• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

"Hollywood Formula" Worksheet

Oh, God, this is too fun! I can't believe the madness that went down while I was at work. L!O!L!

You know I gotta weigh in. But first, I must shower, and relax, after a very long day of work.

In the meantime, first, I have to step in and correct a horrible wrong. Blake Snyder, rest in peace, was a spec writer. Spec writers don't get their names in the credits -- they just get a very fulfilling lifetime career, doing what they love.

Oh, and directorik, you forgot James Cameron. Yeah, I know, not many people would call him a master, but he seems to be doing pretty well, and a lot of people seem to enjoy his movies. He never went to film school.
 
maralyn, you need to check your "facts".

Tarantino did not attend film school. Spielberg did not attend film school. I'm not going to bother fact-checking the rest of your blather, cuz those are a couple of big ones.

Here's a few others you might've heard of that never attended film school:

Steven Soderbergh, Robert Rodriguez, Quentin Tarantino, Richard Linklater, Spike Jonze, Christopher Nolan, James Cameron, David Fincher, Peter Jackson, Ridley Scott, Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, David Mamet, Frank Durabont...

You know. The masters.
 
Who cares?

Film-school vs. Non-film-school is a moot point. This discussion is structure vs. non-structure.

maralyn, surely your fancy film-school has talked about the three-act structure. That's pretty well-established, accross the board. How about character arc? That's also pretty well-established.

That's just two examples of structure that are completely entrenched -- even your "masters" employ three-acts and makes sure that the character has a strong arc. Snyder, and other screenwriters like him, are simply offering a little more structure. And you know what? Once you understand the structure that Snyder lays out, you begin to see it in pretty much every movie that is made.

That's because structure doesn't define content. A creative screenwrite can jam whatever they want into the structure that has already been pretty clearly established. They're just finding creative ways to deliver original stories in a format that audiences seem to have taken to. I don't see anything wrong with that.
 
See, this is the madness. Anyone who doesn't believe in save the cat must therefore be a non-structuralist.

This is where you are wrong.

Structure does not automatically equate to formula.
 
Marilyn your elitism is making my eyes water.

Tarantino did not go to film school not that it matters. Nearly all of the greats that did go to film school also say that they learned nothing about story telling and it was very helpful for their careers by NETWORKING.

The "formulas" are not the enemy. They are merely a tool to teach new writers the general ebb and flow of filmic structure. Once you master the natural movement of a film, you develop your own take on the process. This is when the writer finds their own voice. The more you develop as a writer the less you care about the "formulas".

I am confident in my knowledge of the craft, I am confident in my abilities as a story teller, and I also learned the formulas. They are not meant to be adhered to 100 percent. That is what new writers don't understand untill they fullly complete a screenplay or two.

I am not one who usually makes judgement calls, but your obvious hatred of anything you deem to be formulaic tripe leads me to think that you lack the practical experience. I honestly doubt that you have written anything, your posts reek of an a faux artist who just regurgitates what other people say.

You have been bashing people for being too hollywood and close minded, when ironically you are doing the exact same thing just on the otherside of the coin.

So don't be afraid to use your mind and realize that Hollywood does not equal Uninspired tripe. Bad filmmaking is bad filmmaking, regardless if its studio, indie, foriegn, student, or arthouse. I have seen more vomit inducing art films about nothing than I care to remember.


There are two types of people in this world, creators and destroyers. I prefer to align myself with creators, even if what they create is bad. And talking about creating does not make you a creator, it just makes you a wannabe.
 
So who have we got.

Lynch, Lucas, Scorsese, Jarmusch, Dominik.

I'll take my list over yours, anyday.

And Blake Snyder's save the cat is still trifling tripe.

You have no idea how uneducated you make yourself sound when you talk so poorly about something that you know nothing of. You don't know who Blake Snyder is; you don't know who his followers are; you don't know a darned thing about his book(s). But, somehow, you know that he is "trifling tripe".

Is narrow-mindedness what they are teaching in film school, these days?

