Karel Segers: I’m here with Michael Sweeney. Michael is a union story analyst, and he’s read scripts for some of the most successful TV shows of recent years. Welcome, Michael. Could you introduce yourself and share a bit about your background?

Michael Sweeney: I’m from New Jersey, USA, and moved to Los Angeles to pursue screenwriting. Since graduating, I’ve worked with several production companies, including Netflix and 101 Studios, the team behind Yellowstone. Meanwhile, I’ve also launched my own website to help clients with their scripts, making them festival-ready, and I still do freelance work for other companies. So, busy, busy.

The Union Script Reader

Karel Segers: You call yourself a Union Analyst. What does that mean?

Michael Sweeney: The Screen Editors Guild created a category for story analysts, offering union protection similar to other groups. It’s odd that it’s not under the writing category, but since we’re technically editing and suggesting in the stories, we have our own classification. In other words, this ensures fair pay and work conditions for script readers, a niche part of the industry. It’s nice for them to know their jobs and work are protected by their own representatives.

Karel Segers: Tell us about your work as a script reader. How did you start out in this field?

Michael Sweeney: It’s all about who you know. After school, I stayed connected with a creative executive, kept pushing for work, and built relationships by constantly asking for meetings and opportunities. You just keep grilling, keep on asking people. You want to set up a meeting, go have lunch, have a chat. 

Remote Work in Hollywood

Karel Segers: Are you still working in physical offices, or has that changed since the pandemic?

Michael Sweeney: I mostly work remotely now. During my time with one company, they offered a main lobby space, but most people, including myself, chose to work from home. While remote work is convenient, it does make networking harder, requiring more effort to stay connected with industry contacts. One benefit of script reading is that it can be done remotely, so I stuck to working from home.

Karel Segers: Now, obviously, that is a different setup from previously. While it’s more convenient, wouldn’t you say it’s harder to make the connections that help you further in the industry?

Michael Sweeney: It is definitely a downside you have to work through. You have to be the driving force, constantly emailing, texting, and messaging on LinkedIn. You have to push almost double time under these conditions. Despite being shut in and feeling like a hermit, the need to connect and be collaborative compels you to reach out. 

Karel Segers: Yet, the work of the scrip reader remains the same: reading scripts and providing feedback. How does this process typically work, and how do scripts reach producers?

Michael Sweeney: It varies by company. Many have a no-solicitation policy, so scripts usually come from agents or managers. If a script stands out, I might look up the writer on LinkedIn to explore connections. It’s about who you know and using any connection to sell a script. If you know someone and have a script that fits the company’s niche, use that connection. Sometimes you find scripts from unrepresented writers that end up being great.

Karel Segers: How many scripts do you read, and how do you provide feedback?

Michael Sweeney: With Netflix, a script reader is paid by the hour, so you can take your time to be detailed. Other companies pay per script, so there’s an incentive to be quicker. I read 8–12 scripts a month, and feedback usually includes a synopsis and comments. Some companies prefer you to tailor your feedback, offering ways to improve the script rather than just passing or recommending it. So, the feedback format can vary by company, but it usually involves a dialogue with the assistant or person who submitted the script.

Karel Segers: Have you noticed changes in script quality over the years?

Michael Sweeney: There’s always a mix of good and bad scripts. However, I’ve found more scripts that resonate emotionally in recent years. One memorable script, Come Away, a dark story about grief, really moved me. Despite the constant flow of bad scripts, the emotionally impactful ones stand out more now. I’ll never forget the first script that really moved me. Over the last few years, I’ve read scripts that genuinely moved me, even made me shed a tear. It’s powerful when that happens, and I think there are more emotionally resonant scripts now.

Advice for Aspiring Screenwriters

Karel Segers: In terms of specific craft aspects, what are the things that jump out where you think, “If only writers would do this, it would be such an easy fix”?

Michael Sweeney: If only writers would pace themselves better. One of the biggest issues I see is poor pacing. Writers often over-embellish the action or clump all the character development into moments of calm, because they don’t know how to integrate character into action. A character’s choices should define them more than their words. Even in a high-speed car chase, a character’s decision can reveal much more than a lengthy monologue around a campfire.

Another thing is knowing your characters well. There’s that image of an iceberg, with more beneath the surface than above. As a writer, you need to know the entire iceberg, even though the audience only sees the tip. If you have a main character with three friends, ensure each friend has a distinct perspective. If their dialogue is interchangeable, consider cutting them. Every character should be essential and someone an actor would want to play, even in a small role.

When you write, ask yourself, “What would I lose without it?” If you can’t answer, then you need to develop it more or cut it. This applies to characters, locations, and any other elements. These are just some of the common issues I’ve seen in scripts this week alone.

Karel Segers: Have you seen anything good on the screen lately that you wish you had written?

Michael Sweeney: I haven’t seen much lately. I’ve been busy, which is fortunate. I’m currently watching the Star Wars animated show, The Bad Batch. The simplicity of how they make those shows is engaging. It might not win awards for writing, but it’s emotionally driven. All the animated Star Wars shows have been some of the best content they have. Despite rough animation in The Clone Wars, the storytelling is strong. I’m also anticipating Cobra Kai and Doctor Who returning. I’ve shifted from watching films to TV shows. I used to go to the movies frequently, but now, being busy, I don’t have the time. The main movie-going demographic is 16 to 26-year-olds…

Karel Segers: Michael, what screenwriting software do you use?

Michael Sweeney: I’ve used Final Draft since film school. It’s been reliable.

Karel Segers: We’ll talk about something else soon that might change the script format dramatically. Do you mind scene numbers or not?

Michael Sweeney: As a reader, my main concern is how easy the script is to read. I feel strongly about fonts; a script not in Courier New can be a headache. Scene numbers help reference specific scenes and make the script look more professional. But if a script doesn’t have scene numbers, I just use page numbers.

Karel Segers: How do you manage the analytical versus creative brain? I know more than one script reader who often struggles with this.

Michael Sweeney: I don’t have trouble switching between them. When reading someone else’s script, being analytical is like a day job. When writing my own script, I abandon the rules. Once the script is written, I use my analytical skills to revise. With clients, I warn them of pitfalls but don’t say anything is set in stone. I suggest improvements while understanding the audience’s expectations. That’s how I bridge the gap between analytical and creative.

