The Midpoint Mind-Melt

It brings up feelings of inadequacy and intimidation. It haunts your dreams at night because you don't have one: the complication. The reversal. The midpoint. Why does it feel like some kind of awful, scary anvil hanging over your head?

The midpoint need not be an intimidating thing. The light bulb went off over my head years ago when I began to use the four act structure and when I realized that the midpoint, while it does do a special job, is really just another plot point.

A brief review of the four act structure (oddly called such, since really, it's just dividing your second act in two):

act one: pages one-30(-ish)
act two A: pages 30-50(ish)
act two B: pages 50-80(ish)
act three: pages 80(ish) on

We know from studying screenwriting that the second act really is the meat and potatoes of the whole script. It is during the second act that the bulk of the horrifying or funny or dramatic or sad adventure you have penned happens. Yes? The first act is primarily set up and engine revving, the third act is the exciting, climactic oh-my-god-how-will-it-all-end. But the second act is the part of the movie that producers buy. It is the part of the story that defines what the movie is really all about. It is the logline of your script writ large.

It is in the second act that Luke gets his set pieces on in STAR WARS. It is the second act that shows us what Elle's decision to go to Harvard Law really looks like for her as she experiences it in LEGALLY BLONDE. And speaking of Witherspoon, it is in the second act of ELECTION that shows us to what lengths Tracy Flick is willing to go.

Plot points are relatively egalitarian. Plot points are the spots in a script when BIG STUFF HAPPENS to propel the story forward. They are they cliffhanger moments, the what-will-the-main-character DO moments. The first plot point propels us INTO the second act, ergo its enormous importance.

In Vogler/Campbell terms, the "call" is the inciting incident on page 10(ish). You know, the "call to adventure" that the main character most emphatically would like to ignore. It's upsetting the applecart. And the main character, in general, would really like to NOT have this crazy adventure but rather to keep on keeping on in his or her normal life..aas flawed or dysfunctional as that life is. The first plot point is an event that SHOVES the main character forward into the meat of the story - whether they like it or not. There is no getting out of this story and there is no possibility of not going on this adventure.

And the second plot point or second act break, which falls around page 75 or 80 (again, using very slippery math; it depends on your script), is what forces a climactic ending for the whole story.

But the midpoint is the game-changer. The main character is coping in a way that should, according to them, wind up this story quickly and easily - but it fails. Something changes. The mid-point is a reversal which causes your main character to have to make a new plan. They get spun in a new direction. What was working will not work. Because the antagonist upped the game. Because something changed drastically.

I used to be able to rattle off how various screenwriting gurus name the midpoint, but I no longer can. I purposely off-loaded that information some time ago. But you can call it whatever you want - it really doesn't have to be complicated.

Every plot point (or pinch, or break) does the same job - it thrusts the hero into the next, more amped up, higher stakes part of the story. If a script takes the shape of a rollercoaster, with the first 10 pages being the slow click-click-click of the rollercoaster heading up the first hill, then each ensuing plot point is a sharp curve, turn or downward drop.

So the first act is compelling but not as heart-pounding as the third act, right? Of course not. Story-telling is a striptease; as the story unfolds, the audiences gets more and more invested. They HAVE to stick around to see what happens. Because it just keeps getting worse.

Think of the midpoint the same as any of your other plot points. Plot points are plot points. They are pivotal moments that raise the stakes and make things worse and more complicated for your main character.

Except, if you look at the placement of each plot point, you'll notice they are perched on the cusp of a particular act, and as the acts progress, they move faster and more pell mell toward the exciting ending.

So the first act break pushes your character INTO the pool - SPLASH - and now they have to swim. RAINMAN: Cruise kidnaps his brother. Off they go. Adventure started. Trigger pulled.

The midpoint is when you take away the raft, lifejacket and lifeguard. Now swim, sucker. You had no idea that this pool is really the wide open sea. SIXTH SENSE: I see dead people.

The second plot point is when your main character is now faced with a choice: Do or die. Succeed or fail. He or she will have to face down the antagonist in a battle scene. All bets are off.

So try not to mythologize the midpoint too much - just take a close look at where it falls in the script. Dead center. And audiences enjoy the vicarious thrill of hoping the main character will succeed but wondering how the hell that is possible. The midpoint is a complication that causes the main character to have to reach for new solutions after a period of total OH SHIT-ness. Now what?

I should invent new labels for plot points:

Uh Oh! - page 10
Can This Situation Get Any Worse?? - page 25
OH HOLY SHIT - midpoint
Do-or-Die Time - page 75

It is around the midpoint that your main character starts to let go of who they were on page one. They start really coming face to face with what is not working in their lives. The midpoint is the part of going camping when you wind up lost in the rain, and have to patch your tent with a pair of boxer shorts and some gum and you sit there glum and pissed off and light a match to look at a map and then discover it's the wrong map. At the midpoint, your main character is totally, utterly FUBARed. A new plan is needed. Some serious action is needed here. Despair, desperation, anger - all of that will inspire a brand new plan of attack. Your character will crawl out of that tent into the mud, rise up and have a new plan. One that might not work but hey, they're lost in the rainy, dark woods, what other choice is there? It is go time and nothing so far has worked out very well. The midpoint is a tipping point for your main character. If the climactic ending shows what your main character is really made of, the midpoint is the first inkling of that.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Subplots or "B" Storylines

There are of course charts, graphs and stacks of books on every aspect of screenwriting. And at times it can all feel quite academic and intimidating. I know I used to feel that way about subplots. Subplot - what do you mean? I just figured out the main plot! Aaargghhh!

