Sunday, April 20, 2014
Advice on Writing Screenplays
I'm gonna ramble a bit.
I don't normally give advice on writing screenplays. Like, who the fuck am I to do that? Well, I'm technically way more qualified than a lot of hacks who do it...
I was a script reader for nearly two years for a company in Los Angeles. I did it all from the comfort of my house. I got the job through the AOL screenwriter message boards, of all places. A working screenwriter on the boards that I had known for a while recommended me to a production company who was looking for readers.
Only problem was that I had never done any coverage for any screenplay. Coverage is the detailed breakdown on a script, and at the end you would put whether you Recommend The Script, Pass on the Script or Pass on the Script/Recommend Writer, which means you'd request another script from the writer.
I lucked out and found some coverage from a book--did a sample coverage on one of my own scripts. I figured I'd not only try to get the job, but maybe they'd even request my script.
I got the job, but they never requested my script.
This was back in 1998ish. The only internet around was the dial up kind. Like 28.8K shit. Yeah, the kind that made the beep handshake sounds when connecting.
Anyway, they started mailing me two scripts a week. I'd read them, do coverage and send them back within seven days. Then repeat. They paid me around $50 per script.
And the craziest part? I must have reviewed around 200 scripts and I never recommended one. I think I recommended a couple of the writers, but none of the scripts were very good.
At the end I was actually prepping to shoot my first flick when I quit. But one script they sent me was SO bad that I sent back the coverage with the line "This script is so bad I couldn't get past 10 pages. Don't pay me for this one. Also, it will be my last script as I'm going off to shoot my own movie." You can find a sample of the coverage I did here, but I removed the title of the script.
So that's one of the reasons I feel a little more qualified to advise about writing scripts. Add on the fact that I've been writing for 30 years, have written over 30 screenplays, and have read well over 300 scripts at this point.
My advice is going to be pretty vague really. I just figured, as I get asked on occasion, that I would pass on what books I think are the most helpful for screenwriters. At least, they were the most helpful to me.
1) Scriptshadow Secrets - This is the newest one I've read and it's chock full of incredible advice using some actual great movies, rather than the normal horseshit you read where they dissect Citizen Kane and Chinatown.
2) Screenwriting: The Sequence Approach - Again a newer one, but one I'm drawn to more and more. It's actually a pretty short book but I'm more and more convinced that using the sequence approach can make finishing a screenplay so much easier.
3) Story by Robert McKee - Probably the most important one to start with if you're completely green
4) The Art of Dramatic Writing by Lajos Egri - This is an older book that doesn't deal with screenwriting, but instead gives some very valuable advice on writing in general. Certainly applicable to screenplays.
5) Writing for Emotional Impact - Pound for pound probably the best book I ever read on the subject of writing. I try to read this as often as I can to keep the principles fresh.
Books I don't recommend:
You'll notice, if you know anything about the books above, that they're not much for formula or things like THIS has to happen by page so and so. I think that not only is that helping to make movies feel very by-the-numbers but it's dumbing down the art form. So that's why these books don't get a thumbs up from me.
1) Save The Cat - Listen, the core principle is sound. Basically let me save you the money on the book by telling you that you need to make your main character likeable. PERIOD. So if he saves an animal or person in the first 10 pages, he will be likeable. But there's a million other ways to do it, and the other things the author tells you to do on this page and that page are just dumb and simplified. Use the sequence approach instead, which basically tells you to break your movie into 10 or so sequences, generally of whatever length you'd like, and your movie won't feel so by-the-book. Not only that but it will be easier to write and STILL be a better movie.
2) Syd Field's Any Of Them - Syd was the screenwriting guru, and his the first book I ever read on writing screenplays. (he wrote a few books but at the time the only one he had then was Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting; A step-by-step guide from concept to finished script). The problem is that a new screenwriter will read this and really start to feel like he's in a box. It will constrain your creativity as you try to follow all the rules. Just don't.
3) How To Write A Movie In 21 Days - Just complete crap. I think this is the only writing book I ever threw away after reading.
So those are the ones I'd recommend. You gotta understand that in this day of advanced technology...where your average Joe Schmoe can pick up a camera and shoot a decent picture because of how good the technology is...and then edit it because computers are so cheap...and add cool effects because Andrew Kramer's way too generous with his genius...EVERY facet of creating movies is being made easier and more simple for your average person.