Taylor Sheridan Script Reader: A Unique Experience

Karel Segers: I’m jumping back now to your job as a reader. You have to keep your objectivity. I know you’ve worked for 101 Studios and got to read Taylor Sheridan’s work. You’ve said you’re not particularly the type of audience who would tune into his work because it’s tailored towards older people. How do you handle that? Do you remember what you said after reading those scripts? Which scripts did you read?

Michael Sweeney: I had the opportunity to read all 10 scripts of Mayor of Kingstown before it was released. I knew the whole story of season one before it came out. It was fun seeing the trailers and knowing the twists. Taylor Sheridan didn’t want intense comments because he knows what he’s doing. My notes were more like, “I lost this character here,” or “I am confused because of the back-and-forth cuts.” It was about giving the production team a sense of the story without heavy critique because Sheridan’s experience speaks for itself. Prolific writers can afford to have things that don’t make sense until later episodes. But if a new writer did the same, I might not be as generous.

Karel Segers: I realized after you told me about Mayor of Kingstown that the project was initially knocked back. It wasn’t until Sheridan made a name for himself that he could produce it. So, how does it feel to read material you know will go into production? That’s different, right?

Michael Sweeney: It definitely is. Knowing a project is green-lit changes your perspective. You think about the production’s validity, the sets needed, and you envision it coming to life. This privilege comes with being established. If I know certain actors are attached, I start reading with their voices and inflections in mind. This can shift the way I view the script. It can be unfair because a decent script might get discarded if it doesn’t hook the reader quickly. Reading for production companies can be demoralizing since many scripts get rejected, whereas working with clients can be more fulfilling.

Karel Segers: So, regarding Mayor of Kingstown, you didn’t know which actors were going to play the roles?

Michael Sweeney: Not initially. By the end, I heard Jeremy Renner was in talks to play the main role, and I thought it was perfect. Knowing the actors can enhance the reading experience, but for Mayor of Kingstown, it was about the writing and the twists.

Karel Segers: If this had been a rookie screenwriter, what would have been your script reader advice regarding the twist?

Michael Sweeney: The twist would need to pack an emotional punch, not just surprise. It has to move me in my gut. For instance, Hitchcock’s Psycho made viewers assume the story was about one character, only to shift unexpectedly. If done well, a twist like this can be compelling. For a rookie, the twist should hook the reader and make them want to see what happens next. Even if it’s a pilot, it needs to end in a way that compels the audience to return.

Karel Segers: What’s the best script you’ve ever read in terms of craft?

Michael Sweeney: That’s tough. I have two in mind. One is Michael Arndt’s Little Miss Sunshine. It’s a fantastic screenplay that translated well to film. Another is The Avengers script. I was surprised by how seamless and flowing the dialogue was, and how visually impactful the action lines were without being overly descriptive. Both scripts are completely different but stand out in terms of craft.

Karel Segers: What’s the biggest unproduced project you’ve ever read? Was that Mayor of Kingstown? Or was it something else?

Michael Sweeney: Well, unproduced or produced?

Karel Segers: When you read it, it was still unproduced. It may have been produced afterward.

Michael Sweeney: Right. Mayor of Kingstown is a big one. I also read a Sorkin script, The Trial of the Chicago 7, before it was produced. It was very long, even for Sorkin. I wondered if it could work as a film or maybe a TV series. Netflix picked it up, and when I watched it, I saw it was a self-contained story. This was early in my time at 101 Studios, and I was still learning. It was interesting to see how my perception changed and to realize, oh no, they were right all along. Aaron Sorkin knows what he’s doing.

The Future of Screenwriting: AI and Digital Platforms

Karel Segers: Absolutely. Now, the big questions. As a script reader, how do you see the future of screenwriting in the context of developments like AI and creativity?

Michael Sweeney: Thanks to the writers’ strike, there will always be pushback against AI. I experimented with feeding my ideas into AI and found the responses uninspired. AI can’t replicate the human voice. I’m wary of it but understand it will become a tool for writers. It’s essential to fight to ensure it stays a tool and not an employee. Beyond technology, there are many ways to break into screenwriting now, like podcasts, YouTube channels, and self-produced shorts. These platforms can bypass traditional Hollywood routes and later attract interest from big studios. For example, Critical Role, a Dungeons and Dragons YouTube channel, became a top-rated animated series on Amazon Prime. Thinking outside the box and leveraging digital platforms can strengthen you as a writer and lead to opportunities.

Karel Segers: Is the rise of streaming services changing the way we tell screen stories?

Michael Sweeney: Yes, for a few reasons. Technically, many pilots don’t have act breaks anymore because streaming doesn’t require them. This allows stories to flow without interruption. Streaming services also offer more inclusivity and variety. Each network used to have a specific style, like the glossy look of ABC shows or the sitcom style of CBS. Streaming provides so many options that it allows for more versatility and caters to various niches. This means different kinds of shows can coexist and thrive on the same platform, offering more content for viewers to enjoy.

Karel Segers: Almost at the end of this, Michael. What are you working on right now? Do you want to share that with us?

Michael Sweeney: I’d love to. I’m working on an hour-long adventure mystery pilot called OURS. The title stands for the Omnipresent Underground Repatriation Society, a secret group that stealthily returns artifacts to their rightful places. It’s inspired by the problematic elements in adventure films, like Indiana Jones, where cultural artifacts are taken and stored in museums. The story follows Annie Anderson, a security guard devoted to a billionaire named Ava Bowman, who personifies imperialism. Annie discovers the darker side of Ava and gets drawn into the society’s mission. Essentially, the show’s core theme is reclamation, both of cultural artifacts and personal identity.

Karel Segers: Who would you want to star in it, and where would it premiere?

Michael Sweeney: Dream casting for Ava would be Meryl Streep. For Annie, I’d prefer an unknown actress to give the character a fresh face. For Abigail Flynn, I’d love Tessa Thompson. As for the premiere, the Chinese Theatre would be amazing.

Karel Segers: Fingers crossed for you, Michael, and thanks so much for your time. 

Michael Sweeney: Absolutely. I appreciate it. If anyone’s interested in my script reader coverage services, the link is in the description. You can find me on Instagram @msweeney_scriptcoverage and the website is in the description as well.

Karel Segers: Thank you, Michael. I look forward to catching up again in the future.

Michael Sweeney: Thanks so much, Karel. All the best.

Karel Segers: Cheers.

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

Pacing is critical. Rush through the story, and viewers struggle to understand what is going on. Slow down too much, and they get bored. How do you manage the pacing and rhythm of a story? Can you fix it in post?

Let’s go back a few decades.