But think of it this way - your character has more going on in his or her life than the adventure at hand, right? Your character has or had a job, a spouse or significant other, parents, siblings - a life. So the B Story - or subplot - is going to be related to something else going on for your main character, if not something going on with another significant character in your script. It's another, lesser complication and it also adds to the lesson or journey for your main character.

Writing subplots is part of writing three-dimensional characters - the adventure happening to them does not exist in a void, right? Stuff was going on for your character before the story began and stuff will go on after the story ends. Characters cannot exist in a bell jar. Subplots not only create a more compelling, fleshed-out story, they are part of a more compelling, fleshed-out character.

Your script might have several strands or subplots that all thematically connect and relate to the main plot. A subplot doesn't necessarily have to take up much screen time but it will definitely have a beginning, middle and end.

A great way to study and really GET subplot is in sitcoms. Just because they are quite overt. Rachel and Ross decide whether to live together - subplot - Joey auditions for a part as a dinosaur. And you'll notice the connect-a-dots with the subplot interrupting the main plot only enough to play itself out pretty efficiently.

Subplots do a lot of things for your script: They flesh out the world and the characters and they also serve as a way of creating more tension in the main plot because we want to get back to THE GOOD PART and see what's going to happen! I could say a bunch of academic stuff here about how the subplot needs to be in service to the theme - but, is that academic? Or just plain obvious? Right? The subplot is some kind of version - even an opposite version - of the theme in the main plot.

Let me think of some subplot examples off the top of my head - mind you, I am only plucking out ONE subplot from these examples, of course there are more:

LEGALLY BLONDE: Elle tries to help her manicurist friend with her love life.

BEETLE JUICE: Lydia's horrible mother, Delia, is an "artist" who seeks to turn the house into an avante garde haven for her pretentious friends.

MILK: Harvey's relationship with his boyfriend is strained by his ambitions.

3:10 to YUMA: Dan Evans tries to earn his son's respect.

HOT FUZZ: Nick Angel's friendship with Danny Butterman.

SCARFACE: Tony Montana's relationships with his wife and his sister.

STAR WARS: The love triangle between Luke, Princess Leia and Han Solo.

POLTERGEIST: Craig T. Nelson's relationship with his work - the evil company that paved the burial ground in the first place.

So take a look at your script - do you have subplots going on? And are those subplots in service to the main character and the main plot? Does each of your subplots have a setup, a complication and a resolution? Does the subplot (or subplots) fit organically into the larger plot? Does the subplot speak to the theme?

Remember, subplots don't need to be complicated, necessarily. Subplots are complements to the main plot. They add nuance, complication and emotional complexity. You don't need to overthink your subplot - I'll bet you already have at least one. Just make sure you set it up, complicate it and pay it off.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

St. Paddy's Short Scene Competition

Okay guys - who feels like doing another short scene competition? Me! I do!

So you know the drill by now, or maybe you're new to TRW and you don't. Guidelines are below.

Keywords are:
Leprechaun
Emerald
Parade

Guidelines:
Write a one page short scene that includes the keywords above. Put the words in context, and make it creative and clever. The words should be key in the scenes, not just a passing inclusion. Don't just slot them in there somewhere. Genre doesn't matter, just keep it to one page.

Deadline:
Please turn your short scenes in by Thursday, March 12th by 11:59pm Pacific Time. I will select the top three and post them here for voting on Monday, March 16th.

Prizes:
A $25 gift certificate to the online vendor (Starbucks, Amazon, etc.) or charity of your choice.

Entry Fee:
Don't be silly.

Submit your scene HERE.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

The Culture of ME

Many blogs are quite personal. Which is why, for a long time, blogs did not interest me whatsoever. Even though I am a people person and a writer, I really am quite honestly not interested in the details of the lives of random bloggers. You know, the early days of blogging were very belly-button gazey so you'd have these blogs (and you still do) in which bloggers rant about everything from movies they like to how much they love their kids or hate their in-laws or when they tried a new recipe. I found (and find) those types of blogs stultifying. If a reader has no investment in who this person IS, then it's tough to be entertained by unqualified rants. However, a good blogger, one who develops a persona, is one who can attract a following that becomes invested. Or is that who becomes invested, Chaia? (Did Wavers know that my adorable-but-could-totally-kick-your-ass assistant, Chaia, edits TRW daily because of course yours truly, who espouses good grammar and language usage, is eminently fallible and doesn't always have time to make corrections?) [LOL. --Ed.]

