Hey daydreamers. I've been lurking through some screenwriter profiles and reading your awesome loglines. Some of you have such great imaginations it blows me away. -- BUT -- I think some screenwriters fall prey to a novelist mindset.
What do I mean by a novelist mindset? Well, when Neil Gaiman was on the set of Stardust (2007) he admitted feeling a tinge of guilt for the construction team. When he was writing the novel, it took very little effort to throw in a flying pirate ship, but when it came time to make the film, uh-oh, now we have to build a flying pirate ship. That's thousands of man-hours and several oversized canvas bags worth of cash to bring a single line into reality.
When you dream too big with your first few scripts, you're stacking the deck against yourself.
We all know that "no one wants to read your script" - nobody reads screenplays for fun. It's business. And as a screenwriter, you should think of yourself as a business.
Unfortunately most of your products won't sell. So you have to plan accordingly. And the most expensive pieces of a production are the size of the cast, the number of locations, and the production design.
To set yourself up for success, I highly recommend that you write screenplays that can be produced on a shoestring budget. That means 1 or 2 locations (3 max), set your story in the modern day, and limit yourself to as few characters as you can.
The strategy behind this is that nearly anyone will be able to make that film, and once one of your scripts has been produced as a successful feature, you'll automatically be so far ahead of all of the other writers with 10 unproduced sci-fi and fantasy masterpieces in their desk drawers.
Thanks for reading my long-a** post. I'd love to hear your thoughts if you have a different perspective.
3 people like this
YES!!! A million times yes! My first feature was a one location story with very few cast, with NO VFX, with nothing that would make it costly. My next feature has been re-written to fit around the resources we have. Yes, we all want to have Avatar money to make our films, but until you've worked up as much reputation as James Cameron, you better write for the market you can access.
I could not agree with you more, and I think you make a great point.
So many of us forget or overlook that at the end of the day, this is a BUSINESS, that people are in it to make their money back, and to make smart business decisions. If you can leverage your career in such a way that you can get a huge budget - THAT is when you start writing the more expensive stories.
2 people like this
you're missing one big problem, to write a good script for one location, the author must be a dramaturgy genius. alas, they don't become like that from birth, for this you need to write dozens of big stories.
3 people like this
Arthur Charpentier I don't think I'd agree. IMO drama all comes down to Intention and Obstacle (Aristotle's Poetics). -- If you have a character with a compelling inner struggle, you can explore that in depth through action and conversation. At the end of the day, the only thing worth writing about is the human "soul" at war with itself.
I think many beginner writers struggle as a result of trying to wow the audience through intricate plot structures and big stakes. But the plot doesn't matter nearly as much as the character's inner conflict.
For example, take these two pitches off the top of my head:
A) In the great water wars of 2084, two tribal chieftains must lead their people into battle after the discovery of a fresh water wellspring on their shared borders.
B) Stranded in the desert and down to their last canteen of water, a father must choose between saving his daughter and his second wife (step-mother to his child).
Both stories are essentially the same. Same stakes, same conflict, but one is much smaller and focuses on the inner struggle rather than the external struggle.
3 people like this
SAW is basically one location. The two dudes who created the franchise were Aussie film student graduates.
The thing I see a lot on forums is newbies want to start at the top. Never bottom (indies & self funded ) and ppl with all the answers always seem to be unemployed, blame conspiracies than lack of skill/talent, no skin in the game ever.
3 people like this
Dan MaxXx Also, Phonebooth, Evil Dead, Inside Man, My Dinner with Andre, The Man from Earth, Ex Machina, Circle, ATM, Room, The Wall, Locke, and Buried (which is just Ryan Reynolds in a box for 2 hours). -- and nearly every haunted house movie around.
2 people like this
Great advice, Langley Coleman. I needed it when I started writing scripts. I wrote big-budget scripts (with no thought to budget) when I should've been writing micro-budget and low-budget scripts.
