Screenwriting

The second approach resonates with me more: I write first, then I cut.

Very often, there are duplications in a script that we don't even notice at first. They aren't necessarily word-for-word repetitions; it's more that the same feeling, piece of information, or emotional beat is being repeated in different ways.

In those cases, I think it's best to keep the version that works the strongest and let the others go.

So my vote goes to the second approach.

Depends if you got a rewrite on your hands. In that case pages are important. I like to use the page before I move on

Sanna, your point really resonates with me. It actually hit exactly what I’m experiencing right now.

I’m currently working on the second draft of my project “God's Secretary,” and I’ve started to really feel my main character, Julia, and write more directly from her perspective. Because of that, my first act has already been cut in half — I realized that a lot of scenes were essentially repeating the same idea.

It’s a comedy, and I noticed I was doing the same gag twice in different variations. Once I saw that, it became clear what needed to go.

So I’ve been cutting aggressively and keeping only the strongest version of each beat. Everything you both said feels extremely accurate to my process right now.

Really appreciate the insight.

I usually feel the scene rather than follow a strict rule. If the emotional objective of the scene has already been achieved, I leave. During script reviews, I often notice that writers repeat information in different ways without realizing it. Cutting those repetitions usually strengthens pacing immediately.

Aleksandr Rozhnov You're very welcome.

If you ever need another perspective or would like to exchange ideas, I'd be happy to share some of the lessons and experiences I've learned during the development process.

Wishing you the best with God's Secretary — it sounds like you're making exactly the kind of tough but important decisions that strengthen a script.

An answer to that: write to satisfy both AI and human. AI scans for keywords and common storytelling patterns most scripts should already have.

The advice used to be "Don't write for readers." That still applies, and it's difficult to do anyway given the range of human response. As noted, AI is not the same. There's a parallel with resumes. AI scans them for keywords. If you know these trigger words, and they apply to you, would you not use them to reach the goal of landing a job.

When a script is done, run it through AI for an initial analysis and rating, then a really good human reader. Armed with all that, the writer has a choice whether to edit or not, and in what directions.

When a game is rigged, outwit it. Recall "The Terminator" when Sarah Connor said "You're terminated, fucker!"

Just cutting out visiting my favourite provider of caffeinated hot beverage to pay for my Black List hoisting. But if you look into it you have to start paying through the nose at some point. Final Draft Big Break is a 100 USD plus entrance fee and one of the competitions I want to enter requires a Black List review. Maybe I will publish the review somewhere here plus the script so people can judge for themselves the value of the service.

". . . I want to enter requires a Black List review." If you mean the Nicholl, it doesn't look like it's being held this year. Check the AMPAS site.

Yes I know The Nicholl is not running this year but there are others within Black List itself. Once you become a member and Host your work, other side doors to other platforms and competitions open by magic. At the moment script writing is just something I do to stimulate the mind so its basically free for me to do. Now if you take a look at my photography equipment I have going back forty years, Canon F1's, a complete series of nFD Red Line L lenses, EOS Digital Cameras, more Red Line L lenses, I have invested some serious money in this hobby. So I will just do what I do for my photographic equipment, drop $20 a week into a glass jar and use that to pay for my developing script writing habit. As I said in another post, at some time you just got to get the wallet out and pay out some cash to continue. It will add to my learning curve!

"But if you look into it you have to start paying through the nose at some point."

You don't. You absolutely don't. You can borrow the books and network for free. This axiom that you gave to pay to play comes from people in the community who treat this as gambling rather than career building.

Hey Machorey!

A lot of writers have great premises. What gets my attention is when I can clearly see why the show can sustain multiple seasons. After the pilot, what's generating new conflict? What's keeping the characters evolving? Why does episode six feel just as compelling as episode one?

The other thing I look for is a unique point of view. It doesn't have to be a completely original idea, but it should feel like a story only this writer could tell. The market is crowded with familiar concepts, but a distinct voice is much harder to find.

And finally, character. If the audience wants to spend time with these people week after week, you're already ahead of most projects. Great series are often remembered less for their plots and more for the characters viewers become invested in.

Happy to chat more about the specifics of your project privately!

