# Readers tell me that every character needs a background story but do they?



## ironpony (Mar 8, 2020)

After showing my script to some readers, they say that I could give this character more development, or this character, etc.  But the screenplay is for a movie that cannot go over 2 hours long, max. They also keep trying to get me to give each of these characters a pay off, but not every character can have a pay off, can they?  If I were to develop every single character with backgrounds for each, and give them each their own individual pay offs, it would be an entire miniseries. Do readers have a point though, that I need to this whilst still somehow keep it short enough?


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 8, 2020)

Backstory and development are not remotely the same thing. When we talk about character development, all we mean is not making characters two-dimensional (a name, gender and basic description). None of that has to come about from any sort of backstory. Much of it can -- and should -- simply come from within the story itself. 

As mentioned previously, the problem with your characters is (1) They all talk the same (2) They all act predictably and similarly (3) They don't have conversations, or apparently considerations, outside of the Case Of The Rapist and (4) They lack credible emotion. You need to address those things within the confines of the text itself before adding redundant backstories via info dump.

Resolution doesn't mean every character dying/riding into the sunset. When Dorothy returns from Oz she receives her resolution in a very final sense (the main character should) but there's no such denouement for all the characters, yet the story still feels 'resolved'. The method for achieving resolution is to identify what each character's motives were for being in the story to begin with. The Tin Man wanted a heart, and he got one. The Wicked Witch wanted to eat Toto or whatever, so she melted. The Munchkins wanted to be saved from the Wicked Witch, and presumably that happened when the Witch died. Not much of this needed a lot of writing. The few things that were resolved 'on screen' were sufficient to resolve all the significant characters' purposes either explicitly (the melting) or implicitly (the Munchkins)...or they just weren't issues needing much attention at all because the character concerned's motivation was not significant as a part of the story (Toto, the Flying Monkeys, etc)


----------



## Theglasshouse (Mar 8, 2020)

Maybe what you need is to combine characters or have less characters so that you can develop them. A mistake might have been to have to many characters. If this is the same script they could have made a good point. It is tough to say what the solution might be if there are any. Ask them if that could help.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 8, 2020)

Yes this is the same story.   It's mainly the group of villains that the readers say I should establish a backstory for each one of them, but that would take way too long for just one screenplay though.  Other movies have groups of villains in, where not every one has a backstory though.  One reader also said that I should give one of the villains a bigger pay off in the story, but that would take too long and drive the ending in a whole different direction though.  But the reader said she found this villain to be the most interesting of all and therefore I should do it.  But in order to not have the reader expect this character to have a big pay off, should I try to make the character less interesting therefore?  Or probably not, but still not create a false expectation.

There is also another subplot character, that the readers want to have a bigger plot out of, but again, why overuse a subplot character, after the subplots job is done, and to do more with that character has no place in the pay off, I thought was best.


----------



## Cephus (Mar 8, 2020)

It doesn't have to be a backstory but it has to be a life. These characters need to feel alive. If they don't, then they are not fleshed out enough. You don't want to make characters less interesting, you want them to be more interesting. You want people to want to watch them. Otherwise, why bother?


----------



## ironpony (Mar 8, 2020)

Oh okay, well the characters are going around committing these bad crimes, so I thought they felt alive in that sense, but they do wear masks a lot of the time while doing so, so it's hard to reveal emotion in the face therefore if it's a movie.   But how can I get the reader to not want to many pay offs, with too many characters then?


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 8, 2020)

Creating a back story BEFORE you write a character will tend to limit you. Create great characters, and add back story when you need it it.
Otherwise, all that character outlining can get in the way.

You really don't know your characters until you have written those first 100 pages.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 8, 2020)

Oh okay.  The script has not made it to 100 pages long, but it's over 90 with all the rewrites I have done so far.


----------



## Tettsuo (Mar 9, 2020)

The readers don't need to know about a character's backstory, but the writer DOES need to know or at the least have an idea of the character's life. If you don't know a character (we're talking influential characters) then you can't maintain a clear narrative about that character. You can't write their quirks or idiosyncrasies that turns characters from 2d into 3d if you don't know where those ticks come from and how it developed.


----------



## indianroads (Mar 9, 2020)

Main characters, sure, they have some backstory that needs to be told.

Beyond that, minor characters have temperament, attitude, ways of speaking that are unique - these things spring from their FOO and backstory. In your writing, be it novel or movie script, you don't need to write about their past - all it needs (IMO) is to show up in attitude.


----------



## InTheThirdPerson (Mar 9, 2020)

When you're getting this feedback from people, are you asking follow-up questions? Are you asking WHY the readers want to know more about the villains?

There could be a number of reasons for this. Do they all have such similar personalities (or lack personality) so that they just seem to be all the same? Is the rest of the story not compelling enough so that the readers are more interested in the villains? Are you leaving too many unanswered questions?

I really feel like the "why" is much more important here. If readers are telling you that they need more from your villains, there's a reason for that.

As a writer, you should know your characters. Even a convenience store clerk who is only going to be in one scene should feel like a real person. Do you need to develop a full backstory for them? Not necessarily. But if a character is important enough to interact with other characters, even briefly, you should know what is motivating them in that scene. Is the clerk bored and barely paying attention to the job? Is the clerk the chatty type who tries to engage the main character in too much conversation?

It's similar with the idea of creating satisfying pay-offs and conclusions. There's a saying that if you introduce a gun in the first act, you better have it go off by the third. And there's something to that. Leaving too many things unanswered in a story will frustrate your readers / audience. The pay-off for minor characters doesn't have to be super complicated or involved, but if your readers are saying they feel like some of your characters need a resolution, then again, you need to figure out the reason for that. Ask your readers what questions they have or feel are unanswered. Then you can start to develop a plan for how to address it.

Right now (and in your other thread) you're just complaining about how much potential work this could be, which is the way wrong attitude.  And it's also way too generic of an approach if you are just thinking of the problem in general terms. How much work it will be is irrelevant if it will make for a better story. 