If you know me today, you’ll hardly believe that for a short time, I was the face of MTV’s pan-European movie show The Big Picture. It was the nineties. MTV was still a teen and hyper hip. I was neither, which may explain why I didn’t last.

The brand had marked its territory worldwide with a fast-paced editing style, a trademark that would affect all audio-visual media, from TV interstitials and commercials to music and corporate videos.

TV series and feature films fell for the new fashion, too, but the editing style didn’t fix malfunctioning or slow-paced stories. Many movies in the MTV spirit bombed terribly. Some that spring to mind are Tank Girl, and later Scott Pilgrim.

ONE FLEW TOO FAST

In one of the earliest articles on this blog, I shared what I learned about story pacing from Milos Forman. In his director’s commentary on One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, he recounts how he struggled to maintain its duration.

“I cut it down television style, under two hours. And you know what was funny? It felt much longer.”

The reason fast cutting doesn’t necessarily speed up a longish film? Because what really matters is not the number of cuts per minute, but the amount of story beats per unit of time.

But even if the smaller segments work individually, it doesn’t guarantee that the overall story will.

What really matters is not the number of cuts per minute, but the amount of story beats per unit of time.

SPEED HUMPS

Early in the new millennium, Richard E. Grant wrote and directed a film based on his childhood, called Wah-Wah. It’s an epic, 3-hour journey full of nostalgia, domestic drama and breathtaking vistas. Except that it’s not really three hours long. The 85-minutes I watched only felt like that.

Wah-Wah is made up of a chain of vignettes, told in episodic fashion. And there you have the reason for its slow pacing. If a film has more than one story, you need to restart the telling after each ‘episode’, much like TV.

In TV, great episodes have cliffhangers, but Wah-Wah has none. And re-booting the story or starting a new one after each vignette requires significant intellectual effort. If this isn’t coupled with high emotional tension, audiences lose interest.

Episodic storytelling works fine on a higher level. TV series form episodic chains, and movie franchises may release an episode every year or so. But within one sitting, we usually prefer a strong sense of unity. A single, focused dramatic story. And I felt this was missing in Wah-Wah.

PACING BROKEN? CONSIDER THIS

A faster edit wouldn’t fix Richard E. Grant’s problem. A narrative technique that sometimes adds to pacing and tension is the ticking clock. “But Wah-Wah was a drama,” I hear you say, “and deadlines are for thrillers and action flicks”. You know what? Deadlines are everywhere.

1. Deadlines

One of my favourite indies is Courtney Hunt’s Sundance winner and Academy Award nominee Frozen River. The film stars Melissa Leo as a mother who needs to pay for a new trailer home before Christmas, or the family will be homeless. This ticking clock kicks in right in the first scene. Similarly, in Jennifer Lawrence’s feature debut Winter’s Bone, written and directed by Debra Granik, the character of Ree must find her father by a deadline, or else…

These are low-budget indies, and both rely on more than one ticking clock to assist the pacing.

Deadlines are everywhere.

More sophisticated methods require an insight in your story’s architecture. If you understand fractal structure, you will know that acts work on every level. Just like the big picture of your story, scenes and sequences often behave like acts, too.

But how to use this to your benefit?

2. One-Two, One-Two

Don’t give your audience a 3rd-act resolution for each scene or sequence.

Once the problem is resolved, they will relax, and it will create that episodic Wah-Wah feel. As a result, you’ll have to work extra hard to pump the momentum up again.

Instead, abort that mini-story. I call it the One-Two, One-Two approach. Give us a first and second act; then abort by cutting in with your inciting incident for the next scene or sequence.

In the video that goes with this article, I illustrate this method with the Toy Story 2 sequence where Woody rescues Wheezy. It’s an unfinished mini-story, as it is aborted before Woody succeeds.

MORE PACING FIXES

While we’re on the topic of fractal structure: your higher-level units (Sequences, Acts) won’t work if the constituent parts don’t work. So for your act to flow, your scenes and sequences need to have a good pace, too. You can diagnose and fix this by looking at the structure of those smaller units first.

3. Scene/Sequence Structure

Many consider Aaron Sorkin for a master dialogue writer. Really? It often takes an A-lister to pull it off believably. I think Sorkin is first and foremost a master of structure. His greatest scenes play for 3-5 mins while keeping their tension. Not because of his clever words, but rather his smart structure.

Proper dramatic structure is probably more a foundational skill than a quick fix for pacing. Fortunately, a few simpler methods exist that you can apply immediately. Most of them are based on common sense, like ‘in late, out early’.

Sorkin is first and foremost a master of structure.

4. In late, out early

While a fast edit won’t fix your fundamental story issues, a lean trim will still pay dividends. You’ll aim to retain only what is essential, i.e. whatever generates an emotional response.

One simple surgical procedure would be to remove all ‘meet and greets’. People stick to social protocols in the real world, but your story will die by them. Cut it out, unless you use them to dramatic purpose.

Cutting scene openers is part of the broader rule of ‘in late, out early’: keep scenes as short as you can. Apart from a few tentpole moments that may run two, three to five minutes, you will typically keep the average duration of your scenes under two minutes, and under a minute for television. This will assist with the overall pacing.

When you research your preferred genres, you’ll find that the averages differ for each.

After looking at the scenes as a whole, you will need to scrutinise the dialogue. In an early draft, characters may take as much time as real-world people to get their point across. But screen drama doesn’t work like that. You’ll need to compress and stylise.

5. Shortened segments

When teaching face-to-face classes, I used a trick to make the day go faster. The first session would run for a full 2 hours, and each subsequent session would shorten by 15 minutes, until a final 60-minute session.

The course was hugely successful, and I’m sure the trick contributed to the students’ experience.

Years later, I found that the pilot for the TV show Braindead did a similar same trick. Check this out!

The pilot teaser (normally around 1- 3 minutes) runs for a whopping 22 pages. Act 1 starts on page 23, and runs for 20 pages. Subsequent acts are 11, 7 and 6 pages respectively.

The pilot sold, and a first season was ordered (but sadly not renewed).

Do you know of any other techniques and tricks to manage the rhythm and pacing of a screen story? Let us know in the comments. Which movies and shows don’t work for you because of their pacing, and which ones rock?

-Karel Segers

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

Given that “Yellowstone” is technically in competition with the enduringly popular “Sunday Night Football” telecast, the fact that the show pulls in more than 7 million viewers in Nielsen’s time-adjusted Live + Same Day ratings — perhaps even appealing to many of the same viewers — is a tremendous feat.

