"One Page per Minute" = SUCKS!!

[Birdman]

Whose idea was this anyway?

I'm having difficulty with this brutally severe "1 page per minute" philosophy regarding writing a screenplay. I envision scenes within my head and I try to convey these images within my script. I'm on page 19 right now, but it doesn't seem like 19 minutes of film footage has passed by. I fear I'm looking at a 3-hour butt-nummer of a movie when I'm finally finished. Here are my issues:

(1) In "Lord of The Rings" we have a spectacular scene where Gandalf races down the side of a mountain with a huge army of horse-bound soldiers in a surprise attack on the attacking enemy. He has the sun at his back creating an extremely memorable scene with amazing special effects. Any movie goer would be truly amazed at the scene in a theater. Here's my issue:

To keep with the "page-per-minute" dogma, one might write this scene as done here:

=========================================

EXT. SIDE OF MOUNTAIN - DAY

Gandalf and a legion of horse-mounted soldiers race down the side of a mountain with the sun blazing behind them. They attack the unsuspecting enemy.

=========================================

So here we have a small, emotionless, robotic section of screenplay script depicting one of the most powerful cinemagraphic scenes in movie history. It's quickly spat out in a couple of fairly unflattering sentences. To read the two sentences written above in no way adequately depicts what happens in the movie ...but if you start adding in any extra detail to try and emphasize the importance of the scene you endanger breaking the "page per minute" rule. ....What do you do????

In contrast:

(2) If you have a back and forth conversation going on between two characters you could end up with several pages of script that only translates to 20 seconds or so of film footage. For example:

====================================

INT. KITCHEN - DAY

JOE

You suck!

SAM

No I don't

JOE

Yes you do!

SAM

Screw you!

JOE

NO! ...Screw you!

SAM

No, Go screw yourself!

etc.

etc.

etc.

So here we have a scene with a quick, rapid fire verbal exchange. Your text quickly moves down the page much faster than a second hand on a clock. This exchange could easily eat up three pages of script but only translate to 20 or so seconds of film footage. ...What do you do?



Is the overall idea that everything will balance out in the end? In other words, some pages exceed the "page per minute" rule but they end up being balanced by scenes with quick exchanges that use much less script time?

-Birdman

P.S. I am very disappointed on how restrictive these scripts become based on the "page per minute" rule. I don't see how anyone could ever truly understand what I'm seeing within my mind based on the extremely limited amount of script space I'm allowed to use for communication what I see. I'm finding that a script for a typical 105 minute movie that is now ready for production is ending up 187 pages long. The rule doesn't seem to apply here. ...Why is that? .......Also, if you are a well-known script writer you get to exceed the "page per minute" rule. Why is one "equally creative" person allowed to blatantly break the formatting rules whereas another is not?

 

[rayw]

is this normal? is it 'acceptable' (whatever that really means)?

Not normal.
Is acceptable.

 

[maz]

Not normal.
Is acceptable.

Certainly concise

I just think about films I've seen where there are long suspenseful scenes where one character stalks another or whatever. Those pages of the script must be lengthy sections of dialogue-free scenes, I guess. I always try to imagine the screenplay when I watch anything these days, which probably says somethng about my state of mind...

 

[rayw]

Certainly concise

I always try to imagine the screenplay when I watch anything these days...

Concise is gooooooooood.

Don't imagine.
Read: http://www.imsdb.com/latest/

 

[directorik]

Those pages of the script must be lengthy sections of dialogue-free scenes, I guess.

Not necessarily. Those pages can be quite short.

Going full circle; that why the "one page/one minute" standard is for
the entire script - not page for page. There may be five pages of
dialogue that will take up 90 seconds of screen time and then "The
battle ensues" which is one line and 5 minutes of screen time.

A long suspenseful scenes where one character stalks another or
whatever could be one page - or half a page - and be several minutes
of screen time.

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

Just as soon as you start trying to make your dreams come true in whatever path you take, in come all of the "common sense" people telling you that you're just a dreamer. You're not being realistic. The odds against your success are overwhelming. They tell you, "Only a select few can actually pull it off". ...the list goes on and on. But strangely enough, it's the people who don't listen to this reasoning that end up being the "select few" who actually DO end up pulling it off. THEY end up being the oddball examples everyone else posts about in forum threads.