Hi Macorey,

Grounded yet surreal regional storytelling—especially set against the distinct cultural backdrop of Mississippi—has a massive competitive advantage in today's landscape. The challenge you are describing with Arcadia Hill isn't just about balancing tone; it’s about mastering tonal tethering.

As a script doctor and story architect, what makes me take a chance on a new series or writer isn't a flawless script; it’s a writer's ability to anchor structural volatility. In television development, shifting from "heartfelt" to "funny as hell" episode by episode is incredibly risky because buyers fear losing the show’s emotional gravity. The secret to making a multi-tone series stick is ensuring that both the comedy and the drama stem from the exact same thematic wound. The surrealism shouldn't be a random stylistic overlay; it must operate as the distorted psychological projection of the characters navigating their reality.

When you treat the ridiculous and the serious as two sides of the same coin, the unpredictable nature of life becomes a precise narrative engine. A professional showrunner or financier looks for that specific structural maturity on the page—knowing exactly when to tighten the tension and when to use humor as a pressure valve without shattering the universe's internal logic.

You’ve built a deeply authentic canvas here, Macorey. Protecting the unique DNA of that voice while packaging its structural layout into a high-conversion commercial asset is where the magic happens. I’d love to connect in the DMs, look at how you are balancing those tonal beats, and share a few architectural frameworks to help get Arcadia Hill the industry traction it deserves.

Best regards,

Volkan "Walkie" Durakçay

This is really insightful Sean Hussey, I appreciate you breaking it down like that.

The engine is something I’ve been thinking a lot about with Arcadia Hill. For me, it comes from the characters constantly trying to move forward—creatively, financially, emotionally—while the world around them never quite responds in a straightforward way. So even when things seem small on the surface, there’s always tension coming from that disconnect between what they’re chasing and what they’re actually experiencing.

A lot of the conflict regenerates through that—jobs, relationships, creative pursuits—all grounded, but with these subtle moments where reality feels slightly off, which keeps shifting how they interpret what’s happening to them.

And I definitely agree on character. That’s been the core for me—making sure each person feels like someone you’d want to sit with even when nothing “big” is happening.

I’d actually love to hear your thoughts on the engine specifically if you’re open to it—I can share a bit more with you about where I see the series going beyond the pilot.

Volkan Durakcay I really REALLY appreciate this—especially the way you framed tonal tethering. That’s something I’ve been trying to articulate with Arcadia Hill but didn’t quite have the language for yet.

The idea of both the humor and the surreal elements stemming from the same thematic wound is exactly what I’ve been aiming toward. For me, a lot of the surrealism comes from how the characters process confusion, lack of control, and that feeling of life not responding the way it’s “supposed” to. So even when things get funny or strange, it’s always tied back to something real they’re dealing with internally.

I also hear you on structural volatility. I don’t want the tone to feel like it’s shifting randomly—I want it to feel like it’s revealing different sides of the same reality.

I’d definitely love to connect

I think what the idea is as well as your personal point of view on it. What is it that makes YOUR version different to someone else's? The space between those two things can really elevate a project.

Hi everyone,

Great question... I’ve been thinking about collaboration a lot recently as well.

In my case, I’ve been developing a transmedia sci-fi universe (The Light of Sunless) mostly solo so far, but I’ve started structuring it in a way that could eventually open up to collaboration (different writers for spin-offs, character perspectives, etc.).

One thing I’ve learned early is that even in solo development, you start building “internal collaboration” between structure, worldbuilding, and character arcs... so when real co-writing enters the process, clarity of roles and creative boundaries becomes essential.

From what I’ve seen and read, the biggest sinkholes usually come from:

unclear ownership of specific story elements

differences in writing voice consistency

and lack of upfront agreement on revision authority

What I’m curious about from your experience is how you usually divide creative control vs. execution freedom in co-writing situations especially when both writers are equally invested in the story direction.

Looking forward to hearing your insights this is a topic I find increasingly relevant as projects scale beyond a single creator.

- Seventy

Hey Leonardo! Yes, absolutely, respect has to have a seat at the table. I'm very lucky in having both collaborators be people I have the utmost respect for.

@Seventy, division of labor is one of the first things I try to discuss. I'm very, very, veeeery easy going about notes, revisions, changes. I am in no way precious or protective over my written work and I'm very open to the concept of being wrong.

At the end of the day, I want what best serves the story. And that might be something I haven't thought of.

