Everyone, well mostly everyone, has been telling me as though it were a fact, which it is for the majority of people, that first screenplays are never sold, but that you should polish them. There are numerous contradictions in what is said. It is almost like they were actually saying to polish it because it might get sold. And everyone says that you'll never get established as a director, let along be financed, unless you start learning all the ropes for the next few years. While I appreciate this, they have overlooked one thing. Soft core pornography! How many people pay with their credit card to access member sites for a day of titilation is not known. All that is known is that loads of people look for it and buy it when they find it. Therefore any first-time director's or filmmaker's films, whether film or vhs, that is being marketed to the public, even on a website, is guaranteed to sell if has got pornography in it. Of course one has to seem to sink to a moral low to make films like this, but there is a difference between porn films that have very little story, and films with a story that include some porn. It is rumoured that a first porn film can finance a second feature film.
But they've overlooked one thing
- Thread starter inetbuff
- Start date
It's an interesting discussion.
I watched a movie, Morvern Callar, this weekend that featured many, many nude scenes by it's actresses. I have also, seen my fair share of soft porn (What? I was once a horny teenage boy!), and MC offered just as much if not more nudity than some soft porn films. Also, it's not like the nudity in this movie didn't revolve around sex ... there was a slightly graphic sex scene, and numerous scenes involving hinted at or vaguely shown sex acts ... it was as sexual as some soft porn films.
Of course, you'll get a lot of people screaming about the artistic differences, but who's to say what art is? Normally, I would say that if you intend it as porn, it's porn. If you intend it as art, it's art. So, I guess morally it depended what you intend it as. And if that is the case, from the get go here you'd have to say it was porn.
I would never do it, but if you could live with yourself after the fact, who am I to say you are wrong?
Poke
I watched a movie, Morvern Callar, this weekend that featured many, many nude scenes by it's actresses. I have also, seen my fair share of soft porn (What? I was once a horny teenage boy!), and MC offered just as much if not more nudity than some soft porn films. Also, it's not like the nudity in this movie didn't revolve around sex ... there was a slightly graphic sex scene, and numerous scenes involving hinted at or vaguely shown sex acts ... it was as sexual as some soft porn films.
Of course, you'll get a lot of people screaming about the artistic differences, but who's to say what art is? Normally, I would say that if you intend it as porn, it's porn. If you intend it as art, it's art. So, I guess morally it depended what you intend it as. And if that is the case, from the get go here you'd have to say it was porn.
I would never do it, but if you could live with yourself after the fact, who am I to say you are wrong?
Poke
i dont know guys u cant just start thinking like that when u wanna make a film...u cant like think:yes i must put soft porn on my script and adjust the rest with the soft porn.....u just have to try to do ur thing and if they like it its ok if they dont ok again!esp when its ur first film, i think itd be totally disastrous to change it as u think it would be accepted by producers or sthng...anyway u know best and i guess im being knaive...pls rent if u havent seen THE BIG PICTURE with Kevin bacon..its no great film but its funny and ull get some clues about what could happen to u if u dont do ur thing :wink:
First Films
There is no doubt that porn is massively profitable. However, it's very rarely script driven.
Almost anyone can make and make profit from porn, the question is, would you want to? Plus, if you really want to make a reputation as a screenwriter, do you want the first entry (pun intended) on your CV to read "Rubber Housewife II"
The reason that any screenwriter should work and rework a script is because it's almost impossible to get it right first draft. The nature of the industry is to rewrite and then rewrite again. In fact, I wouldn't expect anything to get to screen that had less than 10 major rewrites. The hardest thing for a writer to learn is how to take notes and then get their head down to fix the problems.
The other factor which every creative should know, is that it takes at least nineteen bad ideas to get to one good one. That means that your first script is likely not to be your best idea. However, in the process of writing it, you will learn important stuff about writing.
What you will find helpful with your first script , is to get together a group of student actors and ask them to read the script through for you. This will probably be a painful experience, but nothing will tell you more about you dialogue and whether any of your script actually works than a read through.
There is no doubt that porn is massively profitable. However, it's very rarely script driven.
Almost anyone can make and make profit from porn, the question is, would you want to? Plus, if you really want to make a reputation as a screenwriter, do you want the first entry (pun intended) on your CV to read "Rubber Housewife II"
The reason that any screenwriter should work and rework a script is because it's almost impossible to get it right first draft. The nature of the industry is to rewrite and then rewrite again. In fact, I wouldn't expect anything to get to screen that had less than 10 major rewrites. The hardest thing for a writer to learn is how to take notes and then get their head down to fix the problems.
The other factor which every creative should know, is that it takes at least nineteen bad ideas to get to one good one. That means that your first script is likely not to be your best idea. However, in the process of writing it, you will learn important stuff about writing.