You're absolutely right - it's the people who keep going despite all that who end up actually pulling it off. Well, at least the few we hear about all the time at least. That's the catch though - we only hear about those who actually pulled it off, and never about the ones who kept on going despite the odds and still ended up either crashing and burning or else just gradually fade away. So while it's absolutely true that if you give up you'll never succeed, it's also unfortunately true that most who don't give up won't succeed either. It's just like lottery tickets; if you don't buy one, it's impossible to win - but buying one doesn't actually improve your odds significantly. And yet for some reason newspapers never seem to run headlines like "100 Million Lottery Losers Again This Week!".

But that's also beside the point. While there's definitely a certain romantic appeal to fighting the naysayers, just you against the world, and hoping to succeed despite all odds - that's not the only choice other than just giving up. Most of the advice in this thread is about ways to improve your chances of beating the odds, not suggesting you stop writing because of those odds.

I think the key is "How far are you willing to push for a quality product?". This applies to anything you do in life. How many rock bands have outstanding debut albums only to follow-up with mediocre albums at best. Groups like "Foreigner", Alice in Chains" and "Guns and Roses" never managed to beat their first musical endeavors.

If someone ends up looking at their first script that they LOVED and now feel that it is had sub-par execution ....then they simply didn't push it far enough. They compromised on quality. The talent and skill was obviously there ...it just didn't get the technical effort that it deserved.

Those are great examples, but for the opposite reason you're citing them. All three of those groups certainly did beat their first musical endeavors - we just never hear about them anymore.

For instance nobody really remembers "Hollywood Rose", even though the lineup was basically GnR. All the members had been in multiple bands before that, and when they did finally officially become GnR they played the LA clubs for a couple of years before they recorded their first EP (which didn't really go anywhere). Their first (and most successful) full album was the end result of over seven years of the various band members developing their skills, songs, and stage performances in various other musical endeavors. I'm sure all of them thought their first bands/songs/shows were great, but it took a whole lot of work until they had a "first" album that would make the rest of the world agree with their assessment.

So it's not just a question of how far they were willing to push - it's a question of reaching a point where your perception of your own work is realistic, so that you know whether you need to push harder or not. That tends to come from experience, practice, and feedback - and whatever the area, when you're first starting out your perception of your own work tends to be skewed in a highly optimistic direction because you simply don't have the skills and experience necessary to judge it accurately.

 

[Sweetie]

Well, mine was posted as a Sci-Fi "Adventure" ...so at least I'm in one of the best categories to be in. As far as the (R) rating goes ...It's easier to cut something down than to add it in. They can change my "Shit!" to "Damn!" if they want.

I'm amazed that you think it's as simple as that to change a R rating to a PG. You can have a "whatever" attitude to it. It doesn't affect me at all. It doesn't bother me if you spend the next few years eating cat food wondering why your masterpiece gets very little interest from the studios.

you can't deduce a screenplay is incorrectly targeted just because it draws from a diverse group of movie goers or because certain elements of everyday human life are included. You would need a lot more info than just that! That's like saying a novel is incorrectly targeted because the words, tree, fish, coin, football, and lips are in it.

You're correct, there's not enough information to reach a conclusive accurate deduction. I assumed you wouldn't misrepresent your script when asking for advice. If you misrepresent information, the advice you're going to get here isn't going to do you much good.

#4 Science Fiction 612 $21,525,857,020 4,089,216,483 9.42%
#2 Adventure 570 $34,954,489,527 $61,323,666 21.29%

BTW: 25% of the top-grossing movies in the last 20 years were Sci-Fi's. Six out of these twenty movies were "Superhero" movies ...to which I fully expect my main character to have an action figure made in her likeness!

So I'm in the 11 out of 20 in the target audience range. ....Not too bad!

I love it how you seem to completely ignore the R rating of those films.

Don't you find it interesting that the top earners of the last 10 years were all part of a franchise, and none of them were the first.

