# Any one here written a feature length screenplay.



## qwertyman (Mar 18, 2008)

My question is about the three act format.

I am happy with the first act treatment but at this stage it is obvious that it's not going to break: 30 pages -60 pages -30 pages for the three acts. It will more likely break 30/85/15.

In your opinion should I keep at it until I achieve something closer to 30/60/30? 

I hear voices that say 'They're only guidlines.' I'm just wondering if I hear those voices because I want to.

Oh the bells, the bells!


----------



## BOURBON (Mar 18, 2008)

Honestly they really are only guidelines. If you listen to the gurus three act structure is old hat. Ignore them. There are many screen stories with very short third acts. North by Northwest is the filmschool example. If the story balances, the pace works and all your threads have been resolved you're on the right track. The one thing I would keep in mind is an 85p second act will need some good pinches to keep it from feeling over long. Good luck with it. Sad news about Minghella.


----------



## qwertyman (Mar 18, 2008)

Bourbon said:
			
		

> If you listen to the gurus three act structure is old hat. Ignore them.


 
Yeah I'll listen to anybody, who are these gurus and where do they make these pronouncements, can you point me somewhere?



			
				 Bourbon said:
			
		

> The one thing I would keep in mind is an 85p second act will need some good pinches to keep it from feeling over long.


 
I think I have them - but I would say that wouldn't I?

Minghella, yes I just heard.


Thanks Bourbon -


----------



## BOURBON (Mar 18, 2008)

qwertyman said:


> who are these gurus and where do they make these pronouncements, can you point me somewhere?
> 
> I think the whole 'three act structure is dead' BS comes from the fashion for indie films to abandon the three act structure and go all 'eternal sunshine'. The gurus have to reinvent the wheel every now and then to keep selling the books and getting people to go take notes at their endless lectures. I would advise against gurus. Learn by watching films and reading sceenplays. Better to have an instinctive feel for what you're doing than the whole writing by numbers thing. If you are tempted - I still think Robert McKee says some intellegent things and Syd Field is good at stating the obvious...that's if his didactic manner doesn't make you want to punch him in the face.
> 
> ...


----------



## Linton Robinson (Mar 18, 2008)

> Yeah I'll listen to anybody, who are these gurus and where do they make these pronouncements, can you point me somewhere?



You don't have to run out and pay for books and seminars.  You can find them on screenwriting forums.  And how.

The only thing that has a three act FORMAT is a play or halfhour TV show.   Movies, in case you haven't noticed, don't have acts.   No curtains, no stop, no acts.

It's a lame metaphor to describe what is either a non-existance entity OR something so universal there is no point talking about it.  (Challenge the three-act shit and somebody will very quickly say, "A story has to have a beginning, middle, and end"   Yeah, well everything does, doesn't it? 

That paint by the numbers stuff is crap any any of the arts.  Who decided it should be 30-60-30  (and many disagree in their books, by the way, or break it down to more and more complex formulae...how does this affect the use of shape-shifters in The Hero's Journey?)

Some action movies just jump right in to what's happening.   Some artsy movies draw it our forever.   (meaning until you get to "end of act I"   or "instigating incident"  or "first turning point"  or whatever)

Yeah.  Screw it.  Your story has an integrity of it's own.

That said, you look at it, and look at all the movies you admire, and you might find yourself thinking...hmmm,   maybe I should cut to the chase a little quicker,   or, how can I bring this down quicker, leave 'em with the emotion from the climax?

One more word for you here:  this is not exactly the Playground of the Screenplay Gods.   If you are getting into scripts heavily, you should take a look at the many forums that specialize in that form of writing.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Mar 18, 2008)

> I still think Robert McKee says some intellegent things



Very possible.  I've never met him.   He's not given to saying them in his advice books.


----------



## qwertyman (Mar 18, 2008)

bourbon said:
			
		

> Better to have an instinctive feel for what you're doing than the whole writing by numbers thing.


 
I have bulldozed through my rather long life with that maxim. I can't cook because I refuse to follow the recipe - my garage is full of self-assembly furniture that collapsed because I didn't read the instructions and now just when I've decided to read what it says on the tin and follow the rules - you suggest I be instinctive. You should try my souffle.

Syd Field, yes 'didactic' good discription. Very structured, my God mit the Paradigms etc. however I have to start somewhere, and I have heard fairly similar recommendations from others (one in TV and another in feature films). You have to go with the majority don't you?


----------



## BOURBON (Mar 18, 2008)

lin said:


> Very possible. I've never met him. He's not given to saying them in his advice books.


