Whentogotoamovieguru : by James P. Mercurio
Whentogotoamovieguru : by James P. Mercurio
Whentogotoamovieguru : by James P. Mercurio
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
when to go to a movie guru
by James P. Mercurio
On the first day of my first film class at University of
Michigan, the professor warned us that we were
about to begin a journey from which we would never
be able to return. He was talking about studying
film: applying thought and analysis to works of art
whose primary purpose is to inspire emotion. Never
again would we be able to innocently w a t c h a movie.
The classes and seminars I review in this article
demarcate a similar threshold for many writers. No
longer will an emotional scene where a character
reveals his dark secret only wrench your heart. Yo u
will identify the function of the scene as the ghost.
You will wonder if the exposition could have been
more effectively dramatized. You will realize that the
c h a r a c t e rs unconscious desire ironically contrasts
with every other action he has made during the film.
Youll look at your watch, not because youre bored,
but because youre timing act two. And you will even
lose sleep over whether or not Sea of Love is a love
s t o ry with a crime story subplot or a crime story
with a love story subplot.
Curious to explore the cottage industry of teach-
ing about screenwriting, I went to the story guru s ,
those teachers who spin the specifics of screenplay
c o n s t ruction and deconstruction to audiences
around the world every year. I wasnt able to attend
e v e ry seminar (an increasingly daunting task), but
I got to sit in and participate in the seminars and
classes offered by Robert McKee, David Fr e e m a n ,
Richard Wa l t e r, Michael Hauge, Jeff Kitchen, and
John Tru b y. The seminars varied in scope, length,
focus, and intended audience. If, when your moth-
er calls and asks hows it going, you respond that
youve almost figured out how the climax of act two
o rganically resolves itself from the individual char-
acters, then you are either already on this journey
or ready to embark. I hope this guides you and sup-
plies enough evaluative judgment to help you arr i v e
at the class or classes that make most sense for you.
The Pr e s e n t a t i o n
With its 200 to 300 participants and its theater- s t y l e
seating, Robert McKees Story Structure seminar
(thirty hours, $450.00) seems like it is going to be
less a class and more like opening night of a show.
And although its 9:00 in the morning, a one-man
show is what you get. In keeping with the show
m e t a p h o r, the class is not a dialogue, it is a mono-
logue. But McKee, who commands the stage like
one of those highly-paid motivational gurus (what
a stretch), delivers a honed performance that antic-
ipates all of his audiences potential questions.
In contrast, the most intimate class was Jeff
Kitchens A c t i o n -Thriller Writing Seminar (two
days, $189). The informality and moments of inter-
activity among the couple-dozen students create an
atmosphere similar to a graduate level class or
workshop. Kitchen is a soft-spoken East Coast, or
more specifically, New England intellectual. He
brought writers Steve Pink (Grosse Pointe Blank)
and W. Peter Iliff (Patriot Games) in to speak. I have
to admit that there were a few times when I wish
Kitchen would have borrowed from McKee and told
some of his students to shut up.
In between McKees one man show and Kitchens
cozy seminar are David Freemans Beyond Stru c-
ture seminar (eighteen hours, $285), Richard Wa l-
t e rs The Whole Picture seminar (twelve hours,
$275), John Tru b ys Writing the Blockbuster sem-
inar (three hours, $39), and Michael Hauges
Screenwriting for Hollywood. (eighteen hours, the
price is variable). Except for Hauges (at about fift y ) ,
each of these classes had approximately 100 stu-
dents. Walter is a storyteller whereas Freeman, more
the comedian/jokester, infuses his workshop with
jokes and some plain old silliness. Hauge, a James
Cameron look-alike and a psychology dilettante
( a u t h o rs note: it takes one to know one), empha-
sizes meaning and a storys ability to guide us on the
search for ourselves. They were all very accessible to
questions during breaks and at the end of the day.
Extremely polished, Tru b ys mild demeanor belies
a lawyer-like analytical mind; he is always concise
and convincing. Because Tru b ys class was only
three hours long, there was not as much time for
interaction, but he did field every b o d ys question
before ending his seminar.
The Heart of the Classes
McKee begins at the beginning. He gives a lucid and
explicit overview of all issues relevant to dramatur-
g y. He defines the smallest dramatic unita story
beatas a moment that turns or changes. He then
continues to define a scene as a series of beats
resulting in a change, a sequence as a series of
scenes ending in a change, and acts as a series of
sequences that turns in an even larger way. And
f i n a l l y, a story is a series of acts that culminates in
a climax of a final turn, an irreversible change.
Although McKees analysis is Aristotelian, he
deviates slightly by claiming that character is insep-
arable from structure. Character, as opposed to
characterization, is the hard choices characters
make when there is a gap between what they expect
and what they get. Stories only move forward when
characters face and make the hard decisions which
a review of six major
ROBERT McKEES TEN COMMANDMENTS
1) Thou shalt not take the crisis/climax out of the pro-
t a g o n i s t s hands. The anti-deus ex machina c o m-
m a n d m e n t .
