Start with that picture in your mind

That’s how I begin writing; I have a picture that inspires me. It could be something like ‘three Knights on horseback on a hill overlooking a village’ or an ‘alien sitting in a restaurant looking at his watch as it countdowns to something.’ The point is, in the beginning there is very little to go on except this image but once I have it and it excites me enough I can start to ask questions about it.

Start asking questions

Questions are great for opening up the little material you have and expanding on it without you having to just think of stuff out of the blue.

Take the alien example above. I can ask questions such as:

• How did he get there?
• What’s his watch counting down to; is it the destruction of the earth?
• Does anyone recognise him?
• Where does he go after this?
• Is anyone chasing him?
• Meat or fish?

You get it anyway. What happens when I start asking these questions is that more images and ideas develop in my mind, some good, some not so good but a whole load of material will start to come together. It’s exciting at this point to think of the possibilities of the story; you can take it anywhere you want.

Follow the leads

Some of these new leads will inspire me again and form the basis of other scenes. At this point nothing should be discarded as it is too soon to decide or make judgements about what is relevant and not and what might be good in the long term. Later, much of this material may be discarded but for now every idea should be kept for possible eventual use.

Name the scenes

Now at this point I will separate what feels like different scenes and give them a short, one line description. Often they will not seem to link together in any feasible way but this again too early to question. If you try too hard to link scenes together before they are ready, you will only end up with a dull and ordinary script; due to the fact you are only using only remembered knowledge of how to write stories from what you’ve read, seen or done before. Your deeper mind will link your story together in far more interesting ways if you let it.

Don’t forget to start writing

The most important part of writing a screenplay is actually starting it! You have to follow an idea that excites you and that you feel you want to write about. It’s time to take that picture or line or whatever it is in your head and get it down onto paper. Don’t worry about a beginning, middle or an end just start with those images that inspire you and the rest will follow.

JAY: One of my major philosophies of directing is that, as a director, I should understand and be somewhat competent in any aspect of filmmaking. To that end, I started in the business as an actor. I was a professional actor for a few years, got my union card, and moved to the behind-the-scenes side. Transitioning from live theater (in nearly ever technical aspect) to film, I started professionally as an electrician (as lighting was a major aspect of my theater experience) and moved up the ladder. I found a secondary passion for lighting and cinematography and stayed as a DP longer than I had anticipated before “retiring” officially in 2005.

In addition to acting and cinematography I have professionally produced, written and edited films. I think, in the end, knowing and being somewhat competent in all of these trades makes me a much better director. I’m not a real big Star Trek fan, but I’ve often used the analogy of Captain Kirk as the epitome of what a director should be. Someone who is clearly in command, who has the mission objectives firmly in mind, who has the respect of all of those under his command and who knows enough about everyone’s job to be able to troubleshoot any given problem. Sure, Scotty is a much better engineer than Kirk, but when those warp drives don’t work – it’s usually Kirk’s out-of-the-box suggestion that gets Scotty going in the right direction…

That’s what a director is supposed to go: keep everyone moving in the right direction. All of that is a very long-winded way of saying my photography helps my direction by having an intimate understanding of how to tell a story visually – and the skills to understand clearly how to technically accomplish what I’m asking for.

HOW DIFFICULT OR EASY IS IT TO STAND BACK FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHY SIDE OF THINGS?

Surprisingly, not that difficult at all. In 2002, I directed the short film The Night Before and it was the first time I ever worked with another cinematographer – a good friend of mine (and a brilliant DP) Chris Probst. I was taking on a short film with three lead child actors, and I knew I’d have my hands full taking care of the directing chores without worrying about the photography. Keep in mind, prior to this film, I had worked solely as a professional DP for about five or six years. Prior to that I was a gaffer for a few years, an electrician before that and going even further back I was a lighting designer and master electrician in theater – so it’s safe to say for a decade and a half, at that point, lighting had been nearly my whole life.
It was the second day of the shoot on The Night Before and as we were doing a turn-around, I was looking over my script and I heard Chris tell the gaffer to put the “baby” (a 1,000 watt Fresnel fixture) on the other side of the room. I stopped, looked up and realized that I didn’t have any clue there was even a baby in the room! Here we were – a day and a half into shooting and I had NO cognizant idea at all of the lighting that was going on around me. At that moment I looked up and saw his fixtures hanging in the ceiling and saw how he was approaching things…
But prior to that moment, I hadn’t paid any attention at all. It was an extremely liberating experience to totally surrender that aspect of production to someone I wholly trusted. Of course Chris and I discussed the look before hand and I would often make adjustments to the shot just before we rolled (IE: Can we get a little more or less fill here?) but they were minor differences.
I still love shooting, but directing has been my passion my whole life and it was really wonderful to just concentrate on that and do the best job I could.

FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T SEEN IT, CAN YOU TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR SHORT FILM “DESCENT”?

Descent is a short, fifteen minute, thriller about a woman trapped in an elevator with a killer. The official log line is something along the lines: Six weeks after secretly witnessing the brutal murder of her best friend, Andrea finds herself trapped in an elevator with the murderer.

YOU COLLABORATED CLOSELY WITH CHRISTOPHER PROBST, WHO WAS THE CINEMATOGRAPHER AND CO-WRITER ON “DESCENT”. HOW DID YOU END UP WORKING TOGETHER?

Chris and I met during my brief stint in junior college in Arizona. He was one of the filmmakers in the film program with me – and one of the few I saw passionate and dedicated enough to really have potential (IE he walked the walk).

Chris and I moved to Los Angeles together in 1995 and continued to work with one another and help build each other’s careers. Chris took the path to DP as a camera assistant and I took the path as an electrician. Whenever I shot something, Chris would be my 1st AC and I would be his gaffer when he was shooting. We taught each other and pushed each other. I had always shot my own projects until The Night Before, as I said above, when I asked Chris to be my DP. Chris is, in all sincerity, 100 times the DP I ever was – in addition to being a very good friend. It was easy to totally turn the job over to him and never give it a second thought.

When Descent came around, it was actually intended to be a test of the new Sony F950 HD camera for American Cinematographer Magazine, and he originally had another project he was going to shoot to do that test, but it fell through. I shared the idea for Descent with him and we inadvertently started writing it together. He was a bit skeptical about the idea at first, but when I sent him the first partial draft he got into it – did some re-witting and sent it right back to me. We did this ping-pong process through e-mail for six full drafts to come up with the final product; again – always pushing each other not to compromise and make the best product we possibly can. I had co-produced with Chris a couple times on spec commercials, but this was our first longer project together. All-in-all he was a key component to the whole project.

DO YOU ENJOY WORKING WITH PEOPLE YOU’VE WORKED WITH BEFORE? DOES THIS MAKE FOR A MORE SATISFYING, EFFICIENT PRODUCTION EXPERIENCE?

Absolutely. For years I’ve been building a certain collection of people that I love to work with. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me to discard great people and start anew on each project – I’d rather go back to people with whom I have had excellent collaborations in the past and build on that experience. Chris is one of those people, so is Dan O’Brien, my editor, and Buck Sanders my composer. All of these guys make major contributions to the work and they are always the first call I make whenever there’s a new project.

