Draft Zero: A Screenwriting Podcast

How does audience knowledge affect your character’s motivations? Chas and Stu are joined by special guest - filmmaker Mel Killingsworth - to talk all things Star Wars. Well. Focusing on The Mandalorian and The Rise of Skywalker and wherever else our tangents take us. Our primary lens is look at how both shows handle “fan service” — but really its about how you handle character motivations when your audience has more knowledge than your characters, especially knowledge from outside the show itself. To that end, we discuss the characters of Poe, Rey, Kylo, and Palpatine in depth. We also discuss the Watchmen TV Show, Mind-hunter, Jojo Rabbit, Snowtown and Zodiac. SPOILERS ABOUND. Excerpts used for educational purposes. Thanks to Chris Walker for editing this episode. RUNNING ORDER Introduction: Fanservice Poe's Backstory (@ 4:03) The Mandalorian (@ 11:40) The Rise of Skywalker (@ 23:01) Rey Palpatine (@ 24:24) Palpatine's Plan (@ 38:27) Rey Skywalker (@ 46:05) Ben Solo - Depressive Demon Nightmare Boy (@ 52:1

What changes in your writing and development when collaborating with a director? This episode, Chas steps down as co-host (kinda) and is interviewed by Stu as a guest, alongside director Ben Mizzi, about the short rom-com that Chas wrote and Ben directed & produced. The episode covers taking an idea from pitch to screen, working with a director, directing performance on the page, and marketing and distribution strategies for short films. If you are thinking of producing your own content, well worth a listen! And if you want to watch The Snip - a 16 min rom com about a guy who gets a vasectomy without telling his wife - here it is: https://youtu.be/_iBdDFKqqbs Thanks to Chris Walker for editing this episode.   RUNNING ORDER Introduction: The Snip Working With a Director (@ 3:44) How did you go from pitch to script? (@ 13:16) Short films and audience expectations (@ 22:19) What expectations can you have of the end product? (@ 26:41) How do you "direct" performance on the page? (@ 39:05) How do you direct p

In our annual Backmatter-only episode, Stu and Chas indulge themselves by offering personal opinions on the life and work of emerging screenwriters based on their own personal experience. To that end, they discuss: what is and is not in your control in relation to an emerging writing career; choosing what project to develop next; using the Black List site to gain traction; the difference between treatments for pitching as opposed to for development; and the difference in writing style when writing on spec as against work for hire. We also unexpectedly have a guest: David Wappel kindly joins us to share his thoughts on anchoring nouns. RUNNING ORDER Intro What is in your control? (@ 05:27) Choosing what to develop (@ 28:58) Using the Black List site (@ 33:24) Treatments for development vs for pitching (@ 59:47) Writing on spec vs work for hire (@ 01:23:23) Backmatter on backmatter (@ 01:37:37) EPISODE LINKS Wordplayer.com: WORDPLAY/Columns/55. "Time Risk" by Terry Rossio M. Night Shyamalan on His Failures

How can you create flow and contrast in your dialogue? A full three years after the first instalment (and one of our most popular), Stu and Chas have kidnapped Stephen Cleary to once again develop some craft tools around dialogue. It would be fair to say that - in that time - all three have learnt a lot more about dialogue than they knew in 2016. It would be also fair to say that Stephen perhaps learnt a little more through his research into “genderlect”. In Part II, we analyse key scenes from films and TV shows famous for their dialogue, namely FLEABAG (Season 2, Episode 5), JUNO and DEADWOOD (The Pilot). The biggest tools we explore are: the hook and eye; how dialogue can reveal status and empathy; rhythm; contrast and affinity; and pacing. And just to help us all out, Stephen rounds out the episode with some quick fire examples - FIVE EASY PIECES, JERRY MAGUIRE, GROSSE POINTE BLANK, and NOTTING HILL (again) -  and further dialogue tips. Thanks to Chris Walker for editing this episode during the holiday sea

How do you know if your unfilmable is good... or if you’re just being a wanker? In this third and final part of our series on unfilmables, Chas and Stu turn their critical eye to... each other’s work! They take their key learnings from the previous episodes and apply them to rewriting scenes from their own projects. They discuss metaphors, emotional context, and how you can write tone on the page withoutresorting to unfilmables. They are also joined by Carissa Lee (who has been reading the excerpts) to discuss her perspective as an actor on the scripts we’ve been reading; and they answer listener questions about unfilmables. And, lastly, in backmatter Carissa reads the entire script to Stu’s award-nominated script, DUST BUNNY. Thanks to Chris Walker for editing this episode, and Carissa Lee for performing the big print. RUNNING ORDER Introduction / Discussion UNCONDITIONAL (Pilot) by Chas Fisher (@ 09:10) PAYLOAD by Matthew Clayfield & Stuart Willis (@ 38:48) DUST BUNNY by Stuart Willis (@ 59:50) THE AC