2) Thou shalt not make life easy for the protagonist.
Nothing progresses in a story except through conflict.
3) Thou shalt not give exposition for expositions sake .
Dramatize it. Convert exposition to ammunition.
4) Thou shalt not use false mystery or cheap surprise.
5) Thou shalt respect thy audience. The anti-hack com-
m a n d m e n t .
6) Thou shalt know thy world as God knows this one.
The pro-research commandment.
7) Thou shalt not complicate when complexity is better.
D o nt multiply the complications on one level. Use all
three: Intra-personal, Inter-personal, Extra-personal.
8) Thou shalt seek the end of the line, the negation of
the negation, taking characters to the farthest reach-
es and depth of conflict imaginable within the story s
own realm of probability.
9) Thou shalt not write on the nose. Put a subtext
under every text.
10) Thou shalt rewrite.
reveal his or her true nature. Only by having a char-
acter who is willing and able to keep fighting until
the end of the line do you have an effective story.
Although McKee calls his class Story Stru c t u r e ,
he has thirty hours, which allow him to spend some
time on other issues such as scene construction, dia-
logue, and the habits of a professional writer. In fact,
he balances the theory of story and structure with
an emphasis on content and meaning. He is an
advocate of research as the conqueror of clich. He
does a fantastic job of explaining how the controlling
idea and theme manifest themselves dramatically in
the crisis, climax, and resolution of the film.
In McKees scene-by-scene analysis and thematic
analysis of C a s a b l a n c a, he illuminates subtext and
clearly shows how a popular entertainment form
can rise to the level of art. This analysis was on par
with the best I have seen in graduate-level film class-
es. Granted, as Richard Walter points out, the analy-
sis may not have helped Julius & Philip Epstein and
Howard Koch write the script to C a s a b l a n c a, but if
it can give young writers an appreciation of the artis-
tic level to which our craft can rise (without sacri-
ficing any commercial or storytelling aspects), then
kudos to McKee.
Kitchen, like McKee, approaches story from the
perspective of a classical dramaturg. He also begins
with Aristotle but ends with a mostly unknown turn-
o f- t h e - c e n t u ry playwriting teacher, William Thomp-
son Price, founder of The American School of
Playwriting. Using Prices work, Kitchen applies prin-
ciples of rhetoric and dilemma to stru c t u r e .
Whereas most other teachers approach to dilem-
ma is limited to the paradigmatic axis (individual
moments), Kitchens concept of dilemma on the
syntagmatic axis (structural) is difficult but profound
material. Instead of merely considering a scene
where a character has a dilemma (two equally unac-
ceptable choices) and a difficult choice to make, he
shows how a dramatic script should boil down to one
central dilemma for the protagonist. For instance, in
The Godfather, Michaels dilemma is that although
it is unacceptable to sacrifice his happiness and
peaceful life by getting involved with the family crime
business, it is equally unacceptable to allow the fam-
ily to be destroyed by his noninvolvement, as it is
becoming increasingly apparent that he is the only
one capable of running the business properly.
Kitchen believes (correctly) that although this is
a powerful tool, it is material that may take a long
time to sink in. Therefore, he offers a specialized,
yet optional, one-day Hands-On Sunday session
($150) where students work with him to apply his
tools to their own work.
Besides the structural use of Dilemma and Cen-
tral Proposition (see sidebar), Kitchen offers anoth-
er structure tool: Sequence, Proposition, Plot. This
tool uses reverse causality and backward plotting to
effectively eliminate a l l u n n e c e s s a ry scenes. I wont
t ry to explain it here, but its a lifesaver if you have
ever found yourself here in your script and need-
33
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
and when to Go to a movie
screenwriting seminars
JEFF KITC H E N S C E N T R A LP R O P O S I T I O N
Au t h o rs note: Jeff Kitchen gave me permission to abridge his
work and go into some detail regarding his dramatic tool,
Central Proposition, which is a major part of his seminar.
Although a few paragraphs are not going to do this justice,
they should serve as introduction to Kitchens approach.
A syllogism is a logic term that describes two premises
leading to a necessary conclusion: A and B, therefore C.
The most famous example of which is this:
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore Socrates is a mortal.
Kitchen credits William Thompson Price (who was
trained as a lawyer) for using the Logic of Argumenta-
tion to state the core action of a drama as two premis-
es leading to a conclusion. If we consider that drama is
literally a fight to the finish, then the Central Pr o p o s i-
tion for a script is in this form:
A) A volatile situation is created, setting up a
potential fight.
B) An exacerbation of situation A, a touching off
of the fight which will be a fight to the finish.