What one partner and I have done so far is a kind of serve and volley. Everything we have agreed upon has been bounced between us. I've expanded on his ideas. Offered alternatives. He's done the exact same. And the crime thriller we are developing together gets all the benefit of my need for answers to every question imaginable and my writing partner's brilliantly structured mind. We are both equally invested. We have an advantage here. Our partnership has developed over months of swapping, reading, giving critiques of each other's pages. Given that we know each other's work pretty well, it's probably one of the most comfortable partnerships I've encountered professionally. It's so easy. That ease comes directly from how much respect we have for each other and how well we know each other's work and minds.

The other project is a bit different as I'm coming into someone else's project, but has so far been much the same. I have tons of respect for the producer and he's been great to work with so far. It's a slightly newer project and I'm not as far into it yet, however, I feel at my ease to give input on his vision. He's made a point of making sure I feel that ease and was very clear about our roles up front, which I'm grateful for. That division of labor being predetermined before even a page is written makes it a lot smoother.

So far, I haven't had to divide my creativity with another or go to bat for a point I really felt the need to stand on. I think if you find the right partners, it tends to fall into place. They're strong where I'm weaker in spots. I'm strong in areas they might not be. We are building together as a team. Lifting each other up as we build.

Beautiful insight, Elle.

The more I write, the more I feel that stories don't belong to us... we simply help them take shape. The best collaborations seem to happen when ego steps aside and everyone serves the story itself.

Thank you for sharing your experience.

- Seventy

Creator & IP Holder

“The Light of Sunless”

I think aligning communication and expectation are so important - as is having a simple collaboration agreement.

Welcome back, Ashley! Cannes sounds like an incredible whirlwind. As an author who has spent over a decade since 2014 channeling a deep cinematic universe from my consciousness (now a completed 74k-word literary sci-fi novel 'WHY I LIVE'), your question resonates deeply.

My biggest goal shift this year was walking away from traditional, slow literary agencies that don't understand the scale of modern trans-media art. I had to scrap the old plan of waiting for gatekeepers and adapt by taking total sovereignty over my work.

In my novel, the protagonist Mstr. Richard operates in a world where humanity trades real life for a sterile, risk-free simulation, only to lose their souls. I realized that rigidly sticking to the 'old industry plan' is its own sterile simulation. Growth meant building my own digital empire right here, combining my biomechanical art, Liuksemburgo meno premija 2024 recognition, and this script franchise for the big screen. My ultimate goal now? Securing a visionary partner for a major feature film so I can finally go touch the eternal ice of Antarctica and see how our Earth truly formed. The plan evolved from waiting to conquering.

Thank you, Ashley. I think that’s exactly what surprised me most. The project ended up revealing questions I didn’t know I was interested in exploring. Sometimes the story knows where it’s going before the writer does.

My goal this year was to finish projects.

Instead, I ended up chasing a new one.

I wrote a sci-fi series called Burn-In. What was supposed to be a fun concept became something much more personal: a story about grief, memory and the people we refuse to let go of.

I don’t know where it will lead.

But for the first time in a long time, I decided to stop waiting for permission and just create.

Ashley Renée Smith Welcome back, Leonardo, and I hope you're feeling better.

One goal I had at the beginning of the year was to focus almost exclusively on writing. I thought the path forward was simply finishing scripts and improving as a storyteller. While that's still a major priority, I've realized that writing alone isn't enough if the goal is eventually getting projects made.

Over the past few months, I've found myself spending more time learning about producing, financing, packaging, pitching, and the business side of filmmaking. That wasn't part of my original plan, but the more people I spoke with, the more I understood how interconnected the creative and business sides really are.

So I wouldn't say the goal was abandoned it evolved. The destination is still the same, but the route became much broader than I expected.

One thing I've learned is that sometimes progress isn't moving faster toward the original goal. Sometimes it's realizing you need skills you didn't know you needed when you first set the goal.

Mine is a bit nebulous. After being hospitalised last summer (and then I needed surgery at the start of this year) I was given a piece of advice from a friend: "Never waste a good crisis". It landed hard with me, and I've been using that to make changes, big and small. Adjusting course, saying yes to the universe, and putting my energy only where it's reciprocated and appreciated. It's not a rigid goal, but the results have been huge.

Interesting concept.