This confirms the key points in Part 1 of this article. I noted that Sheridan is immensely prolific, his work is increasingly popular, and his scripts maintain a high professional standard.

Let’s now look at his power, politics and – potential – progress. With an ever-expanding universe of serial drama, Sheridan has established himself as one of the most powerful screenwriters in the States. Should he put this to good use, he may be in a unique position to help change the politics of a troubled people, and contribute to some badly needed progress.

POWER – Yellowstone going all Lord Of The Rings

In the late nineties, Peter Jackson signed his $180m LOTR deal with New Line. He leveraged part of it to build a massive film infrastructure hub in his hometown of Wellington. In this way, he didn’t just achieve economy of scale; he also escaped the prying eyes of Hollywood.

Now, Taylor Sheridan is taking a leaf out of Jackson’s book. Only, where Jackson bought buildings and SFX machines, Sheridan now owns almost every horse on the screen.

WARNING: spoilers for 1883 and Yellowstone.

Soon after moving back to his native Texas, Sheridan clinched a $150m+ deal with Paramount. Next, with a group of investors, he bought the legendary “6666” ranch. Why would a filmmaker buy a horse and cattle ranch covering an area twice the size of Chicago, at a cost of around $350m? Perhaps because he’s obsessed with horses, and now his toys are tax-deductible…

Or perhaps, 6666 will become Sheridan’s studio lot. Right now, it already serves up western-style EXT-DAY shots, but I could see soundstages added to the mix as Jackson did with Stone Street Studios. And who says 6666 can’t also become a creative hotspot modelled after Jackson’s Park Road Post (or even Lucas’ Skywalker Ranch)? Texas has enough local talent to benefit from such facilities.

In this scenario, Sheridan would become a big player, and consolidate his influence not only as a creative but also as a business mogul. The next question is what he wants to do with all that power.

POLITICS – Making America United Again.

The heroism in 1883 may conjure the image of a red hot banner reading Make America Great Again. But Sheridan was no fan of #45. Instead, he shows us the positive human values at stake then. His perspective is nobler than the unbridled capitalism, opportunism and antagonism that is the brand of modern Republicans.

If it sounds romantic, it is not naive. Character actions in the Yellowstone universe are earned. You make a mistake and you do penance, before carrying on more wisely. In season 4, Beth and Rip reject Carter before ultimately taking him in; Lloyd attacks Walker, but not without reconciling. The Texans in 1883 first antagonise the immigrants, but then make the compassionate choice to help them out.

And while John Dutton in an early Yellowstone episode says “This is America, we don’t share land here”, I suspect that his mindset won’t survive the show. Second chances, compassion for the underdog, compromise and reconciliation are big themes here.

Sheridan doesn’t want to tell you how to think, but his stories are crystal clear about where he stands. He shows us people, a world, and a way of living that many can relate to, regardless of who you vote for. In this universe, the central characters (Kayce in Yellowstone, Mike in Mayor Of Kingstown, Brennan and The Duttons in 1883) model dignified and moral actions, offering an alternative to the cynicism and hatred in many of the critically acclaimed shows full of rich a-holes.

Just don’t harm the family – or you’re off to the train station.

In the words of fellow Texan Mathew McConaughey, Sheridan is an aggressive centrist. His concern for the flyover states was just as clear in his first film Hell Or High Water, as it is today in 1883, Yellowstone or Mayor Of Kingstown. He’ll make sure his stories are palatable for the audience they’re about, and not just to the intellectual elite. This differentiates his work from the likes of e.g. David Simon.

Similar to his central characters, Sheridan tries to build bridges instead of burning them.

PROGRESS – Making a difference

And you know what? It’s about time we try this route. Audiences are sick and tired of being lectured to. I love watching Clooney’s work, but what has it achieved? Same for Sorkin: watched by the privileged, worshipped by intellectuals. When has Sorkin ever portrayed ordinary people? Never. Because he doesn’t understand them. And while I enjoyed Don’t Look Up as a piece of entertainment, we all know the amount of change it will bring: exactly nothing.

All these Hollywood hotshots preach to the choir, and along the way blame ordinary folk for their voting choices. It’s interesting that the critics are happy to criticise Don’t Look Up, while at the same time ignoring the alternative right before their eyes.

Sheridan believes he’s being overlooked by the awards and critics because he breaks storytelling rules. I doubt this explains it (although he does break rules – successfully). The real reason: his writing is not fashionable. It lacks the sophistication, the clever and the cool of the Successions of this world. Sheridan has opted for melodrama and heart. Try finding that in the world of Logan Roy.

Of course, another explanation for the snubs may be Sheridan’s decision to physically distance himself from the screen production hubs. Perhaps people rather vote for faces they see in the corridors and the street, and for those hanging at the same parties. Of course, it doesn’t matter anyway, because these little statuettes are all about perception. Audiences don’t care for awards or critics. They’ll decide for themselves what’s on the screen next season.

And rather than holding him back, his Texas outpost may well become Sheridan’s superpower.

2022 And On – The Next Decade

With names such as Clark Johnson (The Wire, now also Mayor of Kingstown), Terence Winter (Boardwalk Empire, now Kansas City) and Tom Hanks leaking into the Sheridan universe, my guess is that the detractor pundits will soon capitulate.

With more shows added to his line-up, and A-listers to his pantheon, Taylor Sheridan’s name will only become more ubiquitous. And once the Paramount deal runs out, expect to see his work and name everywhere.

I wanted to explore if Sheridan is the most important and influential screenwriter today. Admittedly, he may not be there quite yet, but in terms of output and popularity, he has no match. And as his first decade as a writer is coming to an end, his productivity is only just getting to cruise speed. And the Thoroughbred Sheridan seems to be, there is a lot of mileage left.

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

Today, Taylor Sheridan is the most important screenwriter alive. What other writer is in equal measure popular, prolific, powerful, professional and political? I know none. Particularly that last element usually kills all the other qualities. Let’s look at the detail.

1. POPULARITY – Taylor Sheridan is crazy popular.

   Taylor Sheridan has connected with an ever-widening audience. Sicario’s box office nearly tripled its $30m budget, Hell Or High Water did even better, and Wind River quadrupled it. Then, Yellowstone hit it really big, with nearly fifteen million Americans tuning in for its Season 4 premiere. It beat NFL and any other season premiere of the past 4 years. 1883, the latest offering at the time of writing, last week broke all records for cable premieres since 2015.