C) Now that the fight has begun, what will be the
r e s u l t ?
The key to applying this material to your script is to
m a ke sure that A and B are intrinsically linked and that
they clearly raise a specific Central Dramatic question C.
For instance, lets look at a purposefully ineffective Cen-
tral Proposition as it applies to a romantic story:
A) Joe sells cars.
B) Mary works at the library.
C) Will they be married?
The problem is that there is nothing inherent in A or B
which forces the question raised in C. Forgive the above
contrived example, but let us see this tool as it is applied
to Romeo and Juliet.
A) Romeo, scion of a family at feud with Juliet s
f a m i l y, falls in love with her at first sight. [A
potential fight is set up.]
B) Romeo defies the enmity of the families and
marries Juliet. [The fight to the finish is now in
p r o g r e s s . ]
C) Will Romeo find happiness in his marriage
with Juliet? [Dramatic Question arising in the
mind of the audience.]
Stripping down the core action of the drama to a uni-
fied proposition as above helps cut through the elu-
siveness of drama. Price said that a writer can take all
of the energy that goes into rewrites and put it into engi-
neering the script properly in the first place.
Kitchen says that the best demonstration of this
tools power is the application of the Proposition to a
work in progress, rather than showing it applied to an
acknowledged masterpiece. (Kitchen spends ample time
in his seminar applying this tool to The Godfather, Toot -
s i e, and Blade Runner.) Kitchen claims that, the tool
has tremendous formative power as it pulls material
into a coherent whole. I have seen this happen over and
over again in my development seminars.
ed logically to get yourself there.
To Kitchens credit, he is also the first person who
demonstrates a concrete usage for the Thirty- N i n e
Dramatic Situations. Whereas David Freeman most-
ly dismisses the situations by asserting that they
dont fit most stories, Kitchen takes the logical and
creative jump to taking the word situations liter-
ally and using them to brainstorm, not necessarily
plots, but themes, scenes, subplots, and characters.
Although much of Kitchens class serv e s
advanced writers, there is an aspect that would
appeal to young writers. At the end of the seminar,
Kitchen literally opens up his notebook to show you
his specific method (an application of his theoreti-
cal tools) of writing. This may help a beginner who
is still trying to establish a concrete writing method,
or an intermediate writer who has had a script fall
apart in the middle pages.
Kitchens emphasis on structure makes his sem-
inar almost the antithesis of and, therefore, comple-
ment to David Freemans seminar. Fr e e m a n s
Beyond Structure class, self-billed as the next logical
step to McKee, has the unique distinction of dwelling
the least on structure of any of these other classes.
Freeman introduces his students to exhaustive lists
of scene-sculpting techniques, plot twists, dialogue
tips, rooting techniques (see sidebar), and character
arcs (to name only some), and supplies clear exam-
ples illustrating each of them. He tries to raise his stu-
dents writing up to, in his own words, the next level.
Freeman provides numerous tools for making
dialogue great and helping expand the dimension and
depth of characters and scenes. His approach is anti-
intellectual (not anti-intelligent) in that the process
of naming these techniques is devoid of pretentious
t h e o ry. For instance, he stated a very eloquent defin-
ition of a bittersweet movie (without using the words
i r o n y, negative emotional value, or negative con-
trolling idea) as a story where the character doesnt
get the goal but still has his or her character arc.
Freemans approach to teaching dialogue differs
from McKees. McKee approaches the topic via
s t ructure, arguing that knowing the beats/stru c t u r e
of your scene frees you to write great dialogue. Not
until you know exactly what subtext your dialogue
needs to convey, are you free to be creative and
come up with great lines. Freemans approach, on
the other hand, relies more on describing and
examining recurring patterns and characteristics of
good dialogue. A few of the over twenty techniques
he names are Dropping the first word of a speech,
A character may start speaking on a tangent, and
A character may have different ways of speaking
around different people. (Imagine the difference
between recounting your hot date to your mom as
opposed to your best same-sex friend.)
For every one of the techniques he names, Fr e e-
man presents a lucid example, and his snippets of
television dialogue are exceptionally well chosen. I
wish, however, that he would have touched on the
subject of whether or not film dialogue has slightly
different requirements from dialogue for television.
His discussion of character was thorough if not
groundbreaking, and he made a nice distinction
between the dimensionality and depth of character.
Freemans Diamond technique for creating char-
acter dimensionality is, excuse the pun, a real gem.
This simple tool insures that your characters not
only stand out, but stand out from each other. Using
s i m p l e - t o-understand terms, he discusses several
ways to layer depth into your characters. Wi t h o u t
any sort of psycho-babble, he discusses how to give
characters a mask: a way for them to protect them-
selves with delusion (self and otherwise), which will
eventually get them into trouble.
