"Note: I’m pondering a post about whether the success of the Transformers franchise along with other big VFX-laden franchise movies is actually having an effect on the way screenwriters are approaching storytelling." I know that, for me, as an aspiring screenwriter, it does. And maybe not so much Transformers, but the general direction where Hollywood is heading. I was actually thinking about this today. I have a story in mind and I'm constantly pouring over it trying to come up with new, inventive ways to organize it. I think the concept is original, but the structure I'm still unsure about. I was having lots of trouble, hitting repetitive mental roadblocks... then I realized: I'm not looking at this from MY point of view, the way I want to tell it; I'm looking at it from the point of view of Contemporary Blockbuster Hollywood. Rather than being creative, I was trying to think up "traditional" ways to convey my concept, ways that might appeal more to a mainstream audience. And that's when it hit me: I'm a dialogue guy! I can't write outrageous, CGI-filled action flicks -- which is what I was trying to do. My greatest influences are the Richard Linklater and Woody Allen type of scripts. Granted, my script would probably require CGI, but that alone doesn't mean I can't be existential and neurotic and humorous with my dialogue! So to answer your question Scott, I think so. I think at least subconsciously the modern-day aspiring screenwriter understands where the market stands and where it's going in the future. I think it can influence your content, but we have to be careful not to let it dictate the QUALITY, STRUCTURE and ORIGINALITY of the STORY.

I went to see this "3 hour toy commercial" knowing what I was getting into. Or so I thought. My thoughts post viewing: Wow, Transformers Age of Extinction was insane. And I mean it made no sense. The movie was so long I had at least an hour to think about why Transformers works as a kids tv cartoon and falls apart as an "adult" CGI blockbuster. 1. The Transformers, even the Autobots, only know how to do two things: transform and fight. That's it. And their personality is always angry, irrational, or unpredictable. 2. At the end of FOUR films we learn there is nothing very special about the Autobots/Deceptions and the only sympathy or interest we have in the Autobots is what we decide to place on them (childhood nostalgia) and almost nothing they earn by the virtue of their actions or character. 3. You can only see so many shots of transforming robots and exploding explosions before your brain not just turns off (it is a popcorn movie after all) but just shuts down. Like, it's mad at you for 3 hours of incessant metal turning into metal and exploding. 4. Optimums Prime is hands down the worst "leader" I've ever seen depicted. He consistently portrays unlikable qualities. In this movie, he grants "freedom" to a group of Transformers by basically forcing them to fight for him or die. Huh? I think The Transformers as a movie franchise was a grand experiment not without some merit, but it's clear there will no such thing as a "good" version unless they completely rethink the concept - which won't happen anytime soon since it's making big $$$.

Kalen, for writers who are NOT flat-out genre-writers, this can be one giant rabbit hole. If you ARE a genre-writer (Action, Horror, Sci-Fi and to a certain degree Thriller), then you immerse yourself in the tropes, memes, patterns and themes, giving yourself over to the genre, come up with a great story concept, and go for it. If you are NOT a genre-writer and try to play that game, much tougher road to hoe. I'm sure some succeed at it, but I just have to think the challenge of (A) flinging yourself into a genre you REALLY don't have a singular passion for, then (B) compete against writers who DO have that passion (and depth of knowledge about the genre from following that passion) is a pretty substantial one. If, however, you're great with dialogue, and Linklater and Allen inspire you, then you've probably saved yourself plenty of grief and maybe years of time. Focus on what you're good at. Focus on what you have a passion for. As that great screenwriting guru Joseph Campbell said: "Follow your bliss." That said, you may be able to craft a genre piece with your unique world view, life experience and way with dialogue that gives expression to a truly distinctive take within that genre. Rian Johnson has done this especially with Brick and Looper, certainly a contributing factor to him landing SW VIII. Bottom line: It appears your mental wanderings have led you to a key realization about your creative self - dialogue guy. If that truly is an asset for you, then by all means, follow that where it takes you. And by the way, if you write some scripts that become writing samples which show off your dialogue-writing chops, your name will go on Dialogue lists, and you may get called in to punch up scripts all over town.

So, claude, this is what is compelling me to see Transformers 4, even though it is most certainly not my type of movie: How does it succeed with audiences? It's easy for someone such as myself to simply slough it off as exceptional eye-candy and M. Bay's incredible eye for visual sequences (you have to give him that as a director). But is there more? Is the "quasi-experimental" approach to narrative they are working with, even though to you (and many others) "made no sense," somehow reflective of a different type of storytelling approach, one we may see more and more due to the films' box office success? I'm honestly curious to see if this is the case. Kruger and Bay worked with this approach on T3 and T4, both huge B.O. successes. Is this type of approach to narrative specific to Transformers or is this a harbinger of things to come? I'm reminded of an anecdote whereby Hollywood's first great movie producer Irving Thalberg told some of the writers on staff at MGM, "Just give me 5 great moments. If you do that, I can sell that movie." How different is that than stitching together a series of sequences that is more like writing a script for Cirque du Soleil, as Kruger has suggested is the case for T4? The history of cinema is full of examples and movements whereby filmmakers stretched narrative form. The Dada movement. Cinema verite. French 'new wave'. German expressionism. Film noir. Some more traditional, some more experimental. The more they veered toward the latter, the less mainstream they have been. If what is going on with Transformers is truly a narrative 'movement,' then that is unusual because it is a straight-ahead commercial movie. But I'm just speaking out of my ass until I see T4 which I will compel myself to do.

There was a recent episode of Half In The Bag where they had all three Transformers movies running simultaneously and noticed everything happened at the same exact time. It just shows how formulaic the stories are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rfup0XKx7o I think the "storytelling approach" is just "connect the dots from sequence to sequence." The connective tissue is literally tissue. It actually reminds me of "Bowfinger" : "he runs towards the aliens, he runs AWAY from the aliens!" One big problem with the movies is that there's really no stakes for anything. "The world will be destroyed." It kinda already is, it wasn't exactly pristine in 2007 and then they proceed to smash whole cities in every single flick. The Decepticons want to take over the world. Why? They can survive in space and go ANYWHERE. Sam and his girlfriend have relationship trouble. So what? I have no reason to care about him or her, there's nothing endearing about either of them. The hero robots are being destroyed! So what, I can't tell them apart and I have nothing to connect to! If there's no character, then no story can come from character, then it's all just dumb actions.

Thanks Scott. I always learn something from your replies! :)