Screenwriting : Spec writing article - great advice about "following rules" by Matthew Kelcourse

Happy New Year, Matthew Kelcourse! Great share! Basil Iwanyk said, "Nowadays, people are more forgiving of deviating from traditional screenplay structures in favour of elevating a writer’s voice and magic.” I'd rather watch – and write – something that deviates from traditional screenplay structure where a writer's voice can shine than a cookie-cutter movie or show.

I feel like that "eclectic voice" definitely resides within (is?) me, but I try and suppress it in the interest of attempting to storm the industry gates sounding/looking like the masses who already have entry passes! My main struggle initially was hearing/seeing "write a great script, but don't be verbose!" That and "follow the rules!" I really want to write like Shane Black, but (wait for it...) I am NOT Shane Black...

Halirious. This producer is giving advice the opposite of most experts here are preaching.

Dont worry about budget, dont read trades, dont worry about attachments, finance, pitchdecks, etc. He just wants the screenplay.

Basically, just write the best "fuck it" screenplay that represents you, and maybe your voice & concept rise to the top. GL!

Dan MaxXx Did you read the Sicario script? As a relative newcomer who skimmed through it I think it reads like something from an actor who had seen a bunch of shooting scripts and then wrote his first spec, and it's pretty obvious it's his first...

I'm not even quite sure what a "f**k it" script entails? Write it in Old English? It sounds like something you buck convention on, but you somehow still adhere to the standard formatting/story structure? "Writer's voice" is quite the buzzword term, but seems more applicable to novel writing than screenplay scribing. In the latter format almost every post, article, blog, book, etc. conditions you to stay within the established road lines!

Hi Dan MaxXx - some writers are open to a variety of approaches, and some are locked in on their own rules and ways, and that's good too. Whatever works for you is the way for you to go, but there are no longer so many "rules" as those established pre-2k and I take advantage of that... makes writing more enjoyable to me. Happy New Year!

Honestly, at this point, I feel people either get it or they don't. I took a peek at r/screenwriting the other day (between my fingers) and almost all of the top posts were about rules. On the flip side, I could probably count the posts I've seen about craft and artistry, over a period of over ten years, on the fingers of one hand.

And on and on, right CJ Walley? What I would never want to hear is that a producer passed on a great script because it didn't follow their version of "the rules". Creativity tends to be less restrained and more imaginative than a list of commandments, ay? Write On!

Matthew Kelcourse that can never be helped. There are plenty of idiot producers out there. You don't want to work with those. You've dodged a bullet it that happens. The good producers out there are looking for potential and with a very open mind too.

Matthew Kelcourse and CJ Walley it often feels like new writers are getting conflicting instructions from screenwriter veteran parents, i.e. mom said 'feel free to bend the rules a bit' and dad said 'conform, conform, conform'... Re: "craft and artistry" I THINK, people concentrate, somewhat myopically it seems, on rules and standard practices because it's hard to instruct people on how to be a good writer. Sure you can tell them "ideate an original story, craft interesting characters, make the story flow well, etc.", but there tends to be a lot of failure in the delivery... I see people on here and other forums complain about writing and I'm like, "Um, might want to try another craft then..." I write every day because just as when I was learning new instruments my craft only gets better by drum roll practicing!

The only real standard that really matters is "Is it good?"

Everything else is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.... if it's good. no one gives a fuck what rules you're breaking. If it's bad, people will point out formatting, etc, because bad scripts tend to have bad formatting, etc, as well as a bad story.

Anything that's breaking a rule or needs to be fixed can be fixed in development; everything else is just semantics we talk about amongst each other because we can't just say "It doesn't matter if it's good."

That's all that matters: Is this script good?

A Producer passes on whether or not a script is good, period... no one reads a script with a specific music cue and goes "I shall pass because that song is too expensive."

They go "That song is too expensive but this other song has a same vibe and is cheaper to use."

Mike Childress, the problem is that, over and over, the veterans giving advice are rarely working writers. They are almost always people who have failed to even get on the first rung of the ladder.

Then there's the issue of fear. Art is an incredibly uncertain thing. That's its beauty, but it requires bravery to explore and stand behind. That's why Dan MaxXx uses the term "fuck it" screenplay - because you have to have the balls to say to the world "fuck it, this is what to write and this is how I want to write it". Academia, on the other hand, is built on a degree of certainty. Those scared by the hedonism of art want to cower behind the reassurance of rules and expectations. They want to carefully prepare homework and have it graded. They want to be told when to jump and how high.

