Riffing off a recent discussion here about the importance of giving a script a great opening, I was reminded of one of my favorite beginning scenes — from the wonderful comedy Parenthood (1989). While the movie follows multiple characters, the Protagonist is Gil (Steve Martin). And his character’s central theme is about what it means to be a good father. Check out this opening sequence and see how the screenwriters Lowell Ganz and Babaloo Mandel manage to set that theme into motion in a delightfully inventive way:
EXT. BASEBALL STADIUM – DAY (1960)
WE OPEN on a TIGHT SHOT of Mickey Mantle (or Willie Mays, but someone clearly identified with baseball twenty-five years ago). He swings and hits a home run.
ANGLE ON BOX SEATS
A man in his thirties (FRANK) and his nine year old boy (GIL) enter their section looking for their seats. An usher (STAN), approaches and examines their tickets helpfully. Stan is skinny. He wears a furry mitten on one hand, which is used to wipe seats. He performs this service for Frank and Gil, who sit down. Gil looks around EAGERLY.
GIL
We missed four innings.
FRANK
I told you I had to stop off and
do some business.
(calls to Stan)
Hey, you. Muscles.
Stan approaches. Frank STEPS OUT into the aisle, and he and Stan converse in WHISPERS for a few seconds. Stan NODS and Frank gives him money. Frank returns to Gil.
FRANK
Gil, this is Stan. He’s gonna
watch you for awhile. I have some
friends I’m meeting. I’ll meet
you back here by the ninth inning.
Have fun.
Frank leaves. Gil accepts all this passively. Stan sits in the aisle next to him.
STAN
So, Gilly, big baseball fan?
GIL
Kinda’.
STAN
Your Dad bring you here a lot?
GIL
Once a year on my birthday. Then
he pays an usher to watch me.
STAN
(sympathetic)
Oh, I see.
GIL
You have to understand. My father,
in his own childhood, was without
a positive male influence.
STAN
Huh?
GIL
His own father kicked him out when
he was only fifteen. So my Dad was
taught to see child-raising as
a job, a burden. A set of
restrictions rather than
opportunities. A prison rather
than a playground. Do you
understand what I’m saying?
Stan is STUNNED and AMAZED.
STAN
You don’t talk like a kid.
GIL
Well, I’m not really a kid.
STAN
You’re not a duck.
GIL
This is a memory of when I was
a kid. I’m thirty-five now. I
have kids of my own. In fact,
you don’t really even exist.
You’re an amalgam.
STAN
A what?
GIL
A combination of several ushers
my Dad left me with over the years.
I’ve combined them into one memory.
STAN
Why?
GIL
(getting excited)
Stan, this was a great symbolic
moment in my life — my father
dumping me with you. It’s part of
why I spent so much of my childhood
with such a shaky sense of self-worth –
so little self-esteem. It’s why I
swore it would be different with my
kids.
(calmer)
I want to help them feel good
about themselves — feel strong, feel
happy. That’s all. That’s my
dream. Strong, happy confident
kids.
STAN
It’s a nice dream.
GIL
Well, it’s like my grandmother
says. What you put into something,
that’s what you get out.
STAN
(nods)
Mm… So that’s great… You’ve
got a lovely family… and I’m
a fucking amalgam.
KAREN (O.C.)
Gil
STAN
Who’s that?
GIL
That’s my wife.
STAN
Nice.
ANGLE ON LITTLE GIL, KAREN AND THEIR THREE KIDS – DAY
KEVIN is nine. Taylor (a girl) is seven. JUSTIN (a boy) is three.
KAREN
(to Little Gil)
Gil?
GIL
Yeah?
ANGLE ON KAREN
KAREN
The game’s over, honey.
ANGLE ON GIL
Only now it’s grown-up Gil.
GIL
Oh.
(he looks around)
Let’s go.
Karen and the kids get up.
GIL
Taylor, that hot dog was dinner,
honey, not a souvenir.
