Video: “The Directors Series – The Coen Brothers” (Part 1)

May 26th, 2016 by

Perfect timing. With my 1-week online class Coen Brothers and the Craft of Storytelling starting on Monday, May 30, along comes Part 1 of what looks to be an excellent series on the cinematic efforts of Joel Coen and Ethan Coen. Here the video covers how the Coens got into filmmaking and their first two movies: Blood Simple. and Raising Arizona:

I saw Blood Simple. when it was released in 1984 and Raising Arizona will always have a soft spot in my heart as one of the very first industry screenings I attended when I first broke into Hollywood in 1987. Also it features my first agent Peter Benedek as a prison counselor.

The Coens are part of my Holy Trinity of filmmakers along with Billy Wilder and Pixar which is why I’m excited to teach this upcoming class on the duo. For more information, go here.

Interview: Chris McCoy (2007, 2009, 2011 Black List)

May 26th, 2016 by

One of the best ways to learn the craft is read what professional screenwriters have to say about it. To that end for the next few weeks, I will be featuring interviews I have conducted with Black List screenwriters.

Today: Chris McCoy is pretty unique among screenwriters in that he has three scripts that have made the Black List: “Get Back” (2007), “Good Looking” (2009), and “Good Kids” (2011). That alone is enough to warrant significant curiosity about this young writer. The fact his screenplays are highly entertaining, distinctive, and filled with quirky characters and strong dialogue makes it even more so. And Good Kids is Chris’ first writing-directing gig, the movie starring Zoey Deutch, Nicholas Braun, Israel Broussard, Demián Bichir, and Ashley Judd.

Here are links to all five parts of my March 2012 interview with Chris:

Part 1: “Comedy is such a great delivery system for subversive ideas – as long as you make people laugh, you can say whatever you want.”

Part 2: “There’s a Kurt Vonnegut quote about this that I love: ‘Write to please just one person. If you open a window and make love to the world, so to speak, your story will get pneumonia.’ That is so great.”

Part 3: “In my work, I like introducing a big concept – i.e. a service that matches you to your soulmate with 100% accuracy, which changes the world overnight – and then getting that concept out of the way as quickly as possible in order to focus on the characters.”

Part 4: “When you’re working with a bunch of characters, it’s important to really have their arcs hammered out beforehand so you don’t lose them within the context of the scene. As long as you know where they’re all going eventually, you have a sense of what you need to do with them when they’re together.”

Part 5: “I think that good dialogue comes from character development – the better you know your character, the more specific the dialogue is going to feel.”

Chris is repped by the Gotham Group.

“Everything is a Remix: The Force Awakens”

May 26th, 2016 by

I have been tracking Kirby Ferguson and his “Everything is a Remix” videos since the very first one came out in 2010. So when Kirby reached out to me via email about his latest video — “Everything is a Remix: The Force Awakens” — I had to check it out. Here it is:

While the video notes numerous similarities between Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens and Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope, Kirby makes some more important points for screenwriters:

* Since everything has pretty much been done before, it is inevitable we will be ‘remixing’ content from previous stories. So the challenge is to Copy, Transform, and Combine — this is Kirby’s language — and that fits in with what I’ve blogged about since I launched this site in 2008: That Hollywood’s philosophy in choosing what movies and TV series to make comes down to this: Similar but different. As I articulated in this 2013 post:

Sequels. Prequels. Remakes. Reboots. Why do Hollywood studios choose to go this route with such familiar material? Why not fill their development slates with bold projects full of fresh ideas and innovative stories?

That would run entirely counter to the working ethos which informs the studio system decision-making process, a business mantra that can best be summed up in this manner: What they are inclined to buy, develop, and produce are projects, including screenplays, that are similar but different.

Again the question: Why? There are many reasons. Here are the biggest two.

The increasing importance of marketing: The simple fact is after the acquisition of a project, years of rewrites, talent falling in and out, battles over budget, months of pre-production, production, post-production, none of it matters one whit unless the studios can sell the movie. And in an increasingly noisy world with consumers bombarded by advertisers on all sides, a studio’s task of getting the message out about a movie has become harder and harder.

