Opening the Doors to Hollywood® - Hollywood Discovery Awards
HollywoodNet || HollywoodLive || HollywoodFest || HollywoodShop || HollywoodBooks || Members

STORY SENSE FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
by Dr. Paul Lucey

Paul Lucey is a screenwriter, professor, and author of the book Story Sense: Writing Story and Script for Film and Television, a 400-page book written for people who are serious about learning the art, traditions, and technique of screenwriting. He has written scripts for all the major studios and television networks.

Previous FAQ File Drawer Sections

#1 #2 #3 #4 #5
#6 #7 #8 #9 #10

About Dr. Lucey

Question: Wesley Strick has said the three most important elements to success in Hollywood is talent, luck, and perserverance. Any comments or things to add? And secondly, do you ever suggest writing under a psudenym (sp?) due to the fact that groupism, racism, ageism, sexism, sexual orientationism, still exists in Hollywood?

Response: Strick's three points are essential; however, one should not misread what "luck" means. Often writers get "lucky" the way actors and other creative people get "lucky": they have produced so much stuff that eventually something gets noticed, which whistles up one's entire body of work, and the producer, agent, actor, director, or whatever realizes that he or she has lucked onto (after reading God knows how many scripts!) someone who knows how to tell an entertaining story and create good characters. So, regarding "luck" I'd advise focusing on perseverance and write your heart and brains out so that buyers will be lucky enough to come upon your work. And keep writing no matter how many times you get knocked senseless. PERSEVERE!!!

Talent is another buzz word that should be viewed cautiously because many new writers are insecure and easily persuade themselves that they lack talent--or ran out of it, etc. Remember: Creative people are most creative when inventing goblins and harpies to peck out the eyes of their imagination. This is most likely to happen when we become discouraged for whatever reason. It is then, when our ego is deflated, that we are attacked by the evil thought that we have no talent.

What does talent mean? To me it means a lot of things, like knowing stuff about movies because of scripts and books that we've read; it means applying those insights to movies and understanding they are made and marketed. This is a painless study nowadays because there are so many fine articles, books, TV shows on movies, and the like to study. Talent means having a connection to the world and what's happening in it, so our writing is about something, and not cheap mind-rot. It means investing characters with the dignity and complexity that human beings deserve in terms of their spiritually, inner beings, and history. Talent means having the ability to see those dimensional characters in mind's eye, so they come alive in imagination and say and do things that amaze us.

And does not talent also refer to a certain connection of heart, mind, and spirit that enables us - writers and other species - to tune in on the world and listen to its heart beating and to laugh and cry over the wonderful and terrible things that happen to life on this planet? Talent is being able to smell the earth and all those who live on the earth, otherwise what is there to write about? Of course this little aria is merely another way of saying writers need talent, luck, and perseverance.
Respondent also asks about using a pseudonym "due to the fact that groupism, racism, ageism, sexism, sexual orientationism, still exists in Hollywood." No one has ever asked me that question before, plus I'm not sure what "groupism" and the like are being referred to here. Hollywood, bless its tattered little heart, has always been a haven for odd balls, weirdoes, and wannabees of every form imaginable and a some that are unimaginable. Therefore, I cannot fathom why anyone would assume a fake name to pass muster in the land of the misbegotten. All they really care about is the quality of the script, not whether it was pecked out by someone's nose, written by an 800- pound figure skater, or a member of the Temple Shrine of Cannibalism and Free Love. Or am I missing something here? Paul Lucey



Question: Should we quit our jobs (in manufacturing) and devote all our time to screenwriting? If so, should we move to L.A. Thanks a mil!

Response: Quitting jobs and coming to LA is something you must decide for yourself, based on how badly you want to be a screenwriter, what your family and living situation is, and whether you have a partner. "Story Sense" discusses this topic; others may offer different advice, but in the end each person chooses the life he or she wishes to live.

The fourth and final hat that screenwriter wear is that of a warrior. This mode is important, because screenwriters must endure a grueling apprenticeship to learn their craft. This is an accomplishment that deserves protection, especially when dealing with those who make script decisions. We become warriors to stay active in an industry that is overrun with meddling executives who have wildly varying degrees of script expertise and story inclinations. We become warriors to protect our work when it is criticized, trashed, or ignored. We become warriors to combat bouts of fear and insecurity that would cripple our ability to write.