   Sheridan’s stories appeal to broad demographics, from the farmer to the white-collar worker, from the high school student to the single mother. In the US, he’s found a big audience in the flyover states – which are finally seen on screen – and with city dwellers dreaming of a Yellowstone lifestyle.

   The stories are simple, and the emotions are big. The writing is lean and full of melodrama. Yellowstone is not just another dysfunctional family soap; it is rich in theme, brimming with metaphors, and delivered in a sweeping visual style. Easy viewing.

2. PROLIFICNESS – Yes, that’s a word. I looked it up.

   Taylor Sheridan is insanely prolific. Last Sunday, fans in the US saw no less than 4 fresh TV hours drop from his hand. He has 3 shows running concurrently: Yellowstone, The Mayor of Kingstown and 1883. Every single episode of these has Sheridan credited as the sole writer. This is unheard of.

   To achieve this, Sheridan says he didn’t sleep for 7 months in the lead-up to the premiere screening of 1883. No wonder.

   Over the past 4 years, Sheridan has single-handedly written more than 50 hours of serial material. Before that, he garnered sole credit on four produced features, while his shared credits – Without Remorse and Those Who Wish Me Dead – enjoyed somewhat less critical acclaim. Let him ride alone…

1. PROFESSIONALISM – Taylor Sheridan’s scripts show a high standard.

Sheridan’s scripts shine in clarity and concision, as apparent from his superb 2012 Blacklist topper Hell Or High Water. Today, he no longer needs to impress, and nobody will mind if he breaks a rule or two. Yet, unlike some other established writers, his scripts still offer solid models for anyone trying to break in. Even if they’re only first drafts, as Sheridan has claimed.

Taylor Sheridan was never formally trained, and so he tries to avoid the mistakes in all the bad scripts he read as an actor. He starts his stories with absurdly simple plots, and he is allergic to exposition. Both are pretty good principles if you want to write for a broad audience.

Under Paramount’s phenomenal time pressure, the quality of the writing may have suffered. Still, the material is pretty strong, given that Sheridan is not relying on a 5-10-strong writers room like about every top-rated show. So, instead of comparing Yellowstone to Breaking Bad (although both pilots have more than a few similarities in their opening shots), perhaps compare it to El Camino.

His material is close to his heart, his stories are simple, raw and direct, and his direction shows minimal cinematic frills. And so is his writing: economical and straightforward. While the material has a masculine bias – he is a cowboy after all – he has created admirable female characters over the years.

About his ability to create compelling scenes, ScriptShadow wrote: “Scripts live or die on their scenes. So if you can come up with an operating procedure that ensures all your scenes are entertaining, you’re set. And Sheridan seems to have figured that mystery out.“

And before anyone points it out, I know. He doesn’t outline.

Next week on Taylor Sheridan: 4) POWER and 5) POLITICS

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

A few years ago I had a student who kept repeating a word I had never heard before, until I realised he was concatenating two familiar words into something quite bizarre. I am aware that I do something similar, when I bunch together the phrases “you know” and “I mean” into “ya-meen”. I don’t know anyone else who does this, so I’m proud of my idiolect.

In movie dialogue, we distinguish characters among other things by their native language, dialect, and idiolect. And even though you rarely need to specify all this in the screenplay, it is good to have an understanding.

So, let’s look at a few ways of dealing with accents and foreign language, without hampering the read.

Leave it to the story

In Martin McDonagh’s In Bruges – one of the scripts we studied in Immersion – the characters each speak with their respective accents, but it’s never mentioned in the script. We assume that Ray and Ken are British from a line in the opening monologue “Get the fuck out of London.”

The lead characters ended up being played by Irish actors, but McDonagh has said that this was a happy coincidence more than anything else. When Ralph Fiennes’ character of Harry enters the film with his thick Cockney accent, you’ll find that this is not mentioned in the script, either.

Character introduction

By far the easiest way to set up how a character speaks, is in their first introduction.

If PAUL (28) is a pudgy Liverpudlian, we may assume this comes with the appropriate accent. You can specify whether the accent is slight or thick.

This technique avoids any possible annoyance with the reader, as nobody likes reading accent quirks throughout an entire script.

Scene Notes

Sometime characters change language in the course of a story. In this case, a SCENE NOTE right after the slug may indicate that “The entire scene is in Russian, subtitled in English”, or “During the flashbacks, everyone except our hero will speak Klingon.”

This avoids having to write a whole bunch of parentheticals. Speaking of which —

Choice Of Words

The characters in the world of the Coen brothers often speak in quirky ways. This never hampers the ease of reading their dialogue, as the accent is usually only apparent in the choice of words. A good example is Marge from Fargo.

MARGE [on the phone]: Oh my. Where? Yeah? Aw geez. Okay, there in a jif. Real good, then.

Parenthetical

When a single line, or a few lines are spoken in a different language, you have two options: either you want the audience to understand it, or you don’t.

If you do, the foreign language lines will be subtitled in the film; and if you don’t, they won’t.

Write the lines in English with a parenthetical, e.g. (in Italian) to show they need subtitles. In this way, the reader has the same experience as the audience: it’s a foreign language but they understand what is being said.

If you’re using a simple word or short phrase (ciao, nyet, or ‘dio mio’) and you trust your audience will understand it, just print it verbatim.

Original Dialogue

Sometimes the language is foreign to the main character, and we want the audience to feel just as confused as them, by not translating. In this case, you write the dialogue in the script in the original foreign language – without parenthetical.

This means there won’t be any subtitles, keeping the audience in the hero’s POV.

Do you know of any other ways of dealing with accents, dialect or foreign language? Or do you have great script examples to prove or disprove any of the above, please tell us in the comments.

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

The only reason Chris topped every other promising screenwriter that year – and he knows it – was his gut-wrenching finale. Those last few pages of The Muppet Man even beat the image of Zuckerberg endlessly refreshing Erica’s profile.

One of the web’s most ruthless script reviewers called it “the most emotional finale since a certain giant ship sank ten years ago.”

But what’s the big deal about endings?

Why Wow Them In The End

The first great Hollywood movie I saw as a kid was Star Wars (IV: A New Hope). I’ll never forget how I felt, coming out of the cinema: I desperately wanted to stay in the universe of Luke Skywalker, and relive the entire experience. Its finale was just perfect.

A great ending can save an otherwise problematic or difficult script – like The Muppet Man. Have you seen Tarantino’s Once Upon A Time… In Hollywood? Industry pros know that to go into profit, you need word of mouth – and repeat business. Great endings deliver just that.