2 people like this
Maurice Vaughan Haha, didn't we all! My first screenplay was about a cross-country roadtrip with a huge cast of colorful weirdos. -- then my second was about a robot super-war. We only learn these lessons through mistake after mistake. Even when more experienced filmmakers tell us what pitfalls to avoid, we head right for them,
5 people like this
New producers are easier to reach out to but don't have any assets. However they are more willing to consider low budget filmscripts written by screenwriters who don't have a track recorded. You have to start somewhere and that is probably the best way to go.
3 people like this
I think the key is nailing a zero location script. No locations = super cheap to produce. No sets, no talent, no craft services, no grips.... heck, you could picture lock before you write the script.
2 people like this
Dan Guardino Agreed. Plus a lower budget requirement for other things will allow you to attach a much "higher quality" cast if you're packaging your own projects
2 people like this
Langley Coleman, it doesn't work that way. viewers will not watch the second option.
3 people like this
This is excellent advice and much needed. Looking back on one of my first screenplays, I had a major shootout in a warehouse in Downtown L.A. I took no account for stunt actors, ammo, damages to the location, etc. Now, a bit older and wiser (or just older lol), I consider all of these things when writing. "The easiest way to get a film made is to make it easy to make."
3 people like this
Arthur Charpentier You're right that not as many viewers will watch a small drama or thriller as a tentpole adventure film, but a small film needs a lot fewer viewers to be successful. And we're talking about building a screenwriting career - the main point being that getting your script produced makes you a much more desirable talent than being able to write the next Avengers or Guardians, but not being able to get that movie made.
2 people like this
@khalil Hakeem, wow "The easiest way to get a film made is to make it easy to make." I'm definitely going to steal that
2 people like this
Langley Coleman I think my first feature script was about ancient Greek Power Ranger-type warriors. HUGE budget. Haha
2 people like this
Maurice Vaughan Classic! huge budget, unknown IP. "huge franchise potential"! XD
1 person likes this
Yeah, classic, Langley Coleman. :) I might revisit the script down the line.
2 people like this
Maurice Vaughan It definitely sounds interesting enough to revisit. Maybe a comic book run would be a good way to introduce the IP at a lower cost. Especially if you were to use an AI like Midjourney for the art.
4 people like this
This is such a helpful and important post, Langley Coleman! I can't tell you the number of big-budget period pieces that I received from first-time screenwriters when I worked in development. It always broke my heart to have to tell them, especially when the writing was strong, that it was too much of an uphill battle for the marketplace currently. When you have more wiggle room in your budget to go out to big attachments, it's easier to get a script written by a newer writer over the line.
2 people like this
@ashley Thanks so much! -- out of curiosity, how do you feel about screenwriters working to package their own original scripts before approaching reps? do the potential missteps outweigh the advantages?
4 people like this
Langley Coleman Sometimes, yes. The tricky thing about getting attachments too early is that you can't predict how other producers or buyers will feel about specific people. This is an industry built on relationships and you can't always know who people are friends with or who someone may not be interested in working with. When an attachment is an undeniable star or creator, obviously that makes it easier, but those people are the hardest to get for anyone. If you have a great project that wows a buyer or a producer, but then you already have someone attached that the producer/buyer isn't impressed by or doesn't like, that can put a stop to things fast. It's a gamble just like anything else though. All you can do is try and keep moving forward.
2 people like this
Great idea, Langley Coleman. A comic book. Thanks!
6 people like this
If a screenwriter doesn’t have a track record they can attach a well-known director or actor and use their contacts and credit to make their screenplays more valuable. However it only works if the attachment is worth attaching.
2 people like this
It is more profitable for the author to write an expensive story, because you can make a book or a comic book out of it. and since the chance of selling any script is slim, most cheap scripts will go to waste.
and as I wrote before, an author needs a lot of experience to write a good story on a small budget. The example of Russian cinema proves this. we have hundreds of low-budget films being made, but the audience doesn't watch them.