If you want an example of how to create compelling characters in a two-hour script format, study the movie Die Hard.

Do the villains all have backstories that the audience is aware of? Nope. But they do all feel like unique personalities, and they all have some sort of resolution / pay-off (even if it's just being quickly shot by Bruce Willis). Pretty much every character with a speaking role in that film offers up some clue about their personality, which makes all of them feel more like real people instead of just pieces moving the plot forward.


----------



## Foxee (Mar 9, 2020)

You should know more about your characters than you actually write.


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 9, 2020)

ironpony said:
			
		

> Readers tell me that ...


Are you still seeking feedback from readers? :-O

How many more rounds of feedback are you planning to engage in?

Have you considered setting some concrete deadlines for this screenplay? Doing so might help you get past this hurdle of perpetually needing reader feedback/approval. :encouragement:


----------



## ironpony (Mar 9, 2020)

Oh I didn't show it to new readers yet.  I told myself I wasn't going to show it to new readers and just hope for the best, but I am still trying to fix the problems outlined before, by them.

But as for the writing knowing the characters more than the readers, when it comes to every villain in a story, does the writer actually no more about every villain?  For example, in a movie like Braveheart, did the writer Randall Wallace, really give a backstory to every soldier in the English army that William Wallace had to fight and new the individual motivations of each one of them, for why they decided to join the English and fight the Scottish, and what made it personal for each one of them?


----------



## InTheThirdPerson (Mar 9, 2020)

ironpony said:


> But as for the writing knowing the characters more than the readers, when it comes to every villain in a story, does the writer actually no more about every villain?  For example, in a movie like Braveheart, did the writer Randall Wallace, really give a backstory to every soldier in the English army that William Wallace had to fight and new the individual motivations of each one of them, for why they decided to join the English and fight the Scottish, and what made it personal for each one of them?



I can't tell if you're being serious or just intentionally over-exaggerating with a question like this.

No, an author wouldn't necessary put effort into complex backstories for each member of an entire army. However, an author would/should try to think of that army as a whole in terms of character: What's the goal? What will inspire the army to continue fighting? What are the fears that will make it stop? How is the army going to achieve its goal? This will help to make the actions of the army, and even individual soldiers within the army, make sense to the reader/audience.

Braveheart is actually a good example of this, because most of the battles tend to make sense to the audience. The audience knows what each side is trying to achieve and the film does a decent job of showing how they plan to achieve their goal (regardless of whether or not they are successful). 

When you see chaotic battle scenes in movies, where nothing really makes much sense, chances are you're dealing with an author who said "do I really need to put the work into this?"


----------



## RWK (Mar 9, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Oh I didn't show it to new readers yet.  I told myself I wasn't going to show it to new readers and just hope for the best, but I am still trying to fix the problems outlined before, by them.
> 
> But as for the writing knowing the characters more than the readers, when it comes to every villain in a story, does the writer actually no more about every villain?  For example, in a movie like Braveheart, did the writer Randall Wallace, really give a backstory to every soldier in the English army that William Wallace had to fight and new the individual motivations of each one of them, for why they decided to join the English and fight the Scottish, and what made it personal for each one of them?



If the English soldiers are not real to the writer, odds are they will not be real to the reader/viewer. 

As noted above, Braveheart does the job well.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 9, 2020)

InTheThirdPerson said:


> I can't tell if you're being serious or just intentionally over-exaggerating with a question like this.
> 
> No, an author wouldn't necessary put effort into complex backstories for each member of an entire army. However, an author would/should try to think of that army as a whole in terms of character: What's the goal? What will inspire the army to continue fighting? What are the fears that will make it stop? How is the army going to achieve its goal? This will help to make the actions of the army, and even individual soldiers within the army, make sense to the reader/audience.
> 
> ...



Well I was trying to choose an example that was very obvious.  In Braveheart, the audiences were satisfied with not every villain having a backstory or even much character development.  They just wanted to concentrate on the more major characters.  So how do I do that, where the reader is fine just concentrating on the major characters, and does not care if every villain has a backstory?


----------



## InTheThirdPerson (Mar 9, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well I was trying to choose an example that was very obvious.  In Braveheart, the audiences were satisfied with not every villain having a backstory or even much character development.  They just wanted to concentrate on the more major characters.  So how do I do that, where the reader is fine just concentrating on the major characters, and does not care if every villain has a backstory?




About the only way you can "make" readers follow the specific path you want your story to take is with excellent writing. Even then, not everyone will do so. But clear and focused writing, with defined characters and defined motivations will help to take your readers / viewers down the path you want. 

Again, you need to follow up with your readers and find out why they  feel more information about the villains is needed. There is no magic formula here that will make your readers conform to what you want. YOU have to figure out where the problem areas are and come up with solutions to fix them. And that may mean asking follow up questions to your test readers to try to get at what the real problems are -- because they might not even know. If they tell you they want to know more about your villains, it could be because they want to know more about your villains. Or it could be because your other characters aren't interesting enough, so they are focused more on the villains.

We don't know why they are giving you this feedback. They do. Ask them.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 9, 2020)

Oh okay.  Well I want the villains to be a character as a whole group, like in Braveheart, but the readers want each character to be in individual character, so I will have to figure out how to combine a group of characters into a character representation.


----------



## InTheThirdPerson (Mar 9, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay.  Well I want the villains to be a character as a whole group, like in Braveheart, but the readers want each character to be in individual character, so I will have to figure out how to combine a group of characters into a character representation.



It's a lot easier to characterize a large group (e.g., an army) with one set of goals and motivations.  If you've got just a handful of villains, you can't make them all the same. No one will buy it.

EDIT: Let me put this another way. You are literally saying you want to put more work into your story to try to make all of the villains seem the same and uninteresting enough to care about, instead of putting more work into your story to try to make your villains seem like real individual characters. Which one of those seems like a really bad idea?