Gil takes it and tosses it away.
Now normally you’d think that a static scene of talking heads, filled with exposition would be a dreadful way to start off a script. But Ganz & Mandel use a clever conceit — Big Gil talking through the persona of Little Gil — not only to mine some humor, but also to underscore the sympathy we immediately feel for the Protagonist, turning the exposition into an entertaining set up to the story. Here’s the scene from the movie:
I see it as also poking fun at the cliche of the opening scene set in childhood that is supposed to inform our understanding of the adult character. Hilarious!
This is a great scene and a great intro, but it only works because of those specific writers.
As a working writer (like you) you know we couldn't write this scene and get past development unless we had an actor or a director (and an 800 pound gorilla of an actor or director) to get around the note that this is on the nose and too expositional. That's the real world. Also, it would never fly in a spec with newbie writers. Agents and managers would use the same excuse.
Anyway, the truth of the matter is that it's a great scene, but not much of an example to newbie writers. Sorry to disagree with you once again.
Anonymous One
Top Ten, the Great Scene series is just that: great scenes. They're meant to inspire and broaden readers' imaginations, as well as tie scripts to visuals, so that people can see the correlation of the printed page to the final version.
I suppose I could run a disclaimer whenever I choose a scene that I think might not work in today's spec marketplace (especially as it relates to non-pros). But then, wouldn't that run counter to trying to engender creative thinking?
And at the end of the day, I suspect script readers and story analysts would rather have writers stretching the norms to be creative than stifling creativity in order to fit to some preconceived notion of screenplay form / 'conventional wisdom.'
Scott,
Thanks for responding personally. Your argument is right. I haven't read your blog enough to understand the concept of those posts.
I agree with you that it inspires creativity. I found it inspiring. Forgive me if I didn't understand that.
I looked at your blog as something that teaches newbies how to write screenplays that might get past those pesky gatekeepers in Hollywood. That's why I responded the way I did.
I have taught, too, (seminars here in LA and given lectures at film festivals) and I tend to filter advice through a very small funnel: How can I teach my students to write something that might advance their careers as screenwriters? When I look at things through that narrow filter, I rule out having them "model" scripts/scenes/styles that will work against them.
Since I'm a writer and not a teacher, I don't have the luxury to do as much as you do with your blog and (I'm sure) with your classes (if this blog is any indication because as I said before you do a great job).
I do disagree that readers (in general) are looking for scripts that stretch the norm in terms of those ingrained prejudices. Like VO. Even though half of the top ten movies of all time use VO, I still don't recommend it to a newbie. It can stop an agent, manager or reader from going past page 10!
Anyway, take it for what it's worth as I did read somewhere that you want to encourage dialogue.
Anonymous One
Thanks for your further comments. I confess that in my teaching and on this blog, I do bump up against dual instincts: To promote creativity and yet provide a reality check as to the pragmatics of writing a script for Hwood.
I guess I look at those instincts as the two sidewalls of my general approach, and sometimes that causes a bit of bouncing back and forth. But I think if you do continue to track what happens here or even check out some of the previous posts, you'll see I definitely do focus a great deal on the pragmatics of writing in the 'real' world of the Hwood marketplace. Hence all the business about spec script sales, box office, interviews with professional / working writers, etc.
As a good example, one of the more popular threads we've had here was a series of posts from D.C. Mar, one of my students, who has been a script reader and story analyst for over a decade. You can go here to see those posts. Again the focus very much on the reality of trying to write and sell a script in Hwood, impressing the point that script readers are the studios' gatekeepers.
So yes, please do feel free to comment and contribute to the dialogue. This blog is a labor of love — that is love of screenwriting and movies — and is always evolving. Much of that evolution is a result of reader feedback.
And if you feel inclined, perhaps you'd email me (scottdistillery@gmail.com) to learn more about your writing career. Always looking to do Q&A interviews with working writers as we have done occasionally in the past.
Cheers!
Scott