How can unfilmables help you create those cinematic moments of awe? In this second part of our series on unfilmables, Chas and Stu continue their deep dive into how writing the “unfilmable” can enhance your script. Rather than looking at micro moments, they turn their gaze to "moments of awe" — those often breathtaking cinematic moments that feel beyond writing. But are those scenes actually unscriptable? In this episode we look at sequences from YOU WERE NEVER REALLY HERE, SEARCHING FOR BOBBY FISCHER, THE INVITATION, and MOONLIGHT. We talk writing cinematically, performance beats, breaking (and maintaining) “the spell”, limited palettes of language, self-contextualising writing, and "instructables". Thanks to Chris Walker for editing this episode, and Carissa Lee for performing the big print. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND and all copyright material used under fair use for educational purposes. RUNNING ORDER WHEN UNFILMABLES DON’T WORK(@ 12:01) YOU WERE NEVER REALLY HERE(@ 26:08) screenplay by Lynne Ramsay, ba

How can unfilmables enhance the experience of your script? AKA Why your screenwriting guru is wrong In this episode, Chas and Stu deep dive into the controversial area of “unfilmables” — those alleged screenwriting sins, where a writer writes a line that (apparently) cannot be seen or heard. But many produced spec scripts use unfilmables to great effect. So how and why do they “get away with it”? In this first part, they look at unfilmables in micro moments: to describe locations, set (or change) the mood/tone, bring performances to life, and communicate certain types of humour. To that end, they breakdown into examples from LETHAL WEAPON, MY BRIDESMAID IS A BITCH, HEREDITARY, FLEABAG, KILLING EVE, A QUIET PLACE, KILLING THEM SOFTLY, SHARP OBJECTS, SPARTAN, THE NICE GUYS, DRIVE, THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING MISSOURI, TREE OF LIFE, and MICHAEL CLAYTON. Thanks to Chris Walker for editing this episode, and Carissa Lee for performing the big print. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND and all copyright material used und

One day, Chas saw Avengers: Endgame for the second time and wrote a review on Letterboxd. In particular, he had issues with how little he perceived the characters of Cap and Tony changed within the film, their big finale (spoiler). Then friend and patron of the podcast Julio vehemently disagreed in the comments. He was egged on by Stu. And there in the comments began a debate that looked a lot like an episode of Draft Zero. So we decided to make it one.   And what began as an exploration of how to dramatise character change swiftly became an exploration of how to position audience in relation to your characters. Do you want the audience empathising with the characters? Feeling what they are feeling in the moment? Or do you want your audience sympathising with your characters? Being rocked by surprise after the fact? Reminding your audience of their own personal relationship with the characters.   As always, spoiler-tastic.   RUNNING ORDER   CHAS’ LETTERBOXD REVIEW [@ 00:00:00] HOW DOES THE SNAP AFFECT CAP &a

How can you let your characters tell us how they feel? In watching Season 7 (and the first three episodes of Season 8) of Game of Thrones, Stu noticed that there were lots of scenes where characters either met for the first time or were reunited after a long time apart. In these scenes, the audience knows (or thinks they know) more than either character. And so the fascination, power and subversion comes from what the characters choose to reveal... or not.   And yet... while we thought this episode would be an extension of our previous musings on exposition, in nearly every great scene we assessed, the characters basically said “screw talking about plot or backstory” and instead exposited about their character. How it feels to be them. How they have, or have not, changed.    And so this episode unexpectedly but rewardingly pivoted to learnings on how to set up and sell character exposition.     As always: SPOILERS ABOUND and all copyright material used under fair use for educational purposes.   RUNNING ORDER

How can you best articulate your ideas? It is time (in fact, well past time) for our semi-annual #Backmatter episode. For the uninitiated, this is an episode where Stu and Chas discuss career and craft-related topics beyond what makes great screenplays work. To that end, Stu and Chas dive into: a five year review of Draft Zero and how it has changed their writing craft and process; a discussion on the aesthetics of writing; learnings for emerging writers in having their work produced; and finally forgiving yourself for not writing. As always: an amazing thank you to out Patreons for supporting more Draft Zero more often, and in particular Patreon Chris Walker who edited this episode for us. EPISODE LINKS Beginner’s Guide to Draft Zero — http://draft-zero.com/beginners-guide/ Watch: Ira Glass on The Gap - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PbC4gqZGPSY Listen: Lingua Ignota - For I Am The Light (And Mine Is The Only Way)https://linguaignota.bandcamp.com/album/all-bitches-die-2 Read: Michael Hauge — STORY STRUCTUR