It isn't all or nothing here. You don't need to map out each villain from birth. But if your readers want to know more about them, it's probably because they are bland and generic and, well, you know what they say -- a hero is only as good as their villain. Do you need to know where each villain went to high school? No. But you should know them well enough that you can write each with a distinct voice. Is one the natural leader? Is one impulsive? Is one the guy the others pick on? Does one want to be in charge, so opposes the leader? And so on. Give each one a reason / motivation for being part of this gang in the first place so that when you write them, they feel authentic. If this is a revenge tale where the hero ultimately takes them out, knowing who each villain is in your mind will also likely help you to write their end -- which one will fight to the end and which one will beg for mercy, for example.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 9, 2020)

Well my script, is about a group of villains going around committing kidnapping and rape crimes, and the police are trying figure out who they are and catch them.  I wrote so that there are 7 of them, cause the plot needs at least 7 to hold together since they play different roles, and have to be in different places.

However, one reader said that it would be more powerful if I make add more numbers to the group cause then it's a more powerful force for the police to have to contend with.  One reader said I should have 15 of them instead.  Where as another reader said it feels perhaps a little far fetched with 15 and I should stick to 7.  So it depends on the number I go with.  If I go with 15, is it easier to not have to individualize them all?  But even if they are not all the same, they still have to stick together as a group and make the same decisions for them to be a threat of one.  Is that not good, if they do that?


----------



## RWK (Mar 9, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well my script, is about a group of villains going around committing kidnapping and rape crimes, and the police are trying figure out who they are and catch them.  I wrote so that there are 7 of them, cause the plot needs at least 7 to hold together since they play different roles, and have to be in different places.
> 
> However, one reader said that it would be more powerful if I make add more numbers to the group cause then it's a more powerful force for the police to have to contend with.  One reader said I should have 15 of them instead.  Where as another reader said it feels perhaps a little far fetched with 15 and I should stick to 7.  So it depends on the number I go with.  If I go with 15, is it easier to not have to individualize them all?  But even if they are not all the same, they still have to stick together as a group and make the same decisions for them to be a threat of one.  Is that not good, if they do that?



You're the writer, and as such, you make the choices. You can't write by committee.


----------



## InTheThirdPerson (Mar 10, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well my script, is about a group of villains going around committing kidnapping and rape crimes, and the police are trying figure out who they are and catch them.  I wrote so that there are 7 of them, cause the plot needs at least 7 to hold together since they play different roles, and have to be in different places.
> 
> However, one reader said that it would be more powerful if I make add more numbers to the group cause then it's a more powerful force for the police to have to contend with.  One reader said I should have 15 of them instead.  Where as another reader said it feels perhaps a little far fetched with 15 and I should stick to 7.  So it depends on the number I go with.  If I go with 15, is it easier to not have to individualize them all?  But even if they are not all the same, they still have to stick together as a group and make the same decisions for them to be a threat of one.  Is that not good, if they do that?



Dude... like with your other thread that went on for 13 pages, you are changing the parameters of your question when you aren't getting the answer you want.

You originally asked if your villains need a backstory and now you're saying your feedback was to add more villains.

It's your story, so at some point you're going to need to make decisions on your own about what, if anything, needs to be fixed. However, similar to the other thread, this one is following a similar theme: namely, you seem completely resistant to thinking more in depth about your characters if it means you might need to change some things in your story. The question you should be asking is not whether or not something creates more work for you, but whether or not it will make your story better.

Feedback is just that. Feedback. You can take it or leave it. You're the one that has to decide if you feel ok with your characters as is, or if it will serve the story better to put more work into them. If you don't think your story needs more work, or you don't really feel like doing that work, then don't. You do not need our permission to do whatever you want with your story.

But if you're going to ask for help, it's not doing anyone any good when you just keep resisting the advice you're getting, or asking a different question when you don't like the answer to the first one.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 10, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well my script, is about a group of villains going around committing kidnapping and rape crimes, and the police are trying figure out who they are and catch them.  I wrote so that there are 7 of them, cause the plot needs at least 7 to hold together since they play different roles, and have to be in different places.
> 
> However, one reader said that it would be more powerful if I make add more numbers to the group cause then it's a more powerful force for the police to have to contend with.  One reader said I should have 15 of them instead.  Where as another reader said it feels perhaps a little far fetched with 15 and I should stick to 7.  So it depends on the number I go with.  If I go with 15, is it easier to not have to individualize them all?  But even if they are not all the same, they still have to stick together as a group and make the same decisions for them to be a threat of one.  Is that not good, if they do that?



Balancing the number of villains in a story can be kind of tricky. On the one hand, you have to make the threat seem significant enough to present a credible challenge to the protagonist(s), on the other, you get into this kind of Freudian 'is this big enough?' thing where you end up going way over the top and the result isn't good. The more villains you add, the weaker the individual development is likely to be, because as you mention you can't exactly go into a whole lot of detail with that many characters.

Character balance more broadly can be tough. The way this usually gets addressed is to have fewer major characters (I would define major in this case as characters that are in multiple scenes -- so not to include receptionists and waiters and incidental stuff) and have more development of those characters. The credible challenge can be addressed by simply making sure that your antagonist(s) are individually dangerous enough to pose a considerable threat either individually or at least within the small group. 

I think fifteen antagonists sounds like too many. That being said, it doesn't mean you can't have fifteen -- or thirty, or a hundred -- only that you probably can't really show that many in-text. You need to make a fraction of that number the villains who are actually shown on screen, whether they are part of a larger organization or not doesn't matter very much. You can just refer to them, or have them in the background somewhere.

That being said, I have somewhat of a difficulty imagining how this gang could credibly have fifteen people. Rape is generally a solitary crime, and when it isn't, the 'gangs' are usually pretty small because, well, rapists aren't typically very social nor good at coordinating their raping. Unless you can build a really solid explanation for why this gang differ from the profile, you're probably better off sticking to the profile: Lonely misfits who can't fit in. I suspect even the most widely visited incel forum probably doesn't have many more active members than fifteen.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 10, 2020)

Oh okay thanks.  Well I want to go big enough on the number in the group without being too big of course.  But I don't want to have to develop each one of them so that each one has a different explained personal motive for joining the group.  I want the reason to be a whole, but it seems that the couple of readers I asked, have trouble swallowing that, but another one, said go for 15 of them as she suggested.

