by Jenna | May 31, 2014 | Science Fiction, ScriptMag Articles
My Sci-Fi Circuit article on ScriptMag originally published on March 26, 2014.
One of the challenges with writing good science fiction is introducing not only the world itself, but any story background needed to set the stage for what's to come. In my recent interview with Amazon Studios-optioned Adam Pachter, he mentioned his pet peeve about screenwriters using voiceover to get away with exposition that might otherwise be delivered through story. On the other hand, Carson Reeves, Scriptshadow blogger and Scriptshadow Secrets author, recommends using some kind of introduction for sci-fi scripts to help avoid overly expository dialogue, such as title cards (like in Star Wars or Blade Runner) or voiceover. His reason for this, as he puts it, is that “science fiction is a memory hog,” and if a writer isn't careful, a large percentage of her script can end up being filled with exposition. Like Pachter, I've never been a fan of much in the way of voiceover in general but I thought it was worth exploring the options to blasting our readers and viewers with tons of exposition. I mean, let's face it, Carson's right about sheer volume of page space taken up by story explanation. So are there efficient ways of bringing the audience up to speed that actually work? What's been done before, and what do we think about them? Are there times the standbys such as title cards, flashbacks, and voiceover work? Is there anything else?
Title Cards
As much of a Star Wars fan as I am, I've never been enamored of the opening title cards. I've seen the movies repeatedly but every time, part way through the title card, I realize I've lost the train of thought and oops, guess what, it's already rolling off the screen. I don't know if it's the stiff prose or the speed or what, but it loses meaning for me pretty quickly. And are they necessary? Perhaps. The most relevant part to me has always been, "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away." For me, that's enough to say, "This isn't here and now, different rules apply." The rest just has a "Blah, blah, blah, Ginger" vibe to it for me. I found myself having a similar reaction to the opening scrolling backstory in Blade Runner. On the other hand, I found the opening to 2010: The Year We Make Contact much more compelling. It's not much different: words appear in moving animation across the screen. But the distinction for me is that I have the sense that I'm part of the story as opposed to being informed about it. I believe this is because I am reading the mission analysis of the expedition in 2001: A Space Odyssey, and I'm experiencing it as if it is being written in front of me in real time. I'm not being told. I'm being shown.
Flashbacks
And what about flashbacks? Seems like every time I turn around there's someone telling us (and by "us" I mean newer screenwriters working to break into the industry) to never, never, never use evil, bad, horrible flashbacks. But are they so terrible? Haven't we see them used quite successfully in "Mad Men", "Lost", and even The Butterfly Effect? Perhaps this is where the "only once you're an established, successful screenwriter" rule applies? I find that often I enjoy flashbacks, as a way of getting a sense of what has come before. But perhaps that just the lazy spec writer's method of getting the backstory across?
Voiceover
Which brings me to voiceover. I was recently reminded how much I enjoyed the voiceover in The Croods. Perhaps it was because it was not a voiceover telling the backstory, but one setting the tone at the opening of the movie. "Eep" tells us what it's like in her world as the story begins. It's all about how she feels about it. There's another voiceover sequence at the end, where Eep conveys the message of the movie in a simple way -- to change the rules and follow the light. She essentially highlights her father's character arc. And for me, it worked. Perhaps it only works because it is a family movie? Or perhaps you will disagree with me and say that it does not work, period.
But what about voiceover in sci-fi? Where do we see examples of voiceover -- or not -- in the realm of science fiction?
One of my favorite examples of voiceover in science fiction was for the movie Serenity, the follow-up to the much beloved and prematurely cancelled TV series, "Firefly". In Serenity, Joss Whedon was faced with a difficult challenge -- satisfying the existing "Firefly" audience while bringing a new audience up to speed. And quickly. He used an intriguing combination of voiceover and illustration to describe the world of Serenity, but then quickly transitioned into the story -- the voiceover was the voice of a teacher, in an outdoor classroom with a younger version of of the primary characters, "River". (There are later quick flashbacks to that scene and location as well -- that show the feelingand tone to deepen our understanding of what's happening.) Personally, I think the voiceover in this case works. It's not "just" voiceover.
Again, as with The Croods, it's done as part of the story, part of the history, told in a way that illustrates not only the world, but also just barely enough of the backstory to get us caught up. (And I think that's another key -- to give us just enough of a taste that we're willing to jump in to the new world and explore it with the writer, but not enough to feel bludgeoned over the head with meaningless facts, names, and data.)
On the other hand, and I say this as a diehard "Firefly" fan, I didn't love the initial voiceover in "Firefly" that aired in the opening sequences after the pilot, nor do I love it with the newer TV series, "Almost Human". It feels extraneous.
Other Methods
And what about other methods? One of my other favorites is the documentary-style footage shown in District 9. Again, we're given a visceral, feeling-based sense of what's happened, how people feel about it, and the problems in place that bring us to the present day, in a way that we're familiar with as a culture: watching the news. In Avatar, Jake Sulley's video journals provide a unique way for us as the viewers to experience what he's going through. It all feels like part of the story.