What you will find helpful with your first script , is to get together a group of student actors and ask them to read the script through for you. This will probably be a painful experience, but nothing will tell you more about you dialogue and whether any of your script actually works than a read through.
I agree a read through with actual actors (not yourself) is the most productive way to test the strength of your work. It is easy to find people that are willing. I ussaully create a vague set in a large open room. Clothes hampers for walls cots for beds that sort of thing. I will film the read through as I would like to see it play out. Watching it over is a great tool.
I don't know
Perhaps I'm simply being pompous, but I like to think I have good ideas. I don't immediately go to the board with them and write out the whole thing when the idea slaps me. I usually let it simmer a bit. I think it out grow the characters from infancy into their roles in the story and splash a large dose of whatever's been wrong with me for my whole life loosely over the canvas and by the time the script is actually put to paper it is everything it can be.
I have worked things out for over seven years on a single script before moving to the writing process and if I were to rewrite it as many times as you guys seem to think is needed there's no way it would be even remotely the story that I set out to tell. I don't know about you, but I feel like that would destroy my vision of the story.
I know that the Hollywood way is to have things rewritten until every drop of originality is bleed from the script only to add overly stylized themes to in before it hits the screen, but I feel that there isn't enough trust put in the story itself or the writer for that matter. I think that's why we see so many borrowed ideas hit the screen these days. Writers seem to be afraid to put their heads on the chopping block and go down with the first draft. Eventually, things will change. Either producers and movie-goers will be forced to accept that originality is better than the played out old formulas and themes, or everything that we (the independents) love about the medium will die shortly before the entire institution collapses into bitter memory.
I say go the canvas with your first draft at least your heart is in it.
William J Long III
Perhaps I'm simply being pompous, but I like to think I have good ideas. I don't immediately go to the board with them and write out the whole thing when the idea slaps me. I usually let it simmer a bit. I think it out grow the characters from infancy into their roles in the story and splash a large dose of whatever's been wrong with me for my whole life loosely over the canvas and by the time the script is actually put to paper it is everything it can be.
I have worked things out for over seven years on a single script before moving to the writing process and if I were to rewrite it as many times as you guys seem to think is needed there's no way it would be even remotely the story that I set out to tell. I don't know about you, but I feel like that would destroy my vision of the story.
I know that the Hollywood way is to have things rewritten until every drop of originality is bleed from the script only to add overly stylized themes to in before it hits the screen, but I feel that there isn't enough trust put in the story itself or the writer for that matter. I think that's why we see so many borrowed ideas hit the screen these days. Writers seem to be afraid to put their heads on the chopping block and go down with the first draft. Eventually, things will change. Either producers and movie-goers will be forced to accept that originality is better than the played out old formulas and themes, or everything that we (the independents) love about the medium will die shortly before the entire institution collapses into bitter memory.
I say go the canvas with your first draft at least your heart is in it.
William J Long III
Applause I agree with that thought. I think a constant rewrite isn't the answer. I also believe a read through is good for two things. Not all the actors will have the same take as you and your original thought maybe lost in their interpretation. Change of verbiage may be required not a change in story or idea.Rewrites
Firstly, if you take seven years reworking your story, then the thing that hits the piece of paper isn't the first draft. It's a story that's had seven years of writing, and you are right, good preparation does go to produce better first drafts.
However, trying to make the piece perfect first draft slows the creative process for me. I'd rather spend some time plotting on file cards and making notes, bang out a rough first draft and get to know my characters. Usually by the end of the first draft I know them much better than when I first started writing. This allows me to go back and adjust the earlier parts of the film when I was still feeling my way. I then step away from the script for at least six weeks, go back to it, read it fresh and take notes. Stuff that looked stunning when I first looked at it, often doesn't look so great when I've got some distance from the project. I'll then go back and rewrite based on those thoughts. At this point I generally try to halve the amount of dialogue I've written, as I have a tendancy to over write in first draft.
The script then goes to my producer, who will pick up on things that I've missed, things that seemed obvious to me, but haven't translated onto the page. Mainly, these are character and plot inconsistencies. This process of notes and rewrites will go on until we both believe that the script works.
We then scout locations. This will often involve rewrites, as we find new elements in the location that will help shape the story.
Then we cast, read-through and run rehearsals. At this point re-writes will be developed to accomodate the performances of the actors, building on the strenghts that they bring to the party.
Then on location, during principle photography, additional rewrites may crop up to deal with contingencies we hadn't foreseen (location problems for instance)
For me, the script development process is something that makes the final product better. I don't believe that it has to take life out of a script.
As an independent film maker the time I invest in developing my script is the best thing I can do. It is the thing that makes everything else work.