But as far as character development goes, there are 3 major villains in the group who get time to shine character wise, and their development plays into the story and plot.  Where as the other members, are just their for either muscle, or threat support for the story, if that makes sense.


----------



## Annoying kid (Mar 10, 2020)

Ironpony, if I were you I'd stop writing this script. Because there's either one of two possibilities. 

1) This script requires backing from a film studio. Given the controversial nature of the subject matter, you should start querying film studios or agents at this point. Now a query doesn't mean you give them your script. It means you tell them what its about and you tell them about yourself. If no ones interested, you've saved yourself additional work, or they might have given you suggestions as to why they wont take it. You can start making adjustments to what they want instead of random readers or people on a forum.

or 

2) This is an independent film project. In which case, stop writing, start storyboarding.  Then adjust the writing in response to that. Then start  filming demo reels, with yourself and preferably a woman of some kind acting out the male and female roles respectively. If you can't get someone else, do it yourself. SEE how the script translates to your visual media. You'll learn so much more about it. Then adjust again, get some actors if you have the budget, and film a part 1 of your script. 

That in itself would make you stand out in the eyes of an agent or a studio when your peers are just sending in scripts. Film all the variations of a scene. The more content you have the better it'll be in editing. As you have more options. Actors will tell you how theyd like their characters to have more depth. Depth added through their performance. But you need to give them space to give you a performance. Micro managing the script is not the way to do that.


----------



## BornForBurning (Mar 10, 2020)

> Ironpony, if I were you I'd stop writing this script


an impossible feat by all measures


----------



## RWK (Mar 11, 2020)

Annoying kid said:


> Ironpony, if I were you I'd stop writing this script. Because there's either one of two possibilities.
> 
> 1) This script requires backing from a film studio. Given the controversial nature of the subject matter, you should start querying film studios or agents at this point. Now a query doesn't mean you give them your script. It means you tell them what its about and you tell them about yourself. If no ones interested, you've saved yourself additional work, or they might have given you suggestions as to why they wont take it. You can start making adjustments to what they want instead of random readers or people on a forum.
> 
> ...



Very good advice.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 11, 2020)

Oh well when it comes to option #1, this is just what I wast told in my research of the industry, but they say to always have the script ready to go, when you pitch, cause if you do not have it ready to go, then it shows to them that you are not serious enough, if that's true.

As for #2 and stop writing, start storyboarding, wouldn't I need to make the writing as close to perfect first, for the storyboards to hold together though, but also to get actors and crew interested, if they see a polished script first?


----------



## bdcharles (Mar 11, 2020)

ironpony said:


> As for #2 and stop writing, start storyboarding, wouldn't I need to make the writing as close to perfect first, for the storyboards to hold together though, but also to get actors and crew interested, if they see a polished script first?



Isn't a storyboard higher level than that - like a visual synopsis, detailing key events? My understanding is that it is a good pitch tool and can also help planning, eg to work out inconsistencies without going into too much detail. The detail is what would come later, in the script, as I understand it. Could be wrong though...


----------



## Annoying kid (Mar 11, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Oh well when it comes to option #1, this is just what I wast told in my research of the industry, but they say to always have the script ready to go, when you pitch, cause if you do not have it ready to go, then it shows to them that you are not serious enough, if that's true.
> 
> As for #2 and stop writing, start storyboarding, wouldn't I need to make the writing as close to perfect first, for the storyboards to hold together though, but also to get actors and crew interested, if they see a polished script first?




#1 - No, not in this case. With your query, you're mainly trying to find out if they'd even be open to the concept itself. If they say yes, you send them a plot synopsis. If they say yes to that, and you get that far, then you can either send the script you have now, they will either accept it, or reject it, likely giving reasons why they rejected it. In which case you can adjust based on that. Or they dont give a reason, in which case you STILL know they're interested in the concept and plot synopsis, therefore you know you can resubmit to them later on.

Normally it can be assumed that someone will like a script thats well written. However in your case, the subject matter is controversial to the point where you cannot assume people will want to take it on even if its written well and polished. In which case it makes sense to find out first if any agents/studios are interested in such a concept. If I was writing this rapey stuff, I wouldn't have even started the script proper before emailing and writing to agents to find out if this is even a thing that any studio will want to take on. I'd have just given them the plot synopsis.

If every agent I email either doesnt respond or responds with "No fucking chance". Then I'll know I need to change things in order for it to be within an indie budget. I can write with that in mind. 

#2 If the storyboards arent holding together you change the script so it does hold together.  This is why you're testing it in visual media in the first place. You can't just have the movie's imagery play out in your head and expect it to translate to real world visual media seamlessly. I *guarantee *some things in your "near perfect script" will have to be cut due to the limitations of the screen. Some things you will be describing in dialogue that would be clear via expressed visual language. But you won't know that unless you test it. Through role play. Through story board. You are not a novel writer. You're acting like one when you shouldn't. Nobody cares about a near perfect script. We care about a near perfect film. Don't be that guy who writes a "near perfect" script and then resists adapting and changing it during the process. That film maker who shuts down improv and insists on doing everything "as written". That doesn't impress actors.


----------



## RWK (Mar 11, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Oh well when it comes to option #1, this is just what I wast told in my research of the industry, but they say to always have the script ready to go, when you pitch, cause if you do not have it ready to go, then it shows to them that you are not serious enough, if that's true.
> 
> As for #2 and stop writing, start storyboarding, wouldn't I need to make the writing as close to perfect first, for the storyboards to hold together though, but also to get actors and crew interested, if they see a polished script first?



If you are a first-time scriptwriter, in the event that you actually sell a script, the odds are they are going to buy your idea and have a veteran writer work it over.