Except writing. No computer program, no technology is ever going to make creating a great screenplay easy. That's your ace in the hole if you're trying to compete now. You've got to become a good writer.
And that takes a lot of writing.
Sunday, February 2, 2014
Night of the Clowns
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3465392/
I guess it's only fitting that I put this here. It appears to be about 90% certain that my next movie will be a return to clowns. No, not FOC3 which will probably never happen, but "Night of the Clowns".
Not only will it be super cool to be right before "Night of the Comet" and "Night of the Creeps" in an alphabetical movie order, but it's set in the 1980's. A return to my teenage years!
I can't talk too much about it, but suffice it to say it's gonna be a straight horror film. Lotta deaths and a lotta clowns.
Here's Fangoria talking about it a little with their announcement of the FOC2 Blu Ray! Free shipping's almost over, so get yours now!
http://www.fangoria.com/new/exclusive-director-talks-night-of-the-clowns-fear-of-clowns-2-on-blu-ray/
I guess it's only fitting that I put this here. It appears to be about 90% certain that my next movie will be a return to clowns. No, not FOC3 which will probably never happen, but "Night of the Clowns".
Not only will it be super cool to be right before "Night of the Comet" and "Night of the Creeps" in an alphabetical movie order, but it's set in the 1980's. A return to my teenage years!
I can't talk too much about it, but suffice it to say it's gonna be a straight horror film. Lotta deaths and a lotta clowns.
Here's Fangoria talking about it a little with their announcement of the FOC2 Blu Ray! Free shipping's almost over, so get yours now!
http://www.fangoria.com/new/exclusive-director-talks-night-of-the-clowns-fear-of-clowns-2-on-blu-ray/
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Filmmaking Advice: Unmotivated Movement
Uh oh, this scene's gonna be boring without some unmotivated movement...
You know, I try to stay away from giving advice regarding filmmaking because let's face it: Who the hell am I to be giving advice? (and if you've ever seen my early movies, you're probably nodding your head right now)
Practical advice, like, what kind of microphone should you use/not use or what's a good way to use guns in the street with no permits so nobody gets shot or arrested? Yeah, I'll do that. But advice regarding actual directing? I try to stay away.
But I feel like I want to put this out there so maybe younger filmmakers will start to consider this aspect of what I'm seeing more and more of. The topic is: Unmotivated movement.
It's always been a pet peeve of mine. I'm not even sure most new filmmakers even understand what it is. So, here ya go.
When you set up a shot that has movement in it you need to consider WHY you are moving the camera. If you are moving the camera because your shot is boring otherwise then that is unmotivated movement. You'll find a lot of this during conversations between people.
And sure, I've even been guilty of this on occasion. You got two talking heads on the screen for two minutes and it feels like DEATH. I know. Best advice I ever heard about this is to GET YOUR TALKING HEADS WALKING. Instead of sitting down, have them GOING somewhere. Now you have motivated movement because if your camera doesn't move then it's missing the action.
THAT is the prime reason for camera movement. The camera should be moving to follow the action or to draw the viewer's eye to something.
The only other reason to move the camera is to reveal the geography of a scene that may come in to play later. So you're orienting the viewer so they understand the scene that will unfold.
That's pretty much it. (other than using certain movements to dramatically emphasize/de-emphasize a character) Sure, I'm simplifying it quite a bit. There's stylistic reasons and there's mood-related reasons. But that's not why many of today's budding filmmakers are moving the camera--they're moving the camera because STATIC(NON-MOVEMENT) IS BAD(in their head).
I know, you got that new slider for your DSLR so you really wanna move the camera parallel to what's going on because FILM IS MOVEMENT, man!(I don't remember where I first heard this quote) But it's really not.
And why not, you ask? Well, one reason is because if every shot is moving then every shot with movement loses its meaning, its punch. If you have three static shots of individual people, then a shot where you're pushing in on another person, that last shot will bring extra meaning to that person(the viewer will understand that person or moment is important). Now if you have the same push in on four different people, it's meaningless.
So all I'm asking is to think about WHY you're moving the camera in your shot. If there's no reason and you want the movement anyway, add a reason. It'll improve the shot.