Final Thoughts
One of the challenges with using any kind of expository storytelling, in my opinion, is that it feels like it condescends to the audience. As if we are too stupid to figure out what's going on and someone has to explain it to us. My general preference is to demonstrate the backstory through action and dialogue. My favorite example is from the movie Aliens, when Ripley's ship is discovered adrift in space and she is still in cryo-sleep. It doesn't take much in the way of visual illustration, action, and dialogue to quickly understand not only that she's been lost in space for 57 years, but also exactly what that means to her. In the end, it seems to me that taking the pedantic "teaching" route is the core of the problem, rather than there being a problem with a specific methodology. I believe that flashbacks, voiceover, and even animated title cards have their place, when used to immerse the viewer into the story. My personal bias will always be to choose to illustrate as much as possible through action, then through character dialogue. I don't think we need to be so concerned about the intelligence of our viewers to keep up with what we're doing. They are, after all, sci-fi fans.
What's your take?
I'd love to hear your opinion in the comments. Where have you seen exposition through these various methods succeed and fail? Are you vehemently opposed to any and all of these methods?
[Original article at ScriptMag]
Image by Andrea Bohl from Pixabay
by Jenna | Mar 22, 2014 | Science Fiction, ScriptMag Articles
My Sci-Fi Circuit article on ScriptMag originally published on January 17, 2014.
Besides some of the standard approaches to breaking into the spec market, like querying agents and managers, attending pitch fests, or submitting to contests, what else is there for a sci-fi spec writer looking to get a little industry traction?
Amazon Studios has been relatively new to the industry. They've undergone a number of changes to their approach to developing projects since their inception, and I've been curious to find out more about how it all works -- from someone who's seen it from the inside out.
I reached out to Adam Pachter, who recently landed an option with Amazon studios for his sci-fi script Hiber to find out more about how the Amazon Studios process works and what it's meant for him so far.
Adam, thanks so much for being here with us today to talk about your recent development agreement with Amazon Studios for your sci-fi script Hiber. First, can you tell us what Hiber is about and how you were inspired to write it?
It’s a fun story, and one of those rare times when I can pinpoint the precise moment an idea occurred to me. One late October morning in 2012, I was driving my family down the highway and trying to entertain my two young daughters. We were discussing a recent episode of the PBS kids show “Wild Kratts” that involved animal hibernation, and I was quizzing my then 4-year-old about it: “Does a bat hibernate? Does a bear hibernate?” Stuff like that. Then, as a joke, I said, “Does a person hibernate?” and my 4-year-old said, “Silly dad, people can’t hibernate.” And instantly the creative light bulb flicked on and I thought, “But what if they could?” And then a second later I thought, “What if only rich people could?” And the basics of what became Hiber just fell into place from there; I had the plot outline by the end of that day, and wrote my first draft in a couple weeks.
Although I spent several more months revising it, the Hiber script stayed close to the initial vision I had of a future America in which climate change has made the winters much worse, and the rich get to hibernate while everyone else struggles to survive. And I owe it all to my daughters and the silly conversation we had!
How did the selection process with Amazon Studios unfold and how long did it take from script submission to the development agreement being signed?
When the Hiber idea came to me I’d only been writing scripts for a little more than a year, and I was still a dabbler, which your colleague Lee Jessup will tell you is the kiss of death for a baby writer! I’d written a comedy, a romantic drama, and a contained horror/thriller, and I’d actually submitted a couple of them to Amazon Studios, where they were politely declined.
But Hiber felt different. Everyone got the concept right away, and I think the visual backdrop -- DC buried under ten feet of snow -- captured people’s imaginations. So after doing my revisions, I submitted it to Amazon in late April, and this time I heard back from a development exec just a couple of weeks later. He said he’d read it and wanted to chat, and when we got on the phone, he offered me the option. I was delighted and of course said yes, and I signed the development agreement with Amazon in late May.
Being optioned as a baby writer is always thrilling. I guess the only part that didn’t surprise me was that if any of my scripts got optioned, it would be Hiber. From the get-go, there’s just been something about it, and Hiber also made the semis of 2013’s Scriptapalooza contest, which I think speaks to its appeal.
How would you describe the model that Amazon Studios is using to find and develop projects? What makes it different than standard industry practices?
I think the great advantage of Amazon Studios is that you can submit from anywhere -- you don’t need to be in L.A. (I’m in the Boston area), you don’t need to be represented, etc. With Amazon, all these typical barriers to entry don’t exist. And although I do have some contacts in L.A., I’d be kidding myself if I thought I could have gotten anywhere near this far without the opportunity that Amazon presented. I consider it a more democratic process, based not on who you know, but solely on the quality of your script, and in a way that made getting optioned by Amazon even more exciting.
What can you tell us about the development agreement terms for writers with Amazon Studios versus the way an agreement for a WGA writer might look? I understand that some writers might feel limited by the terms of the agreement. What's your opinion about the value of Amazon Studios deals for new spec writers?
One of the nice things about Amazon Studios is that they don’t hide the ball when it comes to their development agreement -- it’s right on their website -- and in fact you have to agree to it in order to submit. In another life I was an attorney, so I know how to read a contract, and I think that for screenwriters starting out in the business, the Amazon agreement is perfectly fair. Obviously the terms offered to a non-WGA beginning screenwriter are going to be less generous than those for someone who’s established. But that’s hardly limited to Amazon. I read all the time about screenwriters agonizing over taking so-called “free options,” and whether it’s realistic to expect compensation when you’re just starting out. And I have to say, compared to that, Amazon’s payment felt great!
And what does Amazon actually pay for an option?
They pay $10,000 for an option, and then there are other payments depending on how far the project goes ($200,000 to buy all the rights, etc.).