It does, indeed, make for a more efficient production experience. For instance, with Chris and I, we’ve been working together for so many years now – we’ve reached that cliche “ESP” kind of communication level. He can look at me and say “For this shot, we’ll do a little dot-dot-dot…” and I’ll know exactly what he’s talking about and nothing more needs to be said. That kind of shorthand only comes from years of working with someone. If I had a totally new DP on a film, someone I had never worked with before, I’d have to be much more involved, communicate much more clearly and keep a tighter eye to see if/how he/she was interpreting my needs. With people like Chris and Buck and Dan – I don’t have to do that at all.
Generally I get along with people very well and, mostly, I’m happy to work with them again – but I am very critical and I’m mostly looking for the best people I can find who also work well with my style of filmmaking. There’s a short list of people I’ll never work with again – but it takes a lot to make that list.

HOW DID YOU FIND APRIL ADAMSON AND ROB MCLAUGHLIN, YOUR MAIN ACTORS FOR “DESCENT”? DID YOU HAVE A LENGTHY AUDITION PROCESS?

There was absolutely no audition process for Descent at all. Just prior to Descent I was working as a producer on two feature films and a short film. In a six month period I, literally, saw over 2,000 actors in auditions and I was DONE with the audition process for quite a while. I had originally worked with April on The Night Before and then a good friend of mine, Jamie Neese, cast April as the lead in his short thriller, which I co-produced and photographed for him. Having worked with April on both those projects, seen her incredible range and what a joy she is to work with – there was no question who I went to first for Descent. It was purely a situation where I sent April the script and said “Do you want to do this?” and she said “Yes” that was the whole casting process with her.

Rob was a friend who I had known for a few years. I knew he was getting more and more roles and he had the perfect look I wanted – so I asked him to read the script and meet with me on it. We sat down for an hour or so one afternoon, talked about it and I cast him there. Anthony Backman and I were actors together back in the day. In high school we competed against each other in Speech and were both on a TV show called T.V. or Not T.V. together. I re-connected with him and cast him in two shorts I was doing for Group 101 (a collective of filmmakers in Los Angeles who each make one film a month for six months) and cast him the same way I did April. Finally, Renee, who played the unfortunate victim, had foolishly offered her apartment to us for a location. I was originally considering another actress I had worked with before, but when Chris and I talked to Renee about her apartment we both looked at each other and said “Vanessa?” – Renee was game – and casting was done.

WHEN AN ACTOR COMES TO YOU TO AUDITION, WHAT DO YOU HAVE THEM DO?

That depends greatly on the project and the role. Generally the actor will read with a casting director or assistant from the script for that project. We videotape the actor for reference. I like to talk to them just a little bit before and after their reading, maybe give a little direction and have them read again – but it’s often very clear who is right for the role. For one of the features I was casting in the big six-month span, we did all improve auditions; nothing prepared, nothing scripted. That was a fascinating process.

For The Night Before we didn’t really have an “audition-able” scene in the script, so I decided to give the kids scenes from Stand By Me for their first audition. In the end, that wasn’t the best idea as it showed us who really had acting chops – but not necessarily in good context to the piece we were doing. For callback auditions we switched to the actual script. For more established actors, they rarely audition. We’ll generally sit down with them and have a meeting, discuss the project and character and make a decision from there.

When actors do audition, I’m looking for someone who embodies the role and transcends expectations. It’s amazing when it does happen. You can be sitting through reading after reading after reading, day after day and suddenly someone comes in – and your jaw drops to the floor. When that happens – there’s usually very little discussion – it is simply that person IS the role and they get the gig. It isn’t always that clear cut – but when that happens it can be pretty magical.

Actor’s reputations really make a difference, too. How they are to work with is a big factor in my considerations – do they make for a good set environment, or will they be difficult and put everyone on edge. I prefer to have a comfortable set. Work is fun – we should all enjoy the day (even though it’s hard work) and one main sour apple can ruin the barrel quickly.

WITH A FILM LIKE “DESCENT” WHICH FOCUSES ON THE MAIN CHARACTER’S INTERNAL FEELINGS AND FEARS, HOW IMPORTANT IS A GOOD AMOUNT OF REHEARSAL TIME FOR DEVELOPING THE PERFROMANCES YOU WANT?

We didn’t do any rehearsal for Descent, and I wish I had. What wound up happening is that we did quite a bit of rehearsal and discovery on-camera the first day of shooting. It was a little challenging to “dial-in” Rob and April’s performances to what I was looking for while “on the clock” that first day, but we got through it. Rehearsal is often a luxury that you don’t get. Schedules get in the way and so many factors can’t really be rehearsed – especially for something like Descent where most of the film has no dialogue at all. I would have liked to work with both of them a little bit more in prep, however, but in the end it turned out great.

WHAT DO YOU DO TO CHANGE THINGS WHEN YOU’RE NOT GETTING WHAT YOU WANT FROM AN ACTOR’S PERFORMANCE?

That varies considerably depending on the actor. A director once told me, many years ago: ‘There are three types of actors: the kind you need to baby, the kind you need to kick in the ass and the kind you need to leave alone. A good director knows the difference and works with them accordingly…’ That’s an over simplification, but it’s very true. Generally when something isn’t working right I’ll usually ask the actor what their intention is – where they’re going with the performance. We discuss it and I’ll offer adjustments to their line of thinking that gets it back on track – sometimes that can just be a verb (no, you don’t want to punish him here, sooth him…) sometimes it’s about motivation (this is NOT when she reveals her secret… She’s still scared and it’s haunting her here…) sometimes it’s merely a fact of breaking through the barriers keeping the actor from the good performance. Breaking through the barriers can be tough – and it all depends on the situation.

SOME DIRECTORS ARE MORE COMFORTABLE FOCUSING ON THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF A FILM THAN ON THEIR ACTOR’S PERFORMANCES. WHAT’S YOUR VIEW?

I think they’re both equally important. For the moment, for the scene, the actor’s performance is everything. The nuance of their performance drives the film and engages the audience. People go to see people. BUT the technical aspects are what sets the tone and arch for the bigger picture – the whole film. Visual story telling is a major part of the audience’s journey and not focusing on that aspect is missing a big piece of the pie.
I’m very comfortable working with actors, primarily because I understand where they’re coming from. Having been an actor, I can speak their language fairly well. It’s a relationship built on trust – they have to trust me completely to really let go in their performance and trust that I will guide them in the right direction. At the same time, I can speak the technical language. I understand very well the differences between a close up and a medium shot – when to move the camera, when to block actors to camera and vise versa. Both aspects are equally important, in my view.

THERE IS ALWAYS THE UNEXPECTED ON SHOOTS, EQUIPMENT FAILS, ACTORS FREEZE, LIGHT FADES. WHAT PROBLEMS HAVE YOU ENCOUNTERED AS A DIRECTOR THAT YOU’VE MANAGED TO OVERCOME?

Oh, there are problems every day. There are major obstacles every scene, every setup – that’s all part of the job. Overcoming those obstacles is what directing is all about.

I have a personal obstacle that happens once every production. There comes a time, usually a couple days in, when things go wrong – things have to change and my entire plan goes out the window. Suddenly I’m at a loss. What do we shoot? where do we start? what’s the point of view for this scene? How do we overcome this blocking problem? I get overwhelmed, my mind feels like a stripped gear – spinning and getting nowhere. I used to kind of sulk off and try to desperately work out the problem, but I’ve found a better solution. I just dive in and start shooting. I’ll pick a camera position – almost totally randomly – get the actors in and start shooting the scene.

As soon as I do that – it all becomes clear and I can make the necessary adjustments to the current setup to get us back on track. I’ve run into this “moment of doom” once on every project – but now that I know how to deal with it, I’m much less overwhelmed by it. Just dive in and start rolling and figure it out as you go.

