I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script (2009)(villagevoice.com)
villagevoice.com
I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script (2009)
https://www.villagevoice.com/i-will-not-read-your-fucking-script/
47 comments
Andy Weir's advice is really good and something that honestly, as a writer, I should stick to more.
I wouldn't post my work on the Internet, though. The problem with the internet is that there's a lot of, frankly, very poor quality feedback that might be brutally honest, but also isn't useful. People will tell you loudly and intently that you must do something in way X, but the reality is that the professional advice would be way Y, and for your situation, way Z is also OK. Everyone (myself included) has a tendency to sound super certain of things they should actually be maybe 50-60% certain about.
And heaven help you if you happen to talk about anything political or otherwise controversial. Then you either end up in a room of yes-men who agree with and love everything you do, or a chamber of endless hate and rage at your existence.
I wouldn't post my work on the Internet, though. The problem with the internet is that there's a lot of, frankly, very poor quality feedback that might be brutally honest, but also isn't useful. People will tell you loudly and intently that you must do something in way X, but the reality is that the professional advice would be way Y, and for your situation, way Z is also OK. Everyone (myself included) has a tendency to sound super certain of things they should actually be maybe 50-60% certain about.
And heaven help you if you happen to talk about anything political or otherwise controversial. Then you either end up in a room of yes-men who agree with and love everything you do, or a chamber of endless hate and rage at your existence.
> People will tell you loudly and intently that you must do something in way X, but the reality is that the professional advice would be way Y, and for your situation, way Z is also OK.
The way I've heard it (I _think_ from Sanderson), people are generally quite good at telling you where something is wrong but _awful_ at telling you how to fix it.
The way I've heard it (I _think_ from Sanderson), people are generally quite good at telling you where something is wrong but _awful_ at telling you how to fix it.
In game development I believe developers should listen to their players complaints but never to how the players would fix the problems.
Yes! That's a great way of putting it.
I think they're sometimes called identity goals
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ulterior-motives/200...
Though I wonder how far can this idea can be traced.
Though I wonder how far can this idea can be traced.
A developing idea has a level of pressure/energy that drives its realization. Relieving that pressure for that hit can be -so- tempting ... and fatal.
I can completely empathize with this story - I have been in this situation both as a writer, and as an engineer ("what do you think of this app idea?").
But I will say, the feedback:
> He was way more interested in telling his one story than in being a writer. It was like buying all the parts to a car and starting to build it before learning the basics of auto mechanics. You’ll learn a lot along the way, I said, but you’ll never have a car that runs.
is not as considerate as the author thinks it is. It's correct, but it would also be pretty brutal to hear, because it discounts the fact that this person's poor work was still a lot of work for them. It doesn't validate the effort. I don't think the problem is that people think screenwriting is easy. They think it's hard, they put a lot of work into it, after all -- they just also think they succeeded.
So I think a kinder way to put this would be something like: "You have a great sense of enthusiasm for the story and you have clearly put a lot of effort into it. What I recommend as your next step is that you work on refining this into a form that matches the expectations of people who professionally read scripts. You can do that by attending X class, or Y workshop, or reading Z books/scripts/whatever. Mostly, you can do it by reading lots of scripts, and writing even more - so I encourage you to keep writing!"
That is, tell them the exact same thing, but in a way which doesn't also imply 'you have failed at this,' and instead says 'you can succeed at this, but you haven't yet, there's more to do.'
This absolutely could still fail - honestly, the acquaintance in the story sounds like a bit too much of a dick to get the message. And maybe it isn't true - maybe this person will never become a good writer. In all probability, that's what'll happen. But there's no reason to slam the door shut.
But I will say, the feedback:
> He was way more interested in telling his one story than in being a writer. It was like buying all the parts to a car and starting to build it before learning the basics of auto mechanics. You’ll learn a lot along the way, I said, but you’ll never have a car that runs.
is not as considerate as the author thinks it is. It's correct, but it would also be pretty brutal to hear, because it discounts the fact that this person's poor work was still a lot of work for them. It doesn't validate the effort. I don't think the problem is that people think screenwriting is easy. They think it's hard, they put a lot of work into it, after all -- they just also think they succeeded.
So I think a kinder way to put this would be something like: "You have a great sense of enthusiasm for the story and you have clearly put a lot of effort into it. What I recommend as your next step is that you work on refining this into a form that matches the expectations of people who professionally read scripts. You can do that by attending X class, or Y workshop, or reading Z books/scripts/whatever. Mostly, you can do it by reading lots of scripts, and writing even more - so I encourage you to keep writing!"