I have thus far fairly successfully avoided making The Rouge Wave about me. Rather, I really do try to make it about YOU. I already know about me. But I gather that you guys enjoy having a reasonably entertaining place to go where you might pick up some inspiration or tips about screenwriting while avoiding work and other temporarily avoidable duties. I am a procrastinator helper and I'm happy to be your Florence Nightingale.

So every day I try to come up with something for The Rouge Wave that contains valuable information for you. Some days it's easy, other days I stare at the screen and then go look at my Facebook, check the weather, get more coffee and return to the blank screen. Some days I'm cranky about something and so I blog about that. Other days I figure, well, we haven't talked about X subject for awhile, I guess it's my duty to return to that subject. The truth is, in the two+ years I've been writing The Rouge Wave, I think we've covered pretty much every subject related to screenwriting.

If you've ever wondered, yes, I do have to approve comments so if your comment shows up - yes, I read it. You might have a question in your comment and if I have the time and the desire, I answer it. If I don't have the time, I'm sorry, I skip answering the question. I do my best. I actually would MUCH prefer if you sent questions or topic suggestions HERE.

I have received zero flaming bags of poop since I changed the "anonymous" comment posting setting. It seems when one's real name is involved, people are a little more thoughtful in their comments. Fancy that.

As you can imagine, while I love The Rouge Wave, it is only one of 10,000 other daily duties, what with running a script coverage company in the throes of tremendous growth and a screenwriting competition - which - wow, you'd be surprised how much behind the scenes work THAT is. I had to have two training sessions on how to operate the Without A Box submission system. Color me not so techno-savvy. I manage several readers, a new creative director (hi, wonderful Keith I cannot do without), business partners and new investors. And then I try to find time to write.

The blur between my personal and professional lives is profound. Some stuff comes up and I try to repurpose it to make it relevant to writers and writing. Like being at the hospital all last weekend. Or the interest and attachment my partner and I have in and to our thriller. Or the arrival of Ray the Chihuahua a few months ago. He's up to a mighty five pounds, by the way. So - you might want to watch your fingertips and valuables around him. How so much attitude can be packed into five pounds is a mystery to me. Then there's Maddy the Shih-Tzu, or as we affectionately call her, The Glacier. She doesn't move around a whole lot. Except right around midnight when she and Ray do their nightly Indy 500 around my apartment. The other night, Maddy leaned from the couch to the coffee table and one by one nicked tangerines and brought them to her lair. She was lying on a pile of like 10 tangerines when I figured this out.

But mostly, I figure Wavers really don't want to know about what I get up to on a daily basis. But maybe I am wrong. Which is why today is an experiment in how long I can hold your attention. Don't worry, I have no intentions of changing up the content of TRW. It's just for today.

I practice what I preach in terms of joyfulness and balance in my life. I take long walks most every day. And on those long walks I decompress and explore my colorful neighborhood. Which is probably 80% Orthodox Jewish so that's interesting. I live quite close to CBS Television City and am treated to bursts of audience applause several days a week which is surreal. Can you imagine? My home is an informal salon for creatives - people knock on my door and show up at all hours, seven days a week. I guess it's comfy here and I always have good food and wine. Steve Faber is my neighbor and dear friend and so we have a lot of late night chats about what he's doing. He is one of the smartest, most intellectually curious people I have ever met and we love to discuss politics, history and literature. Give Steve a good cigar and a glass of wine or Belgian beer and you've got yourself one amazing conversation. Plus Steve has taught me what courage, humor and tenacity look like.

I am thinking of getting an office so that I no longer work at home. I am looking at an office on The Lot which is a historic studio lot here in LA. Mary Pickford, Douglass Fairbanks and Charlie Chaplin had their offices there. It is a storied studio lot and currently has offices rented to everyone from Alan Ball, Sacha Baron Cohen, Fuse Entertainment, Pachew Productions*, Heroes and Villains and too many others to list. True Blood is filmed there and there is a great commissary and courtyard. I'm excited to move my offices there and will be doing so in about a month. I feel like an 18-year-old getting her first apartment - I'm already thinking about how to decorate! I have been enjoying working at cafes lately but to have an actual office - that sounds like heaven to me. Then my home can again be just my home.

*Pachew Productions is a yet-to-exist production company that my friend Mike and I are noodling around with starting. Mike's offices are currently at The Lot.

So there you have it: today's Rouge Wave. Forgive me if I have bored you, thank you very much if I have entertained you. Either way - get back to work.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Character Introductions and Voice

The very first time we see a character in your script is a fantastic opportunity for you to show us in descriptive words, WHO this character is. We need to know their age, yes, but we need to know something about the totality of this person. Now, in reality, people are layered and complex and one glance can't possibly telegraph everything about them, can it? And yet one can get a snapshot of a person based on their clothing and mannerisms.