I understand there's some debate about the impact that Amazon Studios is having on the spec market, much as there's been a debate about Amazon's impact on the publishing market. Do you see this impact as having a positive or negative impact on the marketplace?
Of course there’s a debate, as there is when any new business model enters an established field, and I think that’s healthy. In my opinion, Amazon Studios has a positive impact on the spec market because it provides access to those who otherwise would have a hard time getting their scripts read, let alone optioned. Certainly in my case it has opened doors. And other writers with whom I’ve spoken have also had a positive experience.
It’s not going to be the right move for everyone, and I certainly would never advise someone to stop trying to get representation, taking classes, entering contests, etc., and just submit script after script to Amazon. After all, they do receive thousands of submissions! But especially for folks like me who live 3,000 miles from L.A. and won’t be moving there anytime soon, it has provided opportunities that would not have otherwise existed. And in an industry as hard to break into as Hollywood, I applaud anything that expands opportunity.
Where does the project stand now and what are the next steps?
At this point I’m about seven months into an 18-month option; or, if you want to be precise, an 18-month extension of my option, since when you submit to Amazon, you give them a free 45-day evaluation period. Right now Hiber’s in development along with about 30 other projects on Amazon’s movie slate, and while I know the odds of any particular script becoming a movie remain long, I do feel good about Hiber’s chances.
As a screenwriter I’ll be the first to admit that I’m still honing my craft, and I look forward to the improvements that Amazon will make as Hiber moves through development. Right now I’m focused on building my screenwriting “brand” by creating a strong portfolio of sci-fi specs.
How did you come to write sci-fi?
This is a great example of the old saying that hindsight is 20-20. In retrospect, of course I should have become a sci-fi screenwriter; I grew up reading Bradbury, Heinlein, Clarke, and Asimov, and I’ve always enjoyed sci-fi films. In fact, I love both Star Trek and Star Wars – which explains the unhealthy level of jealousy I harbor towards J.J. Abrams!
But when I started as a writer, I tended to follow, rather than try to direct, my story ideas, so they lead me into a number of different genres and places. One of the great things about the Hiber option is that it enabled me to say out loud, “I’m a sci-fi screenwriter,” and ever since then, I’ve focused on keeping my antenna open to that particular type of story, with positive results. I still do get the occasional comedy or drama idea, but I know that following them would dilute, rather than strengthen, my brand. In addition to Hiber, right now I have five sci-fi scripts written and another in progress, so I feel good about the direction I’ve chosen.
Do you have any tips to share with other sci-fi writers looking to break into the sci-fi spec market? Any pet peeves?
Be visual; create something cool and new. It doesn’t need to be an alien planet; any future, including our own, is a brave new world that’s worth exploring. And when you’re exploring, try to do so without my personal pet peeve: the expository voice-over. It’s amazing how many sci-fi films still use that storytelling crutch. And the reason this bugs me is it assumes the future will need explaining. Actually, the future, when it comes, won’t seem different and bizarre -- we’ll experience it as normal, just like we do the present day. And you don’t need voice-overs to understand the present.
One more thing -- please lay off Manhattan. Speaking as a huge Red Sox fan, I still have to say New York’s been blown up enough. Try Sicily, or San Antonio, or Siberia instead. Gotta spread the love!
Thanks, Adam!
Adam Pachter lives near Boston and teaches American Literature at Cambridge College. He is the author of the novella ASH and numerous short stories. Adam also edited the Fenway Fiction series of baseball anthologies. While Adam's Hiberscript is in development at Amazon Studios, he's busy working on a number of other sci-fi specs.
Thanks for reading.
[Original article at ScriptMag]
Image by Stefan Keller from Pixabay
by Jenna | Feb 22, 2014 | Science Fiction, ScriptMag Articles
My Sci-Fi Circuit article on ScriptMag originally published on December 20, 2013.
If you've been following this column for a while, you'll have seen the many recommendations about focusing on writing low-budget spec scripts from both screenwriting gurus like Chris Soth and Scott Myers, as well as sci-fi screenwriters who have been successfully breaking into the sci-fi market, like Dan Gordon and Shane Joseph Willis.
Since my personal sci-fi palate has always tended toward the higher budget range (epic spaceship battles and the like), I've been making a point to check out lower budget movies ($5 million or less) like Moon, Sleep Dealer,Another Earth, and Safety Not Guaranteed.
In my opinion, all four delivered well-executed stories -- and definitely on a low budget. Let's take a look at them here, from highest to lowest in terms of budget.
Moon
In Moon, Sam Rockwell stars as "Sam Bell," an isolated helium-3 miner about to complete a three-year tour of duty on the far side of the moon. His only company is a robot GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey), and he suffers greatly from faulty communications with Earth which only allow him to send one-way messages to his wife.
As his stint comes to a close, Sam begins hallucinating and having increasingly bizarre experiences, and ultimately discovers unexpected information about the true nature of his assignment.
What makes Moon shine as a sci-fi story is its unusual and isolated setting, compelling acting, and intriguing food-for-thought twist at the end.
Moon was co-written by director Duncan Jones and screenwriter Nathan Parker. They set out to keep the budget limited to $5 million by limiting the cast size and filming in a studio (source: Wikipedia). The movie grossed $9.7 million worldwide and won many awards.