WHAT HAVE YOU LEARNED AS A DIRECTOR SINCE YOU SHIFTED YOUR FOCUS FROM CINEMATOGRAPHY?

There’s a lot more responsibility riding on my shoulders for each project. In addition – there is a LOT less work for me, overall. As a DP, I could easily do 5-10 projects a year – if it got slow, I could find a commercial or music video or short film…As a director, I’m LUCKY to do one project a year. It means I have to really focus on trying to develop as much material as I possibly can in the hopes that one will succeed and lead to the next. It’s a much different business and lifestyle paradigm that I’m still getting used to. I also have a much more direct line to the equity investors and their demands – and that puts a much different perspective on your work, not always a good one. You have to balance all that as a director and I have to balance out a LOT more “down” time than I did when I was a DP – that can be very hard on the spirit, for sure.

WHAT DO YOU SEE AS THE FUTURE FOR FILM? IS IT “DEAD” AND IF SO DOES IT’S DEMISE MAKE YOU SAD OR HAVE YOU EMBRACED THE HD REVOLUTION?

Well – I don’t see the demise of film anytime soon. I, honestly, don’t feel that film will “die” in my lifetime. By “die” I mean will be primarily replaced by digital technology. Film will never completely “die” as we have a 100+ year heritage with film and no one is ever going to digitize Citizen Kane and destroy the film prints.

At the same time, digital technology is in its infancy and it’s fantastic. I tell filmmakers all the time, if your feature budget is under $5,000,000 – $10,000,000 there is no reason to consider film. Digital technology is the way to go for those kinds of budgets. If you’re above that, then film is more the way to go.

Without getting into a HUGE diatribe, there are four aspects of digital technology – digital origination, digital postproduction, digital exhibition and digital archiving – that need to be firmly in place before the “death” of film. Right now we have digital postproduction firmly in place and a vast majority of projects do not touch film in postproduction at all. Digital exhibition is coming into it’s own – but it still accounts for less than 5% of all theatrical exhibition around the world (in the US we’re seeing just under 2,000 screens digital compared to 37,000 screens film). Digital origination is starting to catch on a little more – but its’ still minor. In 2006 9% of all films released theatrically in the US were originated digitally (excluding animation and documentary) – so we’re still a ways off from digital replacing film in that category.

Where digital is at a COMPLETE loss is in archiving. No one has devised a fool-proof digital archival system that is guaranteed to last 100+ years. Some media can claim to last that long – but no one can know for sure if we’ll have the hardware/software necessary to read that media in 100 years. Film requires only the light and the human eye to see – digital requires much more and the technology evolves so quickly, it is often obsolete before it is even close to seeing full adoption as a standard medium.
So… No. I’m not sad – and yes, I have embraced digital technology.

JAY, CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT YOUR DOCUMENTARY “CAM GIRLS”

CamGirls is an introduction to the cultural phenomenon of web cams and, specifically, women running amateur web cam sites from their own homes. I was fascinated by this expanding culture and started looking into why anyone would do this – especially those who are not necessarily porn sites and those who do not necessarily cam for profit. What I discovered is quite surprising – the reasons are just as diverse as the women themselves. CamGirls introduces the audience to the real women behind the cams, what their lives are like, who they are, and tries to get behind why they do what they do.
I’ve been working on this for nearly four years now – much longer than I ever thought I would – but we’re seeing a potential light at the end of the proverbial tunnel – so I’m happy about that.

WHEN AND WHERE WILL WE BE ABLE TO SEE IT?

Damn good question. Hopefully we’ll be completed with it by fall 2007, so we could potentially have a release in place by early 2008.

IS THE BEST PART OF BEING A DIRECTOR HAVING YOUR OWN CHAIR?

LOL… I actually rarely ever sit down. I’m not a big fan of director’s chairs – although the older I get the more that will probably change – I’m more comfortable sitting on an apple box or camera case close to the action than kicking back in a director’s chair out away from where the magic is happening. The best part of directing, for me, is when I get to see the final work with an audience and they ride on the emotional journey (whatever that may be) with all the right turns – just as I intended. THAT’s what makes it all worth it.

OK, WHAT’S THE BEST PEICE OF FILMMAKING ADVICE YOU’VE EVER BEEN GIVEN?

Steven Spielberg said it – and it’s VERY true: “Wear comfortable shoes.”

THANKS JAY!

JAY HOLBEN is Director, Writer and former Cinematogrpaher.

Dez: It’s a documentary feature film to use a genre word, but in essence it’s a psychedelic journey or a shamanic journey if you like. The vehicle is the writing and worldview of Alan Moore, probably one of the greatest English writers of the last 50 years. Since he’s incredibly articulate, that search for a deeper underlying truth beneath our physical reality is expressed in the clearest possible way, while sketching a portrait of one of the greatest creative minds of our times.

ALAN MOORE IS A NOTORIOUSLY PRIVATE MAN. HOW DID YOU GO ABOUT SECURING HIS COOPERATION FOR THE PROJECT?

I approached him with the main theme of the film and emphasized that the film wouldn’t be focused on comics –although I love the medium– but rather on his magical world view. At the time all the interviews I read about him were comics based, and I thought what a shame. Here you have one of the most interesting writers alive and nobody delves deeper into the creative process. So I faxed him the treatment with the theme: The artist as contemporary shaman.

Which at the time was something I was slowly becoming aware of, that there is a deeper drive and intention to art, when it really comes from inside. So he called me back after the weekend and the ball just rolled from there.

CAN YOU TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT THE FINANCE FOR THE FILM, HOW YOU RAISED THE MONEY AND THE CHALLENGES INVOLVED IN THIS?

Initially there were some other parties involved, potential co-production deals, where they either would secure finance and post-production, produce the project or do all of it, etc. etc. When it all became clear (and this can take anywhere from months to years) that nothing was happening from any of these companies and people, I had to jump in the fire and start fund raising. Now, when you start out, you will have to beg, borrow, steal, rob, hustle –I don’t know if it was Bill Laswell who said something similar about music– as long as you have a clear plan of how to produce a final result.

So I injected my last savings into the company I founded, started to borrow from family, friends, business connections and gave up my own equity in other projects and business ventures, anything to inject some cash into the film. Then at the last stages business loans were necessary, credit cards, all the stuff I never did in my life as I hate owing money to anybody, especially bureaucratic institutions. It’s been quite tough the last few years, because effectively, the last year was a move from being a production company to a distribution company. Developing the DVD and the infra-structure to sell the film.

In retrospect it was a mission impossible, and had I known about all the obstacles I maybe would not have done it. But that’s why it’s good when you don’t know what you’re doing and just keep going. And I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone, because the money is stuck for a long time and you’ll get creditors breathing down your neck, so the pressure to deliver something marketable is tremendous.

All of the above was parallel to trying the conventional route by the way, film funds that rejected the 80 page business plans and submission. Distribution companies were interested after completion, but too scared to take it on as they considered it too much of a “niche”, or they couldn’t convince they really understood the film and how it had to be packaged and marketed. So a good thing that I moved ahead independently.

WHO WERE THE OTHER IMPORTANT MEMBERS OF YOUR PRODUCTION TEAM?

Quite a few and all really talented people, some also on the threshold of developing their skills further, some I’ve lost contact with as they went their own way. Moritz Winkler the cinematographer and editor was a close collaborator and although not into comics, was able to translate the feel into the cinematography and was great to work with in the editing process.

