What was it about? Was it good?
The first one I can remember finishing was when I was 14 or 15. I started writing screenplays at 13 but I can't remember what those were like, and most of them went unfinished.
So the first one I can remember involved a guy who falls in love with his best friend's new girlfriend, who turns out not to be what she seems. Strange things start to happen, and it seems like the new girl is who's doing it all. The whole thing becomes Mulholland Drivey where one person is now another person, and then about an hour in, the main character dies. Then, he wakes up, in a completely new life. He's told that he has been in a coma for a long time, but he doesn't remember anything about this life he's woken up to. The next half of the movie is about him dealing with this (wife and son who he doesn't remember), while elements and characters from the first half of the film come in and confuse him. I forget how it ends (it probably just ends with him accepting at face value that he had dreamed his whole previous life).
It never really had a title. I called it Ethan's House because that was where the first scene took place.
I remember it having some pretty good parts, but also some pretty bad parts. The characters were pretty undeveloped and uninteresting, except for a couple that I came to care a lot about while I was writing it. Nobody's first writing attempts are good, though, so really it was just me trying this and that and learning from it. I lost the file a long time ago so I can't re-read it. I'd imagine that a few elements from the script will pop up in a future script someday.
What about you?
The first one I ever finished was at 18. It was about a 15-year-old girl in a small coastal town, whose older sister disappeared under mysterious circumstances and she becomes obsessed with the idea that their father killed her. It had a great first act, an aimless second act, and an incomprehensible third act. It was the victim of my writing the script before I had figured out what story I wanted to tell. I love my main character in it, though. The script I'm in the middle of right now revisits a very similar character, but in a totally different (better) context.
Sounds a lot like Lost Highway, matt.
Wrote my first one when I was like 8 or 9. 4th grade, some bus safety stuff. I was a total prima donna with my material too. Didn't like the creative direction my teacher was taking it, and I gave her shit about it, so she totally wrote my name on the board!!!
Done too many short things to count, and so I don't. I have 4 or 5 substantial features in various stages of progress, tons of other glimmers of ideas, but I've never finished any of 'em. Been writing seriously for about 7 years. It's true, like PTA said: It's like ironing. And it's nice to see a fragment of an idea you've scratched out in a composition book or something become something real on the page. But I can't crank 'em out like some artists. And finishing (and getting started, like Sorkin said, and like P pontificated of PTA) are two of the hardest parts.
If any of you have ever written plays, taken playwriting classes, you'll know, too. If not, I highly recommend it. If you thought seeing an idea fleshed out was cool, it's nothing like the rush you get of having something you've written performed and it working. Memories of a directing for the camera class I took back in college is all.
Quote from: ono on June 11, 2010, 03:38:12 PM
Sounds a lot like Lost Highway, matt.
You're right, it does! I hadn't seen Lost Highway when I wrote it, though. It's tonally very different but yeah, it's got a lot of the same stuff going on.
I wrote an elmore leonard-esque script when I was really young (16?) about a paparazzi who got hired to stalk corrupt politicians because of his photography skills (and to replace the private gumshoe who died doing what he did) and he also met a phony psychic girl named Juanita. the guy's name was Solid Eaton.
and then I wrote a feature length script that I now hate but still love the characters about a rough filipino kid who is secretly a badass on the guitar and a crazed vietnam vet who will do all he can to stop the kid from playing anywhere near the city.
both of those are from so long ago I feel like I still haven't written a feature.
Jurassic Park 2.
