Tarantino once said the script should not just be a blueprint and should be an enjoyable read. He said lean into the prose but not too much so to where it’s a novel. Interesting to see different perspectives.
We could look at the distinction between writers and writer/directors as well - unless the former has relationships to pipeline to they need to keep to forms expected by the general (readers) market. Tarantino can play as loosely or deeply as he wished to...
He only got attention because he used vulgar and sexually explicit language, which hadn't been done before. He also made gangsters the leads with personalities. But the novelty faded.
Steve Douglas-Craig has been my favourite guest so far because what he said - though it's not entirely revelatory - he says it in a way that I can understand because I too like structure and he has provided me certain insights that genuinely makes me want to practice more. I like rewriting drafts because it helps me internalise and truly understand what I want to say in my story and my characters' motivations. This channel has been an invaluable public resource, thank you so much!
When I watched Godzilla minus one recently, at times I thought it was predictable. But its only because I understand movie structure. The general audience probably wouldnt recognize it as much. That structure though is what makes it great. The way it sets up the characters and the plot. The way it resolves them and pays off at the end. The way some things were forshadowed briefly but became important at the end like them mentioning the japanese government doesnt provide the planes with eject seats or how people are still missing hinting that the girl might still be alive or the guy who's never been to war but helps save the day or the final line "Is your war over?" The pay off is so satisfying because everything is perfectly set up and well structured. Good Structure is what makes a good movie.
The character had a life before your movie and assuming they didn't die, will have a life afterwards. The movie is a pivotal time in that character's life story.
Thanks Jay! Great to see you discover this one. Also keep an eye out for more segments with Andy Guerdat. Think you will enjoy that one as well. Happy Holidays and a blessed 2024 to come!
Don't agree that if you introduce the main character fifteen pages in is a sign of an inexperienced writer. It can be a sign of confidence in the story telling and help set the table of what's to come. You see it in horror and thrillers all the time. Scream, Jaws the Chaser etc etc. But maybe the argument is the "killer" is the main character but a classic like Psycho broke that rule beautifully. To me, is it a compelling story or not - thats it. I read scripts all the time and when I smell the basic structure that everyone seems to follow, the proving "blue print", that can get very predictable, which is never good for telling a good story.
Your middle sentence seems correct - the rules vary by genre, and in various horror sub-genre's the priority can be to setup an aspect of that world... Per your last note - this is where good writing comes in. We generally need a passage = a conflict that is the fulcrum of the story. Otherwise we are left without an vicarious experienc - unless the intention is the art presented as itself. It is uppon the structure that a good writer delivers something new and compelling.
You could argue that atoms lack inherent structure, as they consist of particle-wave fields; we impose structure on them for the sake of simplification and explication. A parallel argument might apply to story narratives.
If my character's taking a dump in the bathroom, eventually, they're gonna have to wipe, flush, stand, and leave the room. So, if we're not allowed to describe a character's movement, then what?
Oh dear there are still people who don’t understand that human ability is a mix of strengths and weaknesses, plenty of people spell well and have absolutely no creativity. Spelling is easy to fix, it’s intelligence and style you want to find. This attitude was prevalent in the 60s and 70s and still mentioned here, very amusing error on his part.
Ari Aster is a buffoon. His script for Midsommar was terrible, structure or no structure. And he bombed big time on his last film, losing about 30 million $$. So, I would say he is not this super artist they make him out to be.
Here is our full interview with Steve - ruclips.net/video/adVxPaj17rU/видео.html
Tarantino once said the script should not just be a blueprint and should be an enjoyable read. He said lean into the prose but not too much so to where it’s a novel. Interesting to see different perspectives.
Good comment!
We could look at the distinction between writers and writer/directors as well - unless the former has relationships to pipeline to they need to keep to forms expected by the general (readers) market. Tarantino can play as loosely or deeply as he wished to...
He only got attention because he used vulgar and sexually explicit language, which hadn't been done before. He also made gangsters the leads with personalities. But the novelty faded.
@@DAMON409 Haha!
Steve Douglas-Craig has been my favourite guest so far because what he said - though it's not entirely revelatory - he says it in a way that I can understand because I too like structure and he has provided me certain insights that genuinely makes me want to practice more. I like rewriting drafts because it helps me internalise and truly understand what I want to say in my story and my characters' motivations. This channel has been an invaluable public resource, thank you so much!
