Do you ever worry about your audience just not getting it?
You write out your seemingly-clever ideas to script, focusing on the invocation of your philosophy; epitomizing and embodying your thesis so subtly that it washes over your audience without hammering them hard, and yet it just goes right over their heads? Or the complete opposite when you receive criticism that it's so heavy-handed and not all that subtle?
I'm being driven insane at how much I have to refine my work to dumb it down or smarten it up to get my point across for all audiences. It makes me wonder how Alex Garland or Steven Zaillian manage to slip their scripts past their gatekeeping readers. At first I doubted myself as being a bad writer, but when the readers who do get it are reassuring, I'm left worried about target audiences and the studio gatekeepers. What do you do?
Just... write. If you don't feel good about this script, write the next one, and then 5 more. Then come back to this one because you might have learned how to do it better.
Scrutinising tiny details never helps me, it hinders me. And it sounds like you are obsessed with very very slight nuances. I always take a step back to clear my head and come back to it with fresh eyes.
2 people like this
Look, there's no formula way to pass gatekeepers, impressing studio execs, etc....either you make it or you don't so don't bash your head over that. Many writers who did it with one script, didn't make it with another. But what you can control is will you write for the wide audience, put some commercial value to your script, or are you gonna go artsy on it, do it for yourself...if later, don't be surprised you get to be only one who endorse it.
Is the point you trying to make, two sided? So you are exploring all aspects of your theme? If you are trying to get a one word point across you’ll have to go all Fast and Furious and say the word “Family” 100 times in your movie.
4 people like this
These days Alex Garland doesn't get his scripts past studio gate keepers, he finds the money and makes the film himself. That may also be your path.
Your job is to work on more than one level. The average audience member sees the surface of the story and finds it entertaining. It's in some popular genre and it hits all of the genre beats.
The more sophisticated members of the audience see the story as a metaphor for larger issues, and find all of the hidden nuggets in your story.
Take a movie like the original INVASION OF THE BODYSNATCHERS as an example. It works perfectly well as a (low budget) science fiction alien invasion movie. It has scares and suspense and a great deal of paranoia - who has been taken over by an alien?
But it's also a serious look at middle class conformity and the loss of free will... and also a commentary on Mccarthyism.
If you didn't get any of that, still a great science fiction film. Very entertaining.
Heck, it's been remade a few times because it works on more than one level.
If your story only works on one level? That's a problem.
1 person likes this
Brad, it's something I'm constantly worrying about myself in my own work. Will studios or audience understand the work, and I say, let it go. Someone out there will acknowledge your talent. Don't worry about the target audience, as it sounds like you're already writing toward a sophisticated audience that will "get it."
6 people like this
The fallacy here, as is often with trying to break into screenwriting, is that there is some sort of Goldilocks zone to aim for.
Different movies are targeted at different demographics and smart producers know who they want to reach.
This is before considering that the only thing that really matters is that the story is enjoyable. If readers enjoy the experience but don't really follow the plot, that's fine. If readers feel something from the script but can't put their finger on it, that's fine. I love Shane Black's "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" but, for the life of me, I can't follow the plot.
One of the biggest traps you can fall into when trying to break-in is trying to satisfy the whims of peers. You need to think hard about if they are your audience. If you want to make dumb action movies (and all the power to you if you do), you're going to have a hard time pleasing some pretentious dullard who likes to watch existential black & white art films and can't put their own subjectivity aside. Alignment is critical in this game.
2 people like this
Brad, my short answer to your question is: No. Not everybody's gonna get everything all the time. I don't fret over it.
2 people like this
from a writing standpoint, the description should paint a clear and cinematic description of what should be on the screen. If it's high-art, people might not get the nuances of the art part, but the screenplay itself shouldn't be confusing.
1 person likes this
Hi Brad,
For some reason, your post reminds me of a couple lines from This is Spinal Tap.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ian Faith : The Boston gig has been cancelled...
David St. Hubbins : What?
Ian Faith : Yeah. I wouldn't worry about it though, it's not a big college town.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Marty: The last time Tap toured America, they where, uh, booked into 10,000 seat arenas, and 15,000 seat venues, and it seems that now, on their current tour they're being booked into 1,200 seat arenas, 1,500 seat arenas, and uh I was just wondering, does this mean uh...the popularity of the group is waning?
Ian: Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no...no, no, not at all. I, I, I just think that the.. uh.. their appeal is becoming more selective.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Best fortunes your creative endeavors, Brad, and stay safe!
