the new software
Download Story Structure Software 3.0 now
What separates our method from that of other screenwriting guri?
Our primary purpose is to help you to sell your script!
Thus when I get a rash of messages from those of you who are using STC! to leapfrog ahead, I just have to share. And having gotten permission from the screenwriters below to do that, let’s hear a few!
This past Saturday, when I spoke to the Screenwriter’s Network out at Universal Studios here in L.A., screenwriter Jan Wilson came up after my talk to tell me she had read Save The Cat! and, using the logline method in Chapter 1, had a success story to relate:
“I have about (more or less) a bazillion books on screenwriting, and even though it was recommended to me several times to buy your book, I thought ‘Oh come on, do I really need yet another screenwriting book?!’ So I didn’t buy it for the longest time. Meanwhile, I have my script up on Inktip.com, and I’m getting some moderate action on it. Even Inktip said that if you aren’t getting a lot of hits, the culprit is usually your logline. I HATE doing loglines, they are so hard!
So finally after hearing your book recommended for the tenth time, I thought ‘Fine! I’ll spend the last of my precious money on another damn screenwriting book! Who cares if I can’t pay my electric bill, right?’
And I swear this is true: I read it and by page 8 I suddenly said OUT LOUD (mind you, I live alone! Nobody there to hear me.) ‘This book is already worth it and I’m only on page eight!’ The way you get it across to us sometimes-dense screenwriters about how to write loglines was priceless. I finally got it that what I want to put in my logline is not necessarily what ‘they’ are receptive to hearing. Now that I knew what they would be ‘judging’ my logline on, I rewrote it exactly as you instructed.
Well, frankly I thought my new logline sounded more plain and boring. ‘But so-and-so isn’t even mentioned! And what about that cool aspect of so-and-so?’ But I bit the bullet and wrote it just like you told me to, leaving out what I ‘wanted’ to include. Sounded a little plain to me, but I’m going to take this guy Blake’s word for it.
I posted my new logline, and the very next day I got an email from a director/producer. He wanted to speak to me in person as soon as possible, and the next day we arranged a time for a phone call. Then he wanted to meet with me in person to discuss the script. He said, ‘As soon as I read your logline I was drawn in immediately.’ I thought ‘Wow, I just HAVE to tell Blake that!’ If I hadn’t changed my logline, he would never had read my script. And my script is low-concept — not easy to write a logline for those.
I had a great meeting with him, and things look pretty good, I think good things are going to come of this.
So I just had to share this with you and say thanks! ”
Jan, thank you!
I also checked in recently with my December Structure Class and two members of that group had stories to share.
Ben Frahm wrote a hilarious high-concept script called Dr. Sensitive. It’s about an insensitive intern who magically feels everyone’s pain. It’s a great concept and Ben emailed to say:
“Since the STC! writing seminar, I’ve had some luck with my script DR. SENSITIVE. I took a meeting with Industry Entertainment who wants to option the script and give me an Associate Producer title if the movie gets made. I’m not jumping at anything yet, and am still testing out some other possibilities with the help of a manager/producer.”
And Brian Willem, also in that class, responded saying:
“A script that I wrote and pitched to the group placed in the Top Ten in a screenplay contest. The contest sent out a press release to industry contacts and I’ve been contacted by a production company that wants to read it.
It’s called Company Man, a driven but nice guy salesman and his two ‘ethically challenged’ associates who attempt to save their jobs in the final days of the sales year in any way possible. When all traditional avenues fail they’re left with one last hope … to landing the biggest account in the biz in the most competitive environment around.. the National Sales Convention in Las Vegas, Nevada.
There is a ton of credit due to you, since I read your book twice before I took the seminar and it helped me more than any other book or class or anything that I came into contact with prior.
Thanks again!”
Ditto.
But perhaps my favorite email came in today from Joey Amdahl:
“I’m almost done reading SAVE THE CAT and i wanted to thank you for writing it! By far, this is one of the best books on screenwriting that i’ve ever read. I used your idea of making the protagonist of my latest script UNCONVENTIONAL THERAPY a very likeable guy from the start and i think this has improved the script ten-fold. (it’s amazing how the Save the Cat concept should be obvious to screenwriters but it isn’t) Thus, it’s a great idea. Anyway, you have a wonderful writing voice and invaluable knowledge to give. So THANKS! ”
And Joey added:
“i like your blog. you’re actually much younger then I had envisioned.”