----------



## becwriter (Mar 23, 2020)

Characters need depth and color commensurate with their role in the story. Main characters need more depth in order for your readers to invest emotion in them. That being said, a single, skillfully-written sentence can convey an incredible amount of color for lesser characters right in the body of the story itself.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 26, 2020)

Annoying kid said:


> #1 - No, not in this case. With your query, you're mainly trying to find out if they'd even be open to the concept itself. If they say yes, you send them a plot synopsis. If they say yes to that, and you get that far, then you can either send the script you have now, they will either accept it, or reject it, likely giving reasons why they rejected it. In which case you can adjust based on that. Or they dont give a reason, in which case you STILL know they're interested in the concept and plot synopsis, therefore you know you can resubmit to them later on.
> 
> Normally it can be assumed that someone will like a script thats well written. However in your case, the subject matter is controversial to the point where you cannot assume people will want to take it on even if its written well and polished. In which case it makes sense to find out first if any agents/studios are interested in such a concept. If I was writing this rapey stuff, I wouldn't have even started the script proper before emailing and writing to agents to find out if this is even a thing that any studio will want to take on. I'd have just given them the plot synopsis.
> 
> ...



Okay thanks.  I was just told by other writers when reading on advice, is do not pitch an idea, unless you have a script ready to go, cause if you pitch and then they ask for the script right after, and you say it's not written yet, than it shows to them that you are not serious.  Is that true then?


----------



## Amy-rose (Mar 28, 2020)

Back-story and development aren't really the same thing.

Backstory - is their past, their history. Key moments in there lives and key people that shaped them today. Understanding those moments gives better incite to a character and can even change our perception of them. A character that just hates women and is negative about/towards them is just a sexist. But when you discover his mother beat him as a child, then his wife had numerous affairs behind his back you can understand why he hates women, even if you think he's wrong to hate all women because of two "bad eggs". "All women are bad" is his lie. His mother established that lie and his wife reinforced it. Not every character needs this kind of depth shown in the story, but the main character and the antagonist (if there is one) could do with it.

Character Development - is how the character changes through the novel. How they develop. Maybe our women hating man learns not all women are cruel and to be distrusted. That's development. A coming to terms with wounds that haunt him and getting over them in development. Like a character arc but on a more emotional level.

I hope that's correct anyway. I'm not experienced and new to writing and I only think it's fair to say that before people can my advice and it's wrong.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 29, 2020)

Amy-rose said:


> Back-story and development aren't really the same thing.
> 
> Backstory - is their past, their history. Key moments in there lives and key people that shaped them today. Understanding those moments gives better incite to a character and can even change our perception of them. A character that just hates women and is negative about/towards them is just a sexist. But when you discover his mother beat him as a child, then his wife had numerous affairs behind his back you can understand why he hates women, even if you think he's wrong to hate all women because of two "bad eggs". "All women are bad" is his lie. His mother established that lie and his wife reinforced it. Not every character needs this kind of depth shown in the story, but the main character and the antagonist (if there is one) could do with it.
> 
> ...



Yeah that makes sense.  It's just the readers want to know the reasons why every single villain decided to join up in the group of villains.  But it's only a screenplay for one movie so there isn't time to explain everyone's reason, is there?


----------



## bazz cargo (Mar 29, 2020)

Unless the character's backstory is integral to the story then no... The lightest of thumbnails is all you need, and rarely that much. 
For shortcuts there are cliches and stereotypes. Use them sparingly unless it is a comedy. 
One thought on scripting. The more cast members the more expensive it is to make. Which is why so many series include two hander episodes. The more scenes that use the same scenery cuts costs. While a writer can have fun there is an executive who will be budgeting. 
Good luck




ironpony said:


> After showing my script to some readers, they say that I could give this character more development, or this character, etc.  But the screenplay is for a movie that cannot go over 2 hours long, max. They also keep trying to get me to give each of these characters a pay off, but not every character can have a pay off, can they?  If I were to develop every single character with backgrounds for each, and give them each their own individual pay offs, it would be an entire miniseries. Do readers have a point though, that I need to this whilst still somehow keep it short enough?


----------



## Annoying kid (Mar 29, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  I was just told by other writers when reading on advice, is do not pitch an idea, unless you have a script ready to go, cause if you pitch and then they ask for the script right after, and you say it's not written yet, than it shows to them that you are not serious.  Is that true then?



Normally it is true. But dude, you're writing an incel rape script as your *first feature length screenplay. 
*
[video=youtube;1oY7TsYDqao]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oY7TsYDqao[/video] 

You went to film school, yes? Ask your tutor what they think  you should do with your concept and plot synopsis/script. Hell go on twitter and ask a bunch of agents about what they expect of scripts that deal with the concept of rape. 

They're likely to answer you there because they can tell other writers what they expect while they're answering you. So they save themselves alot of submissions that they don't want. Tweet them and frame it that way. 

Or if you're putting all your eggs in this basket and going for broke,  query them and just send what you have if they ask. Go on sites like The blacklist https://blcklst.com/#aspiring_screenwriters, and/or IMDB pro, upload it/share the idea around and go for broke. 

What you don't want to do is spend another ten years "perfecting" it, then try to sell it, only to get rejected at every turn, and then get all depressed about it. It looks like it might go that way. You can only tinker with a script so much before it doesn't improve anymore because you'll find yourself with the details and minutiae of a writer of 20 years, but the core structure of a newbie.  Its very difficult to make radical changes after you've been working on it so long. Thats why you come on this forum, asking questions over and over, about little tidbits of your story. Like, "If every character needs a backstory".   You keep second guessing yourself because the core structure has long since turned to concrete in your mind and you are hyper-focusing on the details. You sense that there's something wrong about your script and you hope that if you tinker with the details enough at the level of lines and minor plot points (like minor characters backstories) that it will eventually create a masterpiece. 

It won't though. As the problems lie way up stream. As a first script guy, unless you're some genius, you're bound to have problems in the core structure. major characterization and thematic concept. Listen to John Truby on rewriting (youtube). 