I have never, ever had a first draft, that was anywhere as good as a fully developed script.
I've made a good living as a writer all my life, I've got a wall full of international awards to prove it and the one thing that I know for certain, is that good writing takes multiple drafts and that good ideas take time to develop.
This post was written in two drafts
Firstly, if you take seven years reworking your story, then the thing that hits the piece of paper isn't the first draft. It's a story that's had seven years of writing, and you are right, good preparation does go to produce better first drafts.
However, trying to make the piece perfect first draft slows the creative process for me. I'd rather spend some time plotting on file cards and making notes, bang out a rough first draft and get to know my characters. Usually by the end of the first draft I know them much better than when I first started writing. This allows me to go back and adjust the earlier parts of the film when I was still feeling my way. I then step away from the script for at least six weeks, go back to it, read it fresh and take notes. Stuff that looked stunning when I first looked at it, often doesn't look so great when I've got some distance from the project. I'll then go back and rewrite based on those thoughts. At this point I generally try to halve the amount of dialogue I've written, as I have a tendancy to over write in first draft.
The script then goes to my producer, who will pick up on things that I've missed, things that seemed obvious to me, but haven't translated onto the page. Mainly, these are character and plot inconsistencies. This process of notes and rewrites will go on until we both believe that the script works.
We then scout locations. This will often involve rewrites, as we find new elements in the location that will help shape the story.
Then we cast, read-through and run rehearsals. At this point re-writes will be developed to accomodate the performances of the actors, building on the strenghts that they bring to the party.
Then on location, during principle photography, additional rewrites may crop up to deal with contingencies we hadn't foreseen (location problems for instance)
For me, the script development process is something that makes the final product better. I don't believe that it has to take life out of a script.
As an independent film maker the time I invest in developing my script is the best thing I can do. It is the thing that makes everything else work.
I have never, ever had a first draft, that was anywhere as good as a fully developed script.
I've made a good living as a writer all my life, I've got a wall full of international awards to prove it and the one thing that I know for certain, is that good writing takes multiple drafts and that good ideas take time to develop.
This post was written in two drafts
Clive, if more indi filmmakers had the same conception of development as you do, the Studios would be in trouble, and indi filmmaking would be 100 times more prolific than it is today.
Unfortunately, the field is full of people with good ideas but enlarged egos and no understanding of the reality of indi filmmaking. They all think that they have THE idea that will make the next Mariachi. Unfortunately, for every Mariachi there are probably thousands of completed films, hundreds of thousands of scripts, and millions of ideas.
byw, the ego comment was not directed to anyone in particular.
Cheers.
Unfortunately, the field is full of people with good ideas but enlarged egos and no understanding of the reality of indi filmmaking. They all think that they have THE idea that will make the next Mariachi. Unfortunately, for every Mariachi there are probably thousands of completed films, hundreds of thousands of scripts, and millions of ideas.
byw, the ego comment was not directed to anyone in particular.
Cheers.
Agree. Everyone thinks there idea is the next big thing and that it is so good that if they just get it on film and distributed as fast as possible they will be rich. That I believe is the downfall for many indie filmakers is that they do it hoping for riches, fame and glory. Not as an art form. Which I believe it is. Any way my two cents.
The Big Idea
You guys have a point about people wanting to get rich quick via film, but I think wonder if any writer ever thinks that their ideas are the big ones. Honestly, I don't think it has as much to do with ego as it does perception. If you don't think that your story will have an effect on people why write it down in the first place. Personally, It takes two things for me to get to the writing stage. First it must interest me and I must want to see it on screen (not a difficult criteria for most people I don't imagine) and secondly will it be able to get across the question that drives the piece to begin with?
I write to answer questions that I have about what it means to be human and how to go about finding one's place in the world. I create scenerios to test my theories and insert character for events to happen to and around. My personal philosophies are present but only and undertone as the events play out and change the characters for better or worse.
I do think that writing for profit is a bad idea, but I think that we all believe that we have something great when we sit down at the drawing board. The only problem comes when some people deny the fact that the pride of other writers may actually be well-founded. So every time I see a post that says "everybody thinks they have the next big idea" I can't help but tack on the "but I'm the only one whose got it right" to go along with it. To put it simply everybodies ideas are great and prolific and profitable to someone else. The only problem any of us really face is finding those people who will love our ideas for what they are.
No offense is intended, I have simply seen too many "The Next Big Idea" posts in my time,
William J Long III
You guys have a point about people wanting to get rich quick via film, but I think wonder if any writer ever thinks that their ideas are the big ones. Honestly, I don't think it has as much to do with ego as it does perception. If you don't think that your story will have an effect on people why write it down in the first place. Personally, It takes two things for me to get to the writing stage. First it must interest me and I must want to see it on screen (not a difficult criteria for most people I don't imagine) and secondly will it be able to get across the question that drives the piece to begin with?