Brian Kinney the special make-up fx artist was a big Alan Moore fan and knew every letter and image of his work, much more than I did in fact. So not only did he create the first ever V for Vendetta and Watchmen-Rorschach masks, but he was also like a walking reference book to check if I got things right. He later moved back to the US and after some odd jobs ended up at the special make up department of CSI New York. We had planned to do some brutal prosthetics in a martial arts film as in the 70s Japanese films, but we later saw a lot of that in Kill Bill unfortunately and the whole mainstream has gone more gory, so we’ll have to find new ways of doing things.

Drew Richards, the music composer created a great score without having seen any of the film. Additional music was provided by Spectre, a hiphop producer from Brooklyn and also by Lustmord. There was also one track by Bill Laswell and Alan Douglas. All of their music was very influential in writing the film, so it was a good decision to contact them all early in the process.

John Coulthart was involved after the film was completed, with the publicity material and DVD design. One of the few people I know that have that perfect balance between great technical knowledge, understanding of aesthetics and narrative and the whole media business in general and his work was inspiring during the tedious DVD post-production process.

Then there were a lot of other people involved along the way, e.g. Ivor Goldberg who did a lot of the high end computer animation, Mano Camon who edited the bonus interviews and so on.

YOU SHOT ON 16MM? WHAT WERE THE REASONS YOU CHOSE TO SHOOT ON FILM RATHER THAN A DIGITAL FORMAT?

Yes, Super 16mm to be exact. Film, what can I say, has more latitude, has a great contrast and subtle shades, while video is too sharp, edged and the contrast between shadow and light is just harsh. For time lapses as well film is much better and I felt that this would be the only chance to capture a magician on celluloid, so film had to be part of that alchemical process. Film is magic. And another thing is, because it so expensive per minute, you have to be more decisive. I often see people on video shoots and it’s too relaxed, too much hanging around while they just keep the camera rolling.

DID YOU HAVE A FIXED AMOUNT OF TIME TO SHOOT WITH ALAN MOORE?

Yes, and it wasn’t much. We had one day to record an audio interview. And just one day to shoot him, as he was in the busiest period of his career probably. He was writing towards his retirement from mainstream comics, in particular on the ABC line for Wildstorm, so he was toiling away on 5-6 series a month!

I realized later he probably wanted to get out of the DC yoke, because they had bought up Wildstorm at some point, which meant he effectively was working for them again. Now he’s contractually free to do anything he wants.

A few months later in August 2002 we did a few hours of pick ups, his hands laying down the tarot. That was it, not much time but it forces you to plan things out and get out of the grip of Murphy’s Law.

THERE ARE ALSO DRAMATIC SCENES WITHIN THE FILM USING ACTORS. WERE YOU RECREATING SCENES FROM ALAN’S WORK?

DV: Yeah, in fact we did the first Watchmen, V for Vendetta and Hellblazer (later made by Hollywood as Constantine) adaptations ever, which was a great challenge and experiment. I decided that mood, atmosphere was the thing to go for, just to give a flavour of the man’s work.

WHEN AN ACTOR COMES TO YOU TO AUDITION, WHAT DO YOU HAVE THEM DO?

I often ask them what kind of music they listen to and why. This gives me a much better idea of what kind of emotional landscape they go through. Then I ask them to read bits of dialogue from a page. Also testing how well they can memorize a part of a script very quickly and if they are able to improvise. But in general it’s important to see if they are not too wooden because of stage play experience, not too cocky about being the next Brando –or even worse one of those contemporary pretty glamour boy or modelly girl faces– and if they will be chilled out enough to work with for a number of weeks.

In film you don’t have to be the best of buddies, but it’s important that people are at least well mannered and pleasant to work with over a longer period.

CONCERNING PERFORMANCE IN GENERAL, HOW IMPORTANT IS A PROPER AMOUNT OF REHEARSAL TIME FOR YOU AS A DIRECTOR AND YOUR ACTORS BEFORE SHOOTING?

The guerrilla shoots I’ve done never really allowed for more than a few days, but I would say a week to get the whole feel of the script right and another week to go over each scene is a minimum. The more you can rehearse the better, but this depends on the actors as well. What is the method they use, do they like to improvise, do they have a good memory? And there is a point where you just have to shoot, I don’t believe in this Kubrick nonsense of 200 takes. Respect to the man’s oeuvre, but that is just being indecisive. I usually shoot one take, then another 2-3 as backup. With the martial arts project I’m planning, rehearsal time will be at least 4 weeks I would say of training and choreography, but I’m aiming to get real practitioners which will make it easier.

WHAT DO YOU DO TO CHANGE THINGS WHEN YOU’RE NOT GETTING WHAT YOU WANT FROM AN ACTOR’S PERFORMANCE?

Tricks. Actors don’t like them, but they can work. A famous example is I think Rosselini’s use of glycerine or onions to get an actor to cry. Fact is film is an illusion and it’s whatever looks right on screen that counts.

I did similar things with having an actress spray heavy perfume on herself just before an actual take, so it would subliminally calm the actor playing opposite her, who was all hyped up.

SOME DIRECTORS ARE MORE COMFORTABLE FOCUSING ON THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF A FILM THAN ON THEIR ACTOR’S PERFORMANCES. WHAT’S YOUR VIEW?

That’s a film school mentality. We all do it when we start out, as you’re learning about the craft. But it’s like language, learning about the letters, then showing off rhymes and how clever you can be with the grammar, without really saying anything to greater emotional impact.

Some people never evolve beyond that point, but they’re lucky enough to have calibre actors to give reasonable performances. Hollywood is a good example, it’s for 90% a CGI mentality now. Boys with toys.

WHAT OBSTACLES/CHALLENGES DID YOU ENCOUNTER WHILE SHOOTING “MINDSCAPE”? HOW WERE THEY RESOLVED?

Too many. Not enough money, people not living up to commitments of certain jobs, too much to organize with no production or location manager, etc. etc. But you have to stay calm, continue and improvise, that’s the nature of guerrilla film making. It has a lot of limitations, but sometimes they force you to be more creative and it keeps you sharp.

WHEN THINGS DON’T GO TO PLAN, WHAT DO YOU DO TO REMAIN CALM IF YOU FIND YOURSELF BECOMING FRUSTRATED OR FRAZZLED WHILST SHOOTING?

Over the years I’ve learnt to deal with it much more as I didn’t use to be patient at all or not very considerate to what was going on around me. The only goal was to get that shot and if it didn’t work out I got frustrated. But in martial arts you have to be able to suspend your emotions otherwise you will simply end up dead in no time, so I’ve learnt to be more flexible. Meditation helps, but on the actual shoot there’s a really good mantra when things get hairy: Fuck it.

Once you realize you can step back from it for a short break, it helps tremendously. Break for 10 minutes, let everybody do something else entirely and come back to it with a fresh mind.

WHAT DO YOU FEEL YOU HAVE LEARNT AS AN INDEPENDENT PRODUCER/DIRECTOR FROM MAKING THIS FILM?

Too much to go into detail. All of the above. Planning, decision making, legal requirements before you step into the battle zone, evolving the bullshit radar, unilateral movements. Let’s put it this way, I think it was the Dutch football coach who developed total football, Rinus Michels –nicknamed The General– who said: Football is War.

I’m not a sports fan, but I would say: Film is War. You got all these resources, equipment hired for a lot of money and people lined up to do a certain job. Don’t waste it, be efficient. If you want to fuck around and be indecisive go buy a canvas and a few brushes, then you have all the time in the world to play the artist. Film in its intention is an art, but in execution is war.

IF YOU COULD DO IT ALL AGAIN WHAT WOULD YOU DO DIFFERENTLY?

