lizswan@hotmail.com at 2012-06-22 18:28:41:

#21: You gotta identify with your situation/characters, can’t just write ‘cool’. What would make YOU act that way? The characters and situations, which move the audience and stay with them are the ones they identify with - that can be any character in any situation - eg a lost fish or a broken toy - all stories are about human beings - even if they are about a fish or a toy. Now the hard part is writing, that character, into that situation - which will resonate with the audience, and that is the skill I want to develop. Thanks Scott.

zxcvb at 2012-06-22 20:56:22:

I love practical (and praticable) tips like #19 and #20. Yeah, it's nice to get big "philosophical" advice...but it's even nicer to get little nuggets advice you can immediately put to use. Usually there are exceptions to every rule, but #19 is as iron-clad as it gets. I can't think of any film where being saved by coincidence ever worked. At best, it didn't ruin the movie if the movie was otherwise great. And #20 turns a skill that even amateurs excel at (criticizing bad movies) and uses it to improve a skill that even professionals struggle with (creating good movies). To paraphrase Ira Glass, "Even when your work sucks, your taste is still killer."* [*] That's why, he says, it's easy to get discouraged when you're starting out.

Shaula Evans at 2012-06-22 21:24:58:

> #20: Exercise: take the building blocks of a movie you dislike. How d’you rearrange them into what you DO like? It's easy to say: This movie is broken. It's much harder to say: ...and here's how to fix it. #19 is a powerful and practical exercise to work your way into "Group 3" in Scott's Three Groups of People in Hollywood.

zxcvb at 2012-06-23 00:07:30:

I tried doing this with the Pirates of the Caribbean films. Even though I like the idea and feel of a swashbuckling comic adventure, the movies just don't work for me (esp. the sequels). But the elements could be rearranged to make something much better. IMO, there's just too much of everything, making the story hard to keep track of and connect with. Too many characters, too many subplots, too much visual and aural bombast. As a result, the story's universe feels loud and busy rather than rich and dense. So I would eliminate all but the most compelling stories and characters and flesh those out more. For example... 1) Get rid of Will. He's boring. Jack Sparrow is by far the best character. Let he and Elizabeth have more verbal sparring matches and love-hate romantic tension. 2) Take Will's "Lost Father" subplot and make it Jack's instead. It'll let us get to know Jack better, so he's not as cartoon-y. You've got Johnny Depp at your disposal, use the full range of his acting talents. Anyways, as I've been writing my own fantasy/adventure script, I've tried my best not to overstuff it with excess plots and characters. Choose the best ones then escalate the tension and action from there. I've also decided to include some "quieter" scenes that let the story BREATHE every now and then. That might sound counterintuitive for an action/fantasy/adventure script, but when I think of, say, the original Star Wars trilogy, many of my favorite moments are quiet ones -- Obi Wan explaining the Force to Luke; "Let the Wookie win"; Yoda playing the fool upon meeting Luke; Han and Leia's love-hate exchanges. Who knows if my script will turn out any good...but I figure exercises like #20 can only help its long odds.

Shaula Evans at 2012-06-23 00:12:55:

> As a result, the story’s universe feels loud and busy rather than rich and dense. That's a great distinction, zxcvb. > I’ve also decided to include some “quieter” scenes that let the story BREATHE every now and then. Hey, you're in good company: Shakespeare did this all the time; e.g., the comedy of the "Alas poor Yorick" graveyard scene to break up the tragedy in Hamlet. Not that Hamlet was an action/adventure script (in most interpretations), but it's the same basic concept.