what do you think of this idea?

[littleturtle]

to get better in writing screenplays, i was thinking...

i'd watch a movie (any) and then write a screenplay for it afterwards the way i interpreted the story. would that be a waste of time or would it help? i have this story in mind that i already started writing the treatment for, but i'm having trouble coming up with those little scenes in between the important ones. i figure if i do this it would help me learn how to put a good story together on paper.

what do you guys think?

 

[benj09]

i'm a screenwriter, i like to think of a little idea and see if i can create it on a larger scale, say if your screenplay is about 2 friends, how are you going to tell that story, e.g. Flashbacks or continuous, then make some small situations bigger, and remember if a scene doesnt move the story on, get rid of it, you want people to see the best version. Go on talentville.com and sites similar, I started writing screenplays last year, now i'm fully confident. I'm going to film school, all that started because my friend suuggested a film set in liverpool. So i wrote one (it was crap) but then i really liked it....

You can find inspiration everywhere, smoke a joint, then let the ideas flow hahhaha worked for lewis carroll

 

[wheatgrinder]

Great,
I get lots of ideas responding to others. So its a rather selfish habit..

The promise is something both LITERAL and Figurative.

All good movies make a promise and pays off that promise. Think of a war movie. The son going off to war saying "good bye ma!" This sets up an expectation that the we will see the son die in action a hero. What we as writers get to do is play with that expectation. Maybe as we get closer to that inevitable scene the son falls from grace, does some very bad things, things that his mother would be ashamed of. Now wracked with shame and guilt the son volunteers for a suicide mission.. get it?

In your story the literal promise of the "mothers return" can be paid off in many ways. The happy ending way: she returns, and we discover that she was FORCED to stay away, and they live happily ever after. or in the not so happy way. She returns, because she needs a new kidney and tries guilt trip her son into donating! (Yeah, its a plot line from Lost) Does the son rebel and refuse, consigning his mom to death? or does he sacrifice and save her, even though she really doesn't deserve it?

The pay off of that "promise" could very well be your hook. And though it seems natural that it would also be the climax of the story, it doesn't have to be.


I don't think a story can be "about' how damaged some one is...
rather it has to be "about" how the damage affects what he does and how he interacts with others.

This may seem like the same thing, but there is an important difference. You cant photograph inner turmoil and emotional damage.

You can only photograph the RESULTS of that tortured mind in action.

A man sitting alone sad, is not a story element.
A man sitting alone rocking back and forth, and cradling a bloody axe, is a story element.
See the difference? There might be a million reasons why the man is sad, but if its all in his head we cant make a movie out of it.

So I ask again, what is your STORY about? (25 words or less )

If you cant get through the 2nd act, its 90% likely that you don't have external motivation...

Once you know what Michel's GOAL is, and his MOTIVATION for getting there, the 2nd act becomes easy. I'm sounding like a broken record..

Keep at it, and don't be offended if I'm a complete idiot.

 

[wheatgrinder]

So I was listening (for the 10th time) to an audio book "The Heroes 2 journesy' and I thought of you and your story.

In this audio lecture, the speakers present the idea of several key "stages" or turning points in ANY story. This is the story "Arc"

The stages are something like this:

• Setup Old World
• Call to adventure
• New Situation (New World)
• Change Of Plans
• Progress and Setbacks
• Point of No Return
• Complications and Higher Stakes
• Major Set Back
• Climax
• Aftermath (return)

from what I read so far of your story, your key turning points might be:

• Michel living at home with parents (Setup Old World)
• Michel has a desire to "live on his own" (Call to adventure)
• Michel moves to the city (New Situation (New World))
• Michel gets a new job, Michel meets the girl (Change Of Plans)
• Michel struggles to fit in at his new job (Progress and Setbacks)
• Michel loses job and fights with parent (Point of No Return)
• Michel fights with girl friend, is struggling to pay rent (Complications and Higher Stakes)
• Michel's Bio-Mom shows up (Major Set Back)
• Climax
• Michel on the other side of the climax, the change is complete.. Aftermath (return)

Each of this turning points represent a new STAGE in the screenplay. Convention has these turning points at specific TIMES (or percentages of time) during the screenplay. Fiting into the three act structure:

• ACT I
  
  
• Michel living at home with parents (Setup Old World)
• 10% Turn - Michel has a desire to "live on his own" (Call to adventure)
• Michel moves to the city (New Situation (New World))
• 25% Turn- Michel gets a new job, Michel meets the girl (Change Of Plans)
  
  
• ACT II
  
  
• Michel struggles to fit in at his new job (Progress and Setbacks)
  
• 50% Turn - Michel loses job and fights with parent (Point of No Return)
  
• Michel fights with girl friend, is struggling to pay rent (Complications and Higher Stakes)
• 75% Turn-Michel's Bio-Mom shows up (Major Set Back)
  
  
• ACT III
  
  
• Michel in downward spiral, things flying apart..
• 90% Turn - Climax
• Michel on the other side of the climax, the change is complete.. Aftermath (return)

When we break it up like this we can see that the "path" through the 2nd act is leading to the that MAJOR SET BACK. So each scene should somehow point to that Major Set Back. Which should help you in writing those scenes. The 2nd act scenes don't need to be concerned with the final climax, just the mini-climax of the MAJOR SETBACK.


For example the first 10% or so would be us getting to Know Michel. During this stage we would only see GOOD things about Michel. Hes funny, nice to his dog, loves his parents, etc. He is excited to move out on his own and be in the city. This would lead us to the "Michel moves to the city" turning point.

The next bit is Michel living in the "new" situation. Things are good he meets a girl they start to get close. But now we start to see the "flaws" in Michel, how he cant quite relate to others as normal people do etc.. this leads to many complications .. some funny, some sad..

and so on..

Hope this is useful.

wheatgrinder

 

[scifijedi]

i'm an amateur,but i love this screen writing stuff so i'll tell you what i think.....i dig your story & it inspires all kinds of creative thought for me...truthfully,the 1st thing i thought about was this..
a young boy with tourettes syndrome who cusses & twitches regularly ,meets a young girl who has sympathy for him...they become good friends ,but meanwhile his mom has a nervous breakdown because she thinks her son is a curse.....she leaves the young boy.....but,the young boy has inspired the girl to become a psychiatrist later in life...the boy{man now} seeks therapy to redeem his past that he has forgotten..he meets the girl{therapist}they fall in love & he's so happy he forgot he even forgot anything because this girl was mesmorizingly HOT........lol........don't forget,I AM AN AMATEUR.....

 

[Buddy Greenfield]

That's a nice tight story idea Scifi, good job.

-Thanks-

 

[wridingrlm]

on his 7th birthday, his mother leaves him at his friend's house


he still thinks that his parents (psychiatrist and his wife) are actually his parents.

So he knew his mother for 7 years and moved around with her to men's apartments but doesn't know about her when he is older? Unless I missed something I just don't understand this.


Also, what's the Dilemma?

From Wiki -

A dilemma (Greek: δί-λημμα "double proposition") is a problem offering at least two solutions or possibilities, of which none are practically acceptable. One in this position has been traditionally described as "being on the horns of a dilemma", neither horn being comfortable, "between Scylla and Charybdis"; or "being between a rock and a hard place", since both objects or metaphorical choices are rough.