About 14.
that reminds me of my lost world aspergers question nobody has answered
Quote from: Reelist on June 12, 2010, 11:52:10 PM
that reminds me of my lost world aspergers question nobody has answered
i'll answer it, what exactly don't you understand about it?
have you ever heard of asperger's syndrome? i'll start there then. it's a sort of specialized version of autism, it's not as severe or widely affecting as what you see in RAIN MAN. it affects some geniuses, einstein probly had it, mozart, all these ppl who are kind of obsessive over specific things. it's not like a superpower but some ppl have obviously combined it with some skill. like other forms of autism it affects ppl's ability to relate to others on a social level.. at the same time they become really good at focusing on specific tasks.
now i'll explain the lost world. the lost world was the second film in the jurassic park series. it is generally accepted to be a total piece of shit. one of the worst films spielberg has ever made. for someone with the talent of spielberg to make something as shit as The Lost World, something odd must be occurring in his mind. so the joke is that we blame his impaired decision making skills on his aspergers.
to summarize: spielberg has aspergers. the lost world is a piece of shit. we blame aspergers for the lost world. this is funny because we are using a single syndrome to explain not only the decision process that would result in choosing to make the film, but we're also saying the sustained effect of this "apsergers attack" resulted in the years long follow up commitment of production, etc. it's funny to imagine that a single syndrome would show itself in the form of a shitty film, especially since we don't credit spielbergs success on the same factor.
it's like this:
X: "what the FUCK was with the lost world?"
Y: "aspergers"
X: "oh, i see."
i hope that covers your question, which you found so pressing that it needed to be discussed in two threads. please don't hesitate to ask anything else which, as you admitted in your original post, if you had any real interest in figuring out you could fix with a simple google search instead of bringing it up again and again until someone rewarded your lack of initiative.
Quote from: matt35mm on June 11, 2010, 03:15:51 PMWhat about you?
Well, I decided six months ago to write my first. And since it was my first, I wanted it to be:
a) simple. in the sense that the story isn't very complicated.
b) something I could relate to at this stage of my life. something that was honest to my own personal feelings.
c) something that could appeal to other people in my age.
so I decided to write a love story.. and six months later, I'm almost finished with the first draft. I don't know what others will think about it, but I think it's a good first attempt..
Quote from: P on June 13, 2010, 12:57:50 AM
the joke is that we blame his impaired decision making skills on his aspergers.
to summarize: spielberg has aspergers. the lost world is a piece of shit.
Haha. I seriously would have never guessed that. I thought he might have a kid with aspergers or something. The Lost World seemed pretty good to me, but people have assumed at times that I have apergers :shock:
anyways, sorry KarlJan for bogarting your thread
Quote from: P on June 13, 2010, 12:57:50 AM
Quote from: Reelist on June 12, 2010, 11:52:10 PM
that reminds me of my lost world aspergers question nobody has answered
i'll answer it, what exactly don't you understand about it?
have you ever heard of asperger's syndrome? i'll start there then. it's a sort of specialized version of autism, it's not as severe or widely affecting as what you see in RAIN MAN. it affects some geniuses, einstein probly had it, mozart, all these ppl who are kind of obsessive over specific things. it's not like a superpower but some ppl have obviously combined it with some skill. like other forms of autism it affects ppl's ability to relate to others on a social level.. at the same time they become really good at focusing on specific tasks.
now i'll explain the lost world. the lost world was the second film in the jurassic park series. it is generally accepted to be a total piece of shit. one of the worst films spielberg has ever made. for someone with the talent of spielberg to make something as shit as The Lost World, something odd must be occurring in his mind. so the joke is that we blame his impaired decision making skills on his aspergers.
to summarize: spielberg has aspergers. the lost world is a piece of shit. we blame aspergers for the lost world. this is funny because we are using a single syndrome to explain not only the decision process that would result in choosing to make the film, but we're also saying the sustained effect of this "apsergers attack" resulted in the years long follow up commitment of production, etc. it's funny to imagine that a single syndrome would show itself in the form of a shitty film, especially since we don't credit spielbergs success on the same factor.
it's like this:
X: "what the FUCK was with the lost world?"
Y: "aspergers"
X: "oh, i see."
i hope that covers your question, which you found so pressing that it needed to be discussed in two threads. please don't hesitate to ask anything else which, as you admitted in your original post, if you had any real interest in figuring out you could fix with a simple google search instead of bringing it up again and again until someone rewarded your lack of initiative.
This might have been my favorite post ever.