Workshopping ways to fix character motivations. In this second part of their exploration of character motivations, Chas and Stu dive into what makes “BAD” screenplays NOT work.  They examine at moments where they (and maybe you, dear listeners) did not believe a key decision being made by a character and so were taken out of the movie. In a departure from the Draft Zero format, they apply the tools they developed in Part 1 to workshop potential fixes to these beats. Character decisions that come under the microscope are AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR (again), SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY, DIE HARD (which is a good example for contrast, not a bad one!), PREDATOR 2, SICARIO 2: DÍA DEL SOLDADO and PROMETHEUS (with an honourable mention to A PRINCESS BRIDE). Let us know if you like the variation on our format or not! As always: SPOILERS ABOUND! Audio quotations used for educational purposes only. Timestamps indicated below. Chapter markers included in the mp3. Watch it on on YouTube. Read the transcript on GitHub or in HTML.

In part 1 of this 2-part episode, Chas & Stu look at examples of good character motivation.  We’ve all watched movies where we don’t believe the motivation of a character or characters. We may have even written scripts where readers don’t buy the character’s choices. And that’s often a real problem because most of these choices coincide with key structural moments — e.g. the moments where the characters decide to do something “out of character” in order to progress to the next part of the story.  To help us solve the problem of how to improve our character motivations, in this episode we explore great examples of character motivation and how they have helped the audience believe a character’s decision.  And so Chas and Stu dive into NOTTING HILL, TO ALL THE BOYS I’VE LOVED BEFORE, GAME NIGHT, ARRIVAL, IN THE BEDROOM, BEIRUT, BREAKING BAD, THE MATRIX, BLOCKERS, A NEW HOPE (of course) and AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR. Passing/honourable mention also to MANCHESTER BY THE SEA, THE COMMUTER, THE LOBSTER, GAME OF THR

How does removing character and plot questions force your audience to engage with theme? Chas and Stu are joined, once again, by the inestimable Stephen Cleary. This episode is a spiritual sequel to our last episode with Stephen on sequence structure. That episode explored how sequences could be broken into plot, character, and plot/character sequences. Well, Stephen’s back to talk about a different type of sequence: the thematic sequence. By limiting (or removing all together) questions related to character or plot, filmmakers can force their audience to engage with the deeper, underlying meaning of the story. Our deep dive onto this topic focuses on LOVE ACTUALLY, THE EXTERMINATING ANGEL, APOCALYPSE NOW, and IN THE BEDROOM. But it wouldn’t be a Draft Zero without numerous digressions including into HUNGER, GET OUT, INFINITY WAR, and THE THIN RED LINE. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND! Audio quotations used for educational purposes only. Timestamps indicated below. Chapter markers included in the mp3. Watch it on

What if there is no antagonist? It’s time. The Epic Deep Dive(TM) into Antagonists has reached its shuddering conclusion. And for this Part V - by choosing films that have no obvious singular antagonist (and in some cases no obvious narrative either) - Stu and Chas realised there was indeed a final category of antagonists: the films themselves. Where the film (and the filmmaker) are engaging directly with the audience. Where the films are... VERSUS AUDIENCE. The films that led to this “insight” often lie to the audience; talk directly to the audience; misdirect the audience; take the audience on meandering narrative strolls; or make the central character the antagonist to all other characters. Sometimes these techniques power a single scene. Sometimes they take up the whole film. All this to keep the audience compelled in the absence of singular antagonists. And these films are - drum roll, please - OCEAN’S 8, THE SECOND, F FOR FAKE, SANS SOLEIL and FORREST GUMP. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND! Audio quotations u

How do systems pressure your characters to change? This is Part Four (!!) of our Five Part Epic Exploration into antagonists forces and sources of conflict. In this episode we explore "system/world/society" antagonists. While stereotypically associated with science-fiction, these sources of conflict are found across genres. To that end, we talk MINORITY REPORT, DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES, MUDBOUND, and THE LOBSTER - with a special mention of high school movies. We continue refining our tools surrounding antagonists/sources of conflict: obstacles, pressure, enablers, pushers, pullers, education and thwarting. We especially focus on how the pressures of the system/world/society force characters to either submit to the system, overthrow it or escape it; and how framing all of your characters’ journeys in relation to the rules of the world they inhabit can lead to a thematically strong story. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND! Audio quotations used for educational purposes only. Timestamps indicated below. Chapter m