Sleep Dealer
Sleep Dealer is a fascinating study in low-budget sci-fi. Although it didn't perform well in the box office (perhaps because it was only released in 18 theaters), as a sci-fi story I thought it deserved more attention.
It's an intriguing tale of Mexican workers doing grunt work across the border in the United States via remote controlled robots. They're connected to their alter-egos through a network accessed by cables implanted into their backs and arms. Just as Mexican migrant workers perform many of today's heavy labor tasks, so do these workers -- but from a place "safely" across the border, where they are worn out by their late night hours, desperate to make an income.
The story raises interesting social inequity questions, much as Elysium did (albeit at a much higher budget).
Of the four films, Sleep Dealer is the one that truly tackles social commentary in the way sci-fi is known for.
Another Earth
Another Earth embodies a simple sci-fi concept that's well-executed: What if there was another Earth, and an identical copy of you was present on that mirror planet?
A young woman, played by actress Brit Marling, struggles to redeem a horrific mistake -- a drama playing out under the glow of this duplicate, mirror Earth. When she realizes there's a chance for redemption tied to the duplicate planet, she enters an essay contest to try to win a civilian ticket to the mirror world.
The budget for Another Earth was a $750,000, brought in $1.7 million in the box office, and won awards.
What made the movie so powerful were the tragic circumstances the character created and her painful path to try to recover from them. The sci-fi element of the story was always present -- the second Earth was a constant backdrop -- but that was the only visual effect necessary. The story felt like science fiction primarily through implication, which I thought worked brilliantly.
Safety Not Guaranteed
In Safety Not Guaranteed, a young magazine intern, Darius, played by Aubrey Plaza, gets picked by one of the magazine writers to go with him and another intern to research the story behind a classified ad that reads:
"Wanted: Somebody to go back in time with me. This is not a joke. P.O. Box 91 Ocean View, WA 99393. You'll get paid after we get back. Must bring your own weapons. Safety not guaranteed. I have only done this once before."
What makes this movie so terrific are the kooky, ever-so-slightly-over-the-top characters and Darius's growth arc from her reluctance to enjoy life to a more go-for-it spirit. As in Another Earth, the actual sci-fi element is there primarily through conversation and implication: Is this time travel guy for real, or not? Delightfully, you don't discover the answer until the very end. (And I'm not going to tell you what it is, either.)
The budget for Safety Not Guaranteed was a mere $200,000 and it grossed over $4 million, making it the most financially successful of the bunch. The movie also won several awards.
Budget-Box Office Comparison
Let's take a look at how the four movies compared in terms of budget and box office. Isn't it fascinating that the lowest budget performed the best at the box office, relative to its budget?
So what can we take away from all this?
- Keep the budget low by keeping it simple. One idea, well-executed, can go a long way.As Chris Soth said in one Sci-Fi Circuit column, "Stick to one 'What if?' or change and play out the unexpected consequences of it."
- Sci-fi aspects can be minor background elements and still significantly impact the tone and genre. Although Safety isn't even listed in IMDB as "sci-fi" -- and it arguably isn't -- the sci-fi tweak on the story was what hooked me and kept me wondering throughout.
- Great roles and great acting still count, even in the low budget market -- and perhaps more so. Every single one of these movies had compelling story lines, stakes, and characters.
- A limited cast size can help keep the budget low too. Each of these movies had just a few core characters: One in Moon, three in Sleep Dealer, two in Another Earth, and two to four in Safety (depending on how you count).
- Sci-fi is everywhere. I'm struck by how much sci-fi material is out there for the taking with a little creative brainstorming and a willingness to see it through. And it doesn't require complex world-building, alien races, or advanced technology to make the sci-fi magic we know and love. How cool is that?
Thanks for reading!
[Original article at ScriptMag]
Image by ImaArtist from Pixabay
by Jenna | Jan 25, 2014 | Science Fiction, ScriptMag Articles
My Sci-Fi Circuit article on ScriptMag originally published on November 22, 2013.
By now you know how fascinated I am in not only how to write a great sci-fi script, but also in what it takes to break into the market as a sci-fi screenwriter. So when I heard that screenwriter Dan Gordon had recently had a sci-fi screenplay optioned, I reached out to him to get the inside scoop. Dan's a writer that's been around the block a few times and has a solid handle on not only writing amazing sci-fi but also some fascinating insights into what makes the industry tick -- particularly because he's seen it from the inside out working as a reader for a production company.
Dan, thanks for being open to being interviewed about your recent option! Can you tell us about how the deal came to pass? Is this your first?
Actually, this is my second option, but that first one was years ago, so... It’s essentially a first option.
The key was having a timely, well written script. The second part was networking. Here’s how it went down: I’m at a yoga retreat in Santa Barbara where I meet this actress on the retreat and we hit it off. We both like Monty Python, Star Trek, and of course yoga. I share I’m a writer and just finished this script I’m quite jazzed about (I used the ScreenwritingU ProSeries for the rewrite). I pitch the story and she wants to read it.
Well, she loves the story and gives it to a producer friend, and they decide it’s a perfect fit for their slate. After some negotiating on the option, we have a deal.
I understand that the project is "under wraps" right now. Is there anything you CAN tell us about it?
Yes, it's "under wraps," which means I'm not at liberty to discuss ANY of the details of the project, including the title, subject matter and budget except to say that it is a sci-fi project.
What's your background with sci-fi? Do you have a particular passion for it or is this a one-shot deal?
