Craft & Career Newsletter: From A-List Screenwriting

In the song, a guy falls in love with a manatee. The song well highlights the absurdity of their love. The jokes that reference the size/weight of the manatee are funny, as is the idea of captivity - physically (in its tank, in jail) and mentally (in love). Comparing the love to extinction - "And we'll keep falling right off the brink" - is probably the thematic highlight for me.

Although it's not the topic for today, I think the song is missing a sort of last act epiphany/surprise. The "love" is clear near the beginning and never wavers. So there is a lack of progression/momentum. Even Andy Samberg's viral video Jizz in my Pants in the (pardon the pun) climax has a reversal and epiphany: "You say I'm premature/ I just call it ecstasy." However, in keeping with today's topic, there are some other ways that this song doesn't go all the way. As a story, it makes a few promises upon which it doesn't deliver.

One strong idea that the song sets up is that this love started as a cyber relationship. If this is the/a hook for the song, then wouldn't the song owe reference to the web and cyber-dating aspect?   Only the line about the "automated email" pays off that idea. If you are not going to pay off the Internet aspect of the genesis of their relationship, then why include the reference at all? Cut the line about "logging on" and the website. It's underused and possibly not necessary.

The more audacious and attention-grabbing premise is that this website happens to be HORNYmanatee.com.   The relationship is not just between a human and a manatee, but a human and a horny manatee. From a dramaturgical standpoint, that concept is not explored completely. One way would be to establish the lust more and then let the love take over as the relationship grows.

But a stronger way to take the humor and the premise of the horny manatee all the way would be to deliver on their, ah, consummation. Maybe a line like this near the end: "We meet on the high seas/Tryin' to create a new species." This would give the ending the twist/surprise it needs. And, more relevant to today's topic, it would exploit the horniness in the concept. Got a better line about man-on-manatee action? I want to hear it.

What does a sexually needy sea cow have to do with screenwriting? Everything. If you can cut your supposed concept and your story stays the same, then either cut the fat from the setup or exploit it better. Use it or lose it.

Understanding this principle could have really helped the writers (can I even use that word?) of Land of the Lost. If the unique premise/concept of your story is that these characters are time travelers stuck in a land with dangerous dinosaurs and lizard men, then how in the hell do you justify a sequence where the characters get high by a motel pool? That scene could have (and has) been in a bunch of other movies. Even if it's the funniest thing ever, it's generic and doesn't belong in this movie. Concept-wise, it's a non sequitur.

I have read body-switching movies with a Ten-Little-Indians whodunit mystery where the person who solves the crime does it with deductive reasoning just like Columbo or Sherlock Holmes. The problem is that he or she also solves the mystery without any special insight from the body-switching complication. Here's a hint for that story: If the solution isn't tied to switching bodies, don't switch bodies.

If you take the Freaky Friday premise of a daughter and mother switching psyches, you don't then have them go after Indy's Lost Ark, do you? No. Why? Because the concept has no intrinsic connection to the eventual goal/plan. However, the somewhat recent remake of Freaky Friday is a short and clever film that does a fantastic job of exploiting its concept. The scene that starts Chapter 5 on the DVD puts the mother and daughter (having already switched psyches) and the younger brother and the mother's boyfriend in the car on the way to school. The scene advances the story, complicates the situation, and foreshadows. But more importantly, notice how EVERY single line of dialogue relies on the premise of the switched psyches for its meaning and humor.

Here is a transcript of the scene.

Mother is in the front seat with her feet on the dashboard. She battles for control of the radio station with the boyfriend.

DAUGHTER (mother's psyche): (to mother) Feet down. (to son)   Harry, could you settle down?

SON: Bite me!

MOTHER (daughter's psyche): See? Do you see what he does behind your back?

DAUGHTER: Anna!

MOTHER: Mom! Excuse me. And while I'm apologizing let me just say to the whole car how truly sorry I am for being such an insane control freak all the time.

DAUGHTER: You're not controlling, Mom. I'm the one who should be apologizing for my flagrant disregard for anyone's feelings but my own.

MOTHER: Well, at least you have a great sense of style. Not like me.

DAUGHTER: Enough.

MOTHER looks at "her" credit cards.

MOTHER: Platinum, cool.

DAUGHTER: Don't even think about it.

MOTHER'S BOYFRIEND: Am I supposed to follow this?

MOTHER: It's nothing, darling.
(Note: the word "darling" is this line's raison d'etre and why it fits in with the concept. A-list screenwriters see there is no point to the line if it's just "It's nothing.")

He grabs mother's hand

MOTHER'S BOYFRIEND: One more day.

MOTHER: Yeah, it's great we're getting married, isn't it? Even though my husband died. How quickly I've been able to get over it.

DAUGHTER: Just pull up here. Mom, out of the car.