 
Aw...and he says such nice things about your posts.


----------



## BOURBON (Mar 18, 2008)

qwertyman said:


> You should try my souffle.


 
a failed souffle can be a successful omlette.

Joking apart...the world is full of people staggering to write by the numbers laid down by people who usually have achieved nothing of note in the field they are such 'experts' in. Know your story. See it. Write it. Edit it. Polish it.
Do you have some decent formatting software? That is worth spending dollars on.
BB


----------



## qwertyman (Mar 18, 2008)

lin said:
			
		

> Who decided it should be 30-60-30 (and many disagree in their books, by the way, or break it down to more and more complex formulae...how does this affect the use of shape-shifters in The Hero's Journey?)


 
I understand that when a screenplay is read by those who can do something with it i.e flog it, get it made or interest somebody else who can get it made.

The first thing they read is the four or five pages of treatment and if it doesn't fall into the accepted structure it's spiked. 

In other words the people who decide it should be 30-60-30 are the people with the money. Comments please.



			
				 bourbon said:
			
		

> the world is full of people staggering to write by the numbers laid down by people who usually have achieved nothing of note in the field they are such 'experts' in.


I am not too bad a spotting bull-shitters. The two sources I quoted are achievers.



> Do you have some decent formatting software?


 
Final Draft (I told you I read the instructions)


----------



## Linton Robinson (Mar 18, 2008)

Field and McKee?  Acheivers?   Look 'em up.


----------



## Wallmaker (Mar 18, 2008)

Look, screenwriting is marketable craft, like building a house. People have expectations what a house looks like and probably want to buy something that looks like a house. If they don't feel you've built them an acceptible house by their standards, they aren't going to buy your house. Does it mean you can't have a kick ass house? Of course you can. With variety and personality and great characters but also parameters set by the people who are going to buy your product.  Sometimes those parameters vary and not necessarily becuase of the script, but because of the people and the company making it (do you think anyone but the coen bros would have been funded to make No Country for Old Men?)  But the books generalize that for a no name nobody getting into the biz, 30-60-30 won't hurt to blend in and not seem like a novice.

That being said, you're writing a first draft.  Write 30-60-30, 30-85-15, or 30-85-30 or whatever your little heart desires.  When you rewrite and revise, those numbers are going to change.  I'd even say that 120 is waaaay to long for most scripts in most genres.  So don't worry, write it all out, edit and revise so it's polished, and then trouble shoot if you feel your parameters are too extreme.  I just finished my first draft today (YAY!) and it's 145 m-fing pages.  I'm not worried.  You shouldn't be either.  Just get the draft written.  Consider that priority #1.  Becuase that's going to set you apart from the people who don't write the script of their dreams at all.


----------



## qwertyman (Mar 19, 2008)

wallmaker said:
			
		

> Just get the draft written. Consider that priority #1. Becuase that's going to set you apart from the people who don't write the script of their dreams at all.


 
Did you write the treatment first, as suggested by Bourbon?

I'm actually adapting a novel (of mine) for screenplay and I will have to change the sequence of scenes (and bend it a bit) in order to conform to the format. As it stands in the novel it's 30 85 15 - hence my original question.


----------



## Wallmaker (Mar 19, 2008)

qwertyman said:


> Did you write the treatment first, as suggested by Bourbon?



Yes.  I actually wrote an outline.  A treatment is more of a selling tool to show to others.  My outlines are just for me to go over any minutia of the story I want to put on paper.  I mean, it's coherent, but longer and more detail oriented than a treatment.  Most treatments I've seen are 5-10 pages, where my outlines can easily get up to 20.  

Do you need to write one?  Well, you have the book, which is like an extended outline.  I still would, to see if the story flows and you've got everything you need.  Maybe write an outline or treatment, give it to someone who hasn't read your book and see if it makes sense and is a good story to them. 

Basically, it sure is nicer to rewrite a few pages of an outline than fourty pages of a script, right?


----------



## BradW (Mar 30, 2008)

Just to keep things interesting, I know of a few screenwriters who do 30-30-30 rather than 30-60-30 but they write D2DVD movies which often require a shorter (90 minute) running time.

Even if you aren't aiming for the D2DVD market, it might be a good thing to try as you immediately elliminate the major problem that screenwriters have - getting through the second act which can often fall flat because it drags out so much.

The most noticeable three act fiasco I've noticed was the movie Dante's Peak which took forever to get going and then, when the good stuff finally started to happen, it was over in about a half hour before an abrupt as hell ending.


----------