Although Freeman does not focus on stru c t u r e ,
he does address it in broad strokes. However, his tidy
and brief overview would seem to apply mostly to
high-concept fare which seems to be his strength
and passion. The main structural tool he provides is
a way to generate several brainstorms for high-con-
cept films by using other films as a starting point.
Unique to Freeman is that many of his lists refer to
content and not just theory. Instead of just defining,
s a y, plot twist, and prescribing how many there
should be, Freeman lists dozens of specific types of
plot twists. Reviewing his lists for plot twists, char-
acter goals, and character arcs may be an impetus
to finding your structure or breaking out of writer s
block when you are writing your screenplay.
Other than one quick story concept exercise in
Michael Hauges seminar, Freemans seminar is the
only one I attended which incorporates workshop
exercises. He would assign brief exercises focusing
on one of his principles or rules, and then let eager
volunteers read their work aloud. Some of the atten-
dees claimed that these exercises improved their
writing on-the-spot.
Richard Wa l t e rs The Whole Picture is one of
two seminars I attended which spend a substantial
amount of time on the business side of screen-
writing. He covers many of the unwritten rules of
breaking into Hollywood, querying an agent, and
professionalism among writers. Although this infor-
mation could be gleaned from several other
sources, Walter does remind all frustrated writers
that finding an agent is the easy part compared to
writing a damn good script. He also hands out
34
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
GURU SEMINAR REVIEW
JOHN TRUBY
In Tr u b ys newsletter, he briefly discusses the film
A n a s t a s i a, and how its success is linked to its success-
fully melding two genres effectively. His usage of the
word opponent and ally are in the specific sense
in which he defines them in the Tw e n t y -Two Steps.
The first and most important choice for the ani-
mation film is whether to base it on the myth,
fairy tale or drama form the writers (of A n a s -
t a s i a) get to use a Myth foundation for the desire
line: Anastasia wants to find her home. But the
writers wisely avoid the episodic problems that
plague the myth form (and substantially hurt
the success of H e r c u l e s) by layering a second
genre, love, onto the story. Anastasias second
desire, which occasionally conflicts with the first,
is Dmitri. As the lover, he becomes the second
opponent (and first ally), and he and Anastasia
experience all the classic love story beats on their
journey to Paris. Instead of encountering a num-
ber of successive opponents, the lovers ongoing
conflict unifies the middle of the script.
To understand what Truby means in discussing Love
S t o r y, Myth, and other genres, here are his concise
descriptions of the film genres:
A C T I O N: Fight a Battle
C O M E DY: Hilarious Pu r p o s e
C R I M E: Catch a Criminal
D E T E C T I V E: Find the Tr u t h
H O R R O R: Defeat a Monster
FA N TA S Y: Into Imaginary Wo r l d s
LO V E: The Course of Ro m a n c e
M A S T E R P I E C E: Find a Deeper Re a l i t y
M Y T H: The Journey Within
S C I - F I: Tools of the New Wo r l d
T H R I L L E R: Escape Attack
copies of his new book, The Whole Picture, which
chronicles the seminar, so that participants may
eschew note taking, relax, and enjoy the casual
anecdotal lessons that follow.
Walter demystifies the entire process of screen-
writing with a very simple thesis. He tells students to
write stories that are personal to them and that are
integrated. By integrated, he means that every char-
a c t e r, line of dialogue, line of action description, and
s t o ry beat should be absolutely indispensable to your
script. Rather than supplying various complex the-
ories for each genre, Richard simply says there are
two types of movies: good and bad. Period.
His demystification of the process may seem a
little daunting (or trivial) at first. Its a bit like say-
ing, Brevity is the soul of wit. Now go write good
comedy! But when he goes through a few pages of
scripts with the audience, illustrating his concept of
integration, everything becomes clear. Forcing the
writer to make sure every t h i n g s t o ry points, for-
matting, characters, dialogue, action description
is essential and integral, Walter shows that by
stripping away e v e ry t h i n g that isnt good writing,
one will necessarily be left with a very good script.
Lets see how Wa l t e rs approach compares to
some of the other teachers methods. Truby might
s p e c i fy, Subplot characters face essentially the
same situation which the protagonist faces. McKee
theorizes that subplots must satisfy one of the fol-
lowing four functions: to echo or contradict the con-
trolling idea, to complicate the main plot, or to
interest the audience until a delayed inciting inci-
dent falls into place. Walter simply says to the writer
who is ready to add a subplot, ask yourself if the
subplot is absolutely essential (integrated) to the
s t o ry? Does it fit? Is it absolutely indispensable? If
the answer to each of these questions is yes, then
the subplots function will take care of itself.
Walter is also willing to read all of his students
work. He sometimes even recommends scripts to
executives and agents. I slipped him a copy of my
script (I think he was unaware that I was taking his
class for this article), and less than two months later,
he sent me a two-page letter praising the script and
even referring me to an agent. Granted, a few para-
graphs of the letter were form-letterish, but he took
the time to point out some details unique to my script.