Get a producer. Get a sales agent. Secure all the financing first before shooting anything. Make sure any commitments from third parties, companies or whoever promised golden mountains, were all laid down on paper. Create milestones. If at a certain point it becomes clear they can’t deliver, rework the terms and change procedures and plans accordingly. I wouldn’t wait as long as I did to hear back from the various parties anymore, because that lost time can never be given or bought back with all the money in the world.

And to continue on your previous question, I’ve learned that Ego is something you can not take out of the equation. As much as you might be passionate about just getting the project finished, all these Egos are involved that are more keen on the credits, fame or money than you would expect, even if they don’t complete their responsibilities. Before you know it, you get a lot of flack and accusations thrown at you. So whatever you do in the business, because there are so many parties involved, you’ll always get criticism. But you simply can’t please everybody and have to continue with the best of intentions and take the winning team with you to the next project.

DID ALAN MOORE SEE THE FINISHED FILM AND WAS HE PLEASED WITH WHAT YOU’D DONE?

He really loved it. He gave some great compliments that were inspiring as hell, so whatever criticism I will ever get, having the blessing from the man himself –with such a high standard of criteria in narrative– made it all worthwhile. And a benchmark to aim for.

AT WHAT STAGE IS THE FILM AT NOW? WHERE CAN PEOPLE SEE IT?

After a number of festivals and all that, it’s available on DVD now with a lot of bonus material and on sale at: www.shadowsnake.com. Completely independent, but it will be available at retailers at some point.

IF YOU WERE A SUPERHERO/VILLAIN WHAT WOULD YOU BE?

Probably a combination of villain (in the sense that I would be a vigilante) and hero, who could read minds and make the heads explode of corrupt politicians or figures who continuously squeeze out the people and raping the planet, effectively stagnating any spiritual growth. I’ve seen lives and countries destroyed because of that. They are the real villains.

But as that seems to be part of the system we live in, maybe having the power to just become any animal I want at any time and just get out of human society seems a more liberating choice. Fly away to use an old cliché.

WHAT POWERS/COLOURED PANTS WOULD YOU HAVE?

Black pants. Maybe for the hell of it with that red groin piece and chains that singer from Cameo had in that 80s Word up video. It takes balls to wear something like that.

WHAT PROJECTS ARE YOU WORKING ON AT THE MOMENT AND WHAT’S IN THE FUTURE FOR DEZ VYLENZ?

2 films. I’ve put everything else in the fridge and am focusing on the scripts for a martial arts project and a jungle sort of mystical thriller-drama. They’re all part of the Shamanautical Series and parallel with that I’m writing a novel where these characters are developed in depth. I can’t elaborate too much on it till it’s all done, but the future will be that kind of film and story. I’m interested in mystery, myth and mystical planes.

Mundane stuff can be done better by other people, but I just got hired to write two feature screenplays for other kind of material, so we’ll see.

Besides that I’m doing a lot of work as Strategy Consultant, which is not always film related but it pays the bills and is great business experience. And with the whole funding process in the film industry being such an arduous process, I have a back up, because I don’t want to get stuck in development hell.

I love film, but there’s more to it and over the years I’ve become more of a martial artist who works in film rather than the other way around. Martial Arts are a much purer art form as you don’t do it for show or entertainment to anybody else, just for the art. So me retreating from the whole media thing and just living my life somewhere in peace and quiet and teaching is also a very realistic option.

But I’m not disillusioned with the entire film industry as yet, so let’s hope I get at least 3 more films done in the next 10 years that will stand as engaging narratives.

WHAT’S THE BEST PIECE OF FILM MAKING ADVICE YOU’VE BEEN GIVEN OR HEARD ABOUT?

Milos Forman said something like: A director has to be good at all the departments, but he should have people working there who are better than him.

THANKS DEZ

Dez Vylenz is a Director, Writer and Martial Arts choreographer based in London and Amsterdam. For more info on Dez’s work, visit Shadowsnake films.

Lie Still is a psychological ghost story, with the emphasis placed on mood and atmosphere rather than gore and jump scares. It really comes out of my admiration for older films such as The Innocents, The Haunting, Let’s Scare Jessica to Death, Polanski’s early work, and more recently, J-horror films such as Kairo and Ringu.

HOW LONG WAS THE SCRIPT IN DEVELOPMENT BEFORE IT WAS READY TO SHOOT?

Whilst the first draft was written relatively quickly, it took a while to make the film happen and the script was being worked on the whole time, so I’d say about three years.

YOU COLLABORATED WITH PRODUCER NAVIN CHOWDHRY ON YOUR SHORT FILM “THIS BASTARD BUSINESS” AND THEN “LIE STILL”. HOW DID THE TWO OF YOU MEET AND START WORKING TOGETHER?

Just a coincidence, really. I met him though a friend of mine who he was seeing at the time. He’d written a short script, his first (This Bastard Business), and she suggested to him that he give it to me for advice. Not knowing him that well at the time, I was fairly merciless with it and I’m surprised he stuck with me! However, we ended up working on successive drafts together for a year or so. Eventually he decided that he wanted to produce it and asked me if I wanted to be involved.

The film turned out well, played festivals and won some awards. From there, we ended up doing some corporate-type video work together. However, we also used to sit in the pub and hatch schemes about doing a low-budget feature film. Eventually, we stopped talking about it and went and did it…

CAN YOU TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT THE FINANCE FOR THE FILM, HOW THE MONEY WAS RAISED AND ANY DIFFICULTIES THIS INVOLVED?

Raising money is always difficult. I think one of the main problems we had is that people didn’t believe we could do it for the budget we were proposing. Also, there are always issues of control, and we were determined to maintain that for ourselves. We raised a portion of the budget from doing the aforementioned corporate work, and then Navin managed to put the rest of it together, probably by selling various internal organs on the black market.

HOW DID YOU GO ABOUT CASTING THE FILM? WHERE DID YOU FIND YOUR ACTORS?

We had a casting agent advising us, and then of course Navin is himself an actor, so he knew people’s work and had various contacts. He suggested Stuart Laing to me for the main role of John, and after looking at some of his work, I completely agreed. He also knew Nina Sosanya personally, and being a great admirer of hers, I thought she’d be perfect.

Of course, none of this means that people will necessarily be interested, but luckily, most of the actors we approached genuinely liked the script. I think it’s true to say that most actors are always looking for good material, regardless of how much money is involved. If you’ve got an interesting project, I don’t think you need have any problem finding quality actors.

IN GENERAL, DURING THE AUDITIONING PROCESS, HOW DO YOU WORK WITH YOUR ACTORS, WHAT DO YOU HAVE THEM DO? WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR?

A lot of our so-called auditioning process simply involved me looking at examples of people’s previous work and making judgements based on that. We simply didn’t have time to get into a lengthy casting process.

In general however, I’d say it’s important to get a sense of how the actor works and how that would mesh with your own process. I’d be mainly interested to see what their understanding of the character and material was, and what they were going to bring to the table. It is a collaborative process, and I want people who are going to run with what’s on the page. Stuart, for example, ended up completely owning that character, and added shadings to it that were only vaguely there in the script.

I’m therefore usually not so interested in script readings in and of themselves (although they have a place). Some people read well, others badly. It doesn’t necessarily reflect on their ability as an actor.

I’d also say it’s important to make people feel comfortable during the audition process. I’ve heard horror stories about castings you wouldn’t believe, and quite how that benefits anybody’s work I’m not certain.