I was 15. It was a 3 stories thing a la Pulp Fiction, though in chronological order, mostly based around my tough guy / yuppie street gangs phase at the time. One of the stories was about a wanna be tough guy who steals the watch of his hoodlum mentor without realizing it and of course gets in some deep shit because of it, and the other one was about a guy who has to beat the shit out of his best friend to gain entrance into a cooler, rival gang. The third one I don't even remember it. I wrote it, finished it, read it and decided it was shit, so I erased it forever. Now I kinda regret that.
Quote from: Alexandro on June 15, 2010, 10:57:31 AM
I was 15. It was a 3 stories thing a la Pulp Fiction, though in chronological order, mostly based around my tough guy / yuppie street gangs phase at the time. One of the stories was about a wanna be tough guy who steals the watch of his hoodlum mentor without realizing it and of course gets in some deep shit because of it, and the other one was about a guy who has to beat the shit out of his best friend to gain entrance into a cooler, rival gang. The third one I don't even remember it. I wrote it, finished it, read it and decided it was shit, so I erased it forever. Now I kinda regret that.
mimics my first, at 16 though. i didn't erase mine, i wrote on legal pad first (something i'll never do again, but did twice since) the script was really bad, but i had 2 really good scenes in it, one of which i told my friend about a couple of days ago and we've been brainstorming a new script around it as the main premise. it's good i distinguished the crap from the gold that lay buried.
a good idea is a good idea, regardless of age. but man... this first script is so laughable, i guess the difference between myself and guy ritchie is he actually got to make it.
I have yet to write a completed feature script. I don't consider myself very talented with words (as evidenced if you've read any of my posts in the past 7 years), and so I get pretty disillusioned about half way through finishing. Hence why I have to unfinished 60-page scripts that I quit writing half way through.
The first was an awful story about a loser guy who befriends and starts to get used by a vampire. I had no idea what story I wanted to tell, and I was 20 and it was for a screenwriting class and I got a B. The second was pretty cool idea I had a year ago about two would-be scientists who invent a teleporting device that the government finds out about. Very 80s science-oriented and fun, but it fizzled out. I like to think that I'm better at showing stories than writing them.
I haven't written anything along the lines of a feature length screenplay. that seems hard and I figure why do it unless you're actually going to make it? I don't find it very fun to play around with characters on the page unless I have some really fleshed out idea in my head that I'm trying to go for cinematically. Then you have to write it before it slips away
Quote from: Reelist on July 02, 2010, 12:46:42 AM
that seems hard and I figure why do it unless you're actually going to make it?
Yeah, totally unnecessary!
i've only written short films and have amassed a few outlines for features but i think it's a bit useless to even try a feature without being able to hammer out a tight short script first.
the key is TIGHT. if you just want to attempt a feature script because you think the extended length will give you more practice you are mistaken. the most egregious error found in amateur films, short or long, is a piece of shit script (with no talent actors to boot). from a technical point of view, that is if you want to practice editing or camera type stuff or anything at all, it has always been accepted that a short film is the best way to go about it. why waste all that time when you clearly have no idea what you're doing?
narrative creation is no exception. why would it be a good idea to attempt a feature script when all you really want is to understand the process? the basics of script writing are absolutely magnified when you try to write a good short script. you can't just ramble on and write pages and pages of USELESS dialogue (not that it stops MANY short filmmakers from doing it) if your aim is to establish a character or scenario in a short amount of time. what you should be exploring is ECONOMY in both story telling form and in technical ability.
the best short film scripts i've done (and i'm not gonna pretend there's that many.. maybe 2 or 3) have been the result of taking the process as serious as i would a feature. i started with an idea, tried to capture the "hook" in a one sentence grab, extended it to a short synopsis in the form of a PITCH, then went about creating an outline -- at no point thinking about extended pieces of dialogue, only the story structure. once i was happy with the outline i could see each scene by itself, and within each scene thinking of ways to progress the story internally (either through character focus or plot advancement) in the most concise way possible.
make those rules for yourself and you'll find yourself marvelling at the amazing ways great filmmakers communicate EVERYTHING in the quickest way possible. it's not about quick cuts or extreme language or violence, but a clear direction where you find everything comes naturally and you're able to think of MANY things at once simply because you've cut out all the fat. for short filmmakers, unless you think you're mamet, forget dialogue.. that is only ONE of literally DOZENS of ways of communicating that are available to you in the medium of film.