5 people like this
Arthur Charpentier. It is true that most spec screenplays won’t sell. However they are used as a screenwriter’s calling card to show people in the industry that they know the business and how to write for it. That is how screenwriters make contacts and contacts are everything in this business.
4 people like this
Langley Coleman point taken, and that is one kind of conservative approach from the business side that really limits the creative side.
If my main priority was to limit myself creatively and not dream too big, I would probably go into the dry-cleaning business.
On the contrary, I think it's immensely important to dream too big with my first few scripts because they are not intended for production, they are student work.
I see plenty of writers wanting to sell their first script, maybe they will.
Myself I am an artist, as a painter and visual artist I've created and sold more than a thousand paintings in 20 years through more than 100 exhibitions coast to coast, so I probably have a different level of chutzpah or risk tolerance than some others. (As a former stockbroker and branch manager for a $100-million-a-year financial office in Washington DC, I also have some grasp of balance sheets, business plans and ROI models).
I'm moving forward with pre-production on a short reel this summer, budget under five thousand, this is based on my 6th feature script and it's definitely an experimental project that may not even go to any film festivals but just for free distribution on social media.
It's mostly proof-of-concept (or freedom to fail in innumerable ways!) and a way for me to learn some filmmaking skills in a contained-risk environment but nevertheless I will indeed be building some outlandish sets ... in miniature.
So your counsel is good, for sure, in fact it's the pressure to work small that brought me around to writing feature spec number 7 to a much lower contained budget and that one is more of an industry-acceptable style and product,
and has gotten some good reads from industry executives here on Stage 32 consultations.
However for me I don't think I could have gained that perspective by constraining my early creative projects on the page.
I value my forays into the hinterlands of practicality because I think the form serves my imagination and vice-versa, I've got to swing for the fences first and then show up for spring training,
it gives me an unforgettable benchmark and I am intent on doing prototypes, not being a perfectionist, might be more expensive in the long run but I also develop more vast territory to keep my imagination expanding. I am playing the long game.
Also I tend to find contained small movies tragically lame and boring for the most part,
I love spectacle and I'll continue to not only splash it on the page but also to find ways to produce and mount it myself on screens small and medium-sized.
3 people like this
Arthur Charpentier I agree that turning an unproduced feature into a comic or novel is a great way to monetize a concept that isn't gaining traction as an original screenplay, but I would also point out that either of those avenues are going to require the writer to invest their own capital into the project in order to get that IP in front of an audience.
I see on your profile that you have a prolific amount of writing completed in the form of big, adventurous, original screenplays (awesome job!). You say that smaller films will "go to waste", but as far as I can tell, you haven't experimented with smaller films.
I would challenge you to try one! you clearly have a lot of experience writing dramatic screenplays. I think if you force yourself to contend with some restrictions, you'd find it makes your writing stronger. By containing your film in a single location and limiting the cast, you'll find that you need to find more creative solutions to plot obstacles and more interesting events to complicate the characters' attempts to achieve their goals.
You seem to have an interest in sci-fi, so what if an android policeman prototype went haywire and held the crows hostage at the robot's launch party. A lone hero must uncover the hidden crimes of the corrupt businessmen in the audience in order to get the android to deactivate.
I think you could garner a lot of interest in screenplay like that. Limited scope with genre appeal.
in regard to smaller movies in Russian cinema struggling to find viewers, I think you might be discounting a number of factors, including language barriers and the size of the Russian film market when compared to other markets like Germany, The US, UK, and china.
2 people like this
@daniel I love spectacle too. I think your approach is totally valid - but as you mentioned, you prioritize your self-expression over building a career as a screenwriter. So I think we're simply talking about a difference in goals
Best of luck on your proof of concept! You should definitely post some of your progress as you go!
3 people like this
Langley Coleman thank you and I do think that the goals and priorities are not mutually exclusive,
I see it as different career timelines, yes that equals different priorities perhaps for the moment, yet I certainly see the building of personal creative synthesis combined with business success as my responsibility, in my career as a writer,
and I do indeed also witness the clear importance and advantages of bringing makeable low-budget material into production, so I think we are "on the same page" and I appreciate such a vivacious discussion!