Science fiction is my genre. I have a degree in Marine Biology and also taught science for twenty years. So, writing sci-fi was a natural outgrowth from my interests. when I realized I wasn’t cut out for research – I found it tedious which resulted in a crisis in my 20s -- it finally occurred to me it was because I was always considering “what if?” and then imagining the possibilities.
Science research is quite procedurally intensive and of course you can’t just make up “facts.” I was way more interested in the possibilities and creating outcomes based on that. So, about 15 years ago, I decided to start writing scripts, and most of them have been sci-fi.
What tips or advice do you have for sci-fi writers wanting to break into the marketplace? Is this all about luck? Writing quality? Something else?
First, be patient and learn the craft. I wrote 5 scripts before anyone took me seriously. It took 20 scripts before I got optioned the second time. I don’t consider it luck. You have to know the craft and then you have to know what producers are looking for. You learn a lot from InkTip and IMDb as to what’s marketable now.
If possible, intern at a production company as a reader. I did that when I first came out here to Los Angeles, and it was a fantastic opportunity to learn the business and learn about screenwriting. I was quite fortunate when we moved to Paramount Studios so I could explore the lot and just imagine writing scripts for the next big production. And of course, Star Trek was made there...
More importantly though, I learned how to “not” write a script. I understand now why studio readers and producers get jaded. Here was my breakdown for two years as a reader: I gave a “consider” to 1 script in 50 and a “recommend” to 1 script in 100. That’s right – 1% of the scripts I read felt like a movie. It was easy to give a pass -- 99% of scripts are just not there. Some had good ideas, but they lacked in most areas. The funniest part of giving a recommend though was I had developed a reputation for good analysis and producers took me seriously. Very seriously. So when I gave a recommend, I was immediately called into that “office” and had to face three to five eager producers asking me all sorts of questions as to why I recommended the script!
Finally, I would add that good science fiction is good science. I know that sounds obvious, but I can’t tell you how many countless scripts I read that were “sci-fi” and the writer was either careless with science concepts or facts – here’s one of my favorites, “he (scientist) puts the slide under the microscope and turns the magnification to 100,000x.” Really? The best light microscopes are limited to about 2000x. Remember, I’m a biologist, and of course you might think I’m being anal here, but again, good science fiction is good science, and I was the goto intern when they received a sci-fi script, so... when I read that, my first thought was, “this person doesn’t know how to write sci-fi.” And after reading the script, it was clear -- this person didn’t know how to write sci-fi.
What have you learned about the industry and what the market is looking for in terms of sci- fi, based on the response you’ve received?
Well, you have to be patient with pitching sci-fi. It seems to be a cyclicalgenre. About twelve years ago, I had no problem getting my scripts read. Then I went through a dry spell where no one wanted sci-fi. So I decided to write a romantic comedy. I know, quite a change. But, I consider rom-coms one of the most challenging genres out there –- we all know the outcome, they’re highly structured, dialogue driven -- so how do you write one that’s original? Always liking a challenge, I wrote one and pitched it and was quite astonished at the responses I got – everyone wanted to read it. So, I learned, certain genres are way more market friendly.
Recently at the InkTip Pitchfest, I encountered a lot of requests for sci-fi and horror scripts for under $3 million. Most wanted scripts for under a million. I think with CGI costs down, producers can make low budget horror that looks great. Very few wanted just pure sci-fi, so you have to learn to be patient or adjust your pitch to fit the market. Fortunately for me, I write sci-fi that has broad appeal, usually, and I felt would fit their needs. Then when I got home, I had to do page 1 rewrites to match the request of the producers. Yikes!
The other issue is always cost. Because we imagine so many cool things in this genre, you have to be sensitive to the producer’s needs. Special effects, exotic aliens, unique or futuristic sets are usually expensive. When you’re breaking in, if your script is loaded up like the new Star Trek movies, you’re lowering your chances because it won’t work within today’s low budget requirements.
What recommendations do you have for other writers looking to get traction in the market with sci-fi projects?
As I mentioned, know your craft, which always means a great story with great characters. I know, sounds easy. But if you look at the most successful sci-fi shows, it was always about the characters. Star Trek comes to mind. The X-files. Those characters are wonderful and the stories were fantastic.
And write with low budget in mind. That requires creative solutions to furthering the science fiction narrative without being costly. The first script I optioned was at the time low budget, because I chose to make the alien well, human, or at least indistinguishable from a human. I then built the story around an alien who appears human. I use that script now as a writing sample.
What were your early sci-fi influences? What are your favorites now? What have you learned from them?
I’ll never forget the first time I saw 2001 in the theater as a kid. I was about 8 and remember sitting there thinking, “I’m seeing the future.” I was transported in time. Even though I had no idea what the story was about, I realized then I wanted to make movies. It was an awe-inspiring film and still is my favorite.
I already mentioned Star Trek and my other childhood favorite was The Outer Limits. The Outer Limits is a great example of sci-fi done well on a modest budget. Highly creative stories with aliens or humans who usually develop some kind of special power and the outcome usually scared the hell out of me as a child.
As far as writers: Ray Bradbury, Arthur C. Clarke, and H.G. Wells -- all highly imaginative, great story tellers with boundless originality.
Recently, I like the first Matrix movie, the new Star Trek movies, though I found it sacrilegious how they vaporized Vulcan and mixed Spock with Uhura... illogical, but well done. The Batman trilogy, I know not sci-fi, but it has that fantasy element and cool technology that works for me.