1 PG-13 2,288 $77,277,192,507 $33,774,997 46.49%
2 R 3,976 $45,817,658,265 $11,523,556 27.57%
3 PG 1,084 $32,528,891,768 $30,008,203 19.57%

So once you make your film R rating, you reduce the earning capacity by 66%. That's a statistic that people who have 8 figures to invest will know.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you need to know your market and what your market earns. There are successful R rating sci-fi adventure movies out there. They are in the minority. The large majority of successful sci-fi/adventure movies have a PG rating. You may very well have the next big thing, not being aware of the difference

Look at the successful movies on the R rating list:
1 23 The Passion of the Christ NM $370,782,930 2004^
2 59 The Matrix Reloaded WB $281,576,461 2003
3 62 The Hangover WB $277,322,503 2009
4 73 The Hangover Part II WB $254,464,305 2011
5 92 Beverly Hills Cop Par. $234,760,478 1984
6 96 The Exorcist WB $232,906,145 1973^
7 108 Ted Uni. $218,815,487 2012
8 115 Saving Private Ryan DW $216,540,909 1998
9 122 300 WB $210,614,939 2007
10 126 Wedding Crashers NL $209,255,921 2005
11 132 Terminator 2: Judgment Day TriS $204,843,345 1991
12 152 Gladiator DW $187,705,427 2000
13 178 Pretty Woman BV $178,406,268 1990
14 184 There's Something About Mary Fox $176,484,651 1998
15 192 Air Force One Sony $172,956,409 1997
16 193 Rain Man MGM $172,825,435 1988
17 195 The Matrix WB $171,479,930 1999
18 203 Bridesmaids Uni. $169,106,725 2011
19 212 Hannibal MGM $165,092,268 2001
20 219 Django Unchained Wein. $162,805,434 2012
21 226 The Heat Fox $159,557,070 2013
22 228 The Firm Par. $158,348,367 1993
23 231 Scary Movie Mira. $157,019,771 2000
24 232 Fatal Attraction Par. $156,645,693 1987
25 242 Jerry Maguire Sony $153,952,592 1996
26 243 Beverly Hills Cop II Par. $153,665,036 1987
27 246 Sex and the City WB (NL) $152,647,258 2008
28 248 Rambo: First Blood Part II TriS $150,415,432 1985
29 249 Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines WB $150,371,112 2003
30 250 We're the Millers WB $150,221,639 2013

They were written in a way that wasn't aimed at the family market.

The market would be whoever enjoyed movies like "Kill Bill", "E.T.", "Erin Brockovich", "The Matrix" and the "Star Trek" movies.

My concern came from your examples being all over the map. ET and most of Star Trek is family. Kill Bill is about as far from family as you can be. The Matrix is and Erin Brockovich appeal to different markets.


Top 10 Worldwide grossing films based on Box Office for the last 5 years:
1 Avatar PG-13 Fox $2,782.3 $760.5 27.3% $2,021.8 72.7% 2009^
3 Marvel's The Avengers PG-13 BV $1,518.6 $623.4 41.0% $895.2 59.0% 2012
4 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 PG-13 WB $1,341.5 $381.0 28.4% $960.5 71.6% 2011
5 Iron Man 3 PG-13 BV $1,215.4 $409.0 33.7% $806.4 66.3% 2013
6 Transformers: Dark of the Moon PG-13 P/DW $1,123.8 $352.4 31.4% $771.4 68.6% 2011
8 Skyfall PG-13 Sony $1,108.6 $304.4 27.5% $804.2 72.5% 2012
9 The Dark Knight Rises PG-13 WB $1,084.4 $448.1 41.3% $636.3 58.7% 2012
11 Toy Story 3 G BV $1,063.2 $415.0 39.0% $648.2 61.0% 2010
12 Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides PG-13 BV $1,045.7 $241.1 23.1% $804.6 76.9% 2011
15 Alice in Wonderland (2010) PG BV $1,025.5 $334.2 32.6% $691.3 67.4% 2010

In the last 5 years, 8 were PG-13 and 2 were PG. That leaves very little space in the top 10 for R rating movies.

The highest grossing R Rating movie came up at 77th on the box office list (which was also more than 5 years ago).

If your aim is to write #1 movies, don't you think knowing this basic information would be worthwhile?

I'm writing it as how I would like to see it up on the screen.