New (and not-so-new) writers create scripts every day. Some of these are sparkling and fresh; others are rewrites of previous works. Old and new, these projects crowd around the Hollywood's production pipeline, jostling for movie success. To outsiders and newcomers, the business of motion pictures may seem like disorganized tumult, but it is part of the selling ritual that writers endure and that this chapter will examine. To begin with, the chapter offers general advice on how screenwriters relate to the Hollywood system. Next, we examine where writers should work--in Los Angeles, at home, or elsewhere in the country. This discussion is followed with advice about securing an agent. Finally, the chapter discusses how to pitch your story in story conferences. Although there are specialized books that deal fully with these topics, they are presented here as advice for those who might be contemplating a career in screenwriting.

ADVICE FOR NEW WRITERS

In many ways the movies are similar to businesses that feed capital, energy, and raw materials into one end of the production pipeline so that vacuum cleaners, ballbearings, or whatever roll out of the other end. Movies differ only because the raw materials fed into the Hollywood pipeline are the ideas and the energy of those involved with film production. At its heart, there is not much physical machinery involved in making movies--a camera, a few lights, a sound equipment make up the hardware essentials. What Hollywood feeds on are meetings and conferences where movie people discuss casting, financing, scripts, budgets, distribution, and the like. A key element in all this is the selection and review process that deals with film scripts. Decisions are made about which of the hundreds of scripts--all claiming to be sure box-office winners--should be developed. It is in this stage of trying to select scripts that bear the promise of successful movies that the industry suffers most cruelly from Goldman's Law: In Hollywood, nobody knows anything.

Script selection is a source of anxiety and contention, and if the studios could invent a computer program or a machine that would reveal which scripts would pay off at the box-office, their business would be much, much easier. As it is, turning script pages into cans of film is somewhat of a guessing game in which studios and production companies bet millions on their script choices. Although their decisions are made carefully, the selection process is inexact and exasperating, as illustrated by Howard the Duck, Last Action Hero, and Radioland Murders, to single out a few of the titles that did not sell a lot of tickets. Such disappointments are part of the movies. A major studio reviews several thousand movie ideas in a year and selects twenty or so to be made into films. Another fifty or so stories and scripts are funded for possible production in the future.

Screenwriters should have a sense of how much money the script selection process involves and the economic dimension of the movie industry. For a time it was difficult to acquire such information because the founding moguls did not wish competitors and employees to know how well or how poorly their studios were doing. In recent years, however, weekly box-office grosses and star salaries have been published in newspapers as if they were sports scores. In a way they are scores because the numbers establish box-office winners and losers among the studio players.

The industry's belated candor is connected to the exponential growth of ancillary markets (overseas feature box-office, video rentals, and video sales in the U.S. and overseas). The increased income from these sources means that U.S. filmmakers can spend more on their films, which now employ international stars, lavish productions, and astounding technical expertise that foreign filmmakers are unable to match. As a result, U.S. movies and TV shows have become the preferred motion picture entertainment of audiences nearly everywhere.

The price of our success is being paid by overseas filmmakers, who have suffered precipitous box-office and production declines. The Los Angeles Times (July 1, 1994) reported that the European Union lost half of its theater movie audience to American films in the decade between 1984 and 1993. The same decade saw yearly revenues of U.S. films shown in Europe increase from $330 million to $3.6 billion, while those European Union producers who managed to find distributors and theaters that would show their films lost money in most cases. As shown in Figure 12-1, the total income of U.S. film and television from all markets amounted to $16 billion in 1993, giving the U.S. movie industry a balance-of-payment surplus that is second only to our aircraft industry. Projections indicate that the movie business will continue to grow for years to come.

As noted in earlier chapters, it is difficult for screenwriters to escape the gravitational pull of these figures. They bend the commercial mainstream and the work of screenwriters. The numbers flex their muscles as the gorilla of cost that sits in on every meeting and story conference. The same numbers look over our shoulders as we write, nudging us to create dreamy stories that will attract the international mass audience. If this sounds stressful it's because it is stressful.

Although this pressure is difficult to avoid, some writers manage to lessen it a bit by living away from the two main production centers, New York and Los Angeles. Writers invent various schemes for living. Some teach, or write novels, or run businesses. Some work with partners; others work alone. Some subsist on menial jobs. Matters such as these are discussed in our next topic, where to live.