That is, tell them the exact same thing, but in a way which doesn't also imply 'you have failed at this,' and instead says 'you can succeed at this, but you haven't yet, there's more to do.'
This absolutely could still fail - honestly, the acquaintance in the story sounds like a bit too much of a dick to get the message. And maybe it isn't true - maybe this person will never become a good writer. In all probability, that's what'll happen. But there's no reason to slam the door shut.
> You have a great sense of enthusiasm for the story and you have clearly put a lot of effort into it. What I recommend as your next step is that you work on refining this into a form that matches the expectations of people who professionally read scripts. You can do that by attending X class, or Y workshop, or reading Z books/scripts/whatever. Mostly, you can do it by reading lots of scripts, and writing even more - so I encourage you to keep writing!"
I see what you're trying to do here (soften absolutely brutal feedback), but I personally hate that style.
Trying to be candid about feedback that is very much not candid is dishonest and gives its receiver false hope that might be unwarranted.
Also, feedback like this is unclear. If I received this feedback, I would be thinking "Was my piece good, but could be better if I take classes? Or did they hate it? If they hated it, why aren't they telling me?"
Just say the fucking thing.
It's just like layoff or application rejection emails, or announcements that something is going up in price. Nobody cares about how "we thought you had potential, but" or "as a work family, we sometimes need to make tough decisions" or "look at how much value we've provided over the years." Everyone knows that something bad's about to happen. Just say the fucking thing.
I see what you're trying to do here (soften absolutely brutal feedback), but I personally hate that style.
Trying to be candid about feedback that is very much not candid is dishonest and gives its receiver false hope that might be unwarranted.
Also, feedback like this is unclear. If I received this feedback, I would be thinking "Was my piece good, but could be better if I take classes? Or did they hate it? If they hated it, why aren't they telling me?"
Just say the fucking thing.
It's just like layoff or application rejection emails, or announcements that something is going up in price. Nobody cares about how "we thought you had potential, but" or "as a work family, we sometimes need to make tough decisions" or "look at how much value we've provided over the years." Everyone knows that something bad's about to happen. Just say the fucking thing.
My experience with people like this has been that they have a "yes, but" to everything you say; some reason that makes them special and not subject to the laws of the domain. If they haven't put the work in to become craftsmen, it means that they don't want to (they want to BE a craftsman, not work to become one).
After this situation has happened enough, you eventually realize that brutal honesty really is the most humane approach, because otherwise they just aren't going to listen, and it'll be one long, unpleasant train wreck.
After this situation has happened enough, you eventually realize that brutal honesty really is the most humane approach, because otherwise they just aren't going to listen, and it'll be one long, unpleasant train wreck.
In my 20s, I knew people like this. These were the people that abandoned their craft before they hit 30.
I don't know if I agree that brutal honesty is the most humane, but it will certainly save you time on a hopeless endeavor because they'll stop coming to you for dopamine hits.
I don't know if I agree that brutal honesty is the most humane, but it will certainly save you time on a hopeless endeavor because they'll stop coming to you for dopamine hits.
I like your answer.
As the author said, "If someone can talk you out of being a writer, you’re not a writer." By corollary, I'd say if you need or expect consideration from someone you're asking for feedback from, you're not really asking for feedback. As the author puts it, you're asking for a pat on the head.
Consideration is always nice, but if I didn't get it from someone who was giving (free) candid advice I wouldn't call them a dick for it.
Consideration is always nice, but if I didn't get it from someone who was giving (free) candid advice I wouldn't call them a dick for it.
> By corollary, I'd say if you need or expect consideration from someone you're asking for feedback from, you're not really asking for feedback.
I don't agree with this statement. Being reasonably considerate and empathetic is a mandatory requirement of all human interaction, it is not optional just because you are in the position of being asked for something. It's not "a pat on the head" to be helpful and not insulting. Everyone has the right to be treated decently provided their behavior is minimally decent. Asking someone to do something for you is not sufficiently indecent to earn a rude response.
Further, if your goal is to make an impression on someone where they agree with and believe the point you're making, being an asshole to them is unlikely to do it. This story is a case in point - the person thought he was being rude and disengaged, and did not take his advice.
To be clear, I am not saying the author of this piece was intentionally being rude. Just that it makes a lot of sense, from the outside, why he came across that way given what he said.
I don't agree with this statement. Being reasonably considerate and empathetic is a mandatory requirement of all human interaction, it is not optional just because you are in the position of being asked for something. It's not "a pat on the head" to be helpful and not insulting. Everyone has the right to be treated decently provided their behavior is minimally decent. Asking someone to do something for you is not sufficiently indecent to earn a rude response.