Lets say you give every single character a backstory. Are you aware of the repercussions on the structure of your script? Thats not the kind of question anyone who was close to turning professional would ask. If you're just trying to reach perfection at this point and you've essentially finished this draft then you really should leave it alone, and work on the next script. 

But you won't will you? You'll keep wanting to perfect this one almighty script where it'll have the advice from all the writing forums you've frequented (at least 15), with all this advice from *prose* novelists, how can your movie script fail? When it's "perfect" you'll walk into the studio like a King Pin, put that script on the table, and no one will be able to resist. They'll hire you on the spot and get Al Pacino as the cop.   :icon_bounce:


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 29, 2020)

ironpony said:


> It's just the readers want to know the reasons why every single villain decided to join up in the group of villains.



At some point you'll need to get past this hurdle of wanting to satisfy readers whenever they make a suggestion/critique.

Readers will always (ALWAYS) find things wrong with a story. It's just the nature of subjectivity.

If you had the power to live forever, and you were able to rewrite this story for the next thousand years, constantly adjusting based on reader feedback? Guess what: readers would STILL find things wrong with it.

Because readers don't all like the same thing. And they don't all share the same creative ideas.

Trying to rewrite a story based on reader feedback can (and often does) turn into a never-ending loop. The only way to extricate yourself from it is to realize that not all reader suggestions need to be considered.

I'd only consider them if there's a legitimate problem with the story that needs fixing.

A comment like: "This part doesn't make sense, because the character is in a car here, when they were in a _truck _in the previous scene" <-- That's feedback that should definitely be addressed. It points out a logical problem with the story.

On the other hand, a comment like, "I want to know why every single villain joined the gang" <-- That's not a logical problem with the story. That's just a reader expressing their own specific desire.

If you keep considering such things, you'll just be trying to change _your_ story based on the opinions and preferences of _others_. (Which, like I said, is a cycle that could go on forever, with no logical end. Ever.) :grief:


----------



## ironpony (Mar 31, 2020)

Oh okay thanks.  Yes for sure I don't want to go around in circles.  Some of the readers advice I do find to be contradictory.  Not all, but some...

One of the things I was told is I make my villains perhaps too sympathetic and no one wants to see a villain learn a lesson, or have an arc.  They want them remain an evil threat, that has to be stopped throughout the entire plot.  Is that true, do you think as to what most readers want?

But I also find this to be contradictory, cause they want each villain to have their own separate motivations, and reasoning, but at the same time, they do not want any humanized qualities.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Mar 31, 2020)

It helps to develop their motivation to take action (or to depict whatever it is about a character, maybe just imo but it's a good way to see their hopes, dreams, fears, in the story or the so called "ghost"). The better the motivation or more desperate the better and if internal because of conflict. For example a wife wants to climb a moutain because her husband died there. As for the other opinion let's say writers just like to have their villains change or the mc. Some of the best stories have the mc or villain change. I kind of agree two character arcs is too much. I would focus on the mc since this is a movie. Movie teminology calls this the flaw that the character must abandon in order to change and stop hurting others, and thus get past whatever it is that is preventing them from reaching their goals. A honest spy is always dangerous for instance. Reminds me of Edward Snowden's personality.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 31, 2020)

Oh okay.  But there some movies, that have the hero and villain go through changes though, aren't there?


----------



## Theglasshouse (Mar 31, 2020)

I have seen some with that happening such as a revenge story with a redemption in the end.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 31, 2020)

I guess three movies off the top of my head where it happens are Heat, Oldboy, and Cell 211.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Mar 31, 2020)

Les Miserables comes to mind if I mentioned one movie off the top of my head. The hero commits a crime, and the villain is on the side of justice.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 31, 2020)

Oh okay thanks, I thought of Les Miserables too!  Well in my story, the hero has a plan to bring down the group of villains, but in order to do so, his plan involves manipulating the main villain to betray the others.  However, in order to make the villain betray the others, he has to change the villain's character around.  So it's hard for me to keep the villain from changing, when the hero's plan of winning, requires him to change the villain, if that make sense.  But yet, some readers may have a problem with a villain changing.


----------



## dale (Mar 31, 2020)

who are these "readers" you have that seem to do nothing but congregate around you and nitpick every aspect of your work? 
can you send a couple of them over to my house? it's been quite some time since i've had the pleasure of boot-kicking someone out my door.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 31, 2020)

Lol they are just either friends who I ask to be honest, or other people I have met in a writing and filmmaking community where I live.


----------



## Sir-KP (Mar 31, 2020)

ironpony said:


> *no one *wants to see a villain learn a lesson, or have an arc.  *They want them *remain an evil threat, that has to be stopped throughout the entire plot.  Is that true, do you think as to what *most readers *want? But I also find this to be contradictory, cause *they want* each villain to have their own separate motivations, and reasoning, but at the same time, *they do not want* any humanized qualities.



Clearly it's what *they* want. Not *most*. Subjective matter, which apparently you realized their feedback are contradicting. I believe I've said something like this in other threads previously.

I have a suggestion for you: give your script to them, ask them whether the storyline is clear or not. Period. 

When they start criticizing that _this_ should be like _that, _tell them the story is fixed.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 31, 2020)

Well in terms of clarity there are little things here and there they, seem to not be clear on.  Like they said things like the police behave in a way, in which they wouldn't behave, but I felt I did probably more research for writing it than they did, so I think they are just guessing really.


----------



## Sir-KP (Apr 1, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well in terms of clarity there are little things here and there they, seem to not be clear on.  *Like they said things like the police behave in a way, in which they wouldn't behave, but I felt I did probably more research for writing it than they did, so I think they are just guessing really.*



That's it, man. That's it. That's the kind of confidence you should have when you're sure you have done your work, in this case research, and made decision from it.


----------



## ironpony (Apr 2, 2020)

Oh okay, a couple of readers felt also felt that the villains were contradictory in the sense they are going around committing these rape crimes out of revenge, because they are constantly rejected by the opposite sex and feel inferior by them because of it.  So they are out for revenge on them.  However, I was told that this is contradictory, because they are smart enough, to get away with the crimes and not leave any evidence that can tie them to the crimes.  The readers say, if they are smart enough to beat the police, and beat forensics, then why aren't they smart enough to know how to get laid, and form connections with the opposite gender of their desire?