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. You know how you know? Look, I have one of those douchey pictures where I'm framing a shot, that's how you know. :)
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
More reviews
Google notifications is the greatest thing ever! It sends me links to reviews on the web. Here's some I hadn't see before:
Mostly negative:
http://redandsticky.blogspot.com/2011/11/must-kill-to-getbetter-fear-of-clowns.html
Negative:
http://bhorrorblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/fear-of-clowns/
Mostly positive:
http://musingthetrauma.blogspot.com/2010/05/fear-of-clowns.html
But how 'bout this? We're on the list of 10 best Scary Clown movies from Screen Junkies!
http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/genres-movies/horror-films/10-best-killer-clown-movies/
And we're in the "15 Weird and Evil Clowns In Movies" list!
http://whatculture.com/film/15-weird-and-evil-clowns-in-movies.php/6
And then there's this website that says "it's their favorite movie" and then proceeds to give the craziest summary of FOC I've ever read:
http://www.freewebs.com/fh253/
More if I find them!
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Long Time
Man, over a year without a post! Well, as I mentioned there's not a lot to post anymore since I already posted the logs.
Anyway, I recently decided to google alert any reviews of FOC and FOC2. Here's a couple newer ones I hadn't seen before:
(semi-positive)
http://jennyshouseofhorrors.blogspot.com/2012/10/fear-of-clowns.html
(mostly negative)
http://www.critical-film.com/reviews/F/fearofclowns/fearofclowns.html
(6 out of 10)
http://www.nefariousfilms.com/Reviews/Fear%20of%20Clowns%20Review.html
(mostly negative but gets points for calling Rick a "slightly doughier Taylor Lautner" and for calling Frank Lama " so darn handsome", "extremely attractive", "handsome", and calling Shivers "
pec-tastic porn clown".)
http://andrewscottwrites.blogspot.com/2012/07/friday-filmteenth-fear-of-clowns.html
Fairly positive:
http://www.rakuten.com/prod/fear-of-clowns/202147334.html
Anyway, I recently decided to google alert any reviews of FOC and FOC2. Here's a couple newer ones I hadn't seen before:
(semi-positive)
http://jennyshouseofhorrors.blogspot.com/2012/10/fear-of-clowns.html
(mostly negative)
http://www.critical-film.com/reviews/F/fearofclowns/fearofclowns.html
(6 out of 10)
http://www.nefariousfilms.com/Reviews/Fear%20of%20Clowns%20Review.html
(mostly negative but gets points for calling Rick a "slightly doughier Taylor Lautner" and for calling Frank Lama " so darn handsome", "extremely attractive", "handsome", and calling Shivers "
pec-tastic porn clown".)
http://andrewscottwrites.blogspot.com/2012/07/friday-filmteenth-fear-of-clowns.html
Fairly positive:
http://www.rakuten.com/prod/fear-of-clowns/202147334.html
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Defending Your Movie
This was a personal entry into my journal that I made as we were prepping on FOC2, but it's really about FOC. I think it's still pretty appropriate.
So...anyone seen the fun I've been having on the imdb message boards? Just search for FOC and then click on Message Board.
You see...how the internet works is, anyone who has an opinion is now a professional critic. They can click SEND and now they're published! On the internet.
And that's how we get a lot of know-it-alls posting about things they really don't know.
Don't get me wrong...my movies have PLENTY of problems. If you were to say on those boards, "I hate your movie because it was boring and the story didn't make much sense," I probably wouldn't say anything to you. It's your opinion. You're totally entitled to it. And I don't necessarily disagree with you.
But when you say stuff like "poorly-edited", "bad cinematography", "bad script"--then you need to explain how you're qualified to judge that.
Now most of the comments on that board are easy to figure out. They're people who would like to be where I am but don't want to put in the work and effort to do what I'm doing. So it's much easier to rag on a film than actually MAKE one.
And then there's the new guy who came in recently and basically quoted verbatim stuff that's in your film 101 textbooks. He tried to come off all high and mighty and act like he knows what he's doing and could do it all SO much better.
And then I find out who the guys is:
He's a guy who offered to work on my film for free. He's from California and had told my producer that if we flew him out here and had a place for him to stay, he'd work on the film for free.
See, he's just looking to get something behind him. Right now it's all BS and unproduced films. His resume was nice though, because he had some assistant director creds. An AD doesn't actually direct--he's pretty much the guy who works the shooting schedule, keeps people doing what they need to do. He's suppose to keep us on schedule.
So I could use one of those.
This guy was totally on board. Very excited. So excited that he asked if he can mention it to Fangoria in an interview online. I say, whatever. The interview shows up a week later and yep, there's the mention of him working on FOC2.