Thank you Joey, that comes from years of clean living and a fortune in plastic surgery.
And thank you all for those stories — keep ‘em coming!
blakesnyder.com uses WordPress
Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
on April 11th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
To Jan Wilson,
Would you be willing to post your “Before” and “After” loglines? Curiousity may save the cat.
Jeryl
on April 12th, 2006 at 7:10 am
Okay, I’ll play…
A well-known producer was about the third person to recommend STC. Since he was already a fan of my work and felt STC could help me get to the next level, I bought the book that day.
I immediately jumped into a rewrite of a spec he hadn’t seen yet using the BS2 (I’m gonna paper the walls of my office with the BS2. I’m gonna have it printed on my pillowcase…).
Within two weeks of my finishing that rewrite, I had signed with a great manager, optioned that spec for real, contest-disqualifying money to another well-known producer and am presently incorporating his notes (and STC!) with intent to shoot the movie this fall.
It’s been a fun couple of weeks…
on April 13th, 2006 at 6:38 am
Question for everyone…
Has anyone else had a hard time changing their writing habits to using the methods in STC!?
My way of writing was quite different, and while the book makes complete sense and pointed out to me the mistakes I have been making in my writing, it’s been a struggle to change. I was not used to outlining at all, and I know being able to do so will improve my writing a lot.
It’s just frustrating to see what I know would work, what makes sense to do, yet my brain panics everytime I try. It’s getting better, but has it been this difficult for anyone else?
on April 13th, 2006 at 2:03 pm
Amber, I’ve had several different ways of getting into stories. I just go with whatever impulse surfaces first. So the BS2 isn’t my first stop on the creative process.
However, that said, ever since the first time I read STC! I knew there were some very, very good organizing points in it. I have one (beloved) writing project that I want to do really, really well. I’ve researched for it, wrestled with the characters, considered options, and even written out one treatment (that my writers’ group found interesting, but not engaging). After reading STC I now know I need to put the plotline through the BS2 wringer to get it more tightly lined up and focused. But I can feel that it will happen. Right now, there are other projects ahead of it in the queue.
So, my recommendation would be to start out with whatever procedure gets you rolling, writing down notes or whatever. But once the juices are flowing, sit down and work it out on the BS2. It’s worth it.
on April 17th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Thanks Sarah!
My usual way of writing believe it or not does not include outlining, notes, or writing down of anything. I have a very, uh, odd way of coming up with stories. To hear is not always to believe, so we will leave it at that, LOL. So far it has worked, and given strong passionate writing. However, I don’t think anyone is ever done learning, and no one is beyond improvement. So, I look forward to applying Blake’s advice to better my writing.
I think I may have to get used to this first by writing out a complete first draft, then go back and apply the BS2 to it. Maybe that will make the process easier for me.
I know I can do it, I know it is worth it, it’s just getting over my own unique way of doing things that’s the issue.
I am also not one of those people who can write every day. I can’t force anything. Weird, perhaps, but if I try I end up staring at the computer all day. Better to let the process be started in my own way and just let it happen. It makes up for the lost time in a big way. I still usually get a script done faster than most. I just can’t work every day unless I’m…inspired, I guess is the word that fits the situation best.
Yeah, I’m weird, but I’m cool (in my own little fun world)
on April 18th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
I’ve found that Blake’s STC method has utterly changed how I do projects- from a writer’s perspective (obviously) to choosing projects to work on from a director’s POV.
If it’s a project I’m writing or invited to cowrite these days I spend a ton much more time thinking of the logline, the poster, the trailer. If it doesn’t (or I can’t help make it) rock on those fronts it goes in the trash.
This means, Blake, you are responsible for many, many project deaths over here! But that’s OK, survival of the fittest, yadda yadda.
And you guys are right- it’s not easy, shifting the way one works. In fact, I actually lost a writing partner over it. Seriously. He just looked at me, told me he thought the book was bullsh*t and that he refused to be tied to any “f’d up structure”. When I asked him how many screenplays he’d gotten produced using his non-method he got very irked and left.