Do the readers have a point, how can they be so ingenious in one area, but yet so incompetent in another?


----------



## Theglasshouse (Apr 2, 2020)

That's why I sometimes felt your villains needed some kind of disability. 



> You may come across many disabilities in your work life. Some examples of common disabilities you may find are:
> 
> 
> vision Impairment
> ...



They can't work and their odds of maintaining a relationship becomes much harder and almost much harder if well known ex-convicts which deals a blow to sympathy and the audience dislikes the villains because of it.

https://services.anu.edu.au/human-resources/respect-inclusion/different-types-of-disabilities

I do find it difficult to believe somewhat if even they had a disability that it is not for a noble purpose. Maybe an example would be to have a family. 

Inferiority has to in my humble opinion to come from a reason or cause that motivates them to commit the crime.

But then you are in danger of alienating the audience because most movies portray them in a heroic way. You need to research carefully in what cases have movies successfully pulled of the disabled stereotype negatively.

Just my very unprofessional opinion I decided to share. Watch more movies where disabled protagonists are the villain. I think untouchables has one. But I did not believe the characterization in that movie.

If not read a novel which pulls this trope.


----------



## ironpony (Apr 2, 2020)

Oh okay thanks.  Well the way I wrote it was that it was left up to the imagination in order to avoid being too distasteful, but I was told I need to explore this and not leave it up to the imagination  Is that true, or could exploring be more in bad taste?

Also, the readers said to stay way from mental disabilities, cause they said that a person cannot be smart enough to pull off these crimes of they are mentally disabled.  Is that true, and therefore it's not believable?

As for making them ex-cons, doing that will not work for the story, because then they are on file, and would become the prime suspects, if they are in the system already.  So in order for them to remain a mystery up until the third act, I would need villains that are not on file then, right?


----------



## Theglasshouse (Apr 2, 2020)

Seeing successful examples in movies will give you more insights to answer your questions than I can. People can have different tastes in movies. In a movie I saw a long time ago of a intellectually disabled man who killed a woman and was on trial. I would think given a poor background they are more likely to commit a crime. It might not be a high profile crime for example. I remember it because it was a sad movie and the lawyer convinced the judge that the "retarded" man was sentient. Remember there are emotional disabilities as well. It depends on the background of the person. Schizoaffective disorder is considered an emotional disability(mental as well) borderline personality disorder, bipolar personality disorder as is autism.

In that movie the person who had an intelligence or intellectual disability (people who have IQs that are much lower than average) was executed in the electric chair. People with intellectual disabilities don't usually do white collar crimes. Search a newspaper and maybe you'll find an answer.

Communication disabilities are another thing. What about a man that stutters and can't find a job?

I don't know anything of the police force and its practices. Use movies for suspension of disbelief. I am reminded that movies can inspire authors who write the movies. I saw a movie called the unabomber, or the series which has a previous suspect. This movie or series had many suspects for the identity of the unabomber. They were on a big man hunt for the criminal.  The person was previously on a file but for a minor offense (he was mentally abused by the police). They didn't think he was a suspect since he went to Harvard. Among other things, and he was extremely reclusive as well. But since he took part in a police protest it seemed that violence hurt him and created feelings of hate. I still don't know all the motives behind why he did it. But it's an example of all the Hollywood movies, where criminals can get away with crimes when on a file. Try to remember movies where you saw many suspects, but they couldn't find the one suspect.

Real life and movies are where in my opinion you can find successful cases of where suspects repeated crimes. Maybe they were released from jail. They weren't rehabilitated well enough. They were willing to commit a crime since they lacked empathy.

How they evaded it I dont know. I would say a person's personality because of growing up creates or builds their abilities to make decisions that are bad or good.

People disguise themselves to avoid getting caught and change their appearance.

Sometimes police neglect to solve crimes. Because they were convinced they committed an error. Which could lead to the firing of people in the police department or a lawsuit. Or they want to be promoted. A number of movies are based on this premise.

I say some are ex-convicts or use pathological behaviors to feel better. For example, it's been documented that people that harm animals can harm humans as well. They can be considered people with potential to be criminals.

Last off all poverty encourages crime is a popular criminal theme in crime films.

It depends on who you ask. Join a film forum where people discuss the latest movie releases. There's got to be one on the internet. When you find them ask them? Ask them would they believe it?

(remember they have more film knowledge than most people, you should direct answers of your script to them. I bet they'd be eager to participate; I.E. the audience is considered smart in every case which is why you should try to ask them questions, but betareaders seem to be better that don't know you since then they are more honest).

(Remember relatability, or likability is important of characters. You don't want to do an injustice to a stereotype or people might not like the movie's characters. Example some of these groups have been trying to gain rights in their communities).

(A person's distaste imo is important. Explore what movie conventions or tropes existed before, can help you know what to write that is not in distaste or to find a brand-new premise for a film).

Writer's are more critical than fans and that seems to be generally true when they critique something.

I can't answer the questions with an answer. It's better to answer it with critical thinking skills. A outright yes or no won't do the trick to answer your question.


----------



## ironpony (Apr 2, 2020)

Oh okay thanks.  Well I am told that a character who is smart enough to beat a police investigation, is therefore smart enough to get members of the opposite gender, so therefore, it's a contradiction.

But in real life, the real unibomber for example, was smart at evading the FBI for many years, yet he couldn't get women according to what his brother said about him.  Or in real life, OJ Simpson was smart enough to know how to be popular with women, but really sucked at concealing evidence of a murder.  So wouldn't examples like those help show, how a person can be smart in one area, but not another?