TO BE OR NOT TO BE IN L.A.?

Because most American prime-time television drama originates in Los Angeles, those wishing to break into TV writing will find it advantageous to live in L.A. For those interested in writing features, living in L.A. is less important. In her book on the business side of screenwriting, K Callan reports that most agents and production companies are indifferent about where writers live. Their interest is in the script, not where it was written.

Even so, many writers respond well to the creative rush of Los Angeles and New York. They are drawn by movie traditions and the charm of living a bohemian, surfer, or whatever life-style they fancy. Some writers wish to escape their hometowns, while others prefer to remain close to home and the familiar well from which they draw their stories. A few writers live elsewhere but work with a partner who lives in Los Angeles or New York (Jack Epps and Jim Cash wrote Top Gun and other films this way; one partner works in Los Angeles, and the other teaches and lives in Michigan.)

A number of actors, directors, and screenwriters visit L.A. from outlying cities, as needed. Commuters who lack money may ask pals to put them up on a couch for a week or so because these visits are costly, and it can take five years or so to become established and to build a record of work. During this time, money to live on can be a problem.

If it is any consolation, the financial pinch during (and after) break-in is also felt by actors, dancers, and other performers. However, artists have always found ways to endure this period, regardless of what it takes--and it can take everything! Michael Blake knows, for while he was writing the novel that became Dances with Wolves, he lived out of his car and washed dishes in a Chinese restaurant in Arizona. Blake was forty-two at the time and felt that his life was a failure. Bruce Joel rubin wrote for 25 years before Ghost launched his career. The point is that anyone who is contemplating a career in screenwriting should be braced for the lean times that go with the apprenticeship. Most of us see our work rejected at a time when it seems that everyone on earth is writing a screenplay. Our mightiest efforts may be ignored while newcomers score with their first attempt. All this may be happening at the same time we find that the day job we use to pay the rent is so draining that we have no energy to write. To make the torment complete, we often must submit to people whose only qualification as reviewers is their ability to savage our work.

Bitter jokes and painful struggle are the downside of screenwriting, but we stay with it because it is part of the dues we pay for writing movies and because this work is not something that we choose; rather, it chooses us. Like martyrs, we learn how to transform frustration into self-righteousness and to turn privation into a spiritual state. Even so, like all artists, we hear the wolf scratching at the door in the night. At such times we must be a warrior and remember that we chose the writing life; we must yield to fear.

Regarding living arrangements, the most practical situation is to connect with an agent in New York or Los Angeles. This allows telephone conferencing and mail and fax exchanges. When a script is offered for sale, production company executives can read it and decide if they wish to speak with the writer. If they do, conferencing by telephone can be arranged. When a sale is imminent, the writer can travel to L.A. or New York for a face-to-face meeting. Thus, modern communication gives screenwriters a much longer leash than when Jack Warner insisted that his screenwriters sign in at 9:00 A.M. and sign out at 5:00 P.M. when they left the studio for home. (Warner reasoned that because he paid his writers a banker's salary, they should keep a banker's hours.)

Of the many good things that Los Angeles offers, one of the best is UCLA Extension (UCLAX), the largest continuing-education program in the world. UCLAX is especially strong in screenwriting and motion picture production. In screenwriting alone, UCLAX offers forty low-cost ($300 or so) courses each quarter throughout the year. They are taught mainly at night on the UCLA campus by excellent screenwriting teachers, some who moonlight from local film schools. UCLAX is open to anyone, and there are no requirements for admission. Although UCLAX courses cannot be transferred or applied to university degree programs, they are an excellent educational investment
Low-cost courses in screenwriting and filmmaking are also offered by Los Angeles community colleges. Additionally, the Writers Guild of America, the Director's Guild, and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, as well as museums and other area colleges, offer free or low-cost lectures throughout the year. By sifting through these opportunities, newcomers can piece together a practical, low-cost program in screenwriting without the expense of traditional film school.

It should also be noted that many of the people that one meets in the UCLAX writing courses work in the motion picture industry, which means that consorting with classmates presents opportunities to share information on how the business works.