If the movie’s concept or storyline has a familiar ring to it, so the marketing theory goes, it’s more likely to connect with consumers. And if a consumer remembers some aspect of a movie’s ad campaign, the odds increase exponentially they will be motivated to get off their fanny, drive to the local Cineplex, and actually buy a movie ticket.


So from a purely marketing standpoint, similar but different is supposed to make selling the movie easier and more effective. That’s the first reason. The other reason lies at the heart of the studios’ decision-making process regarding movie deals:

Fear of making a mistake: Studio executives are afraid to commit to projects because if a movie they’re associated with bombs, it doesn’t bode well for their careers. This is especially true with the current climate where the major Hollywood studios are all part of major corporate conglomerates which means pretty much everything boils down to profits.

Flops make bad things happen.


This should put a personal spin on why Hollywood puts out so many sequels, remakes, and film adaptations of TV shows. Even if they fail (Cats & Dogs II, The A-Team), studio execs can defend themselves because there are equally, if not more, hits based on similar but different content (Iron Man 2, The Karate Kid, Star Trek).

* Given these dual realities — Every new story is in some way a remix of old stories / Hollywood actually embraces the idea of ‘similar but different’ — the task of the creator, as Kirby lays it out in his videos, is to find the sweet spot between the Familiar on one hand and the Novel on the other.

In a nifty bit of synchronicity, writer-director Christopher McQuarrie made this precise point on Twitter yesterday:

Screenwriting tip: It’s as simple as giving them exactly what they expect in a way they’ve never seen before.

So there’s the takeaway: Give ’em what they expect, but with a fresh combination of narrative elements.

Here is the combo plate of Kirby’s first four videos in the Everything is a Remix series:

For the rest of his videos, go here.

Classic 30s Movie: “Sabotage”

May 26th, 2016 by

May is Classic 30s Movie month. Today’s guest post comes from Jeff Xilon.

Movie Title: Sabotage

Year: 1936

Writers: Charles Bennett (screen play), Ian Hay & Helen Simpson (dialogue), Alma Reville (continuity), E.V.H. Emmett (additional dialogue), based on the novel of Joseph Conrad

Lead Actors: Sylvia Sidney, Oskar Homolka, Desmond Tester, John Loder

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

IMDb Plot Summary: A Scotland Yard undercover detective is on the trail of a saboteur who is part of a plot to set off a bomb in London. But when the detective’s cover is blown, the plot begins to unravel.

Why I Think This Is A Classic 30s Movie

The simplest and most straightforward reason I consider Sabotage to be a classic 30s movie: It is the best movie Alfred Hitchcock, one of the greatest directors to ever work, made in that decade (and he made 15 of then between 1930 and 1939). Heck, for my money it’s the best movie he made before his 6 year epic run of classic movies that stretched from 1954 to 1960, though many people would probably place their bets elsewhere.

Beyond that though is this: Sabotage is 80 years old, and it can still ratchet up the tension, shock, and surprise a jaded and cynical 21st century audience. If you’ve never seen Sabotage, and remain completely spoiler free, I implore you to see it as soon as possible (and it would probably be best if you came back and read the rest of this afterwards). You can even watch it free online thanks to the internet archive here or on YouTube here though I am unsure of the legality of their availability as the film seems to have entered the public domain at one time and then had it’s copyright restored later thanks to changes in relevant laws.

If you have seen it you’ll know that Sabotage is an excellent reminder that “gritty” and “dark” did not simply spring up in our recent movie offerings as fully formed concepts without heritage. What is perhaps unique to our more modern samples of “gritty realism” is the idea of grit for grit’s sake. Sabotage knows that to have true emotional impact, and thus worth, the darkness, the grit, needs to be earned.  So, it gives us characters to care about and relationships to believe in. It builds to its shocks: it shows us Chekov’s gun (or bomb, or knife, or bomb) and still catches us off guard when they come into play.

If you are at all interested in screenwriting and film-making, then I can’t recommend Sabotage enough. It may not have the pedigree of some of the great all-time 30s classics, but it has timeless lessons to teach about storytelling on the big screen.