Think about your favourite movies. Most will have an extraordinary ending.

In this article I won’t give you the secret to writing a Muppet Man ending, but you may learn a few tricks to make yours more memorable.

Which Ending Suits Your Story?

I’m often asked how to end a particular story. How the hell should I know? If I did, it would have been my story. No-one will dictate how to end your script – until you sell…

Still unsure? Look at films you like, and figure out how their ending relates to the beginning.

A strong ending refers back to the start, and shows us a change to the main character, or to the world they live in. This can be incredibly gratifying. To underscore the change, some great films deliver a book-end finale, literally going back to the point of departure.

This full-circle is only one of many techniques to amp up your ending. It doesn’t say what should happen, rather how to execute it.

Amazing Endings: Structure

To deliver on the element of surprise and create an amazing ending, a number of structural techniques may help wow the reader.

In crime or supernatural stories, a twist in the tail may secure your spot in the hall of fame like it did for Se7en, The Usual Suspects, The Invitation or The Sixth Sense.

Alternatively, trick your audience with a false ending, only to give them the mother of all jump scares when the villain comes back one final time.

Here’s an overview of some techniques you may consider:

• Book End
• Twist in the tail
• False Ending
• Narrator Ending
• Frame Story
• Crystal Ball (Mental Construct/Epilogue)
• It Was All A Dream
• Cliffhanger / Anticipation

Be aware that these will enhance the final emotion rather than change it. In a minute, we’ll look at more fundamental ways to impact your reader/audience’s response.

The Insanely Great Ending

I believe Michael Arndt wrote 10 different endings to Little Miss Sunshine, and the one you may have seen was not among them. In the course of writing that fabulous script, he started a rigorous study of movie endings.

He talks about it here.

One of the things Arndt learnt, was that people like endings that are positive, surprising and meaningful.

These three qualities have little to do with the structural options above. In order to deliver a genuinely satisfying emotion to a reader and audience, we need a whole different set of categories.

Emotional Choices

The list below is not meant to offer binary options, but rather a sliding scale for each. I have bolded what typically applies when people speak of a Hollywood ending.

The reality is that most successful films, even in independent and international cinema, follow the popular choices.

• Emotion: Up / Down
• Change / No Change
• Goal: Victory / Failure
• Morality: Noble / Dubious (Dishonourable)
• Plot question: Resolved / Unresolved
• Clarity: Clear / Ambiguous (Confused)
• Reliability: Reliable / Unreliable
• Expected / Unexpected

The last category applies purely to how the ending is delivered. All bolded options are ‘expected’. You must deliver each in a way that is surprising.

Theoretically, your options are unlimited, and your freedom is complete. In the real world, however, only a limited subset of those infinite variations usually works for a mainstream audience.

Four Key Factors

From my own observations, the following 4 are the categories – in order – that will have the greatest impact on the success of your ending, and this is consistent with Michael Arndt’s findings:

• Clarity: most audiences prefer clarity over ambiguity.
• Victory: an up ending – that is earned – trumps  the down or bittersweet ending.
• Change: we want to see positive change in the character or the world.
• Expectation: we prefer an expected outcome, delivered in unexpected ways.

But How? drawkcaB etirW!

Because the ending is the most important part of your story, you cannot write your opening  until you know what your final image is going to be. An amazing ending needs to be set up from the very first shot.

McKee recommends to write your story backwards from the final image. The alternative is that for each draft that alters the final act, you will need to go back to set it up – again.

Practically speaking, you will probably write the first draft sequentially from the start. Then, refine your amazing ending until you’re happy. Finally, go back and start the complete rewrite.

(Of course, a whole lot of pain can be avoided by using use a step outline.)

More About Amazing Endings

If you found this article helpful, please share it around.

Check out the masterclass on your YouTube channel, with examples of some popular endings. Is yours included?

If you subscribe to the channel, I’ll send you a notification next time I publish a free masterclass.

Thank you for reading, and watching!

Karel Segers

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

I love teaching, I adore my students, and I’m fortunate enough to see some good results, as some of my students go on to build a writing career.

Yet, I am growing increasingly frustrated.

There is a missing component in the learning of these young people. Some take the initiative to fill in the blanks, but others aren’t even aware of what is missing.

By just taking courses, there is little chance you will survive the real world.

So what else do you need?

Let’s first look at the positive aspects of books, courses and gurus.

Book, Courses And Gurus

I have written about the merits of film school. You can learn a lot from the experts through books, courses and videos. I have the best memories of binge reading screenwriting books, and then attending lectures by the authors.

In some instances, you can speed up the process of understanding how screenplays work, what has worked in the past and what hasn’t.

You’ll also learn the systems and terminology used in our industry.

Courses give you a general overview, based on more material than you can process in a lifetime. You learn about genres and styles outside your taste, which will help you communicate with professionals.

Books and courses give you different perspectives. No matter how long you study a subject, you’ll still only see it through the lens of your own eyes.

Screenwriting courses may give you a wholly new, valuable point of view.

However, one of the biggest problems with courses, is that only little of what you learn specifically relates to the work that you (will) write.

Therefore it is essential that you get feedback to your own work. It will help improve your performance, and level up to the requirements of the market.

Talk, Don’t Write

One of the local film schools offers their students industry feedback. Professional script consultants come in to help the students improve their scripts from first to final draft. It’s great. Students love it.

Not only is this an introduction to how the industry works; it is an invaluable addition to the lectures. Lecturing is a transfer of knowledge in bulk. The consults provide bespoke feedback, different for each student. Even if two students struggle with the same issue, they may need different solutions.

Consults outclass written reports. In the studio system, notes are a standard form of communication with writers. But without produced credits, you will benefit far more from a direct two-way conversation.

In a live consultation, you are able to ask questions, and so can the consultant. This helps define your objectives, as well as the issues standing in the way of achieving them.

The Consult Is Your Inmost Cave

Most of us work better and faster when we can verbally discuss our work, rather than write or read about it in a snapshot report.

Many aspiring writers are not familiar with the lingo, and consultants should not have to explain or define every concept in a report.

A good script consultation is a mini-workshop, where client and consultant work together to determine the priorities for future work, and the way they could be addressed by the writer. The best consult is an intense, inspiring and rewarding experience for both sides.

A welcome side-effect of some consultations is that writers discover what they are actually writing about.

