It’s time for another Open Forum where any GITS reader can post any question they have about screenwriting, movies, the meaning of life, etc. Your humble servant will be happy to take a crack at answering them. Either post them in comments here or email me:
scottdistillery@gmail.com
Any advice for handling multiple protagonists?
This is actually something that came up as I was re-writing my logline for the GITS Club Logline board.
I'm trying to write a logline/summary of my idea for a script called Portraits of Ophelia, which is a urban-set drama centered around a father-daughter relationship.
I want to show the journeys of both characters equally, side by side. But does that mean I have to make each of them antagonistic to each other? Or can I juggle two protagonists for the entirety of the film (and are there any other films you can think of like this that you might want to recommend)?
See Scott's recent analysis of "The Shawshank Redepemption", which has two protagonists, Red played by Morgan Freeman and Andy played by Tim Robbins.
Scott,
A more philosophical question. I'm thinking of movies that have provoked outrage on the grounds of (perceived) offensiveness in some way, from the depiction of Persians in 300 as decadent barbarians to Robert Downey Jr.'s repeated use of the 'R' word in Tropic Thunder.
My question is, do writers in your opinion have a responsibility to avoid being offensive? It seems to me that certain stories are almost guaranteed to be offensive, for example Scorcese's depiction of Jesus in The Last Temptation, or the aforementioned examples. And yet all of these movies seem to me to have artistic merit and I have a hard time putting myself in the shoes of those who take offense. Sure, ideally we strive to write scripts with complex, nuanced characters and authentic human drama, but sometimes it seems there is a place for exaggeration and caricature. Thoughts?
Reality is offensive, so any work that miirrors reality is only being truthful. If people cannot deal with high doses of reality in entertainment they are better off choosing their entertainment more carefully. People will always be offended by something or other. As long as you are not setting out to deliberately offend, I wouldn't worry about it. Hollywood lives in closed-off, idealistic bubble most of the time. Anything that ruptures that pretension has to be a good thing, as long as it is done realistically and respectfully. But like I said, some people will always find something to complain about.
Anyone know of any specific ways to simplify a story? I feel like I lose touch with my main idea pretty quickly.
There must be some comparable aspects between essays and screenwriting…
Does anyone else feel the last line of "500 Days of Summer" was a cheat/cheapened the movie (which I thought was great up until that point)?
Hi Scott,
I know you often mention the fact that there are a number of scripts one usually needs to write before they "get it". It's usually somwhere in the 5 to 7 range.
My question is, how many did you write before you first got an agent/manager, and how many before you hit with K9?
Thanks for your insights and love the blog!
@Unknown Lyricist:
YES. I loved most of the film (except the overly spunky little sister), and that one line really disappointed me. I feel like if they kept it in, the least they could have done is film it better to try to make it a little less… corny.
How about a discussion of bad moments in very good movies?
See the aforementioned ending to "500 Days of Summer."
Other bad moments…
–Alexander Gudonov's (sp.?) resurrection at the end of "Die Hard"… come on, he was already dead with a chain hanging around his neck 15 minutes before that…
–the Asian friend sequence in "Fargo" … was that needed?
Do you have any?
Mr Scott…
Would you please provide us an analysis for Tommy Wissau's The Room?
Thanks