I write to answer questions that I have about what it means to be human and how to go about finding one's place in the world. I create scenerios to test my theories and insert character for events to happen to and around. My personal philosophies are present but only and undertone as the events play out and change the characters for better or worse.
I do think that writing for profit is a bad idea, but I think that we all believe that we have something great when we sit down at the drawing board. The only problem comes when some people deny the fact that the pride of other writers may actually be well-founded. So every time I see a post that says "everybody thinks they have the next big idea" I can't help but tack on the "but I'm the only one whose got it right" to go along with it. To put it simply everybodies ideas are great and prolific and profitable to someone else. The only problem any of us really face is finding those people who will love our ideas for what they are.
No offense is intended, I have simply seen too many "The Next Big Idea" posts in my time,
William J Long III
Great conversation. But let me make my position very clear.
1. I see nothing wrong with trying to get rich or make a living in filmmaking. I actually think that the “I’ll do it for the art” phylosophy is flawed for most commercial and for-profit indi filmmakers. Indeed, we only produce films that we think will be profitable, and we accommodate the story, script, cast, and crew to make it commercially appealing and likely to be distributed. So, yes! in part, we do it for the money. We are in the business of making movies.
2. I agree. If you do not think you have the best idea, your film will never get anywhere. MY problems is with people that think that they will be rich and famous with a great idea only. As if the “IDEA” had the ability to produce itself. So they set out to film their idea with a midi dv (and sometime a new 35mm of which they know nothing about) and no experience simply because “they guy from the mariachi did it”.
3. So my problem is with the “I don’t need the experience; I don’t need some guy in a suit telling me no; I don’t need an experienced director; I don’t need anyone; I don’t need funding; I can do everything myself because I am god” THAT is the type of EGO I am talking about. This is not a statement about student filmmakers, or first time filmmakers making their first short with a MINI DV. I am talking about the one who wants to by a 35mm camera to shoot a feature film and believes that he will be rich just because he has the best idea. The guy who wants to play with tigers and have never touched a tabby.
Only my 2 cents. Cheers.
1. I see nothing wrong with trying to get rich or make a living in filmmaking. I actually think that the “I’ll do it for the art” phylosophy is flawed for most commercial and for-profit indi filmmakers. Indeed, we only produce films that we think will be profitable, and we accommodate the story, script, cast, and crew to make it commercially appealing and likely to be distributed. So, yes! in part, we do it for the money. We are in the business of making movies.
2. I agree. If you do not think you have the best idea, your film will never get anywhere. MY problems is with people that think that they will be rich and famous with a great idea only. As if the “IDEA” had the ability to produce itself. So they set out to film their idea with a midi dv (and sometime a new 35mm of which they know nothing about) and no experience simply because “they guy from the mariachi did it”.
3. So my problem is with the “I don’t need the experience; I don’t need some guy in a suit telling me no; I don’t need an experienced director; I don’t need anyone; I don’t need funding; I can do everything myself because I am god” THAT is the type of EGO I am talking about. This is not a statement about student filmmakers, or first time filmmakers making their first short with a MINI DV. I am talking about the one who wants to by a 35mm camera to shoot a feature film and believes that he will be rich just because he has the best idea. The guy who wants to play with tigers and have never touched a tabby.
Only my 2 cents. Cheers.
I can't see any difference between those that read scripts, and those that go to the cinema. If you sit ten people down and tell them to take their pick from a hundred scripts, you'll see them picking one up after the other and reading the first couple of pages until one holds their attention, and then you'll end up with ten scripts that they have picked. Out of the one hundred scripts, these they say, are makable. But if you observe ten cinema goers without telling them, to see what films they pick to watch, you will see that they choose at random. They will pay their money to watch this film, that film, going only on the title, the stills, the stars. Even though serious film buffs would say that of that one hundred films only ten are good films. When you're looking at the stills trying to pick between them, you don't know if the films are good. You don't know if the films were selected by serious film makers who thought they were good. They're just stills and that's all you have to go on. Films entertain for a couple of hours, but they are rarely good. Any film production company could select any script from a hundred scripts and make it, and people will watch it.
When I write a screen play, I tend to write one draft and then another without looking at the first draft. So I have two screenplays of the same story line following the same important levels of the story, but with different diallogue. With that I combine the two using the better diallogue for a certain part and from there I'll do any edits to the draft need be. Not sure if this is a good way of going with things, but it seems to work for me. Sorry about the spelling, I'm a horrible speller, God bless word!!!
I thought we were talking about porn here! What gives?
Poke
Poke