Often new writers are not aware of the themes they infuse their stories with.

As a consultant, you are in the privileged position of discovering these themes with the writer. What is their world view? What bugs them, and how do their stories comment on society?

A great consult creates an Inmost Cave, for writers to discover their own voice.

It allows them to develop their voice, and articulate their ideas in ways that the industry and the audience will understand. Sometimes it allows them to clarify, sharpen and refine their ideas.

Often these young writers are yet to find their path in life, and their writing provides a valuable introspection into their values, hopes and dreams. As a consultant, it is a humbling experience to be there, and witness this fascinating process.

And yet, no matter how inspiring, poetic and even mythical these experiences may be, they are no substitute for learning from the source.

Back To The Screenwriting Source

A few years back, a member of a screenwriting forum was eaten alive when he dared to ask for a method to learn screenwriting for free. Many of the readers had paid good money for their education, and they came down on the boy to annihilate him.

It turned out the boy didn’t know any better. He was new to screenwriting, and with a mental health disorder he didn’t know how to be diplomatic when asking his question.

It set me thinking.

Screenwriting books and gurus have only been around since the 1970’s, while some of the very best movies were written long before.

How did screenwriters learn the craft before there were any gurus around?

My guess? From reading great screenplays, stage plays, and novels.

It seems that we have collectively forgotten that the best learning lies in the best scripts. Yet, students these days seem to believe they can educate themselves without opening a single screenplay.

From reading lots of great scripts, you can learn style, structure and dialogue, virtually by osmosis.

One of my most dedicated students used to read a full-length feature screenplay every day, for months. This experience helped him so much, that he skyrocketed to the top of the best screenwriting contests, and was introduced to Hollywood agents. You can do this, too.

To be perfectly honest, though…

Just reading scripts is not going to cut it, either.

Enter Immersion

Thousands of screenplays are available online at any given time. They’re only a download away. So why don’t we all get to work, like, now?

It turns out to be a massive challenge to tell the wheat from the chaff.

Many are mere dialogue transcripts, which is utterly useless for the screenwriter who wants to learn how to use proper formatting and descriptive style.

Others are butchered versions, converted from one format to another, and ending up in a crappy TXT or – even worse – HTML format.

And only a few dozen scripts are available freely from their rights holders.

Fortunately, some sites publish a curated offering of these scripts, so you don’t have to make the selection for yourself.

In my view, once you are reading a rock solid selection of the best scripts, the only other mandatory daily action you need to take, is: write.

This is why after teaching screenwriting courses for nearly ten years, I decided to completely overhaul the philosophy behind my teaching.

I made a thorough review of what had worked in the past, and what didn’t.

I looked at which students had been successful, and who failed. Then I looked at the practices of working screenwriters, and built a system that helps writers build better habits, and prepare them for the writing of a professional screenplay draft. All without a tutor.

I named the course Immersion Screenwriting.

The results have been phenomenal.

The writing exercises I designed for this course emulate some of the brain processes of the seasoned screenwriter. Others are meant to create a steady writing habit, while building some sort of format muscle memory.

By performing these exercises on a daily basis, you adopt the practices of the professional screenwriter effortlessly. The basic version of the course runs for seven weeks (50 days), enough to change or create a new habit.

Take Action

If this all sounds like something you’d like to try, head over here.

If you have spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on screenwriting courses and consults, rest assured that none of that was a waste. You will have acquired a top level understanding of the screenwriting trade.

But to get in the successful habit of writing effective screenplays, you need to not only know but feel what a great script looks like. This takes some time, and a fair amount of reading.

You need to know your genre inside out, you need to know its flagship movies and writing conventions. In addition, you need to be able to apply a contemporary writing style.

Readers want to enjoy your screenplay not only for its story, but also for its reading experience.

So, what script are you reading next?

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

In FRANCES HA, Noah Baumbach paid homage to director Leos Carax, from his film MAUVAIS SANG.

I recently returned from a trip to Sweden, and finally watched the 3 original “Girl” films. You know, the feature films in the Millennium Trilogy, based on the books by Stieg Larsson. 

We look at the introduction of main character Lisbeth Salander. Interestingly, Steven Zaillian removed some of the tension in his English-speaking adaptation. Adaptations are not always effective homages to the original work, and here he certainly reduces the emotional impact.

Finally, I show one of my favourite homages: a clip from RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2. To compare, we watch the original sequence in Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid that was quoted in the game.

Enjoy!

This is a Facebook preview of a video that will soon be posted to my YouTube channel. 

Have you subscribed yet?

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

Steven Miao created the opening video sting and Mukul Kandara helped with setting it all up. Thanks, guys!

The channel had been in the making for a long time, but I just have been too busy with clients, teaching and workshopping awesome projects. What I was planning on doing in January 2017 has finally come to fruition. Will I be able to keep it up? We’ll see.

In the first video, I talk briefly about the correct way to format audio and voice over on a black screen. So many times I have seen this done improperly in screenplays. Yet it is so easy…

Of course, something went wrong during the filming of that first YouTube video, so you couldn’t see the example I was talking about (you can see it below in this article).

I didn’t want to fix the video.

Why not?

The hunt for perfection had been a curse for too long. An excuse for continued procrastination. It was time to ship.

In a way, your shipping is writing; sitting down to commit words to paper.

If you don’t write, great ideas won’t happen. If you don’t believe me, watch that TED talk with Elizabeth Gilbert again.

Okay, back to the formatting class.

Audio Over Black

The example I give in the video is from The Big Sick.

In the YouTube video, you can’t see it. My mistake. But here it is:

As I said above: it is so simple! You just write ‘OVER BLACK’, and then you describe what we hear. At the beginning of a screenplay, this will be printed BEFORE the slugline that introduces the first scene visually.

Easy, right?

Superimposed Text Over Image (Super)

The other thing people often ask me about is how to correctly write a title in the screenplay.

First, you don’t really call this a TITLE. We reserve this for the OPENING and CLOSING TITLES, like you will see in the example.

When you want to indicate where we are (e.g. Paris, Texas), or the time/date (The 18th of December, 2017), you use a SUPER (as in ‘superimposed’).

Mostly I see beginning writers open a scene with the slugline (or scene heading), and then immediately print the Super.

I don’t particularly like this, because the slugline doesn’t give me enough information to visualise the background that the title will be sitting over.