The biggest problem with alot of young filmmakers is that they don't take what they do seriously. Like, I have several friends who also makes short films, and none of them do it seriously. They are just like "I can't get a budget, so there is no point in doing something really serious yet. I'm just gonna wrote something quick and then film it." But you can't be good and devolop at something if you don't take it seriously. I'm not saying that you should be death serious but you should at least have the ambitions to do something good that you will be pleased with. People are also so fucking simple-minded when they start writing. Writing scripts is not that simple. You have to think about thousands of things and make every scene interesting, even if nothing happens in them. People are like "Comedy = Jokes, action = explosions and Megan Fox (yeah, I'm looking at you, Michael)
People should also write things they don't feel comfortable with. Many continue to do things they are good at, but you don't get better if you do so, right? I work in a place (dropped out of school) where young people come when they want to make films. You can like borrow equipment and get advice from those who work there, etc.. And when I got there the first time I showed them a script I wrote, and they criticized my dialogue. They thought it was weak. So I wrote a dialogue-based feature so I could get training and get better. And I did get better at dialogue. Although they now say it's a radio drama. A fucking radio drama! But my dialogue is atleast better. My dialogue is even the thing I'm most pleased with now.
My point is that you should just write all the time. And always have the ambition to become better and develop on the things you aren't so good at. I don't think it matters if it is a short or feature film. If it feels right, and you develop, you should just continue.
I've been working on the same story for well over a year now with no end in the foreseeable future. For whatever reason, I simply cannot write dialogue. I use to love it. It use to come (somewhat) naturally to me and was an enjoyable excercise. In fact, I use to just LOVE writing. I don't know what's happened here, but I feel as if I've lost something before I could really develope it.
For the most part, writing has been coming off as a chore, which is one reason why I generally keep my posts so short.
I've only attempted short films twice now, and both were utter failures.
Several several years ago, a professor gave me a Super8 and told me to have fun with it. "Great," I thought, "now I can make a film!" Word to the wise: if someone gives you a piece of equipment, before you spend hundreds of dollars on project (that you never had to begin with), make sure the item functions properly. .... how foolish I was.
The shoot was mostly positive, and everyone involved was really excited to see the end result. I was working with friends and only one could you call and "actor." I've always felt that there's TOO much dialogue in most films: show, don't tell, right? And instead of forcing dialogue on these people--who would probably never remember it anyway, much less sufficiently express it--I decided to make the film "silent" (also due to technical limitations), and would have a friend write a score corresponding to the action taking place (the idea was in a similar vein to Peter & the Wolf, where one instrument represented one character, another instrument another character, etc etc).
When I got the film back, I felt a trembling embarassment: the film was terribly exposed, hardly any images made it thru development (tho, I did salvage some of these images for my thesis project). I was literally going to bury it and had all but given up on making another.
The second film turned out to be complete uninspired trash shot on video which I thought was ugly anyway so it was never finished.
But now I'm developing another project, finally, and I've enlisted a friend to assist in the writing process. This seems to help quite a bit. We set up deadlines, and providing that structure seems to keep me pretty grounded. I still shy away from dialogue, but I'm trying to get back in the game.