2 people like this
It's more expensive to park your trucks in NYC than it is to build the set on a studio. Apply that logic across the board and it's clear to see that you can write almost anything because if it goes into production, odds are good it'll be filmed on a soundstage. Video walls make it possible to film in almost any environment from the confines of a studio. You can have almost anything happening in the background.
2 people like this
@daniel (sorry, the site won't let me tag some people for some reason) --
Please understand that I don't mean this to be harsh - but I think that's a pie-in-the-sky mentality in this industry.
An original IP that will cost 100 mil to make into a feature film, even if it's an amazing screenplay, is a worthless asset. It's all risk. Any production with a pricetag that large needs to have a number of things built-in in order to be a safe investment (director with a proven track record, cast with an audience draw, and an IP with a pre-existing fan base)
Screenplays only have value as a product if they can be made into a film. unlike other writing like novels or comics, the final piece of writing doesn't ever go out into the market for consumers.
It sounds like you're focused on showing your talent through a portfolio of quality, high-concept writing - but I don't think that is a great long-term mindset. IMO when a writer has a portfolio of unproduceable scripts, it says that they don't understand the business of the film industry far more loudly than it speaks to their talent as a writer.
Even professionals hired on assignment have to respect the projects budget.
2 people like this
Langley Coleman, I have ideas for low-budget films as well. For example, A PUSSYCAT. A comedy about how a cat teaches a closed guy to communicate and understand women.
But, this project requires working with an animal, and writing a comedy with an animal will require a lot of knowledge and effort. So I didn't even waste time on the synopsis.
https://www.stage32.com/profile/391912/Screenplay/Mustachioedess-shaggyess
2 people like this
Arthur Charpentier That's awesome. Did you find that you had to find more creative solutions when writing for a smaller budget?
I won't get too deep into it, because comedy is definitely not my area - but I do know that comedy is extremely culture-dependent and they don't tend to travel as well as other genres. I feel like you may have stacked the deck against yourself by writing a comedy for the global market and also including a trained animal performer (which is hugely expensive in terms of cost and time on set during production)
3 people like this
Langley Coleman, If you study the examples of budget films, you will notice that most of them are clones of other films. The only difference between them is the actors and the entourage. Original scripts require specific things to stand out and attract the attention of viewers.
You are right, the project of the film PUSSYCAT is above my skills as a screenwriter. But only such a project will be interesting to me, because I consider it original and worthy of the viewer's attention. I have no desire to compose another version of the film Saw.
3 people like this
Arthur Charpentier I won't deny that most films (big and small) are sorely lacking in originality, but isn't it the job of you as the screenwriter to develop an original concept for the movie? No one is saying you should re-make Saw, but "it's all been done before" seems like a flimsy argument to me when you have such varied concepts as Saw, Reservoir Dogs, Buried, Clue, and Ex Machina all being produced with a confined scope.
4 people like this
Langley Coleman, You are right, the task of the screenwriters is to come up with an original plot. And the task of producers is to find money, a lot of money. :)
6 people like this
Hollywood considers anything under $5M a low budget film so that is what I am trying to write for. The last two I wrote with Judy Norton would probably cost under $750K each that she will star in. I am writing another one similar to Pacific Heights but base on a true story that would probably cost under $200K. Anything lower than that I am not that interested in writing but that is just me. IN the past I have written and optioned some big budget film scripts and had some luck but things tend to not work the way I hoped. It is a tough business and bigger the budget the harder things tend to get.
2 people like this
I get what you're saying. Novel writing is vastly different from screenwriting, but the creativity aspect and creating an entire world is lacking in script writing. Someone who can write a story then adapt it could learn to make the script more relatable.
1 person likes this
G Del Toro publicly said he has 10-15 finished scripts he can not find backers, and he has multiple Oscars.
1 person likes this
Dan MaxXx and we still have people asking my us amateurs are not given a chance … lol