Mostly you will have a shot held for a few seconds before the Super comes in, like in this example from The Disaster Artist:

In the YouTube video, I mentioned that the slugline is imperfect. It should have a full-stop after “INT”, and ideally you also print the time of day at the end of the slugline, e.g. “INT. JEAN SHELTON’S ACTING STUDIO – DAY”.

Then again, my video wasn’t perfect either.

With all this talk about imperfection I may have given the impression that your script doesn’t have to be perfect.

Well, it doesn’t. Until you send it out…

But that’s a different video altogether.

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!

If you are one of this talented few, script formatting applications like Celtx, Movie Magic and Final Draft are great productivity tools. These take the hassle out of capitalising, indenting and laying out a script in the format demanded by the Hollywood movie moguls.

They also remember the names of your characters and scene locations. They’ll check your spelling, allow you to classify and rearrange scenes, and produce shooting scripts and script reports for your production team.

Final Draft has fought its way to the top in the screenplay formatting wars. If you believe the hype, it is “used by 95% of film and television productions.”

But for most of us, writing a screenplay begins long before we sit down at the keyboard with that real or virtual clean sheet in front of us. If you follow The Story Department’s advice, and have visited Logline It, you know the drill. You will have refined your logline, described the inciting incident, and developed a 3-act structure. You will have laid out the main beats and arcs and possibly covered your wall with scrawled library cards before you type EXT.

There are a few computer applications that can help you with this early stage. Pre-scripting is by definition a messy job with lots of redundancy.

Final Draft 10 aims to pull the whole process together into a single software package. (Declaration of interest: I’ve been a voluntary beta tester on Final Draft 10 for the past 18 months, but I have no financial interest in the software.)

In this review I’ll assume that the script formatting aspect of Final Draft needs no explanation or comment. I’ll confine myself to the meta-script aspects and the new and improved pre-scripting tools.

NAVIGATOR

This tabbed panel is not new — it’s been part of Final Draft for the past 3-4 versions at least, but its utility has been improved.

If you’re already using Final Draft you’ll be familiar with how use it to jump to, drag, rearrange and colour-code scenes. You know how to keep track of characters and define their arcs; and add script notes.

Now the Navigator is linked to The Story Map, which multiplies its usefulness.

STORY MAP

While the Navigator provides a running overview of your screenplay as you are writing it, the Story Map is an omnipresent, interactive view of your story.

It is a horizontal bar at the top of the window, providing an overview of your script at a glance.

Before you begin, you set a target length in pages, define Structure Points (eg. acts, mid-point) and add Beats. These become page targets in the Story Map. You can, of course, drag these targets around, add new points or erase them at will.

As you write new scenes, they appear in the Story Map along with any colours you added in the Navigator. Double clicking on a scene in the Map takes you to that scene in the script. You can zoom in to examine your scene sequence, or zoom out for a birds-eye view of your screenplay.

BEAT BOARD

The Beat Board is the most obvious new feature in Final Draft 10. It’s your pin board, where you scribble on virtual library cards and drag them around until they make sense.

The Board is totally free format, equally useful for brainstorming, structuring and making notes. Double click anywhere on the board to create a card, then change its size and colour and location and drag it into position.

What you put on these virtual cards is up to you: ideas, notes, character sketches, scene descriptions, “beats,” reminders, phone numbers, shopping lists…

I’ve never been an enthusiastic user of library cards and preferred Scrivener to structure my story. However, I’ve become a fan of the Beat Board for this visual process of brainstorming, rearranging, refining and editing.

It is instinctive and almost infinitely flexible. I’d appreciate more colours and a “snap to grid” option, though. Maybe that is my OCD speaking. And I’d like to be able to add hyperlinks and images, but maybe these will come in later versions.

(NB. The Beat Board is not related to the Index Cards view, which has been an option under the VIEW menu since Version 1.)

SPLIT

In Final Draft 9, you had the ability to split the screen vertically or horizontally, but now you can drag your Beats directly into your screenplay from the Split view.

ALT DIALOGUE

Now here’s a handy feature: say you can’t decide whether a character is a Yank or an Aussie; whether he says “Wassup dude?” or “G’day mate?”

This handy refinement enables you to include any number of alternatives.

Just click on the small “+” beside the line and type in the Yank/Aussie lines.

Both alternatives remain in the screenplay until you decide which market you are selling to.

COLLABORATION

I’ve been collaborating on a script with a writer in the USA. We used to email copies back and forth and mark our contributions and changes using Script Notes and colours.

With FD10 and Skype it’s as though we are sitting side-by-side. It’s as simple as clicking “Collaborate”, obtaining a Session ID Number and Skyping (or emailing) the number to him. He clicks Collaborate and enters the ID Number and my script appears on his computer.

We pass Control back and forward and any changes one of us makes, the other sees in real time. You can communicate interactively using text or speech, though we prefer to run a Skype session beside it. It’s as painless as your bandwidth allows.

Unfortunately, the Beat Board, Splits and several other new features are greyed out in Collaboration mode. I hope they are going to be included in versions 10+.

OTHER IMPROVEMENTS

There are a lot of smaller improvements in Version 10, too. You’ll find more scene numbering options, header and footer improvements, revision versions. A long-overdue improvement is in the Dictionaries: Australian English works at last and I’ve tried it with French and German. And here’s a neat trick: when I’m collaborating with my American colleague, his spell-checker reads US English and mine is Australian English.

WORTH THE PRICE?

If you’re a serious scriptwriter, Final Draft 8 or 9 were always worth the investment. MacOS and Windows Final Draft documents are interchangeable and it delivers a script that won’t be rejected on formatting grounds by those picky Hollywood producers’ assistants. There are now Final Draft apps for iPhone and iPad, for both reading (free) and writing (US$10). So you can take it anywhere.

Let’s face it, Final Draft 10 is an investment, whether you are buying it or upgrading. If you’re not being paid for scriptwriting, perhaps stick with Celtx (free) and library cards for a while. When you’re ready to step into the bear pit, download the Free Trial from finaldraft.com, and explore the introduction screens and videos.

If you think it’s for you, check this site for the best price!

FINAL DRAFT 10: FINAL THOUGHTS

Final Draft 10 is a new ball game, with useful, powerful and stable pre-scripting tools and the best collaboration feature on the market.

There are a few options that I hope appear in 10.1: more colours and a snap-to-grid in the Beat Board. Equally useful would be hyperlinks, and the ability to past graphics. Extending the collaboration capability to the Beat Board will double its usefulness.

-Ian Hart

Ian Hart

Ian Hart is a freelance writer and director.

peacemountain.com.au