On top of this is the Dunning Kruger effect. Most people within screenwriting communities are either on the peak of mount stupid or the valley of despair. Very few go the distance. Those on mount stupid tell each other what they want to hear - or at least hear only want they want to hear. Those in the valley of despair either give up or start cannibalising others for money as readers/consultants. Since they have poor craft skills and zero industry experience, they pick at people's formatting and "rule breaking" because it's easy and superficial, further reinforcing people's beliefs that they matter.

This is why taking time to study what successful people have to say is so critical. It's out there in books and interviews, and it all aligns.

Scott Sawitz, you're pretty much bang on there. Indeed, no competent producer is looking at a script as if it's written in stone.

The only issue is that a script they absolutely love can still be unsuitable for their needs. It can be totally out of their funding limits, logistically impossible for them to shoot, or just too much of a gamble in the marketplace.

I have a script that a director told me they'd give their right nut to make, but they also feel their sales agent would spit in their eye if they tried to put it to market. Hell, in a producing capacity myself, I've chosen to write new material I feel is closer to what we can (given our resources) turn profit on now than use my own specs.

CJ Walley Bonafides of contributors/talking heads run the gamut for sure. I take everything I read/hear with a grain of salt, but fortunately I am at the point where the questions I have for veteran writers are primarily about their experiences with writing programs/fellowships or industry interactions/experiences, not like "What makes a 'magic' script?" I am definitely down with F-It scripts as you describe them because my first three qualified as those because I didn't know what the F I was doing! So now I continue to build the war chest with as diverse a writing portfolio as I can muster and the plan is to just carpet bomb the industry with my stuff until (if) I make a successful inroad. Fortunately I really like writing and (a bit to my surprise) specifically writing in the screenplay format. So expect both F-It and more conformist fodder from me like Schroedinger's screenwriter!

Mike Childress, that's actually why I tell a lot of exhausted and demotivated writers to revisit their first few scripts. Our fear levels when we first start are next to zero and we tend to have a very clear yet unrefined voice. It's only once we start talking to scared and lost screenwriters (and they people that prey on them) that we start to take on their fears, cowardice, and dogmatic views.

Consistency, show don't tell, and standard format are the "rules" I stick to; otherwise, it's about creating great characters to tell a wonderful story that keeps the reader anxiously turning the page till the satisfying ending. Any other rules, IMO, are disposable... except Aristotle ;-)

Mike Childress i read Sicario a long time ago and only remember one short sentence, "the soldiers put on night vision goggles" and the director & DP came up with one of the most visually cinematic scene in film history.

Not sure if Sicario was Sheridan's first spec (was an assignment gig) but I heard he wrote it for free, which is against Guild rules but nobody seems to be punished.

CJ Walley I purposely didn't read any scripts before I wrote the first three, I wanted unadulterated writing in this new (to me) format of writing, and although they all would need revising before any serious attempts at hawking I love the stories and regret nothing. I will get back to them, eventually.

Matthew Kelcourse I think the consistency bit is 100% on the money, but what I find on many posts on here and elsewhere is writers conflate competition writing with (attempted) spec sales writing. Obviously there's some Venn Diagram intersection with the two realms, e.g. drawing the story analyst/script reader in on page F-ing one, not ten, writing a well-structured arc, but like CJ and others have alluded to the fact is that many (most?) studio gatekeepers, producers, etc. aren't whipping out scorecards like competition readers. Rules in the streets, but be a freak in the sheets! For example I have been told that execs don't read anything but dialogue, but in the same vein Wrylies/parantheticals are considered indicators of a rookie scribe. I still utilize them, but try and limit usage.

Dan MaxXx In Sheridan's script he does a lot of stuff I have consistently been warned off of, e.g. including camera angles, capitalizing (in dialogue text no less!), etc. The movie is entertaining, no doubt, but in the article Basil talks about the "realism" of Sheridan's script; however, there is still a tremendous amount of artistic license involved. I saw Sheridan's name involved with the Lioness series, and it again channels the Sicario feel/vibes.

Mike Childress Paramount Plus is all Sheridan. Lioness, Yellowstone, Tusla King, Mayor of Kingston, Landman, plus Sheridan adapts John Clancy books & he is one of highest paid vendors. He rents his land and ranches to Paramount when they film his tv shows. Lol!