There is nothing wrong with writing movies that are R rating. There is nothing wrong with writing movies that you'd like to see on the screen. It's smart to write what you'd like to see. What I'm saying is it's irresponsible and unrealistic to write R Rating movies that will require 8 figure budget without understanding who exactly your target market is and how big that market is.

It would likely need an eight figure investment and a high-eight figure one to get it made.

But why waste time writing something designed for a 6 figure budget? Shouldn't we all be writing scripts intended for the #1 slot and let the industry decide how much they want to spend on it?

Knowing what will get made will help you get paid, if you don't pay attention to this, you might as well play the lottery.

Wouldn't it be great if the world worked like that.

Good luck with your writing. I really hope you get your script made and sold and prove me wrong.

 

[Birdman]

ItDonnedOnMe,

I can't argue with anything your posted other than I followed GnR after "Appetite for Destruction" and nothing they put out after that album matched the zeal of that album. True, they all worked on musical endeavors prior, but Apatite was still considered their debut album.

Sooner or later in any venue a person has to "pony up" with a first of something. Some bands developed their sound over time and crushed their debut albums with much later albums (Pink Floyd, U2) and I'm sure there's a lot of screenplay writers who are doing the exact same thing with their screenplays.

One thing we can both agree on, though, is that "execution" is at the center of success either now or later in one's profession. It doesn't matter how good something is if it's poorly executed.

If anyone reading this thread is working on their screenplay idea ...and they are executing it in the most professional way possible (no errors) ...then they have just as much of a chance as anyone of making it to the movie level.

The difference between a lottery ticket and a screenplay is that a writer has control over what he or she is doing. The writer can make or break it based on level of desire. You're at the mercy of "odds" when it comes to the lottery.

Nice post!

-Birdman

 

[Birdman]

Sweetie,

I think I've got it now! I've taken everything you've posted and re-wrote my script based on all of your stats and "You'd better rethink" philosophies. I'm posting it here now! ....I think it will be a big hit! Everyone will love it because it covers the entire spectrum and the Producers will love it because it's low budget.

Here it is:

=====================================

FADE IN

I/E. SOME MYSTERIOUS UNOBJECTIONABLE PLACE - DAY/NIGHT

Something very unique but at the same time
completely unobjectionable is happening. Nobody
is offended and everyone laughs, cries and their lives
are changed.

UNIDENTIFIED DIVERSE PERSON
(inquisitively)
Is everybody happy?


EQUALLY DIVERSE PERSON #1
(emotionally)
Yes!


EQUALLY DIVERSE PERSON #2
(excitedly)
Me too!

EQUALLY DIVERSE PERSON #3
(emotionally)
I know I am!

Everyone joins in a group hug. Tears of joy flow
as a beautiful diversely-colored sunset
descends on the horizon.


FADE OUT

THE END

=====================================



See you at the box office!

-Birdman

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

I can't argue with anything your posted other than I followed GnR after "Apatite for Destruction" and nothing they put out after that album matched the zeal of that album. True, they all worked on musical endeavors prior, but Apatite was still considered their debut album.

That's my point though - it may be considered their debut album, but it wasn't their first serious musical endeavor, not by a long shot. It was just the first thing you were aware of. I'm sure they took every band and show they were in before that just as seriously, but no matter how serious they were it took a significant amount of time/practice/experience for them to reach a point where they could execute at a level necessary to achieve that kind of success.

One thing we can both agree on, though, is that "execution" is at the center of success either now or later in one's profession. It doesn't matter how good something is if it's poorly executed.

I'm not sure that quite makes sense - if execution is what matters, how could something be 'good but poorly executed'? If it's poorly executed, it's not good... at best you could say it has potential, but that's not the same thing as good.

But agreeing that execution is what matters, my point is that the ability to execute well is a function primarily of practice & experience. In general on a first try at anything you don't even have the appropriate frame of reference to judge the level of your own execution, so unless you happen to get lucky it's probably going to be worse than you think it is.

If anyone reading this thread is working on their screenplay idea ...and they are executing it in the most professional way possible (no errors) ...then they have just as much of a chance as anyone of making it to the movie level.