Here's an amalgam of BAD character introductions that I have seen approximately 1.3 million times:

JOHN PATRICK is 43 years old and is wearing khaki pants with a blue shirt and a green tie. He is the president and CEO of a large industrial company and he is uptight and judgmental. His WIFE is 38 and has blonde, curly hair and green eyes. She is dressed in a sexy dress and she is bored with her life.

So - here we have a collection of descriptive words that don't add up to a feeling of who this couple is. They both just stand there like mannequins. We have a lot of information here - and information, by the way, that we cannot SEE (the president and CEO of a company) and dull details that do not paint a picture of the essence of these people. What does "bored with her life" look like? Why the specificity of khaki pants and a blue shirt? What does that convey, actually? That he's conservative? Maybe.

I once read a script years ago in which an African American couple debarks a plane on a tropical island. As they walk down the steps to the tarmac, the writer described their clothing: JOHN wears jeans with a white tee-shirt, tucked in and tan loafers. GINA wears a red floral dress with pink and purple flowers, white sandals and a floppy hat made of straw.

TERRIFIC. What. In the heck. Does this mean? Why do I care? How about they are wearing casual vacation clothes? I mean - what is the meaning here? That they look like they are on vacation? A laundry list of clothing or attributes is just that - a laundry list. It doesn't feel like anything. Don't ask me why that terrible description stuck with me. I have no explanation.

Remember that in screenwriting, your job is to describe people and things in such a way that the reader picks up what you are laying down about a character in the macro and in the micro. The details of their clothing generally doesn't matter - unless it MATTERS.

Here are five key character introductions from JUNO that just sing on the page because they tell a whole mini-story about each character in an engaging, clever and voice-filled way:

JUNO MACGUFF stands on a placid street in a nondescript subdivision, facing the curb. It's FALL. Juno is 16 years old, an artfully bedraggled burnout kid in a Catholic school uniform.

PAUL BLEEKER steps onto the front porch of his house for early morning track practice. Bleeker is a frail 16 year-old kid who looks 14. He wears a cross country uniform that reads "DANCING ELK CONDORS." He is eating some kind of microwaved snack gimmick.

We see BREN cutting up LIBERTY'S food diligently. She's wearing a football sweatshirt over a turtleneck, and sporting the classic Minnesota mom bouffant.

VANESSA opens the door. She's a pretty, meticulous woman in her early 30s. Very Banana Republic.

MARK LORING sits in the austere LIVING ROOM with a woman in a business suit. He is boyishly attractive and in his mid-30s. He rises immediately upon seeing Juno and Mac.

Do Wavers see how entertaining and yet information-specific these introductions are? Do Wavers see the specific word choices that Cody made in order to convey a feeling of each character? Their ages and what they are wearing is noted but equally as much the way they do things speaks VOLUMES.

Bren cuts up her younger daughter's food diligently. Not precisely. Not efficiently. Diligently. Writers are wordsmiths - which is why one of my biggest pet peeves is screenwriters who do not have a love of or facility with language. Diligent is different than precise. It's a subtle difference - well, not really - it's a shading. Diligence conveys duty while precision conveys efficiency. Diligence is a trait that connotes working hard and precision connotes control. Is Bren a controlling mother? Not in the least.

How much does: "...an artfully bedraggled burnout kid in a Catholic school uniform" convey about this main character? Not just bedraggled - artfully bedraggled. Not just artfully bedraggled but an artfully bedraggled burnout kid. Take away any one of these words and the picture shifts just slightly, doesn't it?

Or the detail that Bleeker "is eating some kind of microwaved snack gimmick." Not an apple. Not a muffin. A "microwaved snack gimmick." Which he is eating while standing on the porch.

Notice the fact that Mark Loring "rises immediately upon seeing Juno and Mac." He's polite. Or is he nervous?

I'm actually not the type who idolizes or mythologizes successful screenwriters, heaping them with super-human accolades - HOW did you THINK of that SCENE?? - but I know good writing when I see it. These character introductions of Cody's NAIL the characters; they are engaging and they smack of the tone and vibe of JUNO. I don't care who you are - Diablo Cody or Judy Henkstein from Nebraska - writing in an engaging, entertaining way is just good stuff and it's completely within your reach.

We talked yesterday about doing an action line pass on your script this week - seeking out and destroying various action line problems (too dense, too scattered, too detailed). How about this week at some point you go through your script, Wavers, and take a look at how you introduce your characters using the examples above as inspiration? If Cody can do it, you can do it. Lots of screenwriters can do it - it's not rocket science. It's having FUN when you introduce main characters. It's having FUN with the language you use. It's looking over your palette of word choices and choosing specific words to convey specific feelings. Which YOU and only YOU get to do. Because this is your story, Wavers. How do you want to tell it? How do you want me to feel when I read it?

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Focused Rewriting: Action Lines

You're doing it all the time. Rewriting your script. They say that writing IS rewriting and I think this is self-evident. This is why we must not judge ourselves so harshly. Your writing can always improve. In the early stages of writing your script, mostly you just want to get it down on paper. Just get those pages going.

Rewriting is a necessary, fun and challenging part of improving those pages.