HOW IMPORTANT IS A PROPER AMOUNT OF REHEARSAL TIME FOR YOURSELF AND YOUR ACTORS AND DID YOU GET ENOUGH BEFORE THE SHOOT?

I generally like to have a decent amount of rehearsal time, especially when you’re working with a tight budget/schedule. However, I do think it’s important not to over rehearse and deaden the material. I’m more concerned with making sure that everyone at least understands the intent of what’s on the page than getting perfect line readings.

Our pre-production time was extremely limited because of scheduling factors beyond our control, so we ultimately only had a weekend of rehearsal time with the actors. However, this was enough to at least run through the major dialogue scenes and make sure that we were all in tandem on issues of character and motivation.

WHAT DO YOU DO TO CHANGE THINGS WHEN YOU’RE NOT GETTING WHAT YOU WANT FROM AN ACTOR IN TERMS OF PERFORMANCE?

It depends. Sometimes it might be because I’ve not been clear enough in what I want, or a lack of understanding on their part. In which case it’s my job as a director to clarify, and I always maintain that the best adage is K.I.S.S – Keep It Simple, Stupid. As a director, I’m very text-orientated, and don’t go in for windy metaphorical speeches as to what an actor should be doing. It often comes down to what the character wants, which should be there in the subtext of the script.

Of course, it may be that the script itself is lacking (In my case, I can say this without causing offence to anyone, because I generally write my own stuff!). In which case, I don’t hesitate to throw things out if they’re not working. It might be that I have to come up with something else, or else the actor might suggest ideas. Whatever works for the best of the film. You can’t be overly precious about the words on the page.

It’s always a learning process. Actors are all different, and I’m there to help them give the best performance possible. Establishing trust is a big part of that, but sometimes you just have to know what the right thing to say is. I hope that I’ve managed to say it at least some of the time so far.

HAVE YOU EVER WANTED TO PUNCH AN ACTOR IN THE FACE OR OTHER BODY PART?

Not whilst working with them, no. I’m sure there are difficult actors, but sometimes people will be difficult because they’re in the hands of a bad director. I’m trying not to be one of those. A lot of it is in casting. You look for people that you can work with. Some people think fighting on a set is somehow a creative process – I’m not one of them. There will always be disagreements, but I think it’s helpful to like and respect the people you’re working with. Of course, it doesn’t always happen that way, and there are a few people I’ve crossed off my Christmas card list (and vice versa), but no actors as yet. It’s often considered normal for directors to complain about them, but I do like and respect actors and their work.

YOU CHOSE TO SHOOT ON FILM RATHER THAN ON A DIGITAL FORMAT. WHAT WAS THE THINKING BEHIND THIS DECISION AND HOW INVOLVED WAS YOUR D.O.P. PETER SINCLAIR IN THIS?

I think we convinced ourselves fairly early on that we’d shoot on film. (Of course, my original intent was to shoot black and white, but I was quickly shot down about that!) The quality of HD just wasn’t there when we first started planning, and we wanted to make the best-looking film possible. It cost us, both in terms of time and money, but I believe it was worth it. It’s very possible that the next thing I do will be HD, but I think there are greater possibilities there now.

Pete came onboard very late in the game, so he wasn’t involved in those discussions, but I don’t think he would have been happy shooting it in High Def. He knew precisely what the film required and did a fantastic job of achieving that in the Super-16mm format we ultimately went with.

DID YOU HAVE A CLEAR IDEA OF HOW YOU WANTED THE FILM TO “LOOK” VISUALLY AND DO YOU FEEL YOU ACHIEVED IT?

I did have a clear idea, and certainly had a number of elements I wanted to achieve, but I don’t think it’s good to be too restrictive about these things. I told Pete early on that I wanted a moving camera, muted colours and deep, dark shadows. From what I’m told, this seemed to mesh pretty well with his overall style anyway, so he seemed perfectly happy with that!

On set, I’d prepared a comprehensive shot list, but you have to be flexible. Sometimes what you’ve planned just isn’t possible because of time restrictions, and sometimes the D.P simply has a better idea. Pete Sinclair is a very experienced and talented guy, and I’d be an idiot not to listen to him. So some sequences in the film are precisely as I’d envisaged them, others I went with Pete’s ideas. It’s a definite collaboration.

So yes, I’m very happy with the visual look of the film. It’s one of the things I’m proudest of, especially given the budgetary limitations we were under.

WHAT OBSTACLES/CHALLENGES DID YOU ENCOUNTER WHILE SHOOTING “LIE STILL” AND HOW WERE THEY RESOLVED?

Not to sound like a broken record, but the main obstacles were time and money. A rushed pre-production schedule didn’t help (we only had a limited window of time to shoot in the main location and had to accelerate things because of that). We had a couple of crew members drop out at the last minute and had to scramble to replace them, which led to a lack of planning in some departments.

Sometimes you just have to improvise and go with what’s possible on the day. I’ve made a lot of low/no budget shorts, so I was reasonably comfortable doing that, but it’s not ideal. There were a couple of days where it was definitely seat of your pants time. For me, a lot of the things I wince at in the film are due to lack of prep time and resources.

It does help if you have a plan, because at least you have a foundation to work from when things go wrong. And we were gifted with a very dedicated bunch of people who believed in what we were doing, which certainly got us through the rough spots.

WHEN THINGS DON’T GO TO PLAN, WHAT DO YOU DO TO REMAIN CALM IF YOU FIND YOURSELF BECOMING FRUSTRATED OR STRESSED WHILST SHOOTING?

Throw things at the production assistants.

Not really. There will always be frustrations and stress, and if you can’t deal with that you’ve got no place on a film set. I’m not a shouty kind of director; I just don’t think it helps. I’ll generally skulk off into a corner and stew for a while. (I always start smoking again when I’m filming.) Like I said, always have some kind of a plan. That way, if things go wrong, you still have something to work from. A shot list always helps me. Even if you ultimately have to drop or combine shots, having something down on paper at least gives you a way forward.

A couple of beers at the end of the day work wonders too.

HOW CLOSELY DOES THE FINISHED FILM MATCH YOUR ORIGINAL VISION/EXPECTATION?

In some ways, it’s very close. The performances, visuals and sound are all what I wanted and more. I don’t think any film can ever live up to the ideal in your head but I’m very proud of what we have.

The film changed from the original script to some extent, but that’s just part of the process. Things were dropped and restructured in editing, and we ended up doing a bit of rewriting and reshooting, to augment certain elements and replace others that didn’t work. You’re always learning, and some things that seem to work on the page don’t always in practice. However, the film is basically the same story I conceived of originally, and the initial approach I had in mind never changed. I wanted a dreamlike, subtle horror film with strong characters and performances, and I believe that’s what we managed to get.

IF YOU COULD DO IT ALL AGAIN WOULD YOU DO ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY?

There’s no doubt, but it’s my first feature and I’ll know more about certain things next time. You’re always trying to improve, and I certainly think I’m a better writer/director now than I was then, simply by virtue of age and experience. So yes, there are things in the film I’m uncomfortable with, but they’re my mistakes and I’ll learn from them. (Judging from what I’ve heard from distributors, I should have put more tits and gore in there too, but this is the film we wanted to make and I’ll stand by that.)

And although it was really no-one’s fault, I’d certainly want more prep time if we did it again. And a lot more money.

And a nice trailer, and a personal assistant…

AT WHAT STAGE IS THE FILM AT NOW?

It’s done the festival circuit and is hopefully starting to get sold to various territories. It’s meant to be getting a DVD release in the US and South America sometime soon. No news on the UK alas…it’s a tough market over here.