That would be true if we were talking about a pure meritocracy judged on some objective scale, but that's not the case. It's not like everyone writes their screenplays, throws them in a big pile, they all get read and ranked in order of quality (fewest errors?) and then the top 10% get made into films. I'm sure more good scripts don't get made into films than do each year; in fact just based on experience I'd guess more bad scripts get made into films than good ones - because there are dozens of factors that go into deciding what films to make and quality is only one (and clearly not the most important at that).

The difference between a lottery ticket and a screenplay is that a writer has control over what he or she is doing. The writer can make or break it based on level of desire. You're at the mercy of "odds" when it comes to the lottery.

But the writer has no control over what anyone else is doing - and ultimately it's other people who will make the call on whether your script gets made or not, on some level that's a game of odds too. The lottery player has control over what numbers they pick - but if their numbers don't come up it doesn't matter how much effort they put into picking the numbers in the first place. The same is true of a script in many ways - you might write the most incredible sci-fi screenplay ever written, but if the studio had a couple sci-fi films that bombed last year they may have decided not to do sci-fi for a few years - so your numbers don't come up. Or your script requires a $100 million budget and they've decided not to spend more than $50 million on anything that's not an existing franchise. There's a million reasons they might decide to pass on your script that have nothing to do with the quality - the quality only really comes into play once you've passed all these other hurdles first.

So no - the writer can't just make or break it based on 'level of desire', any more than the lottery player can - this isn't "The Secret" where if you fail it's because you just didn't want it enough. The best you can do is buy more tickets. From a screenwriting standpoint that would mean writing multiple scripts, in different genres, targeted at different audiences and budget ranges. This will make you more appealing to an agent, because they not only have a better chance of selling one of them but they also know that if they do manage to sell one they can probably sell the others (and/or get you jobs writing others). Plus it's likely the practice of writing multiple screenplays will improve the overall quality of your writing, so that if you do manage to get a script to the point where someone is judging it on it's own merits it'll be as good as possible.

 

[rayw]

OP is looking for a back door.

Let him have it.

 

[Sweetie]

But the writer has no control over what anyone else is doing - and ultimately it's other people who will make the call on whether your script gets made or not, on some level that's a game of odds too. The lottery player has control over what numbers they pick - but if their numbers don't come up it doesn't matter how much effort they put into picking the numbers in the first place. The same is true of a script in many ways - you might write the most incredible sci-fi screenplay ever written, but if the studio had a couple sci-fi films that bombed last year they may have decided not to do sci-fi for a few years - so your numbers don't come up. Or your script requires a $100 million budget and they've decided not to spend more than $50 million on anything that's not an existing franchise. There's a million reasons they might decide to pass on your script that have nothing to do with the quality - the quality only really comes into play once you've passed all these other hurdles first.

High end filmmaking is all about the right material, with the right attachments at the right time.

All you can do is think and increase your odds of success. The time vs reward can be very high when you're a writer. Not every spec script is going to sell.

 

[HKB]

Just add lots of B-roll.

 

[directorik]

If anyone reading this thread is working on their screenplay idea ...and they are executing it in the most professional way possible (no errors) ...then they have just as much of a chance as anyone of making it to the movie level.

This is very sweet and optimistic and inspirational. On the 24th I
asked if you want it straight or with sugar. It's pretty obvious what
you want to hear.

Not every screenplay written in the most professional way possible
(no errors) has just as much of chance as anyone of making it to
the movie level. But that would be nice if it were true. It would be
nice if level of desire was what producers looked for, wouldn’t it?

Or would it?

You need to pop over to the peer review websites and read 40 scripts.
Each one of those writers deeply desires their script makes it to the
movie stage. Most are written in the most professional way possible
(no errors). Yet most of them would not make good movies. No matter
how deep their level of desire is, some people just cannot write sellable
screenplays.

The difference between a lottery ticket and a screenplay is that a writer has control over what he or she is doing. The writer can make or break it based on level of desire. You're at the mercy of "odds" when it comes to the lottery.

You're incorrect. The writer has no control over the sale of the script.
The writer has total control over the writing. But no writer, no matter
their level of desire, can do anything at all about the sale of the script.
In fact, the “odds” are much lower and much more arbitrary than the
lottery. A “great” script may never get picked up. That happens all the
time. The winning number is always the winning number in the lottery.

