice of what that writer has decided to invest a year\u2019s time (or thereabout) into can tell me a lot about that individual \u2013 and whether or […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,7,12,10,11,1],"tags":[5,23,3,13,17,19,20,15,16],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=61"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":71,"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61\/revisions\/71"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.screenwriter-to-screenwriter.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nWhat makes one story fundamentally cinematic and another not? Another way of looking at this is: what makes a story worthy of the big screen, millions of viewers and millions of dollars? Sometimes I will read a script that, in terms of subject matter, might seem that it would be movie-worthy, but it is not executed as such \u2013 while I\u2019ll read another project that wouldn\u2019t seem cinematic in the least, but yet it leaps off the page in a larger-than-life way. There is a bit of a gray zone in terms of cinematic appeal. <\/p>\n
\n\u201cHigh concept\u201d is an expression that basically means pitchable in ten seconds or less. We were given a glowing example of this in film school when a male manager swaggered in and instructed us that the ultimate high-concept, pitchable project was, \u201cChick grows a cock.\u201d And he laughed. My friend and I looked at each other and mouthed, \u201cgross.\u201d But, that\u2019s an idea that has a built-in audience of frat boys. A lot of broad comedies fall into this category. Political thrillers tend not to. <\/p>\n
\nFilms are for the masses. It\u2019s a mass-communication medium. Big crews, big dollars, big rewards. Communication to the masses is more successful when it deals with universal themes that affect and touch the lives of every human being. Or, a writer can take something relatively obscure and unique and treat it in a way that is very universal so that it becomes relatable to the masses. Do not assume that if you write the most random and non-sequitur story on the planet, you will win points. You won\u2019t \u2013 because that doesn\u2019t shout \u201cmasses\u201d from the rooftops. <\/p>\n
\nA high-concept script that makes me laugh just from the title or the first page will quickly get my respect. This is because it\u2019s difficult to come up with really funny concepts that are easily communicated. Even if this script starts to fizzle on page 20, the writer has already won my respect \u2013 and the project would be a good candidate for a rewrite. Conversely, if a project is meandering at page 20 (i.e., by page 20, I\u2019m not sure yet what the story is) and without any sort of pitchable concept, that writer won\u2019t have won me over and the script will likely be a resounding pass.<\/p>\n
\nI read a script a couple of days ago for a competition, and it hung with me. I hadn\u2019t yet submitted the score, and when I did, I realized that the script had touched me very deeply \u2013 and so I gave it a strong recommend, and actually wrote in the notes that the script was an emphatic \u201crecommend\u201d and that I \u201cloved it.\u201d I said that I would fight for this project and writer, and hoped to see him\/her in the quarterfinals. This project was about elderly women who go on a road trip. This subject matter isn\u2019t an immediate sparkle. <\/p>\n
\nIt\u2019s very hard for stories that are \u201cslice of life\u201d \u2013 and only that \u2013 to be cinematically viable. Stories that reflect the daily grind \u2013 and only that \u2013 are hard, because they\u2019re in life, about life \u2013 they leave out the \u201clarger than\u201d component. There is very little about the average person\u2019s real daily experience that would warrant a film made about it. I think slice of life stories can be told and still be cinematic, but then there needs to be elements of the character that are larger than life. And there still need to be life and death dramatic stakes involved, or something that the characters feel life-or-death passion about. Because, if you don\u2019t have dramatic conflict in the story, nor in the characters, likely you don\u2019t have enough content to make your story cinema-ready.<\/p>\n
\nI personally tend to really not like scripts that could be stage plays. I don\u2019t like those movies when I see them, and I don\u2019t like the scripts when I read them. I love the theatre, and if a writer wants to write a play, they should do that. Don\u2019t try to shove your chatty play into a movie structure. They are two different mediums, and they do not overlap in most cases. It is very difficult to set a film in one location and build enough dramatic stakes to fuel an interesting movie. <\/p>\n
\nStudy up. Know your genre. Know what\u2019s been produced in the field. Read the trades to see what\u2019s selling. There is absolutely no point in writing a spec script that is a worse version of something that\u2019s in theatres or on TV right now. That is a complete waste of everyone\u2019s time. For more detailed information on this, read my post on \u201cThe Logical World.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nWe\u2019re not recreating the wheel. There is that adage that no story is new. I believe this, because most (if not all) elements of the human experience have been experienced already. I\u2019m not inventing love \u2013 but I can write about the experience of love from my own personal experience. My experience and perceptions about love might very well be completely different than yours, and in that, there would be an illumination there about that universal experience. We\u2019re looking for stories that illuminate the universal condition of humanity, but illuminate in a unique way that we haven\u2019t necessarily seen before. <\/p>\n