I also recommend that new writers think about teaming up with a partner who can share writing and living expenses. As these arrangements are sorted through, the new writer should be thinking about seeking representation with a literary agent. © Paul Lucey<



Question: I've read all the reactions. I'm amazed to find that nobody seems to worry about one of the basic problems of scriptwriting: how to construct a character. I'm being trained as a professional scriptwriter and i find the construction of characters one of the most exciting and challenging of scriptwriting. It is so fascinating to create a personage from scratch that is convincing, interesting and that you can identify with.
A friend of mine told me that one of the differences between American and European cinema is that American cinema is plot oriented, whereas European cinema is more character oriented. Is that true? There are American directors/scriptwriters that really love characters; Paul Auster, Robert Altman, Jim Jarmusch. How to make it in Hollywood if you like their style, and your favorite character is Louise from Naked by Mike Leigh?
I really would like to know, what advice do you give me?

Response: Most screenwriting books address this task, which is as fundamental and exciting as you say. For example, I can recommend two recent books on characterization: Andrew Horton's "Writing the Character Centered Screenplay," (Univ. of California Press, 1994), and Michael Halperin's "Writing Great Characters," (Lone Eagle, 1996). In various places in this web site I talk about characterization; also, my book, "Story Sense," looks carefully at characterization and dialogue in Chapters 5 and 6. Unfortunately, this is such a complex topic that it cannot be reduced to a happy pill or sudden insight that even begins to address this topic. Incidentally, my book is published by the College Division of McGraw Hill, which means that most consumer book stores do not carry it. However, if you order a copy through your local bookseller, they should have it for you in about a week.

You also ask if European films favor character and US films favor plot. Sometimes. Remember, Europeans don't have much money to make movies--and most of them are not skillful with action. However, in some instances, the plot can be extremely active (a lot happens) and at the same time be loaded with interesting characters ("Secrets and Lies," "Naked," "Cold Comfort Farm" and "Breaking the Waves" prove. At the same time, some of the most powerful character stories are done by US filmmakers. "Sling Blade," "A Thousand Acres," "Big Night," "Marvin's Room," and the wonderful Robert Duvall/James Earl Jones/Irma P. Hall movie that I can never remember--it's either "A Family Thing" or "A Family Affair." These films, most done on small budgets, are outstanding, as is much of the writing on prime-time TV, which is also mainly built around great characterizational writing. Some US films mix character and plot in interesting ways. "Rosewood," "Donnie Brasco," Jerry Maguire," and "The Shawshank Redemption" illustrate.

Your core question seems to be one that shows up a lot: How to sell a script to Hollywood. This is a fungo, keed: The door is wide open to anyone who can write a good story and populate it with interesting characters. There is no simple way to do this, but one way to begin is to select a favorite film and study it HARD. And when I say HARD, I mean REALLY HARD. For openers you might try rounding up a copy of the script of a movie and analyzing it in the style and intensity I used to analyze "The Verdict" in my book. There are scripts you can pick up on the internet for free, or buy a script in a bookstore and study it alongside its video. If you've never done this before, take a shot at what director Sydney Pollack does when he preps a movie: he re-types the entire script. Why? He told a room full of writers at the WGA that it gives him a better feel for the writer's intentions in the script and who the characters were. Studying a script this way can take ten or twenty hours, not counting the typing time, but at the end of your study you should have a deeper understanding of how the writer developed his characters. There is no end to this question or its answer so I shall bid adieu to it. Paul Lucey



Question: A problem that I occasionally encounter is trying to balance a Character's presence to the sense of the story in a particular scene. If the character has greater power than the scene requires, it makes them appear strangely passive.. If they are overpowered by the scene they appear phony. I don't know that I'm making this very clear... it is more an intuitive sense. Do you understand my problem? Do you have any tips on how to work with this?

Ray T.

Response: Dear Ray, I'm not sure that I understand your question, but perhaps you need to think through the motivation and backstory of the character in your scene. Think about what this character wants or will get from the scene and why the character is in the scene. Also think about the scenes before and after and if you NEED the scene. Good for you to sense when a character seems "phony." Keep thinking that way; reach for the truth and do not backslide to cobble together a particular scene problem. Good work ain't easy. PL


Become a HollywoodNet Member - It's Free. Choose Category in Menu.
Enter Your Email. Click Submit:
   
 


Hollywood Shopping Network

Scour Hollywood for Movie memorabilia, books and more!

[Inner Circle || HollywoodFestival || HollywoodNetwork || IndieNetwork || Hollydex || Shopping]

e-mail: writing@screenwriters.com

©1995-99 HollywoodNet® All Rights Reserved.