Michael Hauges seminar makes a smooth tran-
sition from basic Syd Fieldian three-act structure to
a satisfyingly complex discussion of character, psy-
c h o l o g y, and character arc. Emphasizing the mun-
dane simplicity of most Hollywood stories, Hauge
begins with the outer goal of the hero and clarifies
that each story should have one specific goal with a
35
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
AD
c l e a r l y-defined end-point (see sidebar). After bring-
ing the beginners up to speed, he then delves into
character orchestration and even deeper into the
inner world of the character: inner conflict, wound,
and character arc.
His definition of character categories: hero,
nemesis, romance character, and reflection are
more specific and flexible than protagonist and
antagonist, because each character in a script can
be in a different category in relationship to each of
the other characters. These character types have
some similarities to Chris Vo g l e rs (author of the
Jung- and Joseph Campbell-influenced The Wr i t e r s
J o u rn e y) archetypes, but the main difference is
once you define a character as a certain type, that
character remains in the same category for the
entire story. More so than Vo g l e rs archetypes, these
character types are closely a l l i e d with and r e f l e c t-
e d in Tru b ys concept of Ally, Opponent, Ally-O p p o-
nent, and Opponent-Ally.
Where Hauges class really gets interesting is in
his use of psychology as a model of exploring char-
acter and character growth. Not only do I find this
approach fascinating, I feel that it is sorely missing
from some of the other approaches to teaching dra-
matic writing. Hauge uses Jungian concepts such as
shadow and individuation to show how theme,
meaning, and character orchestration arise from
the inner workings of the character. His idiosyn-
cratic approach makes him as likely to reference
Sociolinguist Deborah Tannen and pop psycholo-
g i s t / Venutian John Gray as he is Aristotle.
He makes the most concise and illuminating
statement of the relationship of the hero to the
nemesis (usually the opponent or antagonist).
Hauge declares that the nemesis will embody the
inner conflict of the hero. If this sounds so simple
and obvious, then either youre ready to stop taking
classes or youre not comprehending it. Hauge gives
an example from Rain Man. Charley doesnt want
to be close to anybodyespecially his family. So
what happens? This story puts him in a car with
Raymond, a family member to whom he has to give
t w e n t y- f o u r-hour attention. To face Raymond is to
face his inner conflict. Several students in the class
seemed to have an epiphany with this concept.
Regarding the relationship between the protago-
nist and antagonist, Truby says that the hero and
opponent are the most alike right before the crisis. In
discussing the forces of antagonism in a story, McKee
claims that if the issue at stake is love, then the story
must go beyond the contrary (indifference), past the
c o n t r a d i c t o ry (hate), and push forward all the way to
the negation of the negation: self-hate or hate mas-
querading as love. But understanding Hauges seem-
ingly simple yet deceivingly complex notion will do
the most to help turn your story into drama.
Hauge shows clips from and analyzes very mod-
ern and commercial films to illustrate his points.
He did wonderful analyses of Rain Man, Post Card s
from the Edge, and Sleepless in Seattle. Other films
which he discussed were Thelma and Louise, As
Good as it Gets, and Tw i s t e r. Although he did not
show clips from them, he also discussed very recent
movies like The Truman Show and B u l w o r t h.
Like Wa l t e r, Hauge also gives a very thorough
o v e rview of the business etiquette relevant to
screenwriters. He encourages writers to do research
and be aggressive about networking and tracking
potential future contacts. As an audience member,
I appreciated the implicit vote of confidence, but I
think slightly more emphasis on how hard and
important it is to get your script ready to be sent out
would be appropriate. Also like Wa l t e r, albeit more
e m p h a t i c a l l y, Hauge unabashedly recommends tak-
ing all of the other screenwriting classes with the
caveat: dont become a seminar junkie.
John Tru b ys Writers Studio offers several ser-
vices for the screenwriter including screenwriting
s o ftware, audio tapes, and various seminars. Fo r
screenwriters, Truby suggests one of two strategies.
The first is to write a quirky, independent script that
defines your point-o f-view and take on things as
a commodity in and of itself (Ed Burns, Ta r a n t i n o ,
Kevin Smith), the second is to master a specific Hol-
lywood genre or two. Then, of course, regardless of
the track you select, learn your form inside and out
via The Truby Studios products.
