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

Robert McKee's thoughts...Agree or Disagree?

Hey every one,

The following text is taken from a Robert McKee webinar (http://bigthink.com/ideas/19640)


"""""""
So, you must not mistake words for writing.

What you write in terms of characters, in terms of story, in terms of the events in their lives, in terms of the meaning of everything, and the emotional impact of the storytelling, that is 80% of writing.

Dialogue and description is a relatively minor part of the creative process in the performance arts of television and film.

"""""""



Do you agree or disagree?
 
Agree, especially about the emotional impact. Dialogue and description (and actions) are just the tools to convey the story. You could have the best dialogue and the best descriptions in the world, but it doesn't mean squat without a story worth telling and worth watching, a story that resonates emotionally.

Screenwriting is a craft just like any other art form. Learning the tools is easy. Learning what to do with them is the hardest part of the writing process. Just like knowing how to use a paintbrush won't get you painting the Mona Lisa anytime soon. It takes years of practice.
 
Hey every one,
The following text is taken from a Robert McKee webinar (http://bigthink.com/ideas/19640)
"""""""
So, you must not mistake words for writing.

What you write in terms of characters, in terms of story, in terms of the events in their lives, in terms of the meaning of everything, and the emotional impact of the storytelling, that is 80% of writing.

Dialogue and description is a relatively minor part of the creative process in the performance arts of television and film.
"""""""
Do you agree or disagree?

I think the quote needs to be understood in the context of the film. My take is that he is refering to what makes a film successful. He is stating that 80% of a film's meaning comes from the writing or storytelling. The remaining 20% comes craftsmanship--formatting, grammar, stylizations, etc.

He strongly believes it is a collaborative process. Notice that he emphasizes "... in the performance arts ...". Writing is not performance. Performers don't have to worry about what to say. But if the screenplay is written well, all the other creative professionals can immediately envision the characters' lives and environments--costumes, makeup, special effects, set locations & design, lighting, shots, blocking, activities, etc.

If you want to get a good movie, you start with a good story. Does it take years to develop? Sometimes. I do believe there are Mozarts out there. However, I believe there are also a lot more good stories out there than there are people to produce them. An unfortunate reality is that success in the 'illusion industry' is alot of luck, persistence, and who you know. Arguably there is also a lot of shlock. But alot of what is labelled as 'bad' is really 'not of commercial interest' to big studios. Because something is marketable does not make it good.

You could do porn which requires little plot yet can be quite lucrative, I'm told. Or think of clever ways to kill yourself or cause serious bodily injury like JackAss. They make money, if that's the end goal. They have lots of action and little dialogue. While parody movies are fun to watch, they're equally forgettable. Some movies you wish you could scrub out of your brain.

"Tell a good story with deep development with excellent craftsmanship. Then let other creative professionals bring it to life working to their strengths, building on your foundation." I believe that's all McKee was trying to say. I agree with that.
 
Last edited:
Agreed.

That's why McKee also says that a MINIMUM of 75% of the time, effort, blood, sweat and tears that goes into writing a screenplay must be spent on designing the story. The rest, 25% or less, is the actual writing of dialogue and action.
 
mckee1.jpg


I do agree, although it's hard to fully embrace this since I really do enjoy writing dialog. ;)

Then again, as he mentions in the Big Idea interview http://bigthink.com/ideas/19640 dialog is everything in a stage play. But for filmmaking and TV? Story structure and concept is (or should be) where it's at.
 
Robert McKee is a controversial character. Like any endeavour, it's best to be selective what you take. He contradicts himself in different places. Other accomplished screenwriters have also shot him down. Even in the BigThink, he needs to justify why his own screenwriting efforts have been largely unproduced.

That is not meant to be dismissive. He has made major contributions. However, I think he speaks to one style of screenwriting. For those who are similar to him, they are his strong advocates. For those of different styles, he's accepted.

There are many successful screenwriters out there. Some of his ideas are good, some are fair, and others just wrong. It is worth hearing and seeing what successful writers say. Take and use what works for you. But don't try to cram yourself into a style which isn't your own. Look for a new mentor. Look to movies you like, and see who wrote them. Almost every major writer these days has a blog. Read their screenplays.

Again, McKee is an influential voice. But so is Syd Field and many others. Just my thought.
 
Hey every one,

The following text is taken from a Robert McKee webinar (http://bigthink.com/ideas/19640)


"""""""
So, you must not mistake words for writing.

What you write in terms of characters, in terms of story, in terms of the events in their lives, in terms of the meaning of everything, and the emotional impact of the storytelling, that is 80% of writing.

Dialogue and description is a relatively minor part of the creative process in the performance arts of television and film.

"""""""



Do you agree or disagree?

80% of the time, this is true all of the time.
 
Designing a story?

That's why McKee also says that a MINIMUM of 75% of the time, effort, blood, sweat and tears that goes into writing a screenplay must be spent on designing the story.