Birdman, you want to believe in the hope and dream. That puts you in
the vast majority. A place like this can help focus the realistic writer.
You, clearly do not want to understand the business of movie making.
You want to believe it is egalitarian – that a professionally written
screenplay written by a writer with a high level of desire is what producers
are looking for. That every writer stands the same chance is getting the
script sold.

In my opinion a foolish way to approach this business of movie making.
But you are fighting hard to prove to others that your method is an option.

As some point you will either give up or come to the understanding that
this is business and there are things a writer must do to follow a path to
success. That hope does not sell a script. When (if) you ever get to that
point there are people here who can guide you. Until then you stay on
your track and fight the power!

 

[FantasySciFi]

"There's lies, damn lies and statistics!" - Mark Twain

So much of filmmaking 'practice' and 'rules' have evolved from statistical observation. The 'one page, one minute' is based on the simple observation of dividing the final film run time by the script length. It turns out that a 12 pt Courier page with 1" borders works out to roughly one page being one minute. It's not a rule but an observation. It is, however, a very useful guide for budgeting. Just like the observation that one page can take 1.5 - 3 hours to shoot. So when I get a short from a student, based on the dialogue-to-action, I can get a sense of the shoot time. In my experience, if I'm handed a 15 page script, it will typically have 10-16 scenes, take about 30 shoot hours (or 3 days) and have a final run time of about 10-13 minutes. This isn't absolute but quite often true. The longer the script, the closer it falls to the 1 page=1 minute rule. I'll also use the "eighths" to estimate how long a location will be needed.

I want to point out that there is a difference between the production aspect and writing aspect. As a writer, I don't worry about the pages per se. Putting myself in the role of the viewer, unless something is extraordinarily compelling, sitting in a theater seats for more than 2.5 hours is uncomfortable. Understanding the 1p1m guide, I keep my scripts to less than 120 pages. Given there should be more action than dialogue, that 100 pages should be more like 110-120 pages. For a reader at a production company, a 90-110 page script typically translates to 110-120 minutes of screen time.

The UCLA writing model with its acts, crises and transitions that some writers have characterized to exact page counts is based on statistics. Looking over hundreds of successful films, statistical trends have been found. By the first twenty pages, the theme, main characters and initial challenge are presented. Again, these aren't RULES but guidelines of what has proven successful. Romance novels have a formula that has been highly successful. Romance publishers don't want mavericks but creative people who can follow the formula. Movie studios are businesses that operate in a similar way.

I think there is a confusion. What an independent filmmaker does with a script versus what a studio does with a script. As a scriptwriter, you're goal is to sell/option your script. Once that happens, get over it. It will be changed. The director has ideas, the producers have ideas. The studio has ideas. As long as you get your money and screen credit, be satisfied. If you sell it to a major studio, you probably won't see major screen credit. You're transferring copyright and, as a first timer, probably any other claim to profit from sequels. It will be re-worked by studio insiders (some who won't get credit, if that's a consolation). There is a reason why you see many Writer/Director combos. When you're both, you have more creative control. Which is why most indie filmmakers direct (and produce) their own writing. It sucks. Many directors don't like touching other screenwriters' works unless they're friends or fellow students. But take heart, it does happen.

Damn statistics. All that hubbub about audiences, genres, etc. spans from 1995-2013. Each year is different. Lumping them together is deceptive. You see, that audience from 5 years ago, is now 5 years older. Interests change. While I have no crystal ball, there will be a slew of knock-offs come spring of this summer's blockbusters. Also, did I mention studio want to make money? So they leverage successful projects (what books are big for teens, i.e., the next 'Twilight'?) or past successful assets ('Mummy', superhero flicks, etc.). With a record of success, they have a better chance of getting back their money and making a profit. Some new, unknown writer with little to no track record--not so much. The author of "50 Shades of Grey" did not write the screenplay. However, I guarantee that multiple studios are looking for one-offs which will be released sometime before or after to capitalize on the anticipation. It will definitely be rated 'R'! Will it be financially successful? That remains to be seen. (Can one buy stock in BDSM supply houses?) Scarily, the 20 yo watching 50 Shades next year was was 15 and watching Twilight five years before.