The taped seminar of the Tw e n t y-Two Steps (a
part of his software and a part of his larger Story
S t ructure seminar) and Writing the Blockbuster
seminar are general classes on structure. Tru b y s
Tw e n t y-Two Steps is a mini-structure course. More
prescriptive than McKee, Truby presents a paradigm
to follow. Some of the steps seem rather obvious,
such as the introduction of the antagonist (or the
m y s t e ry cloaking the antagonist, or the romance in
a love story). But Tru b ys scientific dissection of sub-
tle points like the difference between a character s
moral need and psychological need is not unimpor-
tant. At first glance, the twenty-two steps may seem
like a mechanical list of prerequisites for a film. Even-
tually however, Tru b ys intelligent application of the
steps to The Verdict and Vertigo show their flexibility.
The three-hour Writing the Blockbuster sem-
inar is a sound but brief overview of screenwriting
s t ructure focusing on character arc, desire-line, and
genre. Truby points out that most blockbusters fol-
low the double track of character and action. There
is a personal/psychological problem for the char-
acter and an external (action) problem. By solving
the personal problem, the protagonist is more able
to solve the action problem. The seminar effective-
ly introduces students to similarities and recurr i n g
patterns in blockbuster movies. But the instru c-
tional emphasis on blending genres makes it clear
that this seminar also acts as a veiled sales pitch for
other Truby items that go into further detail about
36
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
GURU SEMINAR REVIEW
MICHAEL HAUGES FIVE ESSENTIAL ASPECTS TO
A HOLLYWOOD STORY CONCEPT:
1) Hero: a main character who is on-screen more than
anybody else and whose desire (outer motivation) dri-
ves the story.
2) Identification: the audience must identify with the hero.
Here are five ways to create empathy and identification:
S y m p a t h y
Put the character in jeopardy
M a ke the character lika b l e
M a ke the character funny
Po w e r- m a ke the character good at what they do.
3) Outer motivation: this is what the hero pursues. This is the essence of the story. It should be a visible goal with a
clearly defined ending. Instead of The hero wants to get better at baseball, find a recognizable end-point: T h e
hero wants to guide his team to victory in the world series.
4) Conflict: every story must be a David and Goliath story where the person has to overcome seemingly insurmount-
able odds. Conflict is the only way to elicit emotion in the audience.
5) Courage: there must be the need for courage on behalf of the hero.
Tru b ys specialty: genre.
In Tru b ys genre audio tapes and software add-
ons (sold separately), he breaks down each of the
genres (Action, Comedy, Crime, Detective, Horr o r,
Fa n t a s y, Love, Masterpiece, Myth, Sci-Fi, Thriller)
into their unique story beats and components. Then
he matches up the twenty-two steps with their spe-
cific genre counterpart. Even his half-sentence state-
ments of the goal for each genre (see sidebar) are
illuminating. Although there are books written for
fiction writers that contain some of this information
(especially crime, mystery, and romance), Truby is
the most thorough and no-nonsense source for
genre study tailored for screenwriters.
A development executive himself, Truby claims
that Hollywoods obsession with genre, coupled with
its penchant for pigeonholing writers, make it cru-
cial for screenwriters to master a genre. Lo o k i n g
back at the last year or so there was a traveling angel
s t o ry about a traveling angel, a conspiracy thriller
with the word conspiracy in the title, and I saw a
spec script sale for a thriller about mind detectives
(a type of detective Truby distinguishes) called M i n d-
h u n t e r s, so his opinion is worth considering.
Before I was aware of Tru b ys courses, I brain-
stormed a quick list of similar movies I admired and
wanted to watch again before embarking on a
thriller screenplay. I listed films which seemed to
define the genre I wanted to study. Here is the list:
1) Three days of the Condor
2) Parallax Vi e w
3) Marathon Man
4) Pelican Brief
5) The Firm
6) Point Blank
7) All The Presidents Men
Upon analysis, I realized how intertwined the
authors, writers and directors are of these films.
Number #1 and #2 not only share a screenwriter
( Lorenzo Semple, Jr.) and the distinction of being
the two films which Brian Helgeland (who is cur-
rently writing and directing a remake of #6) claims
influenced him most when he wrote C o n s p i r a c y
T h e o ry, but their directors, Sydney Pollack and Alan
J. Pa kula, went on to direct and write/direct, respec-
t i v e l y, the Grisham adaptations of #5 and #4. Pa ku-
la also directed #7, which was written by Wi l l i a m
Goldman, who also penned #3 and the Grisham
adaptation of The Chamber. The recent movie T h e
G a m e made a knowing wink at #2, and here in
1998, #7 is the film X - F i l e s creator Chris Carter
mentioned as the model for the X - F i l e s m o v i e .
It does seem that Hollywood has consistently
gone to the same people to repeat their success in a
genre. And its telling to show how great genre films
from twenty-five years ago can still be our models,
inspirations, and benchmarks for current films.