But it's easy to go back over pages and tweak them to death with no actual goal in mind. You start off by thinking - I'll just make this better. In fact, going over previous pages from where you left off can sometimes be a time-wasting way to avoid not writing the new pages you need to write. I know when I sit down to write, even if I left off on page 42, I start back at page one and read/skim the previous pages and of course make a few changes here and there before returning to page 42 and making that turn into page 48. Ain't nothin' wrong with that. But imagine the efficiency of doing a focused rewrite pass.

How about this week Wavers collectively do an Action Line Rewrite Pass?

Start on page one and go through the script with a laser focus and look at every single action line paragraph:

Are your action lines written in the present continuous tense? Harold is walking, is sitting, is loading his gun - NO NO NO - rather, Harold walks, or he sits or he loads his gun. Action lines should be written in the present simple tense.

Are there ANY typos, misspells or homophones? (two, too, they're, their, your, you're)

Are there any DENSE blocks of action lines? Screw up your eyes and look at your pages. Any block-like patterns? Seek out and destroy them.

Are there scattered action lines that interrupt virtually every line of dialogue? Seek and destroy.

Are you action lines as pithy and efficient as possible? REALLY as efficient as possible?

Have you chosen evocative words that suit the mood, tone and genre of your script?

Are there widows (single words occupying one whole line)?

Are characters described briefly yet effectively?

Are there sounds in your script, which help make the read more cinematic?

Is there a minimum of "business" in your script?

Are there repeated words you've used? Is there too much alliteration?

Go ahead. Start on page one and ask yourself if your script has any of these problems within the action lines. And spend a day or two improving upon these issues. It's good for your script, it's great exercise for you as a writer and once you really, really GET how to write great action lines, you'll never have to worry about it again. But it takes practice and repetition. It really does.

You see, your script can and might have any number of problems ranging from global to specific - structure, theme, logic or character issues - but bad action lines really are the KISS OF DEATH. Because when your action lines suck, then it follows, in a reader's mind, that your whole script sucks. Because action lines are the plate upon which your whole script is served up. I read a script the other day with a GREAT core premise - really, really fascinating. But the action lines absolutely blew the concept out of the water because they were so bad. Don't let this happen to you. There's no excuse when you have resources all around you instructing you how to do it right.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Wherever We Go

So yesterday I spent the day at the UCLA Ronald Reagan Medical Center in the pediatric ward. The Mini-W has a dear friend who has been gravely ill. I don't say gravely lightly, either. I'll be there again today and again later this week. Hospitals are weird places and with another full hospital day ahead of me, I can't help but slide into my observational writer self. Hospitals are veritable hotbeds of character and place observations, aren't they?

The way the doctors seem to stride rather than walk, with their white coats billowing just slightly. The way some visitors are upset and crying, and others seem relieved. The way the nurses become slightly goddess-like because they bring comfort, information and relief. I saw two helper dogs yesterday. One was a huge white Newfoundland-looking dog, the other a playful Jack Terrier. People gathered around both with delight. I saw a woman outside on her cell phone, sobbing. I saw a woman pull her IV tree outside to have a smoke.

Hospitals have a visceral impact; they make one instantly feel a bit wound up and emotional. The atmosphere reminds one how very delicate life and health really is. This particular facility is rather new and looks like it cost about a billion dollars. Until you go upstairs to visit and then it looks like any other hospital. The pediatric ward is particularly difficult. Our friend is a teenager but the other rooms had toddlers and infants in them. And bewildered six-year olds. Some rooms are highly decorated and personalized because that kid has been there for a long time.

My daughter's friend came out of her heavily sedated state to observe, sleepily - "It smells like...Canada in here." We can only ascribe this comment to the effects of some serious medication but it brought a much needed moment of levity. Another moment of levity came when I asked a striding, billowing doctor where to find a particular part of the hospital and he kept right on striding, saying he really didn't know. That's okay, I said. Have a great day and save some lives! He turned and smiled wryly. Is that what I do? He was probably a podiatrist. I was instructed by my daughter to not talk to doctors anymore.

I don't do very well in hospital settings. It upsets me. It brings every anxiety right to the surface. I don't like the smell, the beeping machines, the seriousness of it all. The feeling of being on the razor's edge of life itself. It reminds me that the sunny world outside of the hospital is in some ways ignorant of that razor's edge reality that life can be precarious. It brings up fears - will I be in the hospital someday? Will I live through it? What if this were MY daughter? Would I be able to keep it together?

Actually last year it was my daughter and I held it together with an iron will. When it's YOU or YOUR family you really have no choice. You can fall apart later but not at the hospital. You must listen to the doctors, you must pay attention to what's going on. You must conquer your fear of the blinking lights, beeping machines and abject seriousness of it all.

If you were to write a scene set in a hospital, could you capture the complexity of the sights, sounds and emotions of that place? We drive past hospitals every day in our day-to-day lives. But inside those walls a whole different world is going on. One with its own culture, social constructs and mores. It's not something we often think about - until it's us or someone we love.