Further, if your goal is to make an impression on someone where they agree with and believe the point you're making, being an asshole to them is unlikely to do it. This story is a case in point - the person thought he was being rude and disengaged, and did not take his advice.
To be clear, I am not saying the author of this piece was intentionally being rude. Just that it makes a lot of sense, from the outside, why he came across that way given what he said.
Believe me, I'm all for living in a more considerate and empathetic society. However, I think calling it "a mandatory requirement of all human interaction" is not true and is the seed of the paradox of tolerance. As the author says, "you put me in this spot where my only option is to acquiesce to your demands or be the bad guy."
The thing is, I don't agree with that second statement of the author's, either. You're not a "bad guy" for having boundaries (or because one guy you barely know thinks you are). Saying "I'm sorry, I just can't mix my professional and personal life like that, it's a rule I have for myself and it's nothing about you personally," is totally reasonable!
If you behave reasonably and empathetically, and someone takes issue with it, they're the one with the problem, not you. By behaving tolerantly, you make the other person's intolerance more obvious.
(Though again, like I said, not blaming the author. He clearly tried pretty hard to do the right thing here.)
If you behave reasonably and empathetically, and someone takes issue with it, they're the one with the problem, not you. By behaving tolerantly, you make the other person's intolerance more obvious.
(Though again, like I said, not blaming the author. He clearly tried pretty hard to do the right thing here.)
> You have a great sense of enthusiasm for the story and you have clearly put a lot of effort into it
Any reasonably acute listener will hear this as condescension: “Oh, you worked so hard, bless your heart…”. I don’t think word-smithing the feedback to make it gentler really helps, because people (even bad writers) can see through bullshit. Better to treat the other person as deserving of honesty.
Any reasonably acute listener will hear this as condescension: “Oh, you worked so hard, bless your heart…”. I don’t think word-smithing the feedback to make it gentler really helps, because people (even bad writers) can see through bullshit. Better to treat the other person as deserving of honesty.
This really resonated for me. I work in academia in a STEM field in Japan. For the first decade or so, I was always happy to help people who were struggling with writing a paper in English, and gradually developed a reputation for being the guy who could "get you published" in Nature, Science, Cell Press etc. But I ran into the problem of the limitless demand for this kind of editorial work (due to the massive pressure to publish and the generally poor English ability of many scientists in Japan). It got to the point where I didn't want to meet people because I knew the conversation would turn to whether I could help them, or theur friend, or a grad student, fix a manuscript. Finally I just told everyone who asked that I had to stop for health reasons, and my life is so much better now. I had worried that this might cost me some friends, but it made me realize that the only friendships it cost were ones based on them asking me to do unpleasant work for free.
I'm a professor in a non-STEM field in the U.S. Even if we put foreign-language issues aside, it's surprising to see how much this screenwriter's experiences carry over into academia.
If you weren't too busy on your academic work, that could have been a lucrative side project...
Probably less lucrative now that ChatGPT exists...
You're both right - I did make quite a bit copy-editing for some minor journals published by Japanese scientific societies. But I also experimented a bit last year with using ChatGPT to correct minor spelling and grammatical errors, and it did a credible job. With the right ptompts, you can even get it to do a line by line explanation of the logic behind each of its edits, so it could probably serve as a free, instant and personalized writing tutor as well. I guess its especially well-suited to highly formalized writing styles like those used in research articles.
Fun article, I actively encourage people to not pursue anything related to Hollywood and the "industry", whether it is in front of or behind the screen.
Why? Because it's a nepotistic *hit show. If you're in front of the camera, you have to literally suck someone off to get there (me too was only scratching the surface, both men and women are abused by it). The people that do have talent , of which there are many, are a dime a dozen. If you are already not a prodigy at your craft or have an industry in by the time you get there, you will waste your time.
Behind the scenes, it is only marginally better. You will end up working with some of the most insufferable people in the world who are so passionate about working in entertainment anything that they will work for free.
The industry is also on a precipice with AI which will absolutely decimate both on and off camera rolls. I tell kids all of the time, the entertainment industry is run by some of the most cut throat executives in the world and AI has given them the biggest gift in the world: the ability to gut the biggest expense in their balance sheets: labor.
And honestly, seeing Hollywood shrink is a good thing. It has ceased to be a good place both creatively and spiritually. This article is a prime piece of the general attitude of the industry.
I look forward to the author getting out competed by chatgpt. They all think they're safe, until they are not.