What I’ve learned? Create great characters, invent imaginative stories, know the science, and always remember the coolness factor, whereby the writer asked the question “What if?” and generates a whole universe based on that one question.
What are your next steps with this project?
Getting the movie made. <Grin>
Thanks, Dan!
Dan Gordon is a sci-fi screenwriter based in Santa Monica. He's written over 20 scripts, 3 television pilots, and is currently hard at work on 4 more projects, because he’s obsessive about writing the next sci-fi masterpiece. You can follow Dan online on Facebook, here.
Thanks for reading.
[Original article at ScriptMag]
Image by Angela Yuriko Smith from Pixabay
by Jenna | Dec 28, 2013 | Science Fiction, ScriptMag Articles
My Sci-Fi Circuit article on ScriptMag originally published on October 25, 2013.
One of the primary reasons I love sci-fi is that it provides a powerful vehicle for exploring social issues that might otherwise be too politically incorrect to tackle head on. I cut my sci-fi teeth watching Star Trek, which is known for its many messages and moral explorations, and I'm quite sure that it hugely influenced my own perspectives on how we treat each other on this small planet we call home.
Although many people argue that of theStar Trek series the Voyager story lines in particular were too heavy-handed with their moral overtones, I adored watching Captain Janeway tackle issues of ethnicity, equality, sexism, and more. I loved that she was a female in the captain's chair, one with a strong mind and moral compass. Yes, I've seen articles bashing her moral inconsistency online. Yes, I've seen arguments that she's the worst captain of them all, that her decisions were questionable, etc. etc. I don't care. I loved her, and I loved watching her think. (My only complaint about Janeway was that she was rather asexual, rarely (if ever) getting involved romantically, nor having children.) The fact that her character has sparked such debates about whether her morality was consistent shows that her moral explorations were a central hallmark of the show.
The Messages of Elysium
Recently, watching Elysium, I was again struck by the power of how well a message can be delivered with science fiction. Elysium gives a rather direct illustration of social inequality, of the haves and the have-nots, and the desperation forced on the people who have less -- they'll do anything, rush across guarded borders at the risk of their own lives to get what they need. In Elysium, it's miraculous medical care that can cure anything instantly that drives much of the struggle.
The parallels between our current world and this invented world are crystal clear. Some of us have more than others, and we aren't willing to share it with those who don't. In fact, we'll fight hard to keep those who don't from having it, even if it means taking lives. And to people without Western medical care, our own level of access must look like the most miraculous of resources. Look, let's face it, in the Western world, we take so much for granted. This movie picks up that reality and puts it right in our faces.
What Worked
What I thought Neil Blomkamp did so brilliantly was to SHOW us the contrast. There wasn't a lot of pontificating or exposition about how unfair the medical system was, or the pain, struggle, and risks people faced to get care, but he illustrated that lack through the action of the story. Whether or not you think Elysium was a good storytelling, Blomkamp put us right into the position of feeling the unfairness. The closing scene, which finally shifts the inequity, left me thinking, "Why didn't they do that before?" And indeed, why can't we do that now? He leads us to ask the questions OURSELVES.
To me, this is the essence of sharing a powerful message. To illustrate it clearly, and to design it such a way that the audience itself can't help but questioning the way things are.
The Power of District 9
I had a similar experience watching Blomkamp's District 9. Again, it portrayed an obvious example of the social inequities and racism in South Africa. The story didn't tell us it was wrong, it just showed us. And the chilling tale of a man caught up in the apartheid-driven events only illustrated the story at an even deeper level.
Blomkamp showed us not only the bad behavior of our own past, but also where we are highly likely to go under similar circumstances. I felt entirely convinced by his depiction of one possible way human-alien relations could play out.
And again, I felt that he delivered the message in such a way that left me asking questions and wondering how we would react, what we would do, and what we are and are not doing right now. Bam!
Not So Much With Avatar
On the other hand, as much I loved Avatar, I felt the many, many messages of spirituality, corporate greed, private militarism, and environmentalism (among others) were heavy-handed and hard to swallow. Just when I was hit by one message, another would come along.
And what's the difference? Is the core of the problem just the sheer quantity of message-laden scenes in Avatar? Or did it just fail to deliver fully on an emotional level? Again, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie very much, but at the same time, there were some very awkward notes hit along the way. (I still can't get that scene out of my mind where they first introduce the concept of extracting the "unobtanium" from under the Hometree.)
Just One Message?
I'm reminded of Chris Soth's interview with me for Sci-Fi Circuit, where he mentioned the importance of changing only one thing in the sci-fi world in order to have the greatest impact, to avoid watering the story down, and to keep from wandering into fantasy instead of sci-fi. Perhaps the same is true for movies with a message: Focus on one core message and illustrate that with your storytelling, lest it becomes too on-the-nose, preachy, or heavy-handed.
Perhaps the adage "show don't tell" is the key here.
What are your favorite examples of messages in sci-fi movies? What made them work?
Let us know what you think in the comments.
[Original article at ScriptMag]
Image by Stefan Keller from Pixabay
by Jenna | Nov 30, 2013 | Science Fiction, ScriptMag Articles
My Sci-Fi Circuit article on ScriptMag originally published on September 27, 2013.