As writers, we are blessed with the ability and desire to write about the details of life. We are also cursed because even when we don't want to be observing - we are. We can't help it. I wondered about the doctors with their confident strides - do they feel like rock stars? Do they feel like imposters? They are just people, after all. But in that setting, in that white coat, they are elevated to something almost god-like by those who observe them. Every hospital room has a story. What got that patient there? Who is this patient? What is the prognosis? How is the family coping?

Writers carry around an invisible tool box. Every experience we have, we take notes silently and throw the experience into the hopper. Hospitals, football games, office parties - our own relationships. Have you ever had a fight - or even a joyful moment - with your significant other and thought - ooohhhhh this would be a great scene? I recently had a moment that would make a great comedy scene - a moment of great emotional intimacy that I ruined by making a joke. Well, I mean, ruined it for the man involved but I thought it was very funny. Casualty: one male ego was slightly bruised. Upside: That went right straight into the hopper. A version of that moment will appear in something I write, mark my words.

Writers are liars and thieves. We observe what goes on around us and we drink it all in for future writing purposes. Even when it's happening to us. We embellish to make the story more entertaining. Is the life-saving podiatrist a comedy down the line? Or one small piece of a character? How does Canada smell?

Have a lovely Sunday, Wavers, and here's a fist-bump from one writer to all of you writers out there. Observe, embellish, see and feel what's going on all around you, whether it's at the hospital, the video store or the line at the bank. Life is a moveable feast and it's our job to record it so that later, an audience member somewhere can have a much-needed belly laugh or maybe a really good cry. Our job is important.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Dense Action Lines = Kiss of Death

For many new screenwriters, action lines seem like the least of their concerns. That's just the part where you download what's happening, describe characters, etc., big deal, how hard can it be? I have seen many an aspiring screenwriter who writes in some other context, sometimes even on a high level of achievement (having been published or otherwise lauded), really take action lines for granted - which honestly, as a person who has written published essays and short fiction as well as scripts, irks me. Don't take action line writing so lightly - give it some respect.

Action lines are in some ways Screenwriting 101: Don't just tell me what's going on, lay it out as if I am watching what's going on. Huge difference. Yes, yes, one can adhere to "rules" like keep action lines to less than four lines in one paragraph but really, what sets action lines in a script apart from any other type of writing is that they are cinematic in nature. They have movement, they guide the eye, they set the tone. They don't just plunk us into the middle of a tableau and describe it to death: They are kinetic and elegant.

Don't ever just toss out action lines to simply describe something. Always take advantage and make them pull two and three times their weight. Don't describe a scene as if it is a static diorama. Remember that action lines are NOT subtitled; don't tell me that this dude is the CEO of Evil Corp. and that he's having an agitated conversation with someone. SHOW me what that looks like. Sorry I'm ranting a little; I read a script yesterday that had a great premise but that was absolutely sunk by action lines that did nothing to service the story and everything to take what should have been exciting and make it a describe-o-rama snorefest.

Let me give you an example that is scrambled for confidentiality's sake. This is an amalgam of every bad action line mistake you could make...but let me also say this is NOT an exaggeration. I repeat - NOT an exaggeration. This is sadly common:

LOUISE GINT is blonde, in her 50s but still looking good. She wears expensive clothing but she is annoyed. She is the president of the Junior Soccer League. She is in a high school gymnasium and stands at a podium set up on a stage and tries to get the crowd to quiet down to listen to her. Her vice president, LOU HALL is in his 30s and is a grumpy type who rarely smiles. All around them a crowd waits to hear the speech. A PHOTOGRAPHER with a beard stands toward the back and begins to snap pictures of the event. He is Louise's ex-husband and there is no love lost between them. Screens are on either side of the podium and the screens play footage of a soccer team in Ireland winning a game. Louise starts her speech.

Do you see how annoying this is? And this example is probably eight lines shorter than I commonly see. It is expository, it is boring, it is overwritten and it just sits there like a lump. It doesn't MOVE.

Now let's try it again:

A high school gym is crowded with SOCCER FANS. Parents, die-hards, teenagers. A bearded PHOTOGRAPHER jostles for position at the back. Suddenly, microphone feedback echoes throughout the gym -

LOUISE (O.S.): Ladies and gentleman! Quiet down please!

The crowd turns its attention to the commanding woman at the podium. LOUISE GINT (50s), blonde and confident in her Donna Karan, looks over the crowd.

LOUISE: Quiet please!

LOU HALL (30s), grim and unsmiling, leans in to Louise.

LOU (under his breath): This isn't going to be easy.

Louise covers the microphone with her hand.

LOUISE: Shut up and roll the footage, dammit!

Two large screens on either side of the podium flicker and come to life. Team Ireland plays a rousing, mud-spattered game.

LOUISE: It is my duty as Junior Soccer League President to present to you the incriminating footage of the game played last year in Dublin Heights.

MAN (O.S.): Miss Gint?! Miss Gint!

Louise swivels her head to someone in the back of the crowd. It's the photographer.