So it goes…
Pat
on April 19th, 2006 at 3:59 am
Please
I’m looking for a writing partner to help me develop some of my ideas. I’ve got a lot of good ones, just not the wherewithall to write effectively (I think Blake described it as “too beaucoup” or somthing like that) and could use some help in refining what I’m trying to say.
I also understand that a writing partner is just that, a partner, and they must have ideas and input of their own. I’ve got more than enough people willing to proof and critique my shtuff, I need someone who can actually contribute on their own.
However, I must warn anyone interested that I live in Toronto, so all you sun-dried SoCalites must be willing to work via web. I tend to work more in the sci-fi/horror genre on my own (write what you know, eh), but I can be very adaptive and welcome new challenges.
bryndalton@hotmail.com
on April 19th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Pat,
I can sort of understand your writing partners feelings (or former writing partner).
I think the book is great for letting us all know what we have been missing, those little things that make a big difference between good and great. But I see rules and guidelines as a starting point. Sort of like in life you learn things from those around you, and with your life experiances you turn that knowledge into wisdom and expand on it. (deja vu here, I just talked about this on my forum)
So in other words, I think we all need to understand the importance of the knowledge Blake has shared with us in STC! but we also have to add our own rules and throw out those of our own or even perhaps a few of Blake’s as well.
I think the BS2 is fantastic and a wonderful help. But if a pivotal moment must happen a little sooner or later in the story, you have to be willing to adjust.
My most recent feature script comes to mind here. If you were to judge it by the BS2, it would end up in the trash. The story (stories, actually) could not be told using that structure. It would be a writing instructers worst nightmare to have a student turn in a script like this. Why? Because I threw out every rule of screenwriting and Hollywood and wrote what needed to be written. That script is what got me major attention in Hollywood. That’s what got passed around and talked about. That’s what landed on the desk of someone who wanted to make it happen. Had I not thrown out everything I had been taught about screenwriting, that script would not be so powerful.
I think for some people, structure takes away creativity. It is a major struggle for me to use any rules when developing a story. I then go back and adjust it. It comes to me how it does, I see it as a finished product, I see it as a writer, actress, director, and producer. I know every intimate detail of the story and the characters as living breathing humans. I know more about them than I do myself. All without structure. Then I go back and add structure to the lives of these characters.
So, structure is very important, but I think there are times you have to toss it out the window. Some stories you cannot do justice to by trying to conform it to any structure.
Just my opinion…
on April 19th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Hi guys, and gals. Great to hear so many different opinions about STC. I too found my self in a quandary after reading Blake’s book. I also find it very easy to conceive great stories, but great to who? One main point that Blake shows, and you must be willing to accept is; if you want to sell it, it must fit the formula for marketability. If you want to write, write and continue to write the way you are most comfortable, but if you are like me, a complete unknown, your script had better have its own legs, and smack the producer with, “Here’s the Moneyâ€. The first Title and log line I sent to Blake, he shot down. Not for the premises, in fact he said he “got it†this from a two sentence description. What killed it was that the setting was not something that was easily sold to Hollywood. Great advice, better to stop now than after I pour my heart and soul into a project for weeks or months, thanks Blake. Even if you say, “But so and so did a similar story and Hollywood bought it.†Look closer, who actually wrote it and who produced it. The story I had was a setting done before, but the scripts also came from an actor or producer that was just waiting to do their own project when the time was right. So remember to ask your self, what do I want to do with it? Then read the book again! Thanks, see you l8tr.
on April 20th, 2006 at 9:56 am
Hi JD,
I agree, the story must be marketable. The script I mentioned above got the attention it did because of the story, and I think the structure I used worked for that story, but not all stories. I am currently working on a few that I am trying very hard to apply the BS2 to in order to make them more appealing.
I think we all just have very different views on what works and what doesn’t. I could go to several different people I know in the business… people who have been in the business for more than 20 years…. ask them each the same question and get a completely different answer from each. Some will say a certain subject will never be bought and produced in Hollywood, and others will say that’s what they are looking for. Things that people say you can’t or shouldn’t do as a new writer can be done, if you have the right script and people want it.