Notice that except for perhaps the son's line ("bite me" - which is a catalyst to complicate the situation), there isn't a wasted beat or conflict. Even the boyfriend's lines use the dramatic irony that we know more than he does. Everything is driven by and faithful to the concept. And as soon as they get out of the car, the next moment mirrors this scene where the daughter (mom's psyche) now has to interact with the teenage male love interest with a continuing clever exploitation of the body-switching. Consider watching this movie or studying this scene if you are writing a script with a strong fantasy conceit: Liar Liar, The Nutty Professor, The Mask, etc.

However, these gimmicky comedies are not the only sort of stories where this skill is important. Another movie that exploits its concept very well is Memento. In the story, Leonard Shelby has no short-term memory and is on a quest to find his wife's killer. However, his condition makes him easily manipulated and his decisions very untrustworthy. The morality and authenticity of his quest come into question.

Let's look at the scenes/sequences in Memento from around minute 46 to minute 73 of the movie. We'll focus on the scenes that are in color. To show you how elegantly and seemingly simply the story exploits the premise that he has no short-term memory, I will describe them in chronological order:

Natalie - who is pissed off because Leonard killed her boyfriend - removes all of the pencils from her home and then gets Leonard mad by telling him she is going to use his condition to manipulate him. She pushes his buttons by saying that maybe he is a freak/retard due to getting an STD from his wife, who she calls a whore. He hits her. She runs out the door. He struggles to find a pencil to record the fact that she is lying. She goes outside, gets in her car, and just sits there.

He struggles to find a pencil but can't. She sits in the car for a moment and then comes back in and says Dodd hurt her and gets him worked up to help her. She writes him a message reminding him to get rid of Dodd. He notices his fist is bruised but doesn't figure out he is the one who hit her. He leaves and is freaked out that Teddy is in his (Jimmy's) car.

He freaks out when he gets in his (Jimmy's) car and finds Teddy. "Who the fuck are you?" Teddy warns him about Natalie - that she will use him and has ulterior motives. Leonard writes the warning down. But without any context, he later sees his own note about not trusting Teddy, so he scratches out the comment on Natalie's picture about not trusting her. Ironically, he does take Teddy's written advice in the scene about which hotel to stay at.

He checks into Discount Inn on Teddy's advice. He meets a prostitute and asks her to place some objects - comb, clock, stuffed animal - around the room. He tells her that after he is asleep, she should to go into the bathroom and slam the door. (He is trying to remember the night his wife died by reenacting some of it.) He falls asleep. She slams the door. He gets up.

He sleeps. A door slams. He gets up and notices the stuff around the room. He opens the bathroom and sees a prostitute, who recounts to him what he told her. He tells her to leave. He gets in car.

Leonard gets in the car. He burns the items at a bonfire. He wonders if he has done this before. Flashback to his wife, with a self-reflexive thematic touch: He chides her about reading a coverless book multiple times. "I thought the fun was in finding out what happens next?"

Leonard drives his (Jimmy's) car and Dodd pulls him over because he recognizes Jimmy's car and clothes. Dodd pulls out a gun. Leonard takes off. Dodd breaks the window. Leonard runs away.

Leonard runs but he's not sure why and whether he is being chased or chasing. He sees the note about Dodd and then assumes he is the chaser, so he moves toward him. But when Dodd fires a gun at him, Leonard realizes that he is the one being chased. So he runs away and decides to hijack Dodd at his motel. Leonard finds the room, grabs a bottle of alcohol for a weapon, and waits. Soon, he loses his memory and is confused about why he is holding the bottle. "I don't feel drunk."

"I don't feel drunk." Oblivious to why he is in Dodd's bathroom, Leonard takes a shower. Then, when Dodd comes back, Leonard attacks and overtakes him.   And then when he sees the note to "get rid of him" from Natalie, Leonard tapes up Dodd and calls Teddy.

Do you see how it's all an organic extension of the premise? Look at the specificity in the first scene. The concept/premise allows the femme fatale's actions to be original and unique: hiding pencils, asking him what will make him mad, telling him her plan. And he can't escape her trap because he uses a contextless note on a picture of Teddy's as a reason to ignore his warning.

All of the obstacles to capturing Dodd are specific to the character: He is spotted because he thinks Jimmy's car is his; he can't remember if he is the one chasing or being chased; he forgets that he is lying in wait in his hotel room and the comical obstacle to the battle with Dodd is that he decided to take a shower since he was in the bathroom and couldn't remember why.  It's not just that the Nolans are creative. Their gift is their creativity within the context that they set up.

Now the other important part of the concept is that the story is told in reverse chronological order. Let's look at a chunk of these scenes to see how they are shaped to accommodate and exploit this part of the concept.

Here are the scenes in the order they appeared as well as comments about them.

Leonard runs but he's not sure why and whether he is being chased or chasing. He sees the note about Dodd and then assumes he is the chaser, so he moves toward him. But when Dodd fires a gun at him, Leonard realizes that he is the one being chased. So he runs away and decides to hijack Dodd at his motel. Leonard finds the room, grabs a bottle of alcohol for a weapon, and waits. Soon, he loses his memory and is confused about why he is holding the bottle. "I don't feel drunk."