PHOTGRAPHER: Wasn't this footage obtained through illegal means?

The crowd grows silent. Lou leans closer to Louise and whispers.

LOU: Isn't that -

LOUISE: My ex husband. Bastard.

Etc.

So - you know - this is an example and it really goes nowhere but do Wavers see how both examples basically give out the same information but one does it in a way that is moving along and the other is just an action line DUMP?

Look, writing action lines vis a vis the first example is a natural way for new writers to do it. It's what you are used to; it uses a weird combination of pointillism and paint roller to set up what's going on. But the second example is how scripts (good ones) are actually written - information is doled out on an as-needed basis. As one example, in the first iteration, the writer just informs us that Louise is the president of the junior soccer league and that further, she is annoyed. But in the second example, we just let her BE the junior soccer league president - she tells us that as part of what she's doing. And she SOUNDS annoyed. We don't inform you the photographer is her ex, we discover that in a kinetic way. Louise sees him only after he asks a question. And we find out just who he is in a much more fun way.

It's like the difference between trotting out beauty contest girls and saying: Miss Corona Hills is 27, likes long walks on the beach and really loves puppies! Rather than introducing information as if she walks out onto the stage as an actor in a play - we gather information about her through the way she talks and acts - we gather the information, we look for it, we experience it.

And that sums up the vibe of good action lines, people. Don't information dump but rather, let the information wash over us incrementally. Because when you write that way, you have engaged me, the reader. I am experiencing what I am reading, not being hit over the head with it. This not a manual for a garbage disposal. This is like being led on a garden tour.

And that. Is my rant for the day. Thank you and get back to work.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Pilot Season

By Lisabeth Laiken

OK, quick, answer this — what will you want to watch this fall?

With everything going on in the world, can you hazard a guess right now where you will be and what you will be in the mood for in seven months?

Do you think you will want to watch shows about parenting? A family drama maybe? A family comedy? How about some more soft procedurals? Will you be ready to laugh at the exploits that happen after being fired? Or have your heart tugged by them? Will a new medical drama or two distract you from your woes? Or will you have had enough of reality and just want an escape, so maybe some familiar witches? Vampires? Aliens? Or do you just want to cut to the chase and see the apocalypse? Or the future? These are all options under consideration. Do any of them strike your fancy?

There are millions of dollars at stake right now trying to guess that answer. Maybe that’s why time travel is such a popular television theme; the network execs wish they could do it themselves!

Pilot season is a crazy carnival ride in a good year; this year it might be even wilder - how can the execs gauge anything with everything in such flux? And this pilot season wasn’t even supposed to happen. After the writers strike, the networks proclaimed very loudly that throwing money at an array of pilots didn’t work and wasn’t cost effective and they weren’t going to do it anymore. Well it may be true that it’s inefficient, but not doing it didn’t work out so well either, so they are back at it.

In the last few weeks, dozens of ideas have gotten the greenlight - to go to script, to be cast, to get directors - all with the hope that in March they will get the word to start shooting. If you are writing a spec script or developing your own television show idea, or if you just like TV and want to follow a kind of horserace, there are three great resources to keep track of it all: Variety's Pilot Watch, The Hollywood Reporter's articles and orders at Pilot Log, and The Futon Critic DevWatch. This last resource lists everything - details and history - with great filtering options!

The casting reports are starting to pop up. So much of a show's success depends on chemistry between set-up and actor. Just look at this seasons The Mentalist; its whole pull is what Simon Baker makes of that character in a rather middling show. Who would you like to see back out there? If you were writing a show, who would you want to be delivering your lines? I know that if Kyle Secor, John Hawkes, Emma Caulfield, or Caroline Dhavernas were to be cast in something I would need to check it out. Lauren Graham (who tops my list of MIAs) has a pilot for ABC called "Let It Go" that seems to be gaining momentum, so here’s hoping I’ll see at least one of my faves this fall.

Other shows on the radar already include the latest attempt to recreate AbFab (Kristen Johnston, Kathryn Hahn) and a remake of V. Two movies being dusted off and having their shoulder pads removed are Parenthood and Witches of Eastwick. The CW is hoping to attract the Twilight fans with Vampire Diaries. Hotties James Tupper and Michael Vartan have been tagged for medical shows, Mercy and Time Heals, respectively. Jenna Elfman is getting another go with Accidentally on Purpose and Amy Smart has her first lead in See Cate Run.

It’s way too early to say what will end up on the air. I have my fingers crossed very tightly for the new Herskovitz/Zwick drama A Marriage but who knows — a couple of years ago I was sure we’d be watching Judy Got a Gun and Nice Girls don’t Get a Corner Office. Anyone remember when those had the buzz? It was 2007. We got Cavemen instead.