Then we don't hear from him anymore. Nothing. Not a "Hey, I'm not interested anymore" or anything. Just...silence. Very professional way of doing things.
And now he's on the board saying that after he saw the film and the "final pay quote" he decided not to be a part of it. Final pay quote? It was always ZERO dollars. That's what cracks me up. That's why there's the confusion.
There's only one guy who was offered money to work on the film who is NOT working on the film. Everyone else is on board.
But this guy...like I said...a wannabe filmmaker. He shot a movie like 2 years ago, so I'm very anxious to see the movie so I can post my very own comment on HIS film's message board.
Guess I have to wait until he actually GETS distribution though
Really. I mean...I'm not famous but I can certainly see why most of the filmmakers today avoid any kind of interaction online. You simply can't win.
So I'm probably just going to leave my posts up there long enough for that assfish to read them, then take them all down and stop posting.
So...anyone seen the fun I've been having on the imdb message boards? Just search for FOC and then click on Message Board.
You see...how the internet works is, anyone who has an opinion is now a professional critic. They can click SEND and now they're published! On the internet.
And that's how we get a lot of know-it-alls posting about things they really don't know.
Don't get me wrong...my movies have PLENTY of problems. If you were to say on those boards, "I hate your movie because it was boring and the story didn't make much sense," I probably wouldn't say anything to you. It's your opinion. You're totally entitled to it. And I don't necessarily disagree with you.
But when you say stuff like "poorly-edited", "bad cinematography", "bad script"--then you need to explain how you're qualified to judge that.
Now most of the comments on that board are easy to figure out. They're people who would like to be where I am but don't want to put in the work and effort to do what I'm doing. So it's much easier to rag on a film than actually MAKE one.
And then there's the new guy who came in recently and basically quoted verbatim stuff that's in your film 101 textbooks. He tried to come off all high and mighty and act like he knows what he's doing and could do it all SO much better.
And then I find out who the guys is:
He's a guy who offered to work on my film for free. He's from California and had told my producer that if we flew him out here and had a place for him to stay, he'd work on the film for free.
See, he's just looking to get something behind him. Right now it's all BS and unproduced films. His resume was nice though, because he had some assistant director creds. An AD doesn't actually direct--he's pretty much the guy who works the shooting schedule, keeps people doing what they need to do. He's suppose to keep us on schedule.
So I could use one of those.
This guy was totally on board. Very excited. So excited that he asked if he can mention it to Fangoria in an interview online. I say, whatever. The interview shows up a week later and yep, there's the mention of him working on FOC2.
Then we don't hear from him anymore. Nothing. Not a "Hey, I'm not interested anymore" or anything. Just...silence. Very professional way of doing things.
And now he's on the board saying that after he saw the film and the "final pay quote" he decided not to be a part of it. Final pay quote? It was always ZERO dollars. That's what cracks me up. That's why there's the confusion.
There's only one guy who was offered money to work on the film who is NOT working on the film. Everyone else is on board.
But this guy...like I said...a wannabe filmmaker. He shot a movie like 2 years ago, so I'm very anxious to see the movie so I can post my very own comment on HIS film's message board.
Guess I have to wait until he actually GETS distribution though
Really. I mean...I'm not famous but I can certainly see why most of the filmmakers today avoid any kind of interaction online. You simply can't win.
So I'm probably just going to leave my posts up there long enough for that assfish to read them, then take them all down and stop posting.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Some archive footage, exclusively here!
I know, been a while, right? Well, I've been doing some backing up and came across a bunch of videos of old "Fear of Clowns" audition and rehearsal video. Here it is, unedited.
Check it out! We were all so young...
I will be making a "Fear of Clowns" youtube playlist where I'll try to keep this stuff sorted. Unlisted for now, so you guys are the first to set eyes on them! I'll upload a few more next week.
Rick Ganz Clowns Around During Rehearsal
Jacky & Rick Rehearse FOC
Frank Lama at the FOC audition
Check it out! We were all so young...
I will be making a "Fear of Clowns" youtube playlist where I'll try to keep this stuff sorted. Unlisted for now, so you guys are the first to set eyes on them! I'll upload a few more next week.
Rick Ganz Clowns Around During Rehearsal
Jacky & Rick Rehearse FOC
Frank Lama at the FOC audition
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