Note: Telling this story backward creates a convention-bending chase scene and some spry humor: a chase scene where the character is not sure if he is the hunter or the prey. And he accidentally breaks into room 6 instead of 9 because he reads the note upside down. In the background, we hear a car commercial with a bunch of numbers - years and prices. Together, they are an ironic reminder of how untrustworthy numbers and facts are without context.

Leonard drives his (Jimmy's) car and Dodd pulls him over because he recognizes Jimmy's car and clothes. Dodd pulls out a gun. Leonard takes off. Dodd breaks the window. Leonard runs away.

Note: There is nothing super special about this event. But it's much more interesting in reverse order because it answers the question: How the hell did Dodd end up chasing him?

Leonard gets in the car. He burns the items at a bonfire. He wonders if he has done this before. Flashback to his wife, with a self-reflexive thematic touch: He chides her about reading a coverless book multiple times. "I thought the fun was in finding out what happens next?"

Note: This works as more of a mystery/suspense beat. What are those items?

He sleeps. A door slams. He gets up and notices the stuff around the room. He opens the bathroom door and sees a prostitute, who recounts to him what he told her. He tells her to leave. He gets in car.

Note: Once again, this moment piques our interest because we don't understand it yet. Also, since this is the first time we see the items and they are in a dark room, it allows us to have the same subjective disorientation as Leonard. We are not sure where we are, and we think that maybe we are in his house or in a flashback with the wife - which confuses us because it's not in black and white, but color. Also, note that if this were told chronologically, it would be redundant to have the prostitute explain what he asked her to do.

He checks into Discount Inn on Teddy's advice. He meets a prostitute and asks her to place some objects - comb, clock, stuffed animal - around the room. He tells her that after he is asleep, she should go into the bathroom and slam the door. (He is trying to remember the night his wife died by reenacting some of it.) He falls asleep. She slams the door. He gets up.

Note: Because we already saw the event he is discussing, it could be very boring to watch him explain it. So the conflict in the scene takes a slightly different angle: He struggles to get the prostitute to understand what should be simple instructions. At one point she even tries to use the brush. He stops her quickly - which is a nice way of showing us that it was his wife's.

He freaks out when he gets in his (Jimmy's) car and finds Teddy. "Who the fuck are you?" Teddy warns him about Natalie - that she will use him and has ulterior motives. Leonard writes the warning down. But without any context, he later sees his own note about not trusting Teddy, so he scratches out the comment on Natalie's picture about not trusting her. Ironically, he does take Teddy's written advice in the scene about which hotel to stay at.

Note: It's not clear who he should trust. Because the story is told backward, we, like Leonard, don't have the context and information on which to decide whether to trust Teddy.

He struggles to find a pencil but can't. She sits in the car for a moment and then comes in and says Dodd hurt her and gets him worked up to help her. She writes him a message reminding him to get rid of Dodd. He notices his fist is bruised but doesn't figure out he is the one who hit her. He leaves and is freaked out that Teddy is in his (Jimmy's) car.

Note: The pencil hunt is a great big question that piques our interest. And in the film, this scene raises more questions. What is really going on? We, like him, actually believe she just showed up and that she was hurt by someone else.

Natalie - who is pissed off because Leonard killed her boyfriend - removes all of the pencils from her home and then gets Leonard mad by telling him she is going to use his condition to manipulate him. She pushes his buttons by saying that maybe he is a freak/retard due to getting an STD from his wife, who she calls a whore. He hits her. She runs out the door. He struggles to find a pencil to record the fact that she is lying. She goes outside, gets in her car, and just sits there.

Note: Not only is this a great scene with surprising choices, it pays off the sequence by giving concrete answers to the last two sequences, which raised questions and doubts. Finally, we get some resolution and it's pretty satisfying.

The challenge in telling this story backwards is that you have to shape scenes so that they withhold information that would be revealed if the story were chronological. This creates suspense but also mimics the protagonist's limited and frustrated point-of-view. You also have to find alternate angles or focus for scenes -- like the prostitute who is confused by his instructions -- to avoid repetition or information that becomes boring exposition when the story is told in reverse order.

Every story has its own parameters within which it must stay. The cleverness in Blades of Glory is its exploitation of the skating world: rules of the league, training, partners, loopholes to the rules, the stuffy judges, dangerous and infamous ice tricks, the implicit sexuality of skating pairs (the homophobic main pair and the incestuous rivals) and a chase scene on ice skates. If I dared to watch the film again, I am sure I could point out more ways that it exploits its concept. If you need more examples from it, consider it your homework.

Memento and Freaky Friday are very different movies, but I hope that I have shown the implicit and shared craft at work in both scripts and the resulting movies. Each of these scripts treats its concept like a piece of dough or clay and then proceeds to kneed it and mold it into every possible cool shape without ever breaking a piece off. These principles transcend genre or tone. Watch how the filmmakers set up (and pay homage to Memento) Dory in Finding Nemo.

Your challenge is to retain your material's underlying honesty and passion while you cleverly wrap it up in a bundle that explores all of (and only) the interesting permutations of your setup. If you can do this and take your concept all the way then you will be on yours.