As I mentioned earlier, Snyder was a very successful spec writer. "Save the Cat" isn't necessarily an instructional piece on how to write the best screenplay ever. Really, it's an instructional book on how to make a career out of being a spec writer. Snyders' most devoted followers all intend to be professional spec writers.

Me? I don't fit that category. Personally, I have no interest in being a spec writer. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it -- it's just not for me. Nevertheless, I did find a lot of value in Snyders' teachings. Because of the fact that I'm not trying to sell a script, I didn't feel any pressure to strictly follow his rules; I broke quite a few of them. But that doesn't mean that my screenplay didn't benefit immensely from a lot of the wisdom that is in his writing. maralyn, how do you know his teachings have nothing to offer? You don't. And, unfortunately for you, you probably never will.
 
In your laziness, you've just bundled the two together.

You actually think formula ..... IS structure.

And you couldn't be further from the truth.

But I'm not a self proclaimed guru like dictator rik here. So it's not my job to teach you the fundamentals of film.

I just think you should stop pushing this nonsense like you and Blake know it all.

Because the reality of it is, it looks a lot like neither of you have got a clue how to actually write a script.
 
What is your version of structure Marilyn? Honestly, you bash Snyder as being formulaic, then you say that structure doesn't mean formulaic.

A film does need a vision of the characters real world, then an event that trusts them into the new problem world, then they need to be fully invested in this new world, then they have to try defeat the problem this new world pushes on them, the problem eventually has to get worse be fore the final conflict, then comes the resollution.

That is all that Blake Snyder says, that is what Joeseph Campbell said with his mythic structure/ hero's journey over 60 years ago and thats the bassics of what Aristotle said over 2000 years ago. This is storytelling. call it what you want. It's just terminology.
 
Don't listen to the save the cat devotees. Don't buy into it. It's just internet hype.

Real practitioners don't promote it.

Nobody on any list of filmmakers promotes it.

That should tell you something.
 
In your laziness, you've just bundled the two together.

You actually think formula ..... IS structure.

And you couldn't be further from the truth.

But I'm not a self proclaimed guru like dictator rik here. So it's not my job to teach you the fundamentals of film.

I just think you should stop pushing this nonsense like you and Blake know it all.

Because the reality of it is, it looks a lot like neither of you have got a clue how to actually write a script.

Wow. You sure are good at figuring people out. Directorik's "guru" stamp is not self-appointed. And I have never claimed to be anything of a screenwriting expert on these forums. Just the opposite, on the screenwriting forums I've explained how much of a screenwriting rookie I am; I've asked for advice, and I've been quite receptive to some very harsh criticism. I wonder if you could do the same.

What I have said numerous times is that I found "Save the Cat" to be very helpful to my personal learning process. What's wrong with that?

This isn't fun anymore. Buh-bye now.
 
where do you get your information? It's just inaccurate. There are a lot of screenwriting "gurus" that are a scam, but Snyder just took what was already a well accepted approach to story telling and updated the wording and terminology for a new generation of film maker.

You're arguements have been nothing more than "you are dumber than me" with no evidence to back up what you are saying, half of the "facts" you have posted are flat out wrong. So that means you are just making things up to fit your own elite opinion. That doesn't make you look smarter than anyone, it makes you look like just another member of the artshool confidential herd.

It's funny that you firmly believe that you are right and every other person is wrong. It's either baffling arrogance or sheer ignorance, either way it's not an admirable quality. To form a valid opinion you need to look at both sides with an unbiased eye, then make a decision. I used to be just like you, I hated everything that wasn't what I perceived to be enlightened. Then I actually wrote a couple screenplays, I got over myself and realized that I didn't even like the stuff I pretended to, just so I could seem like I was a true film connoisseur. Now I realize that story telling is story telling, regardless of pretension level.

Enjoy life with your head in the sand.
 
Why the hell do you care WHAT I think?

You are asking me questions only you can answer for yourself.

All of the rest is just clutter. Even me.


That is far from a question only I can answer since I do not understand your way of thinking.

Because you have a different view point than almost everyone on this board it would seem and I like to understand peoples ideas and thoughts.
 
Back
Top