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 3, 2020)

ironpony said:


> Well the way I wrote it was that it was left up to the imagination ... but I was told I need to explore this and not leave it up to the imagination



I don't believe it's reader's role (nor do I believe it's their place) to tell the writer what "needs" to be done. An early reader's role is mostly to give honest (and subjective) feedback. The writer's role is to graciously consider, or dismiss, any feedback that's given.

It sounds like you have readers who are telling you what you "should" do, as if they somehow know better, or as if they're above you. To me, that doesn't sound like a productive (nor healthy) reader-writer relationship.

IMO, early readers should give their personal feedback. What they thought of the story. How the characters and events made them feel. Stuff like that.

Then it's up to the writer to make any creative decisions, in response to the feedback.

Nowhere in that dynamic is there room for the reader to suddenly start making _writerly_ choices or suggestions. If that's happening (which it seems to be), you might want to try seeking feedback from _non-_writers, instead.

Just an idea. :encouragement:


----------



## Theglasshouse (Apr 3, 2020)

Whatever works for him. Right now he doubts most advice handed out to him. Why not make friends with non-writers? Which I suggested sort off by telling him to go to a forum on movies. However, I did make some suggestions that might seem in my conviction right. There is no consensus on what he should do. People agree and disagree with feedback. In a forum it's best to choose the advice I agree the most with (he has to chose the one he agrees with). And since writing isn't even a science and requires more practice than anything else. It's very subjective every opinion people hand out. No one is a master or apprentice. People just have reputations and writing cannot be explained or some dispute it can't be taught (every writer's process is different). Since it's his time and especially his money I agree because readers are more impartial. However, if he ever decides to use the heaps of advice given to him as tall as a small hill.  He knows it must make some logical sense. In addition to this nothing I try to say is prescriptive, are more suggestions, and give him ample room to think, be influenced. But he is the boss of what works for him. I like your opinion, and we all mean to instruct on what we experienced that worked for us as writers.


----------



## ironpony (Apr 3, 2020)

Theglasshouse said:


> Whatever works for him. Right now he doubts most advice handed out to him. Why not make friends with non-writers? Which I suggested sort off by telling him to go to a forum on movies. However, I did make some suggestions that might seem in my conviction right. There is no consensus on what he should do. People agree and disagree with feedback. In a forum it's best to chose to the advice I agree the most with (he has to chose the one he agrees with). And since writing isn't even a science and requires more practice than anything else. It's very subjective every opinion people hand out. No one is a master or apprentice. People just have reputations and writing cannot be explained. Since it's his time and especially his money I agree because readers are more impartial. However, if he ever decides to use the heaps of advice given to him as tall as a small hill.  He knows it must make some logical sense. In addition to this nothing I try to say is prescriptive, are more suggestions, and give him ample room to think, be influenced. But he is the boss of what works for him.



Oh well I have asked non-writers as well, but I find that to be worse, cause I think they may have more biases.  They also seem more offended by the material than writers, and because they are offended, I think that causes them to pick the story apart more, compared to if they were not offended by the subject matter, if that makes sense?


----------



## Theglasshouse (Apr 3, 2020)

That's unfortunate. Heré's something I wanted you to reply to, which is a suggestion.

There's probably well-received movies with high reviews about the subject about sexual offenders who get punished by the law and then there's a happy ending. (He can imitate the best received movies on how they handled the subject on rape sensitively.) That makes logical sense to me, I hope this is helpful. If I could emphasize one advice maybe it could be this one as a suggestion for writers on movies. 

(Ways to create less controversy which seems to be a big topic in this thread imo. How do they create less controversy? How do they handle it? There are many movies on rape and crime. But what did they do right reading reader comments in movies, and what did they do wrong? Why was the movie a failure, why did it succeed in Iron Pony's chosen genre and theme? The concept could be very violent imo, and I don't mean to make you doubt yourself as a writer.)

Controversy can ruin movies unlike books which can thrive on it. It's very much real. You can make them like the appeal of the movie maybe by observing and reflecting on the movie and can find some inspiration. The Biggest box office success in your genre? I would suggest looking that up, and tone done anything by copying those movies. 

However, remember these are all suggestions. If they don't make sense don't decide on using them. That's what I would do.

(One of the few good points from a movie class I took is that one should ask if your idea is unique? Has it been done before is one of the questions? However since you already wrote it, I am just giving this for you to think over). This came from Diane drake came from a successful scriptwriter. I own her book called: Get your story straight. And I took a 200 dollar course which I regret.

Most of these are assumptions. The last one came from the scriptwriter. It's the last one in bold. If you want something to sell it must be unique. The premise is also quickly understood in movies. Audiences have short attention spans supposedly.

Obviously I can't explain how. I need to finish reading Diane drake's book. Her course I did not like or understand how it helped me plot. All it taught was structure of plot points and no inspiration which supposedly can't be taught but must be sought (feeding to the subconscious ideas by seeing lots of movies for instance).


----------



## ironpony (Apr 3, 2020)

Oh okay thanks.  I asked a couple of readers who were offended by it, what could I do to tone it down and make it less offensive, but they said no matter what you do, it will always have that rape stink attached it.  They didn't really put in those words, but they meant that no amount of toning down, can fix it I think.


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 4, 2020)

Then it sounds like they aren't your target audience.

Ideally, you'll want to find early readers who read the synopsis of your story and think, "Yes! This kind of stuff is right up my alley!" Because _that_ is the type of person who will be shelling out money to see your work.

If they're _not_ the kind of person who'll be buying your work, why would you care about their creative feedback?

For example: if you're opening a steak restaurant, who would you rather have sample your menu: vegetarians, or actual steak lovers?

If a vegan samples your steak and says, "I don't like this food!" . . . _so what?_ They're not going to be one of your regular patrons, anyway.

So, I'd say that if you're getting feedback from people who aren't in your target audience, beware—their opinions might not be relevant.

Even worse: their opinions might not matter at all. :cower:


----------



## ironpony (Apr 4, 2020)

Okay thanks, that makes sense, it's just it's strange because those readers seem to like movies or books with similar subject matter in before, when I talked to them about their tastes so I thought I was doing something wrong therefore.


----------