Edit: the downvoter really can't handle the truth. Everyone you see on screen has gotten there because of a favor either nepotism or sexual. I have too many friends who have revealed the dark truth about it. The place isn't to be admired and it's one of the worst industries on the planet.
Why? Because it's a nepotistic *hit show. If you're in front of the camera, you have to literally suck someone off to get there (me too was only scratching the surface, both men and women are abused by it). The people that do have talent , of which there are many, are a dime a dozen. If you are already not a prodigy at your craft or have an industry in by the time you get there, you will waste your time.
Behind the scenes, it is only marginally better. You will end up working with some of the most insufferable people in the world who are so passionate about working in entertainment anything that they will work for free.
The industry is also on a precipice with AI which will absolutely decimate both on and off camera rolls. I tell kids all of the time, the entertainment industry is run by some of the most cut throat executives in the world and AI has given them the biggest gift in the world: the ability to gut the biggest expense in their balance sheets: labor.
And honestly, seeing Hollywood shrink is a good thing. It has ceased to be a good place both creatively and spiritually. This article is a prime piece of the general attitude of the industry.
I look forward to the author getting out competed by chatgpt. They all think they're safe, until they are not.
Edit: the downvoter really can't handle the truth. Everyone you see on screen has gotten there because of a favor either nepotism or sexual. I have too many friends who have revealed the dark truth about it. The place isn't to be admired and it's one of the worst industries on the planet.
This reminds me of a story I once read in Reader's Digest's Life in These United States:
"I'm a land surveyor. A woman in my congregation came up to me after our church service. 'I just have a quick question; can you tell me where exactly is the back property line between me and my neighbor?'
"I told her that I couldn't answer her question off the top of my head, but I could look it up properly if she would call me at the office during the week. 'Oh, goodness, that's not necessary. I wouldn't want to bother you at work.'"
"I'm a land surveyor. A woman in my congregation came up to me after our church service. 'I just have a quick question; can you tell me where exactly is the back property line between me and my neighbor?'
"I told her that I couldn't answer her question off the top of my head, but I could look it up properly if she would call me at the office during the week. 'Oh, goodness, that's not necessary. I wouldn't want to bother you at work.'"
Original link is blocked for me:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230924005317/https://www.villa...
Related: https://youtu.be/2Zqq7nv2FYU?si=Fcx9ryn1YsXlWQtT
Related: https://youtu.be/2Zqq7nv2FYU?si=Fcx9ryn1YsXlWQtT
Really insightful article, but It took me a little bit to realize that he wasn't exactly talking about a shell script.
This guy sounds like a delight at parties.
But he's right. Many aspiring programmers have fallen for the same trap. They don't want to learn to program, they want to have made a program. While you can write your magnum opus, a video game, or an operating system kernel, without learning to program first, it's infinitely more difficult than doing it the other way around.
But he's right. Many aspiring programmers have fallen for the same trap. They don't want to learn to program, they want to have made a program. While you can write your magnum opus, a video game, or an operating system kernel, without learning to program first, it's infinitely more difficult than doing it the other way around.
He talks about the "acquaintance trap" that we are put in, when someone pulls this on us.
If you ask a pro for feedback; especially one that demands a lot from themselves (like most folks at the top of their game), you will be judged as a pro.
I have been on both sides of this, on the asking side, as an artist, and on the judging side, as a software developer.
If you ask a pro for feedback; especially one that demands a lot from themselves (like most folks at the top of their game), you will be judged as a pro.
I have been on both sides of this, on the asking side, as an artist, and on the judging side, as a software developer.
There are few signs of becoming a "master" at software development, but I'd say one of them is gaining a better understanding of how to judge beginners.
Eventually you reach a level of mastery where with just as little effort as you see the beginner's mistakes, you see the thought process that lead to those mistakes.
As soon as you're not a beginner their mistakes seem obvious, but approaching varied and complex problems often enough eventually gives way to the realization most beginner mistakes have similar underlying causes to the "professional" mistakes. It's only how far you need to zoom out to see the underlying cause of the mistake that changes.
—
The beginner does a poor job defining requirements so their Hello [name] generator form breaks when the user types in "\n John". They only made a label tall enough to show one line of text. They see it as "I didn't make the label autosize" or something though, even when told the solution.
The professional does a similarly poor job with requirements, and the system breaks down on some unexpected input in production months down the line... the professional might save the day and write a slick postmortem about how they saved the day using their skills. But it takes a lot more experience to reach the point where that experience evolves into a blanket change for project kickoffs for example, so the owners of external systems can better define requirements that affect them.