OK, TIME FOR A SERIOUS QUESTION: IF YOU WERE A SUPERHERO/VILLAIN WHAT WOULD YOU BE?

Wolverine, because that healing factor must come in handy for hangovers.

WHAT POWERS/COLOURED TIGHTS WOULD YOU HAVE?

I wouldn’t look good in tights, trust me.

WHAT’S THE BEST PIECE OF FILM MAKING ADVICE YOU’VE EVER BEEN GIVEN OR HEARD ABOUT?

Get plenty of sleep. Hire people who are more talented than you. Don’t hire Lindsay Lohan.

FINALLY, WHAT PROJECTS ARE YOU WORKING ON AT THE MOMENT AND WHAT’S IN THE FUTURE FOR SEAN HOGAN?

I recently signed to do a project in Ireland that has since been delayed due to legal difficulties. As it stands now, I’m not sure the original script I wrote will ever be made, so there’s not much I can say about it other than the fact that it was a larger scale supernatural noir/horror film that would have been a lot of fun to do. Something may yet happen with the same producers but I’m not sure what as yet…

So in the meantime I’m going to go back and try and raise some money independently and do another small scale film. I’ve just started writing the script, so it’s early days, but it’s called Corpses for Dogs and will hopefully be a nastily twisted little exploitation piece, with some black humour.

And tits…And gore.

THANKS SEAN.

Sean Hogan is a London based Director and Writer.

Again, dialogue is as much about what you omit as what you put in. It’s important to remember that in real life, very, very few people vocalise their thoughts word-for-word. Speech is a contraction of a thought process, often designed to evoke a response as much as it is to impart information; often speech is about disguising a thought process, diverting people away from what we think we may have given away with our eyes.

Which leads me to another point about being economical with dialogue: you need to LEAVE SPACE FOR THE ACTORS. Most writers are compelled to put every bit of information into the dialogue because they think in terms of the action having to be complete on paper, but this is simply not true. Think about the following:

Say two characters – who know each other well – are waiting for an important piece of plot to telephone them (another script-writing mistake, but we’ll come to that). When the phone finally rings, there’ll usually be a bit of dialogue along the lines of. “That’s our boy”, or something as one of them approaches the phone. It’s simply redundant (and stupid). All you need to indicate is that the characters exchange a look. If the actors are any good, the audience will know exactly what that look is communicating.

It maybe an old cliché, an actor saying he wants to cut a chunk of dialogue because he can say the same thing simply with his face, but like most clichés it’s actually true, a good actor really can impart a line or two’s worth of information with just a look – and doing it visually is always the better way; it is, after all, a visual medium. Now that may seem obvious, but you’d be surprised how many scripts don’t appear to reflect this.

And another cliché about dialogue is you should speak it out loud. This cannot be emphasised enough, because it’s the only way to work out if it has the correct rhythm to it. After all, if the writer can’t speak his own words comfortably, how the hell can he expect the actors to?

‘Mike Johnson’ is scriptwriter…yeah, he is.

On Writing (which is well worth a read) on the subject of story. He likens the process of fashioning a story to that of uncovering a specimen in archaeology, that you chip and brush away at the tiny fragments until finally you have uncovered a complete entity. I think he’s really right about this, because ALL STORIES SHOULD ADHERE TO THEIR OWN INTERNAL LOGIC. It’s one of the most widespread mistakes in script writing, and it largely involves making characters do things that they clearly wouldn’t do in reality (or even worse, in the reality you’ve set up).

You know what it’s like, watching a crap film, when a character suddenly does something outrageously stupid or completely out-of-character, and it’s all because the writer suddenly makes them do something for the sole reason that that the plot requires them do it – it is sheer laziness. This is what I mean about writing being a craft. If you want to do it, you have to adhere to the internal logic; and if you want a character to do something, you have to make it believable for him or her to do so.

I’ll make the example very basic. Say, at a particular juncture in the events, that your main character has a choice of three different avenues to pursue: now the lazy way is simply to have him choose the route – avenue 3 – that leads him to the desired climax of the story, but in real life (i.e. internal logic) it’s not so simple, there may be a variety of reason why avenues 1 or 2 may be taken. The best way to adhere to logic is instead of making him decide which route to take, find reasons that actually prevent him from taking avenues 1 or 2.

Just remember to listen to your characters, if you understand them enough, they will tell you which way the story is going to go next; and be prepared, because it’s often in an entirely different direction to the one you thought you were taking. This is one of the reasons why the rigidity of the “three-act structure” or the card system can work against you, because sometimes you need to hear your characters speaking before you know what will happen next.

To be fair, a lot of this can be worked out when your first draft is complete and you’re going back through it.

As your first draft will more than likely be from the point of view of the main character, it’s important to go through it again making different “passes” for different characters. By that I mean going right through the script and looking at the all events from the point of view of each minor character. This is the best way of finding out whether or not they’re behaving realistically; finding out if – when someone responds to the hero with the reply “yes, that’s not a problem” – the real response is actually, “are you crazy? They know where my wife and children live!”.

A lot of this comes down to really getting to know your characters and the worlds they inhabit – in their own heads and beyond. Most of them are simply versions of you who have been through different experiences. But don’t mistake this difference. Say, for example, you have a character who suddenly gets a gun pointed into their face; if that person is a soldier, or a bodyguard or an armed robber, they’re going to act differently than if they are a teacher or singer; and if they are the latter, they’re going to turn cold, feel faint and possibly shit themselves. Just because they are your heroes, you can’t fake bravado in the face of cold reality, it just won’t wash.

Mike Johnson is a scriptwriter

Try to give your characters names of differing lengths: it’s a lot easier to take in who’s saying what if the speakers are called RICHARD, TED and MR. STEVENSON than if they’re called DAVID, JAMES and STEVE. (You don’t have to stick with these in the dialogue – in speech they can call each other whatever you want them to – just as long as their character name is consistent ahead of the dialogue and in the stage directions).

Put your scene headings (INT. POLICE STATION – DAY) in bold, it makes the location changes much more obvious, particularly during action sequences. (The Final Draft default doesn’t set them in bold, but it’s simply enough to customise)

Break up your stage directions into paragraphs, there’s nothing more tedious when you’re trying to read quickly than three-quarters of a page of unbroken text. Try to think of the action in terms of camera and break your paragraphs accordingly: when moving from one character’s actions to another; or when you think there’d be a cut from a medium-ish shot to a close-up; that sort of thing.

However, DO NOT WRITE CAMERA DIRECTIONS,

it works against you, in much the same way as writing huge, long chunks of description at the beginning of every scene does. This is information for camera and art department, not for an initial reader; the best chance your script has is if it reads at roughly the same speed on the page as it eventually will on the screen.

If information has to be imparted, do it within the scene, through the movements or action of characters; learn how to INTEGRATE, and you will do your work much more justice.

The basic mistake is to think that describing exactly what is in your mind’s eye gives the reader a more accurate picture of the location. It doesn’t, what it gives is a glut of information that blurs the initial image the reader will have in their head from the first sentence.

This is an example of how I think description is done best. Say your character is coming into a seedy bedsit (already, if you use those two words, it creates a fairly strong image in the reader’s mind), don’t give us half a page of the bed, the sink, the walls, etc. just give us something like:

JOHN walks into the seedy bedsit, its filth illuminated by a single, unshaded light-bulb.

Now there’s enough in that single sentence to produce an image in the reader’s mind that is more than enough to play the scene in. It doesn’t matter that the image may be bit different for each reader, the idea is to put them immediately into a place the action can take place in.

- LEARN TO LEAVE OUT AS MUCH AS YOU CAN.

Like good music, good writing is as much about the beats you leave out as those you put in.

That said, you should really make the effort to write your stage directions as good as you possibly can, because if they aren’t interesting, they will get skipped and the reader will miss a lot of what is going on in the script. If the stage directions are economical, pithy and enjoyable to read, more of your script will cross that huge gulf between the printed page and the reader’s mind.

‘Mike Johnson’ is a scriptwriter

A lot of people have a desire to write but just don’t know where to begin.

1. I’m not ready.
2. I’m too busy.
3. I don’t have all the answers yet.
4. I’m not a writer.

Well if you have had an idea swimming around inside you for a while then you are definitely ready, so that’s no 1 gone.

Being too busy is a reality for many of us but we could probably all find a little time each day; there are plenty of books available on time management.

You’ll never have all the answers at the start and this is true of any new task or skill you want to learn. It’s called the fear of making a mistake, wanting it to be perfect, wanting not to fail. If we give in to this one we will never start anything.

Do you think you’re not writer? Well maybe so because not everyone can be but have you tried yet? Or is it just another way of not starting? You won’t know you’re a writer until you’ve written lots and lots. And here’s the rub – the more we do something, the better we get at it: so you can scrub number 4 too.

Let’s look at ways to begin at the beginning.

Have you heard that old chestnut, “a thousand mile journey starts with a single step”? I’m sure you have. Writing is just like that. You can dance around the issue for years but until you sit down and write the story you’ve always wanted to write, it just won’t happen.

The best place to begin is wherever you are now. Make some space in your life and dedicate it to your writing. Find a physical place to work where you won’t be disturbed and begin to make it a habit to go there and write, even if it’s only half an hour a day. Have a pen and paper waiting there or set up your computer so it’s ready to go.

Write constantly for that period and don’t worry if it’ not great quality material. We want to write a first draft, not a finished masterpiece.

If you write a page a day that would be 365 pages a year and that’s a good sized novel! A screenplay is much shorter than that. Half a page a day would hit around the 180 page mark. That could be two first draft screenplays! Can you imagine how satisfying it would be to have 180 pages of your own writing sitting on your desk?

Well, at the start, aim for a ninety page script. With motivation, you can probably write three to four script pages a day. Then you could have a screenplay drafted in one month!

What if you don’t have a story yet?

If you only have one scene in your head, then write it down. Do not wait for inspiration to give you the rest of the story before you write.

Once you begin writing with excitement and enthusiasm you will be desperate to get this story out of the dark recesses of your mind. You will find, with uncanny regularity, different and usable ideas popping into your head. Creativity begins to work when you do. Once you commit yourself to the task in hand, your intuition will begin to nudge your consciousness with mysterious and connected notions. Only when you start to move forward, will your best script ideas follow. The good stuff never makes an appearance while you carry around a lukewarm desire to write something.

Persistent focus on writing will pay huge dividends and it won’t feel like work. Once that story takes hold, you will be excited and passionate and have a keen edge to your thoughts and your ideas. Put pen to paper today!

Check out these posts: How to write a screenplay: Start with the picture in your head, How to write a screenplay: Kick start your script, How to write a screenplay: Freewriting to unleash your creativity and How to write a screenplay: 7 tips for writing a great screenplay.

Log line

A log-line is a single line summarising the entire script or story. It should be dynamic and pack a punch for listeners. This is the ‘big concept’ moment. If someone likes this first pitch they’re likely to want to hear more so make sure it has the ‘wow’ factor.

Synopsis

Summarising the story in present tense is the purpose of the synopsis. It consists of anything between one paragraph and one or two pages. It is good practice to have different versions available, not only for pitching to others but also for yourself; there’s nothing better than being able to rattle off different length versions of your own story without the ‘ums’, ‘errs’ and ‘well it’s kinda like this’.

Step-outline

Here, your story is told in a series of steps. You describe each scene and its action in one or two sentences. Step-outlines are terrific for building up the stages of your story without yet having to fill in all the details. You can then shuffle your short scenes around endlessly as you progress.

Step-outlines are often written on index cards which gives you the advantage of being able to lay them out in front of you and re-arrange scenes at will as new scenes are created. This physical accessibility is often an extremely helpful and freeing tool for the writer at the point when the monitor screen has become an unforgiving and unimpressed tyrant.

Robert McKee, in his classic book ‘Story’, states that ‘the writer never shows his step-outline to people because it’s a tool, too cryptic for anyone but the writer to follow’ (Story, Methuen 1999, pg.413). Once you have the entire script in this format it is a great foundation from which to pitch your story to any interested parties.

Treatment

Every scene is developed into paragraphs and told as if it is happening in the present tense. The action is expanded and described in more detail than the one or two sentence step-outline but only what the audience would see and hear. Dialogue is summarised or excluded, except for occasional important lines.

A treatment will generally be between ten and twenty pages and is often used as a tool for raising financial baking and/or interest in the future film.

If you are ambitious and thorough, a treatment can be anything up to one hundred pages of fully fleshed out story, covering all the elements of the plot or idea. This is a short story format, almost the beginnings of a novel. If you go down this route, you can bet that any script developed from a long treatment will be a good deal more solid, coherent and thought-through.

‘Free-writing’ is one technique that should be used by the screenwriter on a consistent basis and not just for those moments when you are absolutely stuck or desperate.

What is free-writing?

Free-writing is the very simple technique of writing down whatever comes into your mind for a set period of time, say, about five minutes and no more. You do this without censoring yourself, which means you don’t stop after one sentence and make a judgement about how good that sentence is or whether it is worth continuing with. Forget all that until you have filled up half a page, or better still a page.

• Take an idea that you have in your mind; maybe about a scene or a character.
• Pick several keywords that relate to the idea or concept that you want to write about. For example, you have a sci-fi concept, so you decide on: planet, ship, and turbulence. It could be anything.
• Pick something that excites you. Remember we are trying to get those creative juices flowing so it has to be something that you can feel motivated about and this exercise is all about getting past your own critical censor. It is a good idea to incorporate the keywords into sentences when you start the exercise. Even though you have just plucked them from the ‘Ether ‘, using them somewhere in your following free-write will give you the initial direction you need.

So now you start writing and don’t hold back and don’t worry about the words coming out. How hard is that for five minutes?

What if everything I write is gibberish?

Just keep on letting all that subconscious material tumble out. Don’t judge your work or apply any critical process to what you’re doing until the end of the exercise. The idea is that letting this constant flow of words and ideas spill out onto the page is a way of bypassing the conscious, critical mind and letting the creative imagination have full reign.

Don’t be tempted to write for longer periods like this. Free-writing is a short burst activity which you can do over and over again, as often as you want but just make sure you have a break in between sessions.

Often, when we have been sat at our desk or computer most of the day and have written one paragraph, it is because we are putting too much pressure on ourselves to come up with perfect material and the perfect script from scratch. This is an easy trap to fall into and one of the main reasons for it, is the belief that the harder we think with our conscious mind, the better the lines will be. But, there is no point in spending hours or days on a few lines when we have the rest of the story to write. Of course, we will need our brilliant, critical faculty for those times when we have written tons of material that then needs pruning and shaping but you can’t be a perfectionist with the first few drafts of a screenplay. You have to get it written and fleshed out. If you take too long about it, the original and fresh idea you had may start to seem stale and lacking in life. Once the majority of your film is written and the big picture is in place then all those smaller details can be attended to.