I wanted to mention a great article over at Den of Geek titled Do movies and TV shows explain themselves too much? Simon Brew’s prime example of a film that gets it right is Groundhog Day. The comments that follow greatly add to the conversation. I thought it would be a good thing to think about when reading the October scripts.

We've been doing this for 3 weeks now, and we're really enjoying it and learning the craft of screenwriter at the same time. Now, here we're doing our own analysis, giving our own opinions, sharing our thoughts. It was great to read Billy Mernit's insight on Bridesmaids. How about we get someone who was involved in the writing possess. They would really help us learn how they developed their script. I was thinking of a Crime Comedy. One written by a dear friend. How about it guys? Let's crack K-9!

Re: future genres to analyze, could be interesting to do a Period Thriller/Action/War script like Apocalypse Now/ The Third Man/ Inglorious Basterds or a Period Bio-pic like Patton/ Coal Miner's Daughter/ Walk the Line/ Raging Bull/ The King's Speech

Saint, thanks for that. I've got that link opened and hope to get to it today. Groundhog Day is a terrific movie. Believe it or not, there's a very credible Jungian interpretation to be made of that film. Hopefully we can analyze it in our series someday.

Let's look at Action-Adventure at some point (Die Hard, or something like it?) If it's not too fine a distinction, it might be interesting to look at Action Thrillers (Bourne Identity?) as well, and compare and contrast the two genres?

How about "Sequels" as a future genre to analyze? Okay, I realize "sequels" aren't exactly a genre, but I think they're united as a group by all the advantages and problems of picking up where an established property left off. And they make so many of them these days... surely it's something worth looking at. Anyway, I'd think anything from the Godfather2 to Police Academy2 would be fair game.

Crime Comedy would be good. 48 Hrs. is a classic buddy comedy. Anna, you gave me a great idea. I've got dozens of books featuring interviews with screenwriters. I should go through those when we feature a script and pull quotes about the script development process. Speaking of which, I just remembered there's another quote from the Matt Damon interview about how Terence Malick gave he and Affleck the ending to GWH. I need to update today's post with that.

@ Saint -- Good stuff. Thanks for the link. "But that doesn’t mean that an audience can’t take a leap of faith from time to time" This is LITERALLY the definition of suspension of disbelief. In my opinion, it is also the biggest problem with the communal way notes are given. I think executives either forget or don't understand the magic that is suspension of disbelief. Not every concept is for everyone. Yet executives treat films, concepts, premises as if they are. As if everyone needs to understand and love a story for all the same reasons. There is no room for individuality. If the note comes down -- "I love the script, everything is perfect, but WHY does Phil keep repeating his day over and over?" there will be a mission to fill in the backstory even if it spells certain doom for the story. Here's the truth and also the answer that no executive wants to hear: "It doesn't matter." How can you say it doesn't matter? "It doesn't matter." That's the magic of film. We, the audience, are willing to overlook a few minor (and usually ONE MAJOR) plot hole or flaw in logic. As long as the rest of the film doesn't violate play loose with its rules. The irony is this same question could be asked about anything really. It just tends to be the more mundane that gets overlooked. Yet, the more over-the-top reasons are why we go to see movies. Where did Spiderman get his powers? He was bit by a radioactive spider. But does that REALLY answer the question? Nah. We just believe it. Sure, why not. A radioactive spider can give him superpowers. We overlook it, because look at all the cool things he can do now that he's been bitten. That's the essence of suspension of disbelief. We don't go to see the mundane and everyday. We go to see the extraordinary. If we have to ignore one gaping flaw to believe the fantasy, we will. It's human nature. Now, I'm not advocating an Ed Wood -- They'll get it! SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF -- ignoring the details. I'm just saying, if a few people are hung up on one thing, you're probably on the right track. I'd argue GROUND HOG'S DAY would be a worse film if it was a voodoo curse that was responsible. The irony is -- a voodoo curse makes exactly as much sense as nothing at all. Yet, executives seem to find solace in a bullshit reason, than having faith in the audiences willingness to simply believe.

@ Richard -- I think that's a great idea. Lethal Weapon 2 Indiana Jones 3 Aliens Terminator 2 imo are the best sequels ever written. Only 2 writers. Jeff Boam and James Cameron. Coincidence that its specific people that have a mastery of the are of the sequel? I'd also add: The Empire Strikes Back I used to not include Stars Wars because it is truly flawless as a trilogy. But I've been watching the Behind the Scenes Blu-Ray stuff -- and it's clear that George Lucas didn't have all the details ironed out. In an interview after the first film he talks about who will end up with Leia. Obviously, he didn't know she was his Luke's sister. I think sequels tend to be so bad because the decision to make one is almost always a business one. What makes them difficult, is that the audience is expecting the same experience as the first film, but different. Similar, but different, right? There's also the fine line of upping the ante without totally obliterating the canon it comes from. Alien 3 is a great example. Not a terrible movie in its own right, but man does it lose the fanbase in the opening scenes by making the end of ALIENS irrelevant with a title card. THE BOURNE SUPREMACY as well. I know the whole plot revolves around the death of his girlfriend -- that's the hook and driving force -- but man, does it undermine the Bourne Identity.

Yes! Just so much yes. See - your answer is why this topic is exciting to me. There is so much to explore in the question and your response was brilliant. I agree completely, no movie is for everyone. And it's not just that they're made in the attempt to achieve this unachievable goal, but they're marketed as if they already have. That's why there are so many versions of trailers. And versions on DVD. That's why George Lucas made ewoks blink. And why Spielberg regrets turning guns into radios.

Beverly Hills Cop Tango & Cash True Lies Hell, could even do Turner & Hooch :) Listing a bunch of crime comedy movies mostly because I want to see K-9 up there in one of these. :)

Betsy, period story would be great especially for two reasons: (1) How do the writers create a sense of reality per the era (we dug into this a bit with Gladiator). (2) Dialogue: Does it come off as authentic? Good idea.

I like the idea of doing a sequel. The Empire Strikes Back is an excellent call because in my view, it's the best of the SW movies (as a story, nothing will ever take away my experience of seeing SWIV: A New Hope the first few times I saw in a theater when it first came out). Aliens is a good call. T2.

Sequels is a great idea. How do you expand on a universe, adding something new while still retaining what you liked about it in the first place. I also love the idea of Crime Comedy, and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang would be my pick for that - such a fantastic film, a brilliant script as well, incredibly meta without feeling stupid.

More ideas: Horror/Sci-Fi/Comedy - Attack the Block or Shaun of the Dead. Romantic comedy - When Harry Met Sally or Sleepless in Seattle. Superhero films - The Dark Knight, Spider-man 1 or 2, X-Men.

As I've had other discussions about Inception and exposition, my little grey cells were reminded of this Pete Holmes clip. I think it pairs very well with the Den of Geek article.