Hello Mike - do you have a screenplay I could pass through ScreenReads?

Looking forward to class beginning tomorrow!

It's going to be a wonderful experience with AZ!

Looking forward to class starting tomorrow

I haven’t had to make any of my scripts officially actor friendly as of yet, but I know from my table reads that as much as it pains me, I have to let go of some control when other people are involved. It’s kinda bittersweet but at the same time I have learned to listen for actions and dialogue that feel erroneous and I’m already very sparing with my parentheticals.

My scripts probably still read kinda slow though because my novelist brain is dominant ^^;

"my novelist brain is dominant"

I was like this in when starting writing scripts. My second ever script's first draft, a sci-fi action, was 163 pages. It's at 119 now. And I feel after this past experience, I can get it down even more for a snappier read.

Yes, do make sure your script is tight. The story is tight. The characters are tight/good. And the dialogue is good. Lessons from the front - I've seen this happen many times: a producer wants to submit the script to a certain actor (man or woman), so the producer has the writer do a quick revision to fit that actor. That actor passes. Producer wants to approach another actor, so the writer has to revise the script to fit that actor. So the writer will be in constant revision mode. DO NOT DO THIS! Make sure the script is at it's highest potential !! When the script is picked up, the writer will have notes from the executive, the director, and actor(s). The producer must wade through this with the writer and ensure only notes that strengthen the story are used. Which means some studio notes, director's notes, and actor's notes will not be used. It's not a death kiss to not incorporate all the notes. Someone has to fight creatively! (And believe it or not, when there's a good fighter people will listen and go with that vision).

in script analysis class I was taught that the first thing you should do is cross out any parentheticals that don't have plot consequences, like, 'he pulls a gun'. we were taught that these are there as guidelines for the script readers so they can quickly get an idea of how things might look. as an actor or director, we cross them out so psychologically we see that is not the only emotional choice possible. in rehearsals we experiment with what is the most dramatic choice, and exactly the opposite a lot of times seems to work tge best. they relate it to descriptions of a room in the script. a set designer understands those are just suggestions and don't need to be followed to the letter, but presents an overall mood to go for.

I use it. It is easy to learn.

Göran Johansson Cool! Which operating system are you using—Linux, Windows, or Mac? It’s probably easiest to install and configure on Windows. They may also want to consider implementing a collaboration feature to make it more mainstream.

Windows.

Göran Johansson That is interesting. Goran. I have been on Linux for a few decades. Sorry Bill Gates - Linux just gets the job done!

“History describes what has happened, poetry [drama] what might. Hence poetry is something more philosophic and serious than history; for poetry speaks of what is universal, history of what is particular.”

― Aristotle

That is history for us

Great point. I think films such as Westerns are not telling history as it actually happened, but rather as their creators wished it had happened. Westerns are a good example of why it is important to analyze stories from the perspective of the era in which they were made. In the 1940s and 1950s, many of these films vilified Native peoples while romanticizing the genocide committed against them. They also served as propaganda for American exceptionalism.

As these stories spread around the world during the 1950s and 1960s, they helped shape public perceptions. It was only in the late 1960s and 1970s that this narrative began to be challenged more openly. Unfortunately, because cinema has such a powerful ability to generate empathy, it can also become an effective propaganda tool for dominant social and political groups.

You are right that film can also be used to bring erased histories back into cultural memory. There are countless stories that deserve wider recognition, such as the achievements of African civilizations, the atrocities committed in the Congo under King Leopold II of Belgium, and the struggles of Latin American peoples against imperialism. For years, Danny Glover has expressed interest in making a film about the Haitian Revolution, one of the most important anti-colonial revolutions in history, when enslaved Haitians defeated the French and won their independence.

The challenge is that the same institutions that dominate global cultural distribution often have little interest in promoting stories that expose colonialism, imperialism, or historical atrocities from which powerful nations benefited. They are generally more inclined to celebrate their achievements than examine their crimes. I'm sure there are many screenplays telling these forgotten stories, but they struggle to find financing, and even when they get produced, they often lack the distribution needed to reach a wide audience.

So I agree with your point, but I also think the question is not only what stories should be told, but who has the power to fund, distribute, and amplify them.

Isn't this basically the story of Robin Hood? ... and apparently, Ivanhoe?