My Favorite Moment In The Movie

The bus ride. Could it be anything other than Mrs. Verloc’s brother’s ride with a certain special package? (Though Mr. and Mrs. Verloc’s climactic dinner is a close second)

My Favorite Dialogue In the Movie

Mrs. Verloc: What do you think you’re doing?
Ted: Just lending a hand.
Mrs. Verloc: I thought I told you not to interfere?
Ted: I’ve been delivering a little counter-attack. Look, they’re on the run.
Mrs. Verloc: Well, they can come right back. Listen ladies and gentlemen, you’re going to get your money back.
Ted: Don’t give in now, I’ll stand by you.
Mrs. Verloc: I’d prefer you go and stand by your apple store.

Frankly most of the dialogue between Ted and Mrs. Verloc sparkles.

Key Things You Should Look For When Watching This Movie

Well, of course there is The Bus Scene where you should revel in the lost power of a non-digital countdown clock. Be sure to enjoy the performances of the leads, especially Sylvia Sidney and Oskar Homolka. The times Hitchcock eschews dialogue and lets the actors’ faces tell the story. The way the movie subverts all our expectations of what should happen, an effect that is perhaps now multiplied 8 decades later by many people’s expectations of what they will find when they turn to an “old black and white movie.”

I couldn’t find the movie trailer, but here is the famous — some would same infamous — bus scene:

And here is Hitchcock talking about the movie Sabotage and how he would have changed the bus scene:

Thanks, Jeff!

To show our gratitude for your guest post, here’s a dash of creative juju for you. Whoosh!

We already have a set of classic 40s movies, 5os movies, 60s Movies, 70s movies, 80s Movies and 90s Movies. This month, we’re working on 30s movies. And thanks to the GITS community, we’ve got at least 22 movies in the works and hopefully!

Those who I put in bold have already sent me their posts. If you haven’t sent yours to me, please do so as soon as you can!!!

All Quiet on the Western Front – Michael Waters
Bride of Frankenstein – Marija Nielsen
Bringing Up Baby – Melinda Mahaffey
Captain Blood – John Arends
City Girl – Adam Westbrook
Dracula – Sheila Seaclearr
Duck Soup – David Joyner
Gone With The Wind – W. H. Morris
Gunga Din – Steve Huerta
It Happened One Night – Joni Brainerd
Make Way for Tomorrow – Susan Winchell
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington – Amber Watt
Rebecca – Katha
Snow White and the Seven Dwarves – Will King
Sabotage – Jeff Xilon
Stagecoach – Thenewlight
The 39 Steps – Felicity Flesher
The Adventures of Robin Hood – Clay Mitchell
The Petrified Forest – Rachel Sheridan
The Women – Liz Clarke
Topper – Wayne Kline
Vampyr – Megaen Kelly

I am still looking for volunteers. If there’s a 30s movie you’d like to write about, please post your suggestion in comments or contact me via email.

Thanks to everyone who steps up for this ongoing project!

For the original post explaining the series, go here.

For all of the 30s movies featured in the series, go here.

Click REPLY and see you in comments about today’s classic 30s movie!

Writing and the Creative Life: Why creativity thrives in the dark

May 26th, 2016 by

Back in 2009, I was up working in the middle of the night, as I always do, when I was inspired to write this reflection:

Is there anything more profoundly intense than pounding out pages…
Yanked from that story universe you’ve created…
Then in the thick silence of night’s deep darkness…
Read aloud what you’ve written?
Not much above a whisper…
Don’t want to wake all the ‘normal’ people in the household.
Just you…
Your story…
And the blackness enveloping the both of you…
A silent witness to the magic of the muses you’ve managed to wrangle.

As long as I can remember, I have been a night person. That’s generally when I do my best creative thinking. I’ve often wondered why. As it turns out, perhaps it’s nothing more than light… and darkness.

This week, Fast Company published an article (“Why Creativity Thrives in the Dark”) that explores this subject:

Psychologists Anna Steidel and Lioba Werth recently conducted a series of clever experiments designed to measure how creativity responded to various lighting schemes. In a paper published last month, Steidel and Werth reported some of the first evidence for what creative masters know by nature: when the lights switch off, something in the brain switches on.

“Apparently, darkness triggers a chain of interrelated processes, including a cognitive processing style, which is beneficial to creativity,” the researchers concluded in the September issue of the Journal of Environmental Psychology.


