Hi I have two totally unrelated questions that I would love to get some insight on:

1. Is it better to end a scene/sequence as dramatically as possible or as logically as possible? Obviously both would be ideal, but what if you could only choose one of them, do you think an audience will forgive you if your scene was exhilarating yet maybe not entirely logical? Case in point: I have a scene in my latest script where my protagonist is being pursued on foot and is racing to meet up with her team waiting in a getaway car nearby. She has to run up onto a footbridge and cross over to meet them parked on an upper level parking structure on the other side. But she gets trapped on the bridge by her pursuers on both sides of the bridge and the scene ends dramatically.

So the argument becomes: Why didn't the getaway car just wait in the street below the footbridge, which means she wouldn't have to cross the bridge? But I love that scene on the bride because it's more exciting. Do I lose the exciting bridge scene or go for the logical way out? Question 2 has to do with screenwriting contests:

2. My understanding of screenplay contests are that they discover great scripts and stories from undiscovered writers, which makes it a wonderful way of curating original content for Hollywood that is yearning for fresh, new stories that are well crafted. But why are so few of those scripts made into movies? If you look through all the major contests, most of the winner's scripts never get made? Why isn't Hollywood falling over themselves to execute these scripts judged the greatest by some the most prestigious members of Hollywood? Even the Nicholls, the best of them all, had only a handful of its winning scripts produced? Why aren't those great scripts being made into great movies?

You can answer question 1, 2, or both. Thanks a lot for your time, I really appreciate it.

Brandon, if I may give you my two cents on your first question. Why not both? How about you create a reason why the getaway car can't get to the meeting place? Add an obstacle for it: the pursuers block its path, the cops show up, one of the guys screw up and takes the wrong turn, etc. That way it can end logically and dramatically. It might add more urgency to the scene as well. Think of the bank robbery scene in Bonnie & Clyde where the getaway driver waits nervously outside the bank. Not only are we excited about what's going on inside the bank, we are engaged in the getaway driver's story as well: he spots an empty parking spot and decides to park, making it much more difficult and time consuming to get out of there when B&C come storming out with the loot. It makes us go "No, you idiot! Don't park!" The entire scene is more thrilling because of that extra bit of business.

Is Hollywood really like it's portrayed in movies and tv shows or is it exaggerated? If it really is full of drama and amusement have you ever witnessed anything crazy?

Are there any time-tested rules of thumb when it comes to "locking down" your script? That is, knowing when it's ready and done (and not going to get appreciably better or worse)? I'm thinking I should wait until I start writing something else. That way, I can see my last script more objectively instead of being caught up in the emotional rush of "I'm done!"

Scott, I have 2 questions (sorry), and they're both finance related (double sorry). But I've always wondered about them, they're important, and you did ask. So . . . Let's use the 2011 film HUGO as our example. The critical acclaim for HUGO was wonderful. But financially . . . Source = BoxOfficeMojo: ------------------------------------ HUGO's Budget = $ 170 M ========================== HUGO's Domestic B.O. = $ 74 M HUGO'S Foreign B.O. = $ 112 M --------------------------------------------- HUGO'S Total B.O. = $ 186 M ========================== (let's ignore any side revenues like toys, games, kid's clothes, or any other licensing money later) ---------------------------------------- *** Question # 1) It appears to me that Hugo made a little money = $ 16 M net. ($ 186 Revenue - $ 170 Cost). BUT - what about the Marketing Costs involved? When they list "Budget", is that only the studio's Production Costs? If yes, and if the marketing costs of ads, posters, TV commercials, etc, exceeded $ 16 M, then it's a different story. Yes? In Moscow (at least) they absolutely plaster the streets with movie posters - on walls; lighted sign boards; bus stops; kiosks; etc. Those placements cost money. ---------------------------------------- *** Question # 2) regarding "Budget", that money comes out of the studio's accounts by corporate checks, or by EFT wires. So $ 170 = $ 170. Let's call that "a good number". But for "Total Box Office", does that $ 186 M represent what the studio gets back from ticket sales? (If Yes, then we could easily compare "apples-to-apples"). Or, is "Total Box Office" what the theatre operators took in at the cashier window? If Total Box Office represents this, then the studio would get less, I would imagine. Do the theatre operators pay rent for these films, or do they share some contracted % with the studios? Thankyouverymuch. No one ever discusses this.(Just not sexy, I guess). John A