I'm still trying to fully understand what this means. I've always written stories in school just by writing whatever popped in my head as I went along, so the idea of crafting or designing a story ahead of time seems foreign. How does one go about designing a story? I have an example of something I'm messing around with right now:
This is the series of events:
-A doctor working on a cloning experiment donates his cells to be grown and duplicated.
-He talks lackadaisically about the experiment and his clone. He seems indifferent.
-The fetus turns into a baby and he grows fond of the clone.
-The clone is selected to be destroyed.
-Doctor kidnaps baby and escapes from facility.
-Other stuff happens.(?)
Is this an example of designing a story? Should I know the ending already, or should I have known it from the start? Any other comments? I'm reading Story right now so I'm definitely thinking about this stuff. Hope I'm not hijacking the thread, but I can't even answer the question until I understand it.
 
You're not hijacking at all. As Directorik mentioned, maybe it's best not to get hung up in percentages. They really don't mean much. What's important is really crafting a great story, which sounds like what you are doing!

What I take away from McKee is this is the FOUNDATION and FRAMEWORK of the script, building it around solid structure and carefully planning out the PLOT. Dialog is important, but can be fixed and rearranged to serve the story. Kinda like adding different paint colors to the walls or rearranging furniture to suit the tone.

I like the sounds of the idea you're working on, JR. Seems like the doctor will try to save the cloned baby?

I struggle with making sense of all this myself and I'm no expert. While I agree with McKee on a bunch of topics, I have also written many things that he'd probably scoff at. Doesn't matter. He isn't the judge and jury on making great movies, but he certainly knows a thing or two that can come in handy.
 
I'm still trying to fully understand what this means. I've always written stories in school just by writing whatever popped in my head as I went along, so the idea of crafting or designing a story ahead of time seems foreign. How does one go about designing a story?
Writing whatever pops into your head is a great way to write. For
those with natural talent they usually end up with great stories.
Then comes the screenplay - a very different thing.

Crafting a story to have ups and downs, conflicts in the most logical
place, the right mix of emotions and satisfying resolutions can be
very difficult. I've read hundreds scripts that are not crafted well even
though they may be well written.

What you have here is series of events - it's not an example of designing
a story. To craft those into a story will take work, some skill and some
talent. If it was easy there wouldn't be a hundred books about how to
do it.
 
The Two Layers of the Screenplay

I'm still trying to fully understand what this means. I've always written stories in school just by writing whatever popped in my head as I went along, so the idea of crafting or designing a story ahead of time seems foreign. How does one go about designing a story? I have an example of something I'm messing around with right now:
This is the series of events:
-A doctor working on a cloning experiment donates his cells to be grown and duplicated.
-He talks lackadaisically about the experiment and his clone. He seems indifferent.
-The fetus turns into a baby and he grows fond of the clone.
-The clone is selected to be destroyed.
-Doctor kidnaps baby and escapes from facility.
-Other stuff happens.(?)
Is this an example of designing a story? Should I know the ending already, or should I have known it from the start? Any other comments? I'm reading Story right now so I'm definitely thinking about this stuff. Hope I'm not hijacking the thread, but I can't even answer the question until I understand it.

I understand how it seems confusing and contradictory. McKee's interview flipflops Marshall McLuhan's "The medium is not the message"--ie., the story is independent of the vehicle (TV, book, etc.). McKee sees screenplays as different from books from a structural, formal view. However, he also later (and in other places) emphasizes the importance of 'the story'.

A story has two components--the parts we see (events) and the parts we feel inside (theme/drama). In your summary above you are starting to pick up that distinction. The scientist's 'character arc' has him start as dispassionate but slowly become more parental and protective. We see the events, but we also feel inside how he must be struggling with killing part of himself. That inner conflict is the piece that must be resolved.

Do you need to know the ending events? Not immediately. But if you look at your drama, how do you see the issue resolving for the 'father'? Whether the clone is destroyed or lives, he must come to grips with what he is feeling. That is the closure the audience needs. This part you need to have a sense of how you want it to end. All the action scenes are just eye candy. It draws people in at first, but it's superficial. Truly powerful shows combine action with depth.

Avatar is a good example. While the visual effects were stunning, each year studios up the effects. What makes it enduring is it touched on many personal levels--relationships, spirituality, etc. Before it, there was the Matrix which challenged us to think about the nature of reality and causality.

I ran across a quote that I agree with:

"If you want a bit of unresolved PLOT, knock yourself out, BUT don't you dare unresolve your THEME . The audience requires THEME. And if you don't have your WHY? there, then you don't have your THEME"
-Margueritte Pigott at the WILDsound February Event

Ms. Pigott has a whole set of industry credentials behind her being active in the field with several produced movies, TV series, and working as an industry executive.

So your idea has two parts: the subjective/thematic part (parenthood) and the objective/events (clone experiment). You need to nail the first. Decide what message you want to convey about parenting a child or himself and resolve it in your own mind. The events (cloning, government agents, etc.) then just topple like dominoes towards an end. Though a good craftsman will think how to lay out the dominoes to fall in an artistic way. It doesn't necessarily need to be 'a twist' as long as it's done thoughtfully. "Flowers for Algernon" we know he's made a genius and then loses it. It's how he copes with that loss that creates the story.

So yes, you do need to know how your theme will end, but the actual "events" that appear you will find you tinker with endlessly. And in the end, the director and/or producer will likely change your script anyway (the visual "events") to realize their film within budget. Enduring films are ones that address the "Why?" as well as give us brilliant cinematography. The screenwriter is limited partner though unless you are also involved in production.
 
Back
Top