In a subsequent experiment, Steidel and Werth arranged a simulated office environment with three different lighting conditions. Some of the 114 study participants in this test sat at cubicle with a desk light of 500 lux, which is the workplace standard. Others sat at a spot with a bright light of 1,500 lux, a setting often used by TV studios. A third group had a dim light of 150 lux, similar to a very cloudy day.

At their stations, study participants worked on four classic insight problems that require some creativity to solve. (The “candle problem,” for instance, asks people to put a candle on a wall using just a box of tacks; the solution requires realizing the box can be tacked to the wall.) People at the dim workspaces solved significantly more problems than those at the bright cubicles.

So what’s the secret of dim lighting? Steidel and Werth suspect that it creates a “visual message” capable of nudging our minds into an exploratory mode. The idea is that dark places suggest an uninhibited freedom that loosens our thoughts.

Finally I know why I prefer to live like a mole! Curtains closed during the day. A single lamp with a dim bulb on in my study at night. The shadows are my friends! The night welcomes me like a warm blanket, encouraging my creativity to emerge from hibernation, from darkness to darkness… and to the light of imagination.

I’m not a vampire yearning to sink my fangs into some virgin’s throat. I’m a writer yearning to sink my creativity into a virginal story! Yes, a creature of the night… but maybe more accurately, a creature of little light. As I wrote in that reflection years ago:

Truth be told, I’m more of a monk.
Communing with the Creative in the deepest darkness…
The most still stillness…
Where the people of ‘this’ world…
Give way to the souls of the ‘story’ world…
No folks around to spook my characters.

And so it’s midnight.
No calls.
No appointments.
Just me…
And slinky shadows.

C’mon, souls!
There’s nobody around to chase you away.

Let’s you and me chat for awhile…

For the rest of the Fast Company article, go here.

Writing and the Creative Life is a series in which we explore creativity from the practical to the psychological, the latest in brain science to a spiritual take on the subject. Hopefully the more we understand about our creative self, the better we will become as writers. If you have any good reading material in this vein, please post in comments. If you have a particular observation you think readers will benefit from and you would like to explore in a guest post, email me.

[Originally posted November 7, 2013]

Daily Dialogue — May 26, 2016

May 26th, 2016 by

“Look, let me explain something to you. I’m not Mr. Lebowski. You’re Mr. Lebowski. I’m the Dude. So that’s what you call me. That, or His Dudeness … Duder … or El Duderino, if, you know, you’re not into the whole brevity thing.”

The Big Lebowski (1998), written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

The Daily Dialogue theme for the week: The Coen Brothers.

Trivia: The Dude is in every scene of the movie. Even in the scene where the Nihilists are ordering pancakes you can see the van in which the Dude and Walter are driving. This is in keeping with the traditional film-noir, in which the protagonist is the narrator and acts as the audience’s guide throughout the film.

Dialogue On Dialogue: One of the most iconic characters in the Coen brothers oeuvre… and he goes by The Dude.

AMA with Black List founder Franklin Leonard

May 25th, 2016 by

Recently it occurred to me we hadn’t had a Q&A with Black List founder Franklin Leonard in quite some time and with all the changes in the movie and TV business, as well as a host of new Black List initiatives including the Black List Table Reads podcast, Black List Happy Hour networking events in 12 cities in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K., Black List Live! staged readings of Black List scripts, as well as numerous screenwriting workshops and fellowships available to writers worldwide, it’s a perfect time to check in on all things Black List.

So if you’ve ever had a question about the Black List, what it does, where it’s going, and how it’s impacting the screenwriting universe, here is your opportunity to get a response directly from Franklin Leonard himself.

For background, here is Franklin speaking at an Alliance for Artisan Enterprise event in November 2015 in which he provides an overview of how the Black List began and has evolved over the last decade.

If you have a question or comment for Franklin, please click Reply and head to comments and post it there.

Let me add I have gotten to know Franklin over the last five years of the blog’s partnership with the Black List. He is not only one of the smartest, most fascinating people I’ve met, he’s also just an all around great person who truly cares about screenwriters, screenwriting, and storytelling in Hollywood and beyond. When people talk about the need for ‘disruptors’ in the entertainment business, we are lucky to have Franklin taking the lead in that regard. And here is your chance to interface with him with your questions.