Great to hear! Thanks for posting!
"Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist." Can't get away without the first part.
When I watched Godzilla minus one recently, at times I thought it was predictable. But its only because I understand movie structure. The general audience probably wouldnt recognize it as much. That structure though is what makes it great. The way it sets up the characters and the plot. The way it resolves them and pays off at the end. The way some things were forshadowed briefly but became important at the end like them mentioning the japanese government doesnt provide the planes with eject seats or how people are still missing hinting that the girl might still be alive or the guy who's never been to war but helps save the day or the final line "Is your war over?" The pay off is so satisfying because everything is perfectly set up and well structured. Good Structure is what makes a good movie.
Steve, thank you for helping to develop The Book Of Eli! One of my favourites.
The Book of Eli is my favorite Easter movie 😊
What do you think?
Useful, thanks
Wow!!!! So much useful info here. Will need to watch this another 50 times with notes to take it all in. Thank you.
Loved this. A few specific thoughts to bounce with, or against. Thank you!
I write novels and find this series very insightful.
Thanks for posting Mark! Our best to you and your work!
@@filmcourage Thank you!
Very helpful! Thank you!
Great insights!
Thank you!
The character had a life before your movie and assuming they didn't die, will have a life afterwards. The movie is a pivotal time in that character's life story.
This was extremely useful to me. Thx.
Glad it was helpful!
Everything Steve says here is 💯 percent spot-on. Thanks for having him on the channel. Definitely sharing this one. 🙌🏾
Thanks Jay! Great to see you discover this one. Also keep an eye out for more segments with Andy Guerdat. Think you will enjoy that one as well. Happy Holidays and a blessed 2024 to come!
I found this particular video instructive as to the differences between writing novels and crafting screenplays. Well done 👍
Glad it was helpful!
Don't agree that if you introduce the main character fifteen pages in is a sign of an inexperienced writer. It can be a sign of confidence in the story telling and help set the table of what's to come. You see it in horror and thrillers all the time. Scream, Jaws the Chaser etc etc. But maybe the argument is the "killer" is the main character but a classic like Psycho broke that rule beautifully. To me, is it a compelling story or not - thats it. I read scripts all the time and when I smell the basic structure that everyone seems to follow, the proving "blue print", that can get very predictable, which is never good for telling a good story.
Your middle sentence seems correct - the rules vary by genre, and in various horror sub-genre's the priority can be to setup an aspect of that world... Per your last note - this is where good writing comes in. We generally need a passage = a conflict that is the fulcrum of the story. Otherwise we are left without an vicarious experienc - unless the intention is the art presented as itself. It is uppon the structure that a good writer delivers something new and compelling.
I like that background.
Nice & Thanks :)
So, if you can't even tell the actor how to move... you can't make scenes without dialogue?
A screen play is not literature. Good advice
COOL
This is the real deal.
everything needs an structure, dont you think? even atoms have structure let alone a film
You could argue that atoms lack inherent structure, as they consist of particle-wave fields; we impose structure on them for the sake of simplification and explication. A parallel argument might apply to story narratives.
Who is he?
Steve Douglas-Craig
If my character's taking a dump in the bathroom, eventually, they're gonna have to wipe, flush, stand, and leave the room. So, if we're not allowed to describe a character's movement, then what?
Oh dear there are still people who don’t understand that human ability is a mix of strengths and weaknesses, plenty of people spell well and have absolutely no creativity. Spelling is easy to fix, it’s intelligence and style you want to find. This attitude was prevalent in the 60s and 70s and still mentioned here, very amusing error on his part.
I want to read the screenplay with no characters, no structure, no plot, no setting, and no story.
HATE THESE MISTAKES
Hey, Film Courage, about script mistakes: Your video titles are total click-bait.
I cannt beleeve peeple wood send scrips in wit bad speeling.
‘ 🎬🌲✨
Ari Aster is a buffoon. His script for Midsommar was terrible, structure or no structure. And he bombed big time on his last film, losing about 30 million $$. So, I would say he is not this super artist they make him out to be.