Filmmaking and screenwriting are about networking. Hopefully you can meet a likeminded soul and you can bring to life your production. If a new screenwriter can't be assured of selling the next 'tentpole production' to a studio, they can successfully sell to the independent market or produce it themselves. When you sit down to produce a film yourself, you get an immediate wake up call regarding budget as it impacts the script. You write fewer scenes, limit the number of actors, limit the locations, and are conscientious about action sequences. Screen time=money. The cost of actors, props, wardrobe, locations, permits, equipment, supplies, music & sound rights, post-production, distribution, fees for festivals, screenings, etc. Every shoot hour takes about a 1-2.5 hours for editing. So one script page can translate to 6+ production hours. That 100 page script becomes 600 hours or 60 days or 3 months. That, of course, ignores CGI, special effects, compositing, composition, scoring, and all the pre-production work of location scouting, casting, etc. When you actually get into the film business side of the script, suddenly that $10 million budget makes sense. To invest that a producer REALLY needs to believe in the script's ability to make a movie to make a PROFIT. Does it mean you shouldn't think big? No. But being realistic starts to replace pie-in-the-sky. If you're shooting on the weekends, probably you want a smaller script.

When you work for a studio and they say, "write big" you can pretty much be pie-in-the-sky. When you look at the script requests that producers put out on Inkscript, you get a sense of the scope of what sells--characters, genres, budgets, etc. Selling to these producers may seem like a sell-out but it comes down to whether you are writing to make money and see your creations made into pictures, or as an exercise in creative writing for your personal development. If the latter, you need to decide if you're willing to take the step of becoming the director/producer of your own work. Sometimes we write commercially so as to build up credit to produce our pet project(s) later. Did I mention this business is about networking?

Everyone on this forum has their own reasons for writing. Some of us have worked in many roles both in front and behind the camera. My experiences inform my writing and vice versa. I have no issue emulating successful practices but that doesn't mean I need to imitate. In the end, I take responsibility for my story and value the feedback I get on my work from peers I respect. Sometimes I need a reality check or be called on points in the script. I've had to cut out some of my favorite sections. One of the things you need to survive as a screenwriter (or any aspect of filmmaking) is to have a thick skin and not be too attached to the final product. Sometimes, despite the best intentions, your work ends up on the cutting room floor. As long as you get paid and/or credit, it's a step forward. As writer/director, you can always gather up the clippings to put together a director's cut for later release.

 

[Birdman]

This is very sweet and optimistic and inspirational. On the 24th I
asked if you want it straight or with sugar. It's pretty obvious what
you want to hear.

...What I wanted to hear was how important the "page-per-minute" dogma was in writing a screenplay. That was the point of my original post. Whereas I respect your opinion, I do not agree with it on several levels.

Not every screenplay written in the most professional way possible
(no errors) has just as much of chance as anyone of making it to
the movie level. But that would be nice if it were true. It would be
nice if level of desire was what producers looked for, wouldn’t it?

...What I'm talking about has nothing to do with "Desire". You read words and didn't get their meaning. What I meant was that if an unknown screenwriter formats his or her screenplay with excellent formatting skills, then their screenplay has nothing PREVENTING it from going forward. Up the next level. You can have a great screenplay improperly formatted that ends up binned whereas a less powerful screenplay will still have the ability to be recognized.

So I'm sticking to EXACTLY what I wrote. If you properly format your screenplay you have just as much possibility of having your screenplay accepted as the next guy. You've made it past the first level of screening. After that .....it's about quality, marketing and all of the other political horseshit you all are so preoccupied with. You can work your way UP the ladder after you're screenplay is formatted correctly. However, you can't if it's in the trash can.

You need to pop over to the peer reviewwebsites and read 40 scripts.
Each one of those writers deeply desires their script makes it to the
movie stage. Most are written in the most professional way possible
(no errors). Yet most of them would not make good movies. No matter
how deep their level of desire is, some people just cannot write sellable
screenplays.

...As I said before, these people had just as much "opportunity" to have their script made into a movie, but they didn't write a screenplay with enough power behind it to make it all happen. Had they done so ...then maybe they wouldn't all be on that website wondering why? BUT! ...they didn't get their screenplay nixed because of formatting errors.

