larry_barker@btinternet.com at 2012-07-10 11:05:35:

I'm afraid I partially agree with Frank Darabont - and I have a further theory. The whole culture of "You too can be a Screenwriter" has a convinced a LOT of people who can't write that they can. This in turn has increased the size of slush-piles inordinately. Which in turn has lead to the power of the reader, and the creation of a set of rules that are there to make their lives easier. You know the sort of thing - start with an action sequence, state theme on page ten, 105 pages etc etc . Worse than that, these 'rules' have become so ingrained that they have become a self-fulfilling prophecy and now most films do start with a completely pointless action sequence, themes are unsubtly stated at about page ten and so on - simply because people believe that to get off the slush-pile and past the readers, this is what you have to do. Not sure there's a solution - but there sure is problem.

CJ at 2012-07-10 11:31:23:

That's a good point. I think they can also at least get you thinking in terms of story elements what has worked and what hasn't in the past, which you can then take and use in your own work. They can also help expose the vital organs (i.e., plot, structure, theme, elements of scenes, etc.) under the surface of the movies you've been watching so you get an understanding of why, and how, things work in a film. Even though those vitals were always there, sometimes it helps to have someone show them to you in greater detail. As long as you're not under the impression you're going to get an E-Z Bake recipe for a million-dollar script, and instead you examine their advice with a critical eye, you'll be OK, I think.

Jim Endecott at 2012-07-10 11:51:08:

I blame the internet. Information moves so fast and to such a wide audience that anyone in the world can read a screenwriting book, watch a webinar, find a workshop or seminar close to them, enter a contest and best of all download screenplays to read. Think of all the wonderful voices that can be heard now when even a decade ago they would have never been recognized. I agree that the lines are flooded. I also think that more lines are opening every day (Scott being one) and I hold to the idea that if you write a good story, they will find you. Writers write. -Jim

popcornflix at 2012-07-10 14:15:08:

People look at the gurus wrong. Nobody can make you a writer in a weekend seminar. But in a weekend, they can teach you form, and some best practices. Like a coach can teach you the same for weightlifting, but you still need to go to the gym every day for a year if you want muscles. In any commercial art, craft helps you work when inspiration deserts you, and it helps you avoid wasting time when you know what you want to accomplish. Gurus can teach you craft, and it can help. But any commercial artist, including writers, need to put in a lot of time creating a lot of works before they are any good at all.

Jeff at 2012-07-12 13:49:15:

I'm of two minds because I fall on both sides of this argument. I've been teaching for over a decade -- but not by choice. This tired old cliche "those who can't do, teach" is obnoxious and ridiculous. I can tell you from firsthand experience that teaching this stuff effectively is a very difficult thing to do. I've spent a decade doing it because it's so hard to teach, and it takes that long to get good at teaching it. Consider this: There is no "right way" to write a story -- you can break ALL the rules and still create something extraordinary and effective. But how do you teach someone that? How do you help writers create something original -- which, by definition, you can't possibly know in the first place (because it's original, after all!)? Teaching and writing are two completely different skill sets. Great writers can't necessarily teach, and great teachers can't necessarily write. For example, I've read many thousands of screenplays (in my search for material to produce). I can identify what works and what doesn't, and I can show you how and why it's so. That's a unique skill set! I'd love to think I'm a good writer, too, but we get good at what we spend our time doing (which is why you must write DAILY), and I've (unfortunately) spent more time teaching than I ever intended to. That said, there are a ton of time-wasting sites on the internet that promote all the wrong ideas ("helping" you write screenplays producers couldn't possibly ever say Yes to). And, yes, anyone can hang up their shingle and call themselves a teacher. And with the ease of blogging software, now anyone can have their own site up in minutes. I spent 10 years searching for screenplays to produce and came up empty-handed. The LAST thing I want is more garbage cluttering my inbox. And every producer I know suffers the same problem. There is only one solution: Increase your mastery of the craft. Create screenplays that are aligned with producers' needs. As a writer, that means you must write daily. Improve your craft one step at a time. Put yourself out there and see what sticks. When it doesn't work, LEARN from it, and adjust. It takes time and a lot of effort. It's a CRAFT. (And these are all the things implied by what Darabont is saying in the quote above.) And always remember that you will never, ever know everything, so always keep learning, and always keep moving forward. Stay optimistic. As long as movies are made, producers will always need fresh, original material.

Scott at 2012-07-12 14:36:04:

I thank everyone who weighed in with their comments and opinions. Echoing Jeff's comment above -- there's no right way to write [one of my common refrains] -- I don't think there's any point to saying a writer can or can not benefit from so-called screenwriting 'gurus.' I for one benefited from reading Syd Field's "Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting" back in 1986 as it opened my eyes to the concept that stories [at least those intended as movies] do have a structure. But the fact is story is so much more than structure, and that pertains to screenplays, too, even though they are in effect a blueprint to produce a movie. I have never read McKee, Truby, Snyder or most of the other 'gurus,' but I have worked with hundreds of students who have. And the net effect of what I experience on the front lines of interfacing with many aspiring screenwriters is too much of an emphasis on structure - and by that they almost always mean plot - causing scripts to suffer: formulaic stories, thin characters, and narrative largely devoid of significant emotional resonance. As to the point raised in this thread about the preponderance of 'guru' content floating around conveying, either directly or through subtext, that there is some program or paradigm that is key to writing a successful script, using terms like 'blockbuster script' or 'million dollar spec script,' I think that has contributed to a common belief among aspiring writers: I can write this one script and end up in Hollywood tomorrow. In point of fact, that is true in extremely rare cases such as Michael Arndt and Diablo Cody. But in my view, that attitude is wrongheaded, not only because the odds against immediate success are astronomically against the writer, it is putting the focus on the wrong spot: It's not just about writing a script, it's about becoming a screenwriter. Per the latter, it takes time, it takes work, it takes immersing oneself in the world of cinema, it takes reading hundreds of scripts, watching thousands of movies, it takes learning principles and practices used by professional screenwriters. In other words, is your goal to sell one script or have a screenwriting career? I still contend that it's possible for writers to break into Hollywood and become successful at the craft of screenwriting just by doing three things: Read scripts. Watch movies. Write pages. In theory, it is possible to never take a course, never read a screenwriting book, never work with a guru or mentor. And that belief is just one reason why I will never qualify as a 'guru.' For most writers, however, they would benefit from some sort of guided learning, at the very least expediting and focusing their process. As to who you choose to work or study with, do due diligence by seeking out information about this or that supposed expert. Ultimately it comes down to you finding your own writer's voice. And that pretty much comes through time, effort and persistence. Again thanks for all the comments. Provocative thoughts all.

Scott Frazier at 2012-07-13 14:18:14:

I think there are many similarities between becoming a great screenwriter, and becoming a great athlete. 1) Inherent talent / skill is not necessary, but it absolutely helps. 2) When we first start out, we play/write as much as we can. We teach ourselves rhythm and pace and taste as much as a baseball player teaches him how to hold his bat so it feels comfortable, how to throw the ball for maximum efficiency, etc. 3) We must be constantly working at the skill, to improve by making mistakes and correcting bad habits. The less we work, the slower we get better. 4) Coaches / gurus can be a fundamental aspect of becoming great, but I guarantee no baseball ever walked up to working in Sport Chalet and said: I can make you a Major League Baseball player. 5) Coaches / gurus (the good ones anyways) only help us improve, they bring out the latent talent, they provide perspective and insight. 6) Not every great player needs a coach to become great, but most can be improved by one. 7) A coach without a player isn't really a coach at all. A player without a coach is still a player.