One of the most important aspects of screenplay development is a respect for the past, present and future of films.
As shown yesterday in the “Screenplay of the Week”, wikiscreenplay will be tackling the screenplays of yesteryear. We will also dive into the “NetFlix Pick-o-the-Week” which will highlight older films that you should take the time to put on your NetFlix Queue. As for the present, we will try to have reviews for the most current blockbusters in theaters at the moment. Finally, for those of you in search of the latest knowledge and gossip, we will be hitting you with opening week previews, trailers and the hottest news from the films you want to see.
While it is important to see and take in as many movies as possible, try to think about the screenplays while you watch. It is a much different experience and, in my opinion, more rewarding. We at wikiscreenplay will always put the screenplay spin on our articles because that is what sets our site apart. We are trying to put together the first collaborative worldwide screenplay, therefore, the more people who understand the art of screenplay writing the better.
Quick reviews of the blockbusters this summer which appeared before the creation of wikiscreenplay:
Wall-E: Another classic in the long line from the masters at Pixar
When to see: when you want to smile for an hour and a half; when you want to take in the great visuals that keep improving; when you want to understand how Pixar can write a story with only a few talking characters but still give a multitude of layers
When not to see: when you don’t want to be bombarded with a health and green agenda; when you can’t stand another sappy Pixar film with a predictable story
The Dark Knight: the best of the newest wave of super hero flicks
When to see: when you want to be truly impressed by an individual acting performance in Heath Ledger; when you want a darker breed of super hero story; when you want to experience what a great director can do without much CGI
When not to see: when you don’t have around three hours for a movie; when you want to escape the ugliness of the world
Hancock: an interesting idea that becomes to involved in itself
When to see: when you want to see Will Smith doing his Mr. Fourth of July thing
When not to see: when you don’t want a story to twist and turn in no apparent direction for an hour and a half; when you don’t want to be unimpressed with visual effects; when you want a good premise of a film to be wasted
Wanted: pure adrenaline and head shots….now is that good or bad?
When to see: when you want to get right down to business and see some awesome weapons and action scenes; when you want to see good looking representatives of both sexes (Jolie and McAvoy); when you want to hear Morgan Freeman dropping F-bombs
When not to see: when you don’t want to see 25 straight head shots (I know these guys are elite assassins, but really headshots every time?); when you want more dialogue to push forward a worthwhile story.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Screenplay of the Week
"LIAR LIAR"
Written 1996
by Tom Shadyac and Mike Binder
http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/liarliar.pdf
To start off the first of many new features here at wikiscreenplay we have the “Screenplay of the Week”. Each week a full movie screenplay will be posted with a brief synopsis of why its important to read and understand.
This week, as the first installment, we will be looking at on of the many comedies during the 1990’s that starred Jim Carrey. Carrey will always hold a special place in my heart thanks to his dominance of my childhood comedy memory; Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, Dumb & Dumber. These three films shaped my humor as a kid are still among my favorite comedies. With this said I picked Liar Liar as an example of the type of comedy that will not work anymore in today’s box office.
I hope you do take the time to actually read the full screenplay because this can really give a better impression of the filmmakers abilities to turn the written word into a true experience. The transition from screenplay to the big screen is an amazing and intricate task. By not only seeing the film but reading through the screenplay one can really get a sense for whether the screenplay simply could not fail, whether the screenplay was garbage and saved purely by the actors and directors, or whether both sides failed. This process is a major reason for why I got into reading (and writing) screenplays and I know believe to have a better understanding of who in Hollywood are the true stars.
As for Liar Liar, its almost as formulaic a screenplay as possible. Take the protagonist, develop his/her defining flaw, introduce a situation that plays off this flaw and brings the protagonist down to his lowest point, have protagonist face and overcome the flaw. Happy ending for everyone! This is all we expected from comedies, for the most part, up until around the start of the new millennium. All people needed was to feel good during the movie, laugh a few times every 10 minutes or so, and maybe most importantly have a big name starring.
This is Liar Liar. Read the screenplay and you will quickly come to realize that there is really nothing to it. Dad lies and disappoints his some, loses ability to lie (he is a lawyer so let the awkward moments commence!), play off this for some cheap laughs, and then have Dad redeem himself in the end. So what saved Liar Liar from getting slammed at the box office. Two words: Jim Carrey. He single handedly saves the film by being his prototypical physical comedian. The scenes where he is actually physically struggling not to lie are the films best.
So people got what they wanted in 1996 and were happy. Now look at the newest batch of comedies. The most successful ones were centered on relative no names who could be slotted in to well written screenplays and had true on screen chemistry. Superbad, Saving Sarah Marshal, Juno, 40-Year Old Virgin; all of these films brought people in with stories not big names. Movie goes now need a joke every few seconds to be entertained. Slow periods kill the audience.
Keep this in mind when sending in ideas for the project. Let’s get off on the right foot with a premise that will be able to spawn a great story. The jokes will come, I assure you. There are too many funny people in this world to not get an abundance of one liners and site gags. Learn from the past and adapt our story to the new order of comedy.
Written 1996
by Tom Shadyac and Mike Binder
http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/liarliar.pdf
To start off the first of many new features here at wikiscreenplay we have the “Screenplay of the Week”. Each week a full movie screenplay will be posted with a brief synopsis of why its important to read and understand.
This week, as the first installment, we will be looking at on of the many comedies during the 1990’s that starred Jim Carrey. Carrey will always hold a special place in my heart thanks to his dominance of my childhood comedy memory; Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, Dumb & Dumber. These three films shaped my humor as a kid are still among my favorite comedies. With this said I picked Liar Liar as an example of the type of comedy that will not work anymore in today’s box office.
I hope you do take the time to actually read the full screenplay because this can really give a better impression of the filmmakers abilities to turn the written word into a true experience. The transition from screenplay to the big screen is an amazing and intricate task. By not only seeing the film but reading through the screenplay one can really get a sense for whether the screenplay simply could not fail, whether the screenplay was garbage and saved purely by the actors and directors, or whether both sides failed. This process is a major reason for why I got into reading (and writing) screenplays and I know believe to have a better understanding of who in Hollywood are the true stars.
As for Liar Liar, its almost as formulaic a screenplay as possible. Take the protagonist, develop his/her defining flaw, introduce a situation that plays off this flaw and brings the protagonist down to his lowest point, have protagonist face and overcome the flaw. Happy ending for everyone! This is all we expected from comedies, for the most part, up until around the start of the new millennium. All people needed was to feel good during the movie, laugh a few times every 10 minutes or so, and maybe most importantly have a big name starring.
This is Liar Liar. Read the screenplay and you will quickly come to realize that there is really nothing to it. Dad lies and disappoints his some, loses ability to lie (he is a lawyer so let the awkward moments commence!), play off this for some cheap laughs, and then have Dad redeem himself in the end. So what saved Liar Liar from getting slammed at the box office. Two words: Jim Carrey. He single handedly saves the film by being his prototypical physical comedian. The scenes where he is actually physically struggling not to lie are the films best.
So people got what they wanted in 1996 and were happy. Now look at the newest batch of comedies. The most successful ones were centered on relative no names who could be slotted in to well written screenplays and had true on screen chemistry. Superbad, Saving Sarah Marshal, Juno, 40-Year Old Virgin; all of these films brought people in with stories not big names. Movie goes now need a joke every few seconds to be entertained. Slow periods kill the audience.
Keep this in mind when sending in ideas for the project. Let’s get off on the right foot with a premise that will be able to spawn a great story. The jokes will come, I assure you. There are too many funny people in this world to not get an abundance of one liners and site gags. Learn from the past and adapt our story to the new order of comedy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
