The first script I wrote after I moved to LA - my second ever completed script - was an action flick about a former henchlady for the mob who was in witness protection. She had to get from one part of town to the other withing a matter of hours, but she was coincidentally being chased by another henchman for her former boss as well as a couple of cops for no apparent reason.
I'd love to go back in time and give myself notes. Instead I sent the script to a contact who sent it around his management firm where it was universally panned. So I blew that opportunity. On the upside I learned some things about my strengths and weaknesses and that I was nowhere near ready for a professional writing career.
There were a lot of things wrong with that script, but the biggest problem was my lack of a force propelling the story forward. I knew the beginning and I knew the ending and I figure I needed some fights in between. So I made them.
Story get dull? Make a fight happen. My protagonist stumbled on some cops and decided to beat them up for a really stupid reason. Then later on the story was getting dull again so I decided I should have a car chase.
Basically I came up with a story without any depth and made up fight scenes to make sure it was long enough to qualify as a feature.
I learned not to do that anymore.
Instead, I let the story guide the events. A character is shot and needs to get to DC to stop a government conspiracy. The other day I was thinking, I don't have enough story here. I need some fight scenes. And then I went, nooooo don't do that, dumbass.
Think. Where would this story go if they were real people?
A character is shot. What would a person do if they were shot? They go to the hospital. So my character goes to the hospital, the bad guys track him there, he has to get out of it because he still needs to make it to DC.
This seems like common sense, but it's amazing to me how I didn't think of it when I was writing my ill-fated second screenplay.
Events have to push the characters to make decisions and the story comes out of those decisions. You cannot put a bunch of scenes together and make a story.
"Think. Where would this story go if they were real people?
ReplyDeleteA character is shot. What would a person do if they were shot? They go to the hospital. So my character goes to the hospital, the bad guys track him there, he has to get out of it because he still needs to make it to DC."
What if you have a character who is a nurse or a doctor, who takes the needed supplies from the hospital...
and treats your wounded character at home. (WITNESS)
That's exactly what I'm talking about. You take your character and their situation and figure out what choice they would make depending on their desires and needs.
ReplyDeleteIt seems so common sense, but people don't always think that way.
Sometimes it just hard to think (common sensibly) when writing.
ReplyDeleteAt least...for me.
I have what appears to be a pretty decent story happening over here.
My goal now is to try and tell this story with as few locations as possible.
SEE. So much to THINK about.
But wouldn't a gunshot wound showing up at the ER prompt the attending physician to call the cops? I wouldn't be too hard on yourself. Didn't Josh Brolin and Javier Bardhem get shot in "No Country"? Those lunatics didn't go to the hospital.
ReplyDeleteI think you're missing my point. The needs of the characters necessitate their actions. So yes, an ER has to report a gunshot wound. So my characters have to figure out how to get treated and out without getting arrested - an additional complication, and additional problem to solve.
ReplyDeleteThe Cohens solved it by not having their characters go to the hospital at all. That was their choice and a different path for them to follow.
If all our characters made the same choices in the same situations, all our stories would be the same.
Actually, Josh Brolin's character, in the book, ended up in a hospital in Mexico.
ReplyDelete