A few of the other teachers said they believe that
the analysis of breaking down films into divisions
and subdivisions is redundant or useless. I agree
that it is possible to write a good script, even a genre
or a high-concept script without Tru b y. But Tru b y s
a rgument is that to stay competitive in Hollywood,
you have to do everything to master your craft. In
light of my short analysis above, If I were compet-
ing with William Goldman (and I hope to) for a writ-
ing assignment on an Alan Pa kula thriller, I would
want to know as much as I could about the genre.
D e n o u e m e n t
There is something for everyone in each of these
seminars. Until now I have been giving an objective
accounting of the messengers and their message. Pa r t
of my responsibility to you, the writer, is to be critical
and supply enough evaluation to help you choose
what courses make most sense for you. Now I am
going to shift gears and play devils advocate and raise
some possible concerns about each seminar.
I wrestled with the helpfulness of Fr e e m a n s
exhaustive descriptivenot prescriptivelistings of
37
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
AD
AD
RICHARD WA LT E RS PRINCIPLES
Throughout his book The Whole Picture, which follows
the seminar by the same title, Walter lists over twen-
ty no-nonsense gems of insight. Following are a few
of these principles:
Principle 2: Screenwriters must embrace authentic self-
disclosure, no matter how painful, as nothing less than
the organizing principle of their creative lives.
Principle 6: The least important, most overappreciat-
ed element in screenwriting is the idea.
Principle 11: Do not have one character tell another
character what has already been told to the audience.
Principle 16: Every writer will do anything, will seek
any excuse, to avoid working upon the particular
assignment in front of him at any given moment.
Principle 21: Lie through your teeth.
techniques which I believe many people could figure
out by intuition on their own. I talked to a few people
in the class who were frustrated with a lack of theo-
ry. For instance, after listing dialogue techniques like,
Characters interrupt, or Characters answer a
question with a question, Freeman would not pro-
pose a theory or discussion of subtext, or say under
what psychological conditions a character might be
more or less likely to speak in this fashion. But there
were also attendees who seemed to respond imme-
diately to the clarity and simplicity of his message.
Walter gets a bad rap for sometimes being too
anecdotal in his lecture, and I talked to a few partici-
pants who felt the seminar was a bit breezy. Sure, there
is a bit of name-dropping, but Walter usually follows
his own rule of storytelling and subtly integrates his
points and teaching of the craft into his stories. He
tells a story about how personal Star Wa r s was to
G e o rge Lucas, as opposed to its being just a calculat-
ed commercial attempt. Not only was the story inter-
esting, I hope its point was not lost on the audience.
Kitchens material ranges from the very theo-
retical to the elementary. One way Kitchen defuses
this problem is by offering specialized classes such
as his separate one-day sessions for development
execs, his Action-Thriller Seminar, and a one-day
H a n d s -on session for writers to work on their sto-
ries by applying his tools.
Like Kitchen, Hauge covers a wide scope of mate-
rial. He does a fantastic job of carefully leading the
beginning writers to the more difficult material, but
the more advanced writer will have to sit through
some elementary material before reaching the heart
of the class.
One definite misuse of Tru b ys material would
be to use it as a shortcut. The old adage, A little bit
of information can be a dangerous thing, holds
t rue here (see C l i f f h a n g e r). Remember, what
makes a genre film work is the tension between
what has come before and what has yet to be seen
(the original stuff you bring). If you are going to
embark on mastering a genre, you most likely love
those kinds of films. Therefore, before going to the
Truby tapes or software add-ons, I would recom-
mend a self-directed study of favorite, classic, or
canonical films, as I did with the above seven films.
The above adage could also apply to McKees
class. The worst thing this class can do to a young
writer is to overwhelm and stifle him or her. The
worst thing it can do to a novice development exec
is turn him into spawn of Satan. This class can give
development execs the tools to pass on almost every
script. Few scripts submitted to meeven by pro-
fessionalssucceed in the case where the Spine
(through line) is not the external goal of the pro-
tagonist, but the unconscious desire. I worry that
words like spine and unconscious desire get
thrown around a lot by people who couldnt even
i d e n t i fy the spine of a movie like Good Will Hunt-
i n g, which declares itself in the title.
And occasionally McKee goes off on some self-
righteous tirade about Monkey Paws and vivisec-
tion. More than a few times my derriere was begging
me to yell, Shut up, so that we could trim the
twelve-hour day. This should not steer anyone away
from the class; it should just be a reminder to bring
a seat cushion.
B e g i n n e r s
Beginners would benefit from any of these classes.
Freemans and Wa l t e rs absence of theoretical pre-
tense or Aristotelian rhetoric makes their classes a
great choice for beginning writers or for the dilet-
tante considering a change in career. Hauge also
carefully guides beginners into the more challeng-
ing material. The only reason I hesitate to recom-
mend writers who are at the beginning of their craft
to McKee is that all of his principles can seem
daunting at first. Writers should let instinct and
experimentation (failed or otherwise) be their
teacher for a while. Having a script that youve
already written or are working on also helps to learn
the fundamentals, because youre mulling over the
new ideas as you try to apply it to your own script.