What changes in your story if your antagonistic forces can’t be bargained with? In this Part Three of our Five Part Epic Exploration™ into antagonistic forces (and sources of conflict), Chas & Stu explore “nature” antagonists, including some supernatural ones. What became clear in doing the homework (and recording this episode twice) was that the antagonistic forces - whether natural or supernatural - presented different narrative challenges to the protagonists if (a) they did not seem to make choices and (b) could not be bargained with or defeated. And so we embarked upon ALL IS LOST, THE GREY and CONTAGION — with special mentions of THE VVITCH, WORLD WAR Z, ZOMBIELAND, ANNIHILATION, ALIEN, ALIENS and probably some others we’ve forgotten.    Stu elaborates on his distinction between obstacles and pressure; Chas riffs on how nature antagonists can mirror the protagonist and reinforce theme; and they both explore the effect on protagonists who are pushed to their limits by antagonists that cannot be reason

How can characters be their own antagonist? In Part Two of our Five Part Epic Exploration™ into antagonists, Chas & Stu take a look at "vs self" stories. Stories where the protagonist (or main character) serves as their own antagonist as well as the antagonist for those around them. It took us a long time to settle on our homework, but we ended up exploring LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE, SHAME, and MONSTER. Our discussion continues in backmatter with MINDHUNTER and STEVE JOBS. As a result of our exploration, we manage to get a better understanding of our 'thesu' on: internal vs external change; obstacles and pressure; stories without singular antagonists; and how it really is the antagonistic forces that carve out the protagonist’s journey. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND! Audio quotations used for educational purposes only. Timestamps indicated below. Chapter markers included in the mp3. Watch it on on YouTube. Special thanks to our Patreon supporters. If you would like more Draft Zero episodes more often, click here!

What makes a strong human antagonist? Prompted by a listener (and patron of the podcast) question, Stu and Chas dive into antagonistic forces. And because Draft Zero does not do anything by halves, this is Part One of a Five Part Epic Exploration™ into antagonists; namely: vs humans, vs self, vs nature/supernatural, vs systems and “other”. aka the classic narrative conflicts. For this “vs humans” part, we chose to look at DIE HARD, MISERY and THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE OF EBBING, MISSOURI (with special mentions to THE DARK KNIGHT, LA LA LAND and - of course - STAR WARS). In particular, we look at some classical villains, internal vs external antagonists, and how antagonists and protagonists can swap roles over a scene or a sequence. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND Audio quotations used for educational purposes only. Timestamps indicated below. Chapter markers included in the mp3. Special thanks to our Patreon supporters. If you would like more Draft Zero episodes more often, click here! EPISODES LINKS DRAFT ZERO RE

Can your characters be given choices and yet still be deprived of agency? To kick off 2018, Chas and Stu take a deep dive into one of their favourite movies of 2017: Blade Runner 2049. However, they abstained from “Fox News-ing this shit” by being joined by the most accomplished screenwriter they know, C.S. McMullen (Blood List 2017, Black List 2017, also a lover of Blade Runner 2049). For a film that is thematically about choice, Stu and Chas thought this would be an excellent opportunity to explore how characters can be dramatised through binary choices.  And yet, CS opened their eyes to the idea that characters can still be given choices without having agency. Without having choice in their choices. Not having choices that lead to different outcomes. It is perhaps the lack of agency (rather than the lack of choice) that lead to some of the troubling depiction of women and minorities in Blade Runner 2049, which our intrepid hosts explore in detail. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND Audio quotations used for educat

Will Director Stu allow Writer Chas on his set? Following our annual wrap up in 2017, we’ve decided to once again explore what craft issues/lessons we can garner from the latest Stars, namely Episode VIII: The Last Jedi, focusing on how consequences of character actions can do a lot of heavy lifting as to how the audience perceives that character (as well as looking at worldview and overall story structure). We also discuss how the sexual assault allegations in our industry can impact on what work we choose to analyse as well as dive into a bunch of listener questions. We end on whether - if our space pirates project gets off the ground - Chas should come on set, whether Stu will have him and whether it would do anyone any good. As always: SPOILERS ABOUND Audio quotations used for educational purposes only. Timestamps indicated below. Chapter markers included in the mp3. Special thanks to our Patreon supporters. If you would like more Draft Zero episodes more often, click here! BACKMATTER LINKS THE LAST JEDI