CJ Walley Of course... I've had similar things where a producer has said it would be a hard sell, they don't have the budget to do it right, etc... no one looks at a specific moment and thinks "that music cue makes this a pass."

Ultimately the producer is where the rubber meets the road in art vs. commerce.

Mike Childress, I think that was a wise choice. I've watched new writers fail to even write their first screenplay because they became paralysed with indecision and fear after reading various produced ones. I'd take any claims of what execs do with a huge pinch of salt though. There are a lot of Chinese whispers within writing communities and very few people have direct experience with industry members. About ten years ago, people would claim that prodco readers would toss scripts in the trash over the slightest issue until actual readers pointed out they're paid to read scripts in full.

Dan MaxXx, the WGA treating people differently when they have money, power, and status? I refuse to believe it!

Scott Sawitz, 100% and it's a tough balance. People need to appreciate when a writer is writing not just for the marketplace, but a specific segment of said marketplace. Craig Maizin was mocked for sometime by amateur screenwriters for having credits for the likes of Scary Movie and Identity Thief, then he becomes the show runner for Chernobyl and blows everyone away. He didn't suddenly become a better story creator, he did a great job of leaning into two very different audience demographics.

CJ Walley And not every credit you ever have is something amazing ... I look at the guy who did Morbius. His IMDB has a lot of bad movies on it ... but it's paid work. Making a living in this field is incredibly hard and he's doing it... sometimes you write a Scary Movie sequel because that's what keeps the lights on.

Scott Sawitz, again, "bad movie" is contextual, as you can have what film buffs think is garbage performing really well for investors and satisfying a sizeable audience. Adam Sandler tends to be the poster child for bad movies, yet he's made a lot of money and entertained a lot of people doing what he seems to love.

A producing skill is appreciating what a movie is trying to do and evaluating it within that context. I don't care for the Fast & Furious franchise as a viewer but I massively respect the writing as a writer-producer.

A lot of aspiring writers don't seem to see this. Many think there is some sort of Golidlocks script that every prodco/studio will want, and that script itself needs to be highly sophisticated and Oscar worthy. That's not the case.

I've found that producers tend to be impressed by writers who are regularly working, collaborate well, and help deliver movies that generate returns.

One of the writers of Cat Woman (Hallie Berry) said he made more money on the flop than any of his other produced movies and tv shows.

There's a lot of $ on movie flops!

CJ Walley Interesting re: fear about writing a first screenplay... "Fear is the mind-killer." I mean as a Spec Script Ronin no one is paying you, and odds are against your first (or eighth) script getting bought/optioned/produced so might as well "Cry 'havoc!' and let slip the [spec scripts]"! I hope I can sell something eventually, but if I write a hundred screenplays and never have one produced at least I can say "I enjoyed the hell out of it, regardless..." I see a lot of new screenwriters on here looking for that instant gratification after finishing that first script like, "Someone buy this beast!" If only... I'm less than a year in and already I am going to other FNGs "Chill Winstonnnn." Enjoy yourself and write until your fingers bleed. Don't rest on your laurels after that first dip into Lake Minnetonka.

Dan MaxXx, absolutely. I once read a blog about a screenwriter who'd had a great career writing scripts that never actually got made. Many would have called him unlucky, but he made a lot of money and had a great time doing it. I also know of a writer who churns out what many would call "shlock" for a producer with links into Hallmark/Lifetime/Sci-fi. He pays her poorly but she gets probably one assignment a month that comes and goes with little in the way of headaches.

Roger Corman's name is synonymous with bad films but he famously, in his own words, "made a thousand and never lost a dime" while kickstarting a whole bunch of careers.

You have choose sanity over vanity. I have a script with an Oscar nominee attached as a lead. That's huge in terms of validation, but then is it more commercial than the family friendly Civil War assignment I turned around in a couple of weeks?

Mike Childress, there's a lot of people who want to apply a corporate mindset to this and they quickly turn it into a job. There is a thread on Reddit only today where a writer is boasting about reluctantly vomiting up forty plus pages just to get a first draft done. A lot of people have this all completely backwards. You wouldn't hear painters and musicians openly talking in this way.

Passion on the page equals passion on the screen. You can tell when someone truly cares about their work vs when someone truly cares about fame and fortune.