Yep. Totally guilty. Having the peeps in the Writer's Room do peer review totally helped.
4 people like this
A quick way to see how you script plays out is to set-up a virtual table read. It doesn't have to be with professional actors, but the one thing I'd always suggest is that you have someone else read out the scene descriptions. That way you are in the position of the audience and can "watch" your screenplay. Then afterwards you can gather everyone's thoughts - what landed/what didn't etc.
Hi, Brad. Well, no, generally, I don’t worry about it. Perhaps it’s simply a matter of clarity on the page. There’s the concept itself and also the execution. It isn’t dumbing it down or smartening it up, but perhaps it is an issue of not clearly communicating the concept and/or your unique approach. :)
4 people like this
Oh, to add... Brad, you’re a film student, right? Your post reminded me of what one of my art school professors said to me and my fellow creatives (a thousand years ago, lol!) when we were pulling our hair out over a project. If helpful, he simply said never blame the audience for “not getting it.” Never call them stupid. You may not reach everyone, or whatever you are creating may not resonate for every person, and that’s perfectly fine. Do not try to please everyone. You can’t. But any failure of communication is on us, the artist. We are sharing with them and inviting them, asking them to participate with us. An audience member may not enjoy what you are doing or may not have a full understanding of the context or subject matter, but even if an audience member does not like your piece, that in itself shows that you have communicated, right? Intrigue or emotion invites thought; confusion, however, does not. You have to have an understanding of a work to not like it or to not agree with it. So be bold and be clear in your ideas. Every element in your work should have a reason for being there. I remember we all were like, shit.... Any pretentiousness on our part was stamped out. His critiques were brutal. Lol! Anyway, I certainly do not mean to imply anything here about you or anyone else, just sharing something I learned waaaaay back when. Hope it helps some. I wish you the best with all your creative endeavors, Brad!
Want to save these lines from Beth's post here. •
“Never blame the audience” .... “Do not try to please everyone. You can’t.”“But any failure of communication is on us, the artist” •.
Hmmm. 1,000 years ago. Must be in a different town. Or I'd have heard of both.
3 people like this
As a screenwriter you are an entertainer, not a preacher.
2 people like this
No, I don’t ever worry. I wrote a hell of a complex script full of buddhist philosophies, unusual structure (they often confuse who is the protagonist between the two main characters), and a nonlinear in time, including Flashback and forth. Of course there is no producers yet. But it won some awards and was a semi finalist in the Rhode Island Film festival - to name a few. That is good enough for me so far.
The script is called Buddha’s Shadow. Maybe we can swap 10 pages reading to see how complex are we? Or start with the logline?
I posted a similar thread, "Insulting the Audiences Intelligence". There seems to be this need or desire from execs and readers for an extreme amount of exposition. I get so annoyed when films or shows over narrate. Film is visual, don't tell me, show me. To be fair the specific script I'm shopping is very niche in terms of mythology, but at a certain point you have to have confidence in your story and hope that eventually you find the right fit, the right "gatekeeper". I've often wondered the same thing about Aster, Aronofsky, Fincher, etc.
1 person likes this
Same but different Pattana Thaivanich. Swap Buddhist with Druid/Celtic mythology.
3 people like this
I'm not trying to sound egotistical. I simply brought this up after sharing a latest draft of a script with some readers. In a few scenes the analogies delved into some Westworld-esque David Foster Wallace-ish metaphysical holes. Suffice to say, they were divisive.
A few readers said that the scenes were too weird and needed much more elaboration.
Another few said that the scenes were too heavy-handed and needed to be much more subtle.
I want to get it juuuuuuuust right. It's a tug o' war over perceptibility.
Brad, the fact you are agonizing over it disqualifies you from being even within ten light-years of egotistical. Could I suggest something — take a wildly successful subtle movie and ask this same set of readers their opinion. I feel you'll get your answer. Best!
Brad, I've had comments where there are "too many characters." And sure, the mind has to memorize a description for each one while reading, so it's tedious, but when it gets on screen, your eyes compile five characters in a room visually in an instant, no problem. In any case, you're not on the screen yet, so you have to be sensitive to what people's minds can assimilate. World-building and scenes are important, but if you focus most of your pen on the characters, they can be as weird and heavy-handed as you like. Consider turning most of your black space into character-building.
Claude - I'm not so sure about that.