Lisabeth Laiken has been scrutinizing television since they got the breed of dog wrong on Little House on the Prairie. After ending her college years watching movies and television critically in a joint Film Studies and Semiotics program, she went on to use two VCRs to collect and catalog all her favorite shows (over 500 tapes) long before DVR was a glimmer in anyone’s eye.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Getting Unstuck

So you're working on your script and you're just - stuck. Not feeling the love. Suddenly feeling adrift. Suddenly doubting it, disliking it and sliding into an existential spiral of yuckness. Something just isn't working. This is not how it's supposed to be! I am the only writer who is stuck! I suck! Other writers do not go through this! Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

To power through the yuckness and self-pity of feeling stuck, you might ask these questions:

What
What
Why
How
Who

WHAT is the premise? What am I writing here? In one sentence. Spit it out. This is a thriller about a woman being stalked by a potato farmer. Let's practice the power of intentionality here - write the WHAT down on a Post-It and stick it onto your computer monitor.

WHAT turns me on about this story? What tickles me about it? What interests me here? Write it down. Don't judge what you write, just brain dump.

WHY would audiences enjoy seeing this movie? How does it help them escape, reflect or connect with their own humanity? Write it down. Again, brain dump.

HOW can I tell this story in a way that is uniquely compelling? How can I find a way into this story that is different from other stories like it? Do some brainstorming. Do you tell the story in reverse? Is the story set in a different era or location?

WHO is the main character? Do you need to push the pause button on the pages and do some character exercises and backstory writing? Do you really get the flaw of this character? Do you actually know how your character prefers his or her coffee? When they graduated? What they drive, what music they like, how they feel about their parents? How much do you know about this main character? The key to writing a compelling character rather than a marionette is backstory and character work.

In other words, revisit your mission statement for this script. Why did you want to write this story in the first place? What is making you feel suddenly stuck? Are you becoming mired in the details and have you lost track of the big picture? Is your main character really three-dimensional?

Look, there's no two ways about it - writing is painfully difficult at times. That's why most people are incapable of doing it. The brain of a writer must be lit up like a Lite Brite when we are brainstorming or writing. Imagine what that must look like. Take a moment and appreciate how hard this is. This writing thing isn't for sissies.

So be kind to yourself. Don't judge the process. If you need to take a break, take a break. But if you need to open a new Word document and just free-flow brain dump about this script, why you're writing it, who your main character is or why audiences will enjoy this story, do so. What you write won't wind up in the script, per se, but it will go into your creative larder as fuel. I do think that allowing yourself to just type your thoughts freestyle, without judging, can unleash ideas and inspiration that have been hidden.

That's the rub with writing, isn't it? You can't force it. But you can feed it. You can get in the mood for it and mainly - you can give in to the experience of it. Because it just isn't pretty.

It's like camping - you show up at the camp site all outfitted with fancy REI gear and all neatly prepared and two days later you're wearing three layers of filthy clothes with soot on your face and eating something off a stick that dropped in the dirt a minute ago. And you just don't give a damn. There's something totally exhilarating about just not giving a damn anymore.

Why just yesterday, a dear friend, after receiving a summons for a meeting at ICM this Friday, told me how she got to this point. She'd written several comedies, nothing was taking off, and she decided to not give a damn and just write a crazy post-apocalyptic script and damn the goddamn torpedoes. That's the headspace she was in. And now...fast forward about nine months: manager, agent, meetings at prestigious production companies. How's that for just letting go of control and not giving a damn?

Whatever it takes. Nobody is going to judge your process. And being stuck is quite decidedly part of the process. Writing is not neat, it is not pretty, it is not one size fits all. It's okay to have days when you absolutely hate your script. Pick that dirty marshmallow right back up, blow off the filth, ram that stick through it and roast it on the fire. The sweet center will still be there, no matter how you cook it.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Reminder Plus a Happy Dance

Good afternoon, Wavers - I have some exciting news. We landed a really neat writer to dine with our grand prize winner for the 2009 Silver Screenwriting Competition. The doors open for submission on Sunday March 1st, and the deadline is May 1st. The first two weeks of submissions are early bird discounted. The website has not yet been updated to reflect the reason I'm doing a big happy dance today so here's the upshot:

With cash and prizes totaling $10,000, The Silver Screenwriting Competition will award the Grand Prize winner a round trip ticket to Los Angeles, three nights at a four star hotel on the Sunset Strip, meetings with three managers and lunch at the Ivy with Josh Zetumer, currently adapting DUNE for director Peter Berg. (Josh also worked on SHERLOCK HOLMES and JAMES BOND: QUANTUM OF SOLACE). How’d you like to pick his brain over lunch?

And that’s not even including the MacBook Air, iPhone and $750 in cash. Go ahead. Give it a try. Then start packing your bags for Hollywood. Deadline, May 1st, 2009, 11:59pm Pacific Time.

Oh happy happy joy joy. I've actually met Josh on a number of occasions and let me tell you, he's one smart guy. He has twice appeared on the Black List (2008 and 2007) and in 2008 was named one of Variety's Top Ten Screenwriters to Watch. And now you can watch him have lunch and give you some choice advice and inspiration. Super neat. So mark your calendars and get those scripts ready - it's gonna be a fun competition!

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.