You're incorrect. The writer has no control over the sale of the script.
The writer has total control over the writing. But no writer, no matter
their level of desire, can do anything at all about the sale of the script.
In fact, the “odds” are much lower and much more arbitrary than the
lottery. A “great” script may never get picked up. That happens all the
time. The winning number is always the winning number in the lottery.

...I disagree with you 100%. A screenplay writer DOES have some control over the sale of their script. If I "bust ass" and push my script into as many powerful hands as I can, then I DO have control. After all, I could choose NOT to bust ass and maybe send it to one or two outfits. That's a very low level of control, but it's STILL controlling the fate of my script.

If nobody picks up a screenwriter's script ...and it's FABULOUS ...then someone eventually will. Capitalism has a way of making this happen. Sure, there may be great scripts out there that should make it, but don't. But if there's money to be made and YOUR script can make that money, sooner or later it will.

And if you don't believe that, directorik, then why do you even press keys on your keyboard?

Birdman, you want to believe in the hope and dream. That puts you in
the vast majority. A place like this can help focus the realistic writer.
You, clearly do not want to understand the business of movie making.
You want to believe it is egalitarian – that a professionally written
screenplay written by a writer with a high level of desire is what producers
are looking for. That every writer stands the same chance is getting the
script sold. In my opinion a foolish way to approach this business of movie making.
But you are fighting hard to prove to others that your method is an option.

...Never have I posted that "desire" is what producers are looking for. What producers are looking for is a script so damned wonderful that dollar signs dance in front of their eyes. That, coincidentally, is exactly what my script will end up being. There is nothing about "me" that would prevent a producer from buying my script if it's clearly a marketable document. They won't say, "He's old" or "He's white" or "He's not tall enough (or is too short)". I have just as much chance as ANYONE of having my script bought .....as long as I haven't done something to kill it along the way (like "130 pages" or "Improper formatting"). That's why I started this thread.

As some point you will either give up or come to the understanding that
this is business and there are things a writer must do to follow a path to
success. That hope does not sell a script. When (if) you ever get to that
point there are people here who can guide you. Until then you stay on
your track and fight the power!

...Sir, I think only one of us has not "given up". Only one of us feels that they have just as much opportunity as anyone to write something that someone else will buy.

Consequently, only one of us feels that the machine is just so big that it's nearly a lost cause proposition. Only one of us feels they would stand a better chance at winning the lottery than having a script (that THEY created) ultimately be purchased. Only one of us feels that the full force of their creative efforts is somehow less than six cold, sterile, lifeless numbers on a piece of white paper that anyone could buy from a neighborhood 7-11 for a dollar.

Maybe you should come around to my way of thinking, directorik? ...One thing is for sure, ....You would definitely increase your odds for success!

-Birdman

 

[rayw]

OP is looking for a back door.

Let him have it.

 

[Birdman]

It's like a great screenplay, rayw. ...Ya just can't put it down!

-Birdman

 

[rayw]

It's like a great screenplay, rayw. ...Ya just can't put it down!

-Birdman

I'm sure it'll be fine.
Look forward to seeing it soon.

Fly free, Birdman.
Good luck and best wishes.

 

[directorik]

And if you don't believe that, directorik, then why do you even press keys on your keyboard?

I apologize. I won't press keys on my keyboard in conversation with you again.

I'm sorry to have offended you.

 

[Sweetie]

I have just as much chance as ANYONE of having my script bought

Ain't this sweet. You're correct, in one regard, you do have as much of a chance as anyone. Unfortunately, the chance of anyone selling their script is very, very low. It's only what you do to increase those odds that sets you apart from the rest.

.....as long as I haven't done something to kill it along the way (like "130 pages" or "Improper formatting"). That's why I started this thread.

Whether you kill it or not depends on where your script is in development. To give your script in the position of having the best chance of success, you need to attach people with value to it. This isn't what writers consider their job. It's really a producers job. If you want to have the best chance of success, you need to step outside the realm of a writer, otherwise you'll get the same odds as every other writer who creates a masterpiece gets.

Tell me, how long did it take to get Lord of the Rings made into a feature film? Is your story that good? Are you willing to wait that long?