I think it’s all a crapshoot really. It’s about all the pieces fitting together to make it happen, and sometimes you will have no idea of what the entire puzzle is until the pieces are all there. Stick to your guns on what you feel deeply passionate about, be willing to compromise on everything else. In the meantime, be thankful there is a book like STC to help us see the puzzle a little bit more clear before we find out there are pieces missing.
I don’t think anyone will ever be able to say for sure what can and cannot be produced in Hollywood. Like everything in life, there are just too many variables.
on April 20th, 2006 at 1:51 pm
Thanks Amber
You are right on the money. Structure is a funny thing, of course it doesn’t have to be right on that page number, or last that exact amount of pages, but it’s a great guide. Sometimes the way the structure looks from the writers point of view, doesn’t match the BS2, but you would be surprised how close a different interpretation syncs up to it. Roll those dice!
on April 20th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
This is like a discussion/disagreement I once had with a guy about poetry - formal versus “spontaneous”. He contended that poetry should be written from the immediate emotion of the writer, and not structured and crafted. Hence he sneered at formal metered & rhymed poetry.
Me, I thought that was a crock. I love formal poetry, I love writing it. It helps that I “know the rules”.
So I thought I’d just tweak him. I concocted a poem that had all the appearance of being “spontaneous” (ie, more free verse), but carefully planned the flow of it. It was a very unspontaneous piece of work in the making. But I didn’t tell him that - as a consequence, it was, according to him, an terrific example of what he meant by “spontaneous”.
My point is, you have to know the rules (either by conscious training, or by instinct) before you can break them effectively (so that your story intrigues, and doesn’t just fall apart).
I think that’s something a lot of those who are resistant to what Blake’s saying overlook. Even if you don’t want to do it the way Blake recommends, you really should take into account his points. Because they are valid points. A writer who dismisses them as irrelevant is likely to run into problems. If you’re going to run counter to Blake’s advice, you’d better have a way of addressing the audience expectation.
Either way, you’re likely to put more work into the writing than you would have before. (I know I am.)
on April 21st, 2006 at 11:16 am
on April 25th, 2006 at 9:38 am
(Well, Amber apparently meant to say something, but the posting got tangled?)
I’ve spent the last couple of weeks fleshing out the beat sheet of a romantic comedy. (In fact, the core beats had been worked out in Blake’s December Structure class - that was a great, intense two days!) Friday night I started working on it, and I’m now closing in on the end of Act One. I’m having a lot of fun, because it feels like I’ve gotten everything in place.
The one thing that amuses me is that I seem to be running ahead of Blake’s page placement. It’s going that fast. I hit the “statement of theme” on page 4, and I may hit the “break into Act 2″ before page 25. Heh. The nice thing is that one can always flesh things out. Cutting is harder.
But I’m jazzed by the over-all project. Because of the work I did going in (title, logline, beat sheet), I feel this is one of the best focused projects I’ve worked on! All because of STC!
on April 25th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
The posting was there after I posted it, then the plot thickened as the post mysteriously disappeared. Perhaps I said something inappropriate? If I did I can’t think of what it was and I didn’t get an e-mail telling me I had said something wrong.
The cat ate it perhaps? That’s what we all get for saving the cat!
Sarah, I can see how much less work (or how much easier it is) to concentrate on the story after you have the story “beat out” in front of you. I think maybe I am making progress as a story I am working on I suddenly started to be able to put some important cards on the board. Yeah, this investment of buying a board is paying off!
Maybe I just needed time to convince my brain that it is ok to be a bit more prepared ahead of time. I have noticed once I got a few cards up, the others started getting up there a little quicker. Once you can actually see it visually there in front of you, it makes connecting the dots a whole lot easier. It is just harder for me to get it started right now. I think over time that will improve.
Perhaps just as we improve the more we write, the more our methods of writing improve the more we use them.
That’s why I look forward to being able to attend one of Blake’s seminars. I think pushing myself through it in a class type setting will help a lot. Unfortunantly I am tight on finances right now because I am getting ready to move. However once I get settled in I will be immediately looking to attend one.