I've been concentrating more on the writing side of things that directing for the past few years. Nothing too serious, mainly just noodling around on various ideas. I did write a spec of The Office a year or two ago which I thought was pretty decent. And then last year I won a scholarship to the writers bootcamp from the Ny Midnight Movies Screenwriters Challenge. I started my 2 year course in January and the plan is to write a brand new feature every 6 months. Last night I submitted my first script. Right now, I don't think it's too good. I've had a lot going on these last 6 months, and the last minute panic of the imminent deadline demonstrated this is something I really need to be putting a lot more effort into going forward. But the idea I worked is something I've had in my head for many, many years now. Kind of a teen angst coming-of-age story which pays homage to The X-Files (I can hear most of you switching off now), but the idea was to keep it loose, a fairly calm and quiet movie which explores the idea of faith, in a way. I actually wrote a feature-length screenplay of this 4 (?) years ago, and since then almost every element has gone significant changes. Although I know the second half - and certainly the third act - is really fucking weak right now, I think I've at least found the definitive story that I want to tell. Going into this I really wasn't sure what the plot was going to be, just the elements I wanted to use. And I think what I've got is pretty decent. Eventually I see myself going back and re-polishing it, but it's nice to know that I've finally got this idea out of my head and on to the page in a state I can at least live with for now. I start working on my second script for the course Monday. Right now I'm thinking it's going to be a minimalist ghost story/psychological thriller. If anyone cares to read my first script, Nightlights, let me know. I would love the feedback.
Quote from: KarlJan on July 09, 2010, 06:54:25 AM
The biggest problem with alot of young filmmakers is that they don't take what they do seriously. Like, I have several friends who also makes short films, and none of them do it seriously. They are just like "I can't get a budget, so there is no point in doing something really serious yet. I'm just gonna wrote something quick and then film it."
i agree, and there are many outs that they can take to remove this accountability. like for example write something random/strange and quote lynch. or another thing is to just make an all around silly piece. in the end they're just nervous about attempting a serious story with a concrete narrative ark and missing their mark. it hurts more when you fail it's not such a throw away, so people don't wanna risk it. it's also easy to fool people when your intention wasn't articulated if you can fall back on avoiding the harder parts of storytelling.
I agree with you P, however the short film medium has many different techniques then the long form. take perineum's situation, a rewarding dialog scene in a feature script works upon the whole film very differently then in a short film. if you have a dialog sequence in a short film, often it's the centerpiece of the work. i agree people should work on tightening their material and karlj, you and i seem to be getting at the same thing but thinking about a big story is a different undertaking. i guess i take each possible script based on the material and expand from there. if it's short or long, it will come from the material. i agree no one should ever go into a project thinking "i'm going to make this epic", it should be organic. I also think some people are better at long scripts then short ones because of the way and pacing their stories develop. cutting down a great long piece might gut the soul out of it.
I think the hardest thing about writing is to determine what is a cool flourish, and what is self indulgent. because tight scripts (coens aside) can be soulless. often people mix those two things up. it's something i keep on regular reality check. a lot of people can't see when something sucks because they're so in love with their own writing. on the flip side, you might write a great scene and question if it sucks because you don't want to end up looking like one of those people. i'm never at ease with myslef on either side of this debate when it comes to being objective over my own work.
i wrote and directed a 25 min film a few years ago, it was a serious piece and i tried to keep the self indulgence down. i did alright with the film, won some awards for what it's worth... but if people could have seen the original cut they would have rolled their eyes. editing saved a lot of poor-self indulgent dialog. editing someone else's film will help your own writing more than anything else imo. also be honest with yourself, if it sucks it sucks. no ego in the writing or editing, or you're gunna fail. i guess that's my advice.
regarding my major concern with writing: just know your characters, put them in the scenario and even if you know where it's going don't force them to say anything. just let it happen like a method actor would. after that, cut it down. if that mentality is always applied i believe the dialog will be genuine. theoretically the most forced line should always be the first one in any scene, everything else is a reaction.
anyway that's my 2P
my aim is to do a few shorts this and next year and start working towards a low-budget feature in two years. the dilemma is I have two things in mind - one is in the genre of thriller/ action films (but within my means) with some sort of fest-friendly texture, while the other is a very fest-friendly concept, but requires a script that's still yet been written. my instinct is to do the latter first but I'm on such a roll and having so much fun writing the first one.
I started 2 screenplay's with my best friend when i was 17 and they are both still unfinished. I am 23 now, he passed away when i was 19, so after numerous revisions i deducted that i need help. So, i'm fucked. I'd love to see some of these. btw.