Thanks Teddy. The car not getting to the meeting place (or in my case, leaving the meeting place) is a good suggestion. Should've thought about that actually :)

My question is about "minor" characters -- where do you start with them, in terms of fitting them into your script? By minor characters, I mean the significant characters who aren't the protagonist or nemesis. I've read a couple of screenwriting books and of course, I read GITS, and I feel like they're hardly ever mentioned (but in a recent post, Tom Benedek wrote that subplots are often the most important narrative elements in a script). I have my main character, nemesis and basic plot nailed down, but I just don't know where to start with the other characters. Should they have somewhat of their own journey, or are they just there as they relate to the main character? Any discussion on working on the other characters would be appreciated!

Two questions, Scott, which are really more topics than questions. 1. Villain Protagonists I'm working on a villain protagonist and I'm not finding much in the way of information on writing sites about what makes a villain protagonist tick, what makes one great, or how to address the special challenges of writing a villain protagonist that the audience still connects with. I don't think it's a topic you've dealt with much in the past on the blog. I'd love to know if you have any thoughts on the inherent pitfalls of writing a villain protagonist, or how to write one well, and I'd appreciate if you or GITS readers have recommendations on great villain protagonists in films and what makes them great. 2. Breaking the fourth wall Another topic that I'm researching and coming up pretty dry on is breaking the fourth wall (making asides or speaking directly to the camera). My working premise is that this is just like flashbacks, voice overs, or other more stylized choices: it won't work in all stories, it has to be executed well, it has to serve the story, and it has to be justified inside the story universe. That said, what does it take to make asides work well? What are the pitfalls to avoid? And what are examples of films that use asides effectively? If you or GITS readers have thoughts on these two topics, or can point me at good resources or examples, I would really appreciate it.

Melinda, Paul Bassett Davies just shared a good article on B-characters in comedies in the Euroscript newsletter. I don't have a good weblink for it so I'm copying the article for you below. Comedy tends to exaggerate the personalities of B characters, but the advice applied more subtly can be valid for other genres, too. Writing Sit-com B Characters By Paul Bassett Davies via http://www.euroscript.co.uk/ What's in a B character? SITCOM WRITING TIP: How to create and use 'B' Characters. Think of some great sitcoms. Fawlty Towers. Absolutely Fabulous. Peep Show. All based around great characters: Basil Fawlty, Patsy and Edina, Mark and Jeremy. Now think of Basil without Manuel, Patsy and Edina without Saffron, Mark and Jeremy without Super Hans. What would happen? Those sitcoms would lose more than just a secondary character, they'd lose a vital part of what makes them special. The right B character can make a sitcom a classic. B characters aren't as complex as the main characters, in fact they're usually stereotypes, but they play a vital role in the way they interact with the main characters. Why are B characters so important? When the B characters show up in a sitcom something changes. B characters always behave the same way - but they change the way the main characters behave. How do B characters change the behaviour of the main characters? The B characters are often like cartoon versions of the A characters. They're like an exaggerated offspring of one quality in a main character. They can represent exactly what the A characters don't like - about themselves. They reflect them in a distorting mirror. In 'Will and Grace' Jack is exactly the kind of flamboyantly camp gay man that Will would dread to be seen as. Yet Will knows there's a side of him that could be like that. And Karen is the type of crazy, raddled New York fashionista that Grace suspects she could become if she just let things slip a bit and let one aspect of herself out of the cage. Sid James was the perfect side-kick for Tony Hancock, the lower-middle class snob, because he showed Hancock everything he was trying not to be, and often lured him into betraying himself - or taking such pains not to betray himself that he became ludicrous. How to create a B character. Pinpoint the quality that the A character most hates about themselves. Create a B character who embodies this quality. Write some dialogue in which the B character offers advice - like the A character's bad angel, luring them to betray themselves or to react against the B character's attitude so strongly that comic tension or conflict is created. Now you've got the makings of a B character - and now you can start to play, because: B Characters are a lot of fun!

Read Throughs: Scott, do you (or GITS readers) have any advice on how to set up and run an actor read-through of a script? (I.e.,as part of the (re)writing process, not a production table read.)