I don't know professional writing well enough to know if the situation is similar.
Eventually you reach a level of mastery where with just as little effort as you see the beginner's mistakes, you see the thought process that lead to those mistakes.
As soon as you're not a beginner their mistakes seem obvious, but approaching varied and complex problems often enough eventually gives way to the realization most beginner mistakes have similar underlying causes to the "professional" mistakes. It's only how far you need to zoom out to see the underlying cause of the mistake that changes.
—
The beginner does a poor job defining requirements so their Hello [name] generator form breaks when the user types in "\n John". They only made a label tall enough to show one line of text. They see it as "I didn't make the label autosize" or something though, even when told the solution.
The professional does a similarly poor job with requirements, and the system breaks down on some unexpected input in production months down the line... the professional might save the day and write a slick postmortem about how they saved the day using their skills. But it takes a lot more experience to reach the point where that experience evolves into a blanket change for project kickoffs for example, so the owners of external systems can better define requirements that affect them.
I don't know professional writing well enough to know if the situation is similar.
> This guy sounds like a delight at parties
He's clearly had to deal with this issue a lot lol
He's clearly had to deal with this issue a lot lol
Several arguments in here but his last one wasn’t a good one. The idea that an artist as tiny marginal cost to using their hard acquired skill is exactly why it could be painless to do a favor for someone. In this case it wasn’t easy, however, so that point wasn’t relevant at all to the frustration he felt in wasting time on this unappreciative guy with a poor script.
> if he really wanted to be a writer, start at the beginning and take some classes, and start studying seriously.
In a lot of situations this would be terrible advice, not because the craft is not worthy of respect but because its much easier to accept the pain of learning a difficult craft if you have an end goal in sight, something you need to achieve that will provide the impetus for all the work you're going to have to do.
In a lot of situations this would be terrible advice, not because the craft is not worthy of respect but because its much easier to accept the pain of learning a difficult craft if you have an end goal in sight, something you need to achieve that will provide the impetus for all the work you're going to have to do.
Hence the phrase: "Pay the piper."
Once one has a unique skill or position, the number of people who think it would be swell if you could "do this one little favor" grows large in a jiffy.
This is why you pay the piper. The piper may in fact have the time, money, and interest in doing the favor. Nevertheless, the piper must be paid as a noise filter to keep out the riff-raff.
Paying the piper is what adults do and expect.
Once one has a unique skill or position, the number of people who think it would be swell if you could "do this one little favor" grows large in a jiffy.
This is why you pay the piper. The piper may in fact have the time, money, and interest in doing the favor. Nevertheless, the piper must be paid as a noise filter to keep out the riff-raff.
Paying the piper is what adults do and expect.
[deleted]
Script co-written by author of the article:
https://www.scriptslug.com/script/a-history-of-violence-2005
https://www.scriptslug.com/script/a-history-of-violence-2005
“He is currently adapting One Shot, one of the best-selling Jack Reacher books for Paramount.”
Did he ever finish this? Never heard of this movie.
Did he ever finish this? Never heard of this movie.
Yes, I just viewed it last week. It did languish a while in development, and Christopher McQuarrie reworked Olson's script. In fact, a sequel was made with Tom Cruise as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Reacher_(film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Reacher_(film)
[deleted]
404 not found
[deleted]
Moderation please. Words are heavy
Yes, mistitled. Source has "I Will Not Read Your F*%!ing Script". It's furthermore dated 2009.
> You put me in this spot where my only option is to acquiesce to your demands or be the bad guy
I mean, I feel like a simple "no" would also suffice
I mean, I feel like a simple "no" would also suffice
I think one of the points that the author is trying to convey is that there's no simple "no" available. The only "no" is one of two bad options.
My guess is that given the having to say "no" in this context over and over means the difficulty can get to you and you end up saying "yes" on occasion.
Doesn't sound pleasant. It's hard to say no.
My guess is that given the having to say "no" in this context over and over means the difficulty can get to you and you end up saying "yes" on occasion.
Doesn't sound pleasant. It's hard to say no.
> (I should mention that while I was composing my response, he pulled the ultimate amateur move, and sent me an e-mail saying, “If you haven’t read it yet, don’t! I have a new draft. Read this!” In other words, “The draft I told you was ready for professional input, wasn’t actually.”)
What does this say about modern computer game development, where day-one patches are considered normal?
What does this say about modern computer game development, where day-one patches are considered normal?
[deleted]
Andy also had a great strategy to start writing: put it on the internet. Nothing is better for brutally honest feedback than the internet. The Martian was certainly way better for it.