| [BACK]
In my roles as screenwriting professor and script consultant, I read more scripts than the average, which means I give my opinion on whether or not a script works or doesn't on a regular basis.
I've learned to be careful about what I say to an author. I try to be fair and honest. I never (intentionally) come off as the world's- smartest-person-who-knows-everything-there-is-to-know-about-what-it-
takes-to-write-a-good-screenplay. I have met people like this. People who KNOW BEST. These are people who read a script and can tell you what's wrong with it and how to fix it and as you read what they have to say or listen to their stream of criticism you know two things: they never actually written a screenplay and they lack the ability to critique the script that's been written NOT the script they would write if they had the ability.
I recently attended the reading of a play. The play was pretty good. Needed work here and there. Maybe a stronger end of Act One and more shadings and contours for the lead character. I stuck around for the "discussion" that followed. I mistrust people who partake in these discussions. Most of them just like to take a dump on somebody else's work and/or hear themselves talk. (And, of course, there are also those who are TOO NICE, but that's the subject of anotner column). Here I'm concentrating on the know-it-alls.
I felt sorry for the playwright. He had to listen to these elitists tell him how bad his play was and how, if he listened to them, it would be greater than King Lear. Needless to say, no post play discussion group lacks for experts. This poor guy had to listen to contradictory points of view from one pompous ass after another. Only a few people actually gave him useful feedback. (I didn't say a word. I never publicly say anything). But the few who gave the guy stuff he could use pretty much all said the same thing: First Act ends on a weak note. Could be bigger. You go for a laugh in a few spots where you shouldn't. A couple of characters, especially the lead, could be embellished. Ending came upon us too fast. And a few other specific, fixable things.
The playwright took the criticism like a trooper, but I know he was sick to his stomach when it was over. I've been there, as a playwright and screenwriter. When I gave him my thoughts the next day it was very civilized. Specific. Encouraging. I didn't try to make his play my play.
I just tried to make what he wrote clearer and more focused. A couple of things I said might've been wrong or off-base. But I knew that the essence of what I told him was helpful and something that he could consider when he started the next draft.
Moral of the story: avoid know-it-alls. They're full of crap. |