As a sci-fi screenwriter, I'm interested in more than just big tent pole movies. I want to write and see sci-fi stories with heart, stories that make me feel, stories that reveal character. I've always been a huge fan of Firefly and Serenity for that reason, and Joss Whedon continued to impress me particularly with his character work in The Avengers too, even though it also fit the bill of big summer blockbuster.
I recently connected with my fellow ScriptMag columnist Jeff Lyons around the subject of the Enneagram, which he is an expert at using in writing, and asked him how we might see the Enneagram showing up in sci-fi and how we can use it to improve the impact of our stories. Turns out, the Enneagram can be used for for more than character development -- which is what most writers tend to think it's for -- and even get into story structure with it!
I invited Jeff to talk to us about what the Enneagram is and how it can be used in sci-fi storytelling. Let's see what he has to say.
Thanks for being here, Jeff. First, why don't you start off by explaining a little bit about the Enneagram and what it is, and how you help writers use it to become master storytellers?
The Enneagram is the most powerful system available today that describes the nine-core personality drives underlying all human behavior. Each of the nine drives is rooted in thoughts, feelings, and actions that largely determine how we interact with the world, for good or ill. The Enneagram is not our personality, but it is the crankshaft of our personality; it is the thing that drives us through our personhood and through our lives. Everyone has an Enneagram style, including fictional characters and even stories themselves!
All writers and storytellers face the same problems when developing new work: how do you make characters ring true; how do you develop plots that are believable; how do you seamlessly connect all the pieces of a story so everything makes sense; how do you find the right, true, and natural structure of any story?
Traditionally, writers and storytellers familiar with the Enneagram approached these problems with the only tools they knew: Enneagram typing and breaking down characters within stories by core styles, wings, subtypes, tri-types, etc. This is not new news; Enneagram practitioners that are also writers and/or storytellers have been using it to develop characters for novels, plays, and screenplays for years.
While these conventional approaches may have helped develop multi-dimensional characters, they were never meant to solve the problems associated with developing a story from scratch, or fixing one in desperate need of a rewrite. Writing detailed characters is not the same as developing the full structure of a story from inciting incident through final climax. The reality is that traditional Enneagram approaches cannot stand alone in solving the big story problems faced by storytellers. They must be part of a bigger methodology; one that leverages the power of the Enneagram as well as the power of story structure.
What I teach writers is not just how to write great characters using the Enneagram system, but how to use the Enneagram to reveal the underlying structure of any story -- thus making them masterful storytellers.
I understand that there's a particular Enneagram type that lends itself to each genre. Can you describe for us which type is best suited for the sci-fi genre and how it so naturally lends itself to sci-fi?
There are several configurations that relate to sci-fi:
The pure sci-fi story (with no mixed genre elements) is best represented by the Five Enneagram style. This is the thinker style. Typically, in these stories you have the scientist or “expert” faced with an intractable problem or puzzle that has to be solved, usually through mental powers. This is stereotypically seen most clearly in the old sci-fi “B” movies from the 1950s: the formula of these old movies is pure Enneagram five character development.
Five stories are basically situational or problem-solving focused, rather than deep, complex narratives about human dynamics (there are exceptions). These stories are focused on how to solve the problem of staying alive, or remaining human, and this is achieved primarily through the Five’s intelligence and cool-headedness.
There are some general qualities of sci-fi five protagonists that generally get expressed in most pure sci-fi stories:
- The Five protagonist uses his or her mental prowess to survive an irrational and threatening world.
- The Five protagonist is intelligent, observant, and most importantly unemotional.
- The Five protagonist is brilliant at solving scientific problems.
- The Five protagonist keeps a cool head when others lose theirs (literally).
- The Five protagonist mistrusts emotions and is basically a loner.
- Through his or her brainpower, the Five destroys or controls the irrational force or malevolent power that is threatening the world.
- The Five does not seek leadership, but can be decisive and commanding when forced by circumstances to take over the role.
(These qualities are modified slightly from those developed by Judith Searle, author of The Literary Enneagram.)
The sci-fi/adventure mixed-genre is very common today. This is a combination of Five (the thinker Enneagram sytle) and Seven (to have fun Enneagram style). In this configuration the adventure is seen as adventurous—not a trial by fire or a crucible. The Five-Seven protagonist has a sense of excitement, fun, and adventure. Some examples of this in books and film include: Star Wars, Star Trek, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Cocoon, and Back to the Future.
The other mixed-genre form of sci-fi that is very popular is the sci-fi/horror story. Horror is another basic Five Enneagram story. So, even though it's mixed genre, the sci-fi/horror mix is more like pure sci-fi, meaning a strong Five protagonist as outlined above.
These days, there are almost no stories that do not combine genres. The most successful stories are those that combine genres for maximum impact. The Enneagram points you to very tight and condensed narrative design that makes story development more accurate and more dramatically compelling.
And you use the Enneagram not only to design your characters, but also to design your plot and structure, correct? Can you tell us a little more about how that would work?
Yes, the Enneagram is an amazing tool for revealing any story’s structure. I've developed a system called Rapid Story Development™ that uses the Enneagram to cross the gap between idea to story. It shows you how to connect plot to character and character to plot. It reveals the main character traits, quirks, and flaws that spawn the perfect opponents, the right supporting characters, and the essential story milestones (inciting incident, midpoint complication, low point, final battle, etc.) necessary to move a story along its right, true, and natural dramatic path. These concerns are not character development issues -- they are structural issues that determine character.