Similarly I recommend that beginning writers do
not use Tru b ys genre studies as a shortcut. His
approach to Hollywood films via genre is an intelli-
gently schematic and interesting approach which
should complementnot replaceintuition and
the vast store of residual knowledge all writers who
are film lovers have. Tru b ys Writing the Block-
b u s t e r seminar is an introduction to Truby and his
products. And because of its shorter length (3
hours) and its price, its a good choice for beginning
writers not sure if they want to jump into the more
expensive and longer seminars.
I n t e r m e d i a t e
Kitchens various seminars contain a range of use-
ful material from a hands-on introduction to a spe-
cific method of writing, to individualized attention
for each participants material.
38
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
GURU SEMINAR REVIEW
DAV I D FREEMAN ROOT I N GT E C H N I Q U E S
Freeman list over thirty rooting techniques which are
ways to make a character more sympathetic, i.e., to
get audiences to root for them. The movie Philadel-
phia, Freeman points out, uses no less than fifteen of
these techniques. Of those fifteen, here are five:
A character suffers undeserved misfortune.
A character is an underdog.
A character is ethical.
A character stands up against the masses.
A character is thoughtful and intelligent.
Remember in the seminar, Freeman would give exam-
ples from other movies for each of these techniques.
AD
McKees class is textured and would probably
benefit every writer from amateur to highly paid
professional. I even know of writers who have taken
the class a second time, an expensive option that
can be avoided by purchasing McKees tome S t o ry.
Many of Wa l t e rs students found that the few
minutes spent analyzing screenplay pages were the
invaluable highlight. If analysis is what you are seek-
ing, I would recommend Wa l t e rs course, Beyond
the Basics (ten hours, $275). In this seminar he
offers intensive individual attentionapplying his
principles of integration to your scriptwhich
would be fruitful for the intermediate to advanced
writer working on a draft of a script.
Freemans focus on material other than stru c-
ture creates an apparent audience: writers who have
a satisfactory grasp on structure yet want to empha-
size other areas of screenwriting.
A d v a n c e d
As mentioned, McKees Story Structure and Wa l t e r s
Beyond the Basics are good classes for intermedi-
ate-advanced writers. Although Hauges class starts
with elementary (but sound) topics, it eventually picks
up speed and covers some really rich ground.
If youre writing in classic Hollywood genres,
Tru b ys individual genre analyses might be a good
investment. If youre interested in an alternative
approach to structure, emphasizing dramatic unity,
and a fresh application of rhetoric and dilemma to
s t ructure, then consider Kitchens courses to aug-
ment your paradigm of stru c t u r e .
C o n c l u s i o n
But where do you start? Which of the above list is
most important? The word Drama is from the Greek
word meaning to do. Accordingly my suggestion
to a writer is do. Do what feels right. Do what you
want. Do what you need. Do what you mean. But do
plaster your butt into your seat (lounge chair, ham-
mock, or prison cell bench) and write.
39
CREATIVE
SCREENWRITING
AD
AD
David S. Fr e e m a n
Beyond Structure
2118 Wilshire Blvd. - Ste. 274
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Tel (310) 394-6556
h t t p : / / w w w. d f r e e m a n . c o m
Michael Hauge
Screenwriting for Hollywood
Hilltop Pr o d u c t i o n s
PO Box 55728
Sherman Oaks, CA 91413
Tel (818) 995-4209
Fax (818) 986-1504
E-mail: mhauge@juno.com
Jeffrey Kitchen
( A c t i o n -Thriller writing seminar,Thirty-hour Hands-O n
Intensive Development Seminars, Structure Seminars,
Creative Exec One-day Seminars, Guest Speake r s )
F i l m w r i t e r
c/o Goldstein
2118 Wilshire Blvd. - Ste. 526
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Te l : (213) 243-3817
J e f f r e y k @ s o v e r. n e t
Robert McKe e
Story Structure
Two Arts Inc.
12021 Wilshire Blvd. - Ste. 868
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Te l (310) 312-1002
Te l (212) 463-7889
Fax (310) 318-3924
h t t p : / / w w w. m c ke e s t o r y. c o m
Truby Wr i t e rs studio
( Writing the Blockbuster seminar, Story Structure
Class, Writing the Blockbuster software and audio
tapes, software on individual genres and audio tapes
on appropriate genre groupings)
1737 Midvale Av e .
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Toll Free (800) 33-Truby (338-7829)
Tel (310) 575-3050
Richard Wa l t e r
(The Whole Picture, Screenwriting: Beyond the Basics)
Leslie Kallen Seminars
15303 Ventura Blvd. - Ste. 900
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Toll Free (800) 755-2785
SEMINAR CONTACT INFORMATION
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: