1.  Men here wear red pants– if you are in the UK that will read as underwear– so I mean trousers.  They also wear orange, bright green, pink, and turquoise trousers.  Men here are much more sartorially adventurous.  They also wear silk scarves, wool scarves, and cotton scarves which are meant to be decorative as well as warm.

2.  If someone tells you– “Oh it’s just 5 minutes further on” expect it to be about a 20 minute walk.  People here walk much much more than in the US.  They always vastly underestimate how long a walk it is between here and there.  Buy comfortable shoes.

3.  They also smoke more– much more.  Perhaps the walking counter balances this. But expect smoke to be wafting everywhere people gather outside.  Most places do forbid smoking inside restaurants and other public venues but the walking includes walking past lots of smokers.

4.  People live at much colder temperatures, especially in the UK.  Central heating is still an advertised special feature in apartment ads.  Maybe that’s why they smoke– to keep warm.  It could also be why they drink.  People drink way more, especially in the UK, than in the US.  I am talking about middle-aged professionals here– not kids.  Black-out drinking is not uncommon.  I’ve overheard several conversations between colleagues about this in my travels.  Or maybe it’s just the people in the entertainment industry?  Or just people I know.

5.  Whenever there is the least glimmer of sun people sit outdoors in cafes, etc.  It can be freezing cold but people still dine and drink outside if there is any spot of brightness.

6.  People actually take vacations.  Yes, they turn off their mobile phones, their email, and are unreachable– for weeks!  It’s called relaxing.  This is a concept Americans seem to have trouble grasping, especially in the television business.  I am getting used to it.

7.  Things are more expensive here.  People tended to have fewer really nice things and not all the cheap crap that Americans tend to horde.  What they do have they use a lot and enjoy.  Yes yes there is cheaper crap over here but there is somehow a different mind set about things.  Physical evidence is the general lack of gigantic closets and tons of storage space.  This is not necessarily a matter of room size.  A good-sized bedroom might still have no closet and a just a medium sized wardrobe– a few shelves and a small single rack to hang clothes.

8.  Dining is a form of pleasure.  It takes much longer to be served at restaurants and no one rushes the bill.  People linger and talk.  There are certainly American fast food places but when having dinner with friends or colleagues it is a much slower process.  Waiters aren’t rushing to “turn over” the tables.

9.  People here are much more knowledgeable about the US and elsewhere than Americans are about anywhere. In general, they understand the mechanics of the US political process better than a lot of Americans or will quiz you on this to improve their understanding.  They are absolutely astonished at the lack of affordable healthcare and mass shootings of children– and the seeming lack of will to do much about either issue.

10.  They are much more energy conscious.  They drive smaller cars.  In the UK they have individual switches to turn off the current for each plug.  They seem to recycle more and don’t have the animosity some Americans have about alternative energy sources.  Germany, for instance, gets the vast majority of its electricity from solar power.  It’s not a particularly sunny country but they have developed the technology to improve on performance.

No things are not perfect here.  We all know about the economic troubles everywhere.  And yes you can complain about “socialism.”  But I am enjoying my time here and it is changing me, in lots of ways for the better.  I find my self collecting experiences rather than things– yes yes I know I did some shopping in Milan– but I bought a couple of really nice, if a bit expensive things.  I am learning a lot about myself and others.  There is nothing like travel to enrich perspectives and broaden personal horizons.  I am doubly blessed to be working on the stories of other cultures and having the deep intimate conversations that storytelling stimulates.  It’s been a great three months.

Today we had our first advisors’ meeting.  The scripts selected for the workshop are submitted from a variety of international writers.  Austria, Germany, Croatia, Denmark, Canada, Hungary and Norway are all represented by projects here.

In discussing the work to be done on the scripts, the advisors kept going back to the basics.  No matter how accomplished the writer is, it is always necessary to go back to fundaments when a script isn’t working well.  Primarily we discussed issues of want, need and price.  Here is what I mean by those terms.

The Want

In the story the character should immediately identify something he or she desires or wants. The character begins to put all of his or her effort into obtaining some very particular concrete, and often, selfish or self-centered goal.

This goal must be something real, graspable and very tangible. It is something the character can obtain or acheive physically: for example, seduce the woman, sell the stock, solve the crime, win the tournament, reveal the mystery, get the promotion etc. The Want is NOT an abstract or amorphous general desire.

The want is always an actual “thing.” It is something specific that could be obtained with a bit of concerted effort.

The Character’s Need is:

– Some deeper human longing (to be a better father, to appropriately separate from family, to love more generously, to act with integrity, to grow up and assume responsibility etc.)

– A true longing the character isn’t aware of, ignores, denies or tries to suppress

– At the heart of the character’s truest, highest most authentic self

– Something that must be embraced instead of obtaining the Want

The Need is a more abstract intangible set of internal qualities.  It is is a deeper desire for what is good, true and authentically right for the character as an individual of quality, dignity and worth.

The Price

The Price is the terrible personal cost of obtaining the Want and abandoning the Need. OR The terrible personal cost of abandoning the ego-driven goal or Want and embracing the Need.

If the character chooses the Want he or she inevitably surrenders to the fear and falls to the Dark Side. The story ends in tragedy. If the character embraces the Need, he or she finds personal completion. This may or may not be a happy ending but it is one of emotional satisfaction and wholeness.

Which price is the character willing to pay? The character must ultimately pay one price or the other. The more expensive the price is for the character the more compelling and urgent your story will be for the audience.

When a script isn’t working well, isn’t as compelling a read as it should be or has some kind of emotional disconnect in the story, the problem is usually the lack of a clear, urgent and well-developed Want, Need or Price.

Anyone who has heard me speak or who has read the articles on this site know I am always talking about characters taking a Leap of Faith in a story.  I have been a bit hesitant about making my own.

The cliff I am contemplating right now is moving to Europe to live and work for a year, possibly longer.  Serendipity has put several people in my path who have done just that–  They moved to a foreign country without a lot of pre-arranged work and they just made it happen.  They built their wings after taking a big leap of faith.  Each person said “just do it.”  And that is what I am going to do.  I will follow their inspiration.

Contrary to most of the stuff I post on this site– about writing and character or story analysis– I am going to start posting about this big leap off the cliff and the grand experiment of building my wings.  This is a formal declaration rather than the tentative “feelers”  I’ve been cautiously putting out.  It’s an exciting and scary time for me.  I will keep you posted!

.

.

TO THE WRITERS OF THE UNIT

GREETINGS.

AS WE LEARN HOW TO WRITE THIS SHOW, A RECURRING PROBLEM BECOMES CLEAR.

THE PROBLEM IS THIS: TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN *DRAMA* AND NON-DRAMA. LET ME BREAK-IT-DOWN-NOW.

EVERYONE IN CREATION IS SCREAMING AT US TO MAKE THE SHOW CLEAR. WE ARE TASKED WITH, IT SEEMS, CRAMMING A SHITLOAD OF *INFORMATION* INTO A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

OUR FRIENDS. THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO COMMUNICATE *INFORMATION* — AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.

BUT NOTE: THE AUDIENCE WILL NOT TUNE IN TO WATCH INFORMATION. YOU WOULDN’T, I WOULDN’T. NO ONE WOULD OR WILL. THE AUDIENCE WILL ONLY TUNE IN AND STAY TUNED TO WATCH DRAMA.

QUESTION: WHAT IS DRAMA? DRAMA, AGAIN, IS THE QUEST OF THE HERO TO OVERCOME THOSE THINGS WHICH PREVENT HIM FROM ACHIEVING A SPECIFIC, *ACUTE* GOAL.

SO: WE, THE WRITERS, MUST ASK OURSELVES *OF EVERY SCENE* THESE THREE QUESTIONS.

1) WHO WANTS WHAT?

2) WHAT HAPPENS IF HER DON’T GET IT?

3) WHY NOW?

THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE LITMUS PAPER. APPLY THEM, AND THEIR ANSWER WILL TELL YOU IF THE SCENE IS DRAMATIC OR NOT.

IF THE SCENE IS NOT DRAMATICALLY WRITTEN, IT WILL NOT BE DRAMATICALLY ACTED.

THERE IS NO MAGIC FAIRY DUST WHICH WILL MAKE A BORING, USELESS, REDUNDANT, OR MERELY INFORMATIVE SCENE AFTER IT LEAVES YOUR TYPEWRITER. *YOU* THE WRITERS, ARE IN CHARGE OF MAKING SURE *EVERY* SCENE IS DRAMATIC.

THIS MEANS ALL THE “LITTLE” EXPOSITIONAL SCENES OF TWO PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD. THIS BUSHWAH (AND WE ALL TEND TO WRITE IT ON THE FIRST DRAFT) IS LESS THAN USELESS, SHOULD IT FINALLY, GOD FORBID, GET FILMED.

IF THE SCENE BORES YOU WHEN YOU READ IT, REST ASSURED IT *WILL* BORE THE ACTORS, AND WILL, THEN, BORE THE AUDIENCE, AND WE’RE ALL GOING TO BE BACK IN THE BREADLINE.

SOMEONE HAS TO MAKE THE SCENE DRAMATIC. IT IS NOT THE ACTORS JOB (THE ACTORS JOB IS TO BE TRUTHFUL). IT IS NOT THE DIRECTORS JOB. HIS OR HER JOB IS TO FILM IT STRAIGHTFORWARDLY AND REMIND THE ACTORS TO TALK FAST. IT IS *YOUR* JOB.

EVERY SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC. THAT MEANS: THE MAIN CHARACTER MUST HAVE A SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, PRESSING NEED WHICH IMPELS HIM OR HER TO SHOW UP IN THE SCENE.

THIS NEED IS WHY THEY *CAME*. IT IS WHAT THE SCENE IS ABOUT. THEIR ATTEMPT TO GET THIS NEED MET *WILL* LEAD, AT THE END OF THE SCENE,TO *FAILURE* –  THIS IS HOW THE SCENE IS *OVER*.  IT, THIS FAILURE, WILL, THEN, OF NECESSITY, PROPEL US INTO THE *NEXT* SCENE.

ALL THESE ATTEMPTS, TAKEN TOGETHER, WILL, OVER THE COURSE OF THE EPISODE, CONSTITUTE THE *PLOT*.

ANY SCENE, THUS, WHICH DOES NOT BOTH ADVANCE THE PLOT, AND STANDALONE (THAT IS, DRAMATICALLY, BY ITSELF, ON ITS OWN MERITS) IS EITHER SUPERFLUOUS, OR INCORRECTLY WRITTEN.

YES BUT YES BUT YES BUT, YOU SAY: WHAT ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF WRITING IN ALL THAT “INFORMATION?”

AND I RESPOND “*FIGURE IT OUT*” ANY DICKHEAD WITH A BLUESUIT CAN BE (AND IS) TAUGHT TO SAY “MAKE IT CLEARER”, AND “I WANT TO KNOW MORE *ABOUT* HIM”.

WHEN YOU’VE MADE IT SO CLEAR THAT EVEN THIS BLUESUITED PENGUIN IS HAPPY, BOTH YOU AND HE OR SHE *WILL* BE OUT OF A JOB.

THE JOB OF THE DRAMATIST IS TO MAKE THE AUDIENCE WONDER WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. *NOT* TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT JUST HAPPENED, OR TO*SUGGEST* TO THEM WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

ANY DICKHEAD, AS ABOVE, CAN WRITE, “BUT, JIM, IF WE DON’T ASSASSINATE THE PRIME MINISTER IN THE NEXT SCENE, ALL EUROPE WILL BE ENGULFED IN FLAME”

WE ARE NOT GETTING PAID TO *REALIZE* THAT THE AUDIENCE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND THE NEXT SCENE, BUT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WRITE THE SCENE BEFORE US SUCH THAT THE AUDIENCE WILL BE INTERESTED IN WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

YES BUT, YES BUT YES *BUT* YOU REITERATE.

AND I RESPOND *FIGURE IT OUT*.

*HOW* DOES ONE STRIKE THE BALANCE BETWEEN WITHHOLDING AND VOUCHSAFING INFORMATION? *THAT* IS THE ESSENTIAL TASK OF THE DRAMATIST. AND THE ABILITY TO *DO* THAT IS WHAT SEPARATES YOU FROM THE LESSER SPECIES IN THEIR BLUE SUITS.

FIGURE IT OUT.

START, EVERY TIME, WITH THIS INVIOLABLE RULE: THE *SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC*.  IT MUST START BECAUSE THE HERO HAS A PROBLEM, AND IT MUST CULMINATE WITH THE HERO FINDING HIM OR HERSELF EITHER THWARTED OR EDUCATED THAT ANOTHER WAY EXISTS.

LOOK AT YOUR LOG LINES. ANY LOGLINE READING “BOB AND SUE DISCUSS…” IS NOT DESCRIBING A DRAMATIC SCENE.

PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR OUTLINES ARE, GENERALLY, SPECTACULAR. THE DRAMA FLOWS OUT BETWEEN THE OUTLINE AND THE FIRST DRAFT.

THINK LIKE A FILMMAKER RATHER THAN A FUNCTIONARY, BECAUSE, IN TRUTH, *YOU* ARE MAKING THE FILM. WHAT YOU WRITE, THEY WILL SHOOT.

HERE ARE THE DANGER SIGNALS.  ANY TIME TWO CHARACTERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.

ANY TIME ANY CHARACTER IS SAYING TO ANOTHER “AS YOU KNOW”, THAT IS, TELLING ANOTHER CHARACTER WHAT YOU, THE WRITER, NEED THE AUDIENCE TO KNOW, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.

DO *NOT* WRITE A CROCK OF SHIT. WRITE A RIPPING THREE, FOUR, SEVEN MINUTE SCENE WHICH MOVES THE STORY ALONG, AND YOU CAN, VERY SOON, BUY A HOUSE IN BEL AIR *AND* HIRE SOMEONE TO LIVE THERE FOR YOU.

REMEMBER YOU ARE WRITING FOR A VISUAL MEDIUM. *MOST* TELEVISION WRITING, OURS INCLUDED, SOUNDS LIKE *RADIO*.  THE *CAMERA* CAN DO THE EXPLAINING FOR YOU. *LET* IT. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERS *DOING* -*LITERALLY*. WHAT ARE THEY HANDLING, WHAT ARE THEY READING. WHAT ARE THEY WATCHING ON TELEVISION, WHAT ARE THEY *SEEING*.

IF YOU PRETEND THE CHARACTERS CANT SPEAK, AND WRITE A SILENT MOVIE, YOU WILL BE WRITING GREAT DRAMA.

IF YOU DEPRIVE YOURSELF OF THE CRUTCH OF NARRATION, EXPOSITION,INDEED, OF *SPEECH*. YOU WILL BE FORGED TO WORK IN A NEW MEDIUM – TELLING THE STORY IN PICTURES (ALSO KNOWN AS SCREENWRITING)

THIS IS A NEW SKILL. NO ONE DOES IT NATURALLY. YOU CAN TRAIN YOURSELVES TO DO IT, BUT YOU NEED TO *START*.

I CLOSE WITH THE ONE THOUGHT: LOOK AT THE *SCENE* AND ASK YOURSELF “IS IT DRAMATIC? IS IT *ESSENTIAL*? DOES IT ADVANCE THE PLOT?

ANSWER TRUTHFULLY.

IF THE ANSWER IS “NO” WRITE IT AGAIN OR THROW IT OUT. IF YOU’VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS, CALL ME UP.

LOVE, DAVE MAMET

SANTA MONICA 19 OCTOBER 05

(IT IS *NOT* YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW THE ANSWERS, BUT IT IS YOUR, AND MY, RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW AND TO *ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS* OVER AND OVER. UNTIL IT BECOMES SECOND NATURE. I BELIEVE THEY ARE LISTED ABOVE.)

Excerpt taken from movieScope Magazine, Issue 14

There are interesting reasons for the global dominance of American movies, like the fact that they generally have less dialogue than their European counterparts, and their scenes are shorter than those in most EU movies. This has the psychological effect of giving the movie greater impact on the audience-visual storytelling plays into the nature of ‘seeing’-we believe what we see-and also by leaving gaps-cutting the beginning and end from scenes, which does wonders to improve the pacing of the film. We, the audience, fill in those gaps and that makes us feel good about watching the movie.

All good lessons from a European observer.  Are you showing and not telling in your script?  Are you allowing the audience/script reader an opportunity to “fill in the gaps” and be more personally engaged in the story?  If not you are missing some of the qualities that make a script great.