Story structure tells you who your protagonist should be, who the opponent should be, what core relationship needs to exist to drive the middle of your story, and how all these pieces fit together to generate dramatic action.
And the Enneagram is simply the best tool available for identifying these pieces.
How would we see this playing out in a sci-fi story? Can you give us any examples or illustrate it for us in some way?
The Matrix gives a great example of how story structure is informed by the Enneagram (and vice versa).
First, let’s look at the Enneagram elements divorced from any story per se, meaning let’s look at the sci-fi genre as a Five Enneagram protagonist.
5-Thinker Enneagram:
The Five is smart, intellectual and voracious for more information. They are only safe in the world if they can figure out how it works. Once they figure out their environment, then they can control the people around them, because the world would be a wonderful place if it wasn’t for all the stupid people mucking everything up.
At their worst, Fives control their environment by controlling the information. They share their knowledge strategically, only in a way that keeps them safe. They keep people at a distance, hating strong emotion, which they see as needless and wasteful (silly humans). Those damn emotional people! Their greedy desire to keep data close to the vest leads them into paranoia and isolation in their ivory tower. All of this constriction is driven by a core fear they may be wrong or incompetent, so they disintegrate into useless specialization—a pathetic way for them to feel "expert" at something. Their ultimate desire is to be capable and competent—and know it.
The low point of this type is where our character's arc begins.
The Five protagonist's path to change is that they must learn their that they are capable, competent, and wise, and it is their knowledge that finally lifts to the vision that moves them into their Enneagram "integration" point.
They move from their ivory tower of intellectualism to bring their light of knowledge to the world as a visionary, and in their vision they step up and lead. This is the natural growth arc of the Enneagram Five protagonist: moving from being a paranoid, greedy, and fearful jerk into competent, confident, wise visionary that leads others out of the darkness to a new vision of the world.
And this is how it plays out structurally in the actual story:
Neo is isolated and devoid of human contact (silly humans). He lives in his bedroom surrounded by a world he controls through his technology. The world only knows him through his hacker persona. He controls information, and so he controls his environment and the people who might want access to him and what he knows. He is flat emotionally, he clearly does not like emotionality in himself or others. Driven by a fear to be more, to be capable and competent beyond his imagination, his world is turned upside down when smarter people control him with information he doesn’t not have. He is now proven to be wrong and incapable. His worst nightmare is realized. He is now forced to regain his equilibrium, but to do so he must rely on people he doesn’t even know -- another nightmare for a Five Enneagram caught in the downside of their style.
But, what this all leads to is his evolutionary change from paranoid, greedy, fearful jerk to his competent, confident, wise visionary self -- he is THE ONE -- who will lead others out of the darkness to a new vision of a world. Neo’s growth is classic Enneagram integration to the upside of the Five Enneagram, i.e., visionary, self-reliant leader who empowers others, rather than controlling them.
What the above illustrates is how the Enneagram qualities find an amazingly accurate reflection in Neo as the protagonist, in an almost scarily accurate mapping across the abstraction of the pure Enneagram style characteristics to the story beats of The Matrix.
Any other thoughts you'd like to share with us today?
It’s important to understand that writing and storytelling are not the same thing. Storytelling is about story structure. Writing is about language, the use of language, and the romance of the rhythm of words to convey emotion and ideas through rhetoric.
Storytelling and writing use different skill sets and serve different functions. Rarely do both skills exist in the same person. Few writers do both well. And the one most people fall short on is storytelling. Most people are good writers, or at least passable. But, their storytelling skills are almost always lacking.
The Enneagram can help you become a better storyteller, because it can help you learn story structure and can thus shore-up any weakness in story development. If you are like me, you have specific strengths and weaknesses as a writer. One of the weaknesses is undoubtedly story structure and development. I only say this because this what I experience with 90% of the writers I work with (novelists or screenwriters). It’s not a judgment that you are bad and wrong, no—you’re just human. Get over it. Suck it up and do the work needed to strengthen where you are weak. Learn story structure, learn the Enneagram. Both have learning curves and you won’t become masters of them overnight. As with anything, mastering any art takes putting in your ten thousand hours (see Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers: The Story of Success). Put in the time, put in the sweat, and put in the tears. You will only excel in the end, and you will succeed.
Thanks, Jeff!
About Jeff Lyons
Jeff Lyons is a working screenwriter and author. He is a regular guest lecturer at Stanford University's Online Writers Studio and at the UCLA Extension Writers Program, as well as a webinar instructor for The Writers Store and Writer's Digest University. He is also a regular contributor to Script Magazine, where he writes his popular column: “Story Talk,” and to Writer’s Digest Magazine, one of the oldest and most widely read writing magazines published in the U.S. Jeff is the founder of Storygeeks, a professional services company offering story consulting, training and editorial services to screenwriters, novelists and nonfiction authors. His film Billy Miske is currently in pre-production in the U.K. through M4West Pictures Ltd. More information can be found on his website, storygeeks.com. Follow @storygeeks.bsky.social on Bluesky and “like” Storygeeks on Facebook. In 2013, he will be publishing an e-book entitled Anatomy of a Premise Line: 7 Steps to Foolproof Premise and Story Development.
If you'd like to learn about classes offered by Jeff, you can find details and register here: https://www.storygeeks.com/live-classes
[Original article at ScriptMag]
Image by Comfreak from Pixabay