Interview: Donald Margulies (2014 Black List)

May 25th, 2016 by

One of the best ways to learn the craft is read what professional screenwriters have to say about it. To that end for the next few weeks, I will be featuring interviews I have conducted with Black List screenwriters.

Today: Donald Margulies, one of America’s most widely-produced playwrights, won the 2000 Pulitzer Prize for Drama for Dinner with Friends (which was made into a Emmy Award-nominated film for HBO directed by Norman Jewison) and was a finalist twice before for Sight Unseen and Collected Stories. His many other plays, which include The Country House, Shipwrecked! An Entertainment, Brooklyn Boy, the Tony Award-nominated Time Stands Still and the Obie Award-winning The Model Apartment, have been produced on and off-Broadway and in theaters across the United States and around the world. Mr. Margulies has received grants from the National Endowment for the Arts, The New York Foundation for the Arts, and the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. He was the recipient of the 2000 Sidney Kingsley Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Theatre by a playwright. In 2005 he was honored by the American Academy of Arts and Letters with an Award in Literature and by the National Foundation for Jewish Culture with its Award in Literary Arts. He was the 2014 recipient of the PEN/Laura Pels International Foundation for Theatre Award for an American Playwright in Mid-Career and the 2015 William Inge Award for Distinguished Achievement in the American Theater. He has developed numerous screenplays, teleplays and pilots for HBO, Showtime, NBC, CBS, Warner Bros., TriStar, Universal, Paramount, and MGM. He is an adjunct professor of English and Theater Studies at Yale University. The film of his screenplay, The End of the Tour (2013 Black List), directed by James Ponsoldt, premiered at the Sundance Film Festival and will be released in the fall of 2015.

Margulies Headshot

Here are links to all three parts of my March 2015 interview series:

Part 1: “One of the things that excited me when I read the Lipsky book – and what convinced me that the material would be best served as a film and not as a play – was the notion of placing the great satirist of American popular culture, David Foster Wallace, on the American landscape.”

Part 2: “I have said that The End of the Tour was a labor of love and I think everyone associated with it would describe it the same way. I take particular pride in having made this film with my longtime associate, David Kanter, and my former student, James Ponsoldt.”

Part 3: “The danger of research is falling in love with too many details and wanting to use everything. Research is useful as inspiration but it mustn’t become an excuse not to write.”

Donald is repped by WME and Anonymous Content.

Script Analysis: “Big Eyes” – Scene By Scene Breakdown

May 25th, 2016 by

Reading scripts. Absolutely critical to learn the craft of screenwriting. The focus of this weekly series is a deep structural and thematic analysis of each script we read.

Today: A scene-by-scene breakdown of the movie script Big Eyes.

Here is my take on this exercise from a previous series of posts — How To Read A Screenplay:

After a first pass, it’s time to crack open the script for a deeper analysis and you can do that by creating a scene-by-scene breakdown. It is precisely what it sounds like: A list of all the scenes in the script accompanied by a brief description of the events that transpire.

For purposes of this exercise, I have a slightly different take on scene. Here I am looking not just for individual scenes per se, but a scene or set of scenes that comprise one event or a continuous piece of action. Admittedly this is subjective and there is no right or wrong, the point is simply to break down the script into a series of parts which you then can use dig into the script’s structure and themes.

The value of this exercise:

* We pare down the story to its most constituent parts: Scenes.

* By doing this, we consciously explore the structure of the narrative.

* A scene-by-scene breakdown creates a foundation for even deeper analysis of the story.

You may download the script for Big Eyes here.

Written by Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski.

Big Eyes

Scene-by-scene breakdown

By Rachel Sheridan

P. 1: Montage focusing on the popularity of the artist, Keane: A Keane Big Eye waif painting being mass-produced, headlines boasting of Keane’s wealth, various images of everyday America with Keane’s waif paintings in the background.

P. 1: The year 1958, Pleasant Valley Sunday suburbia, identical houses, moms playing in the yard with kids. Title card: Ten Years Earlier.

P. 2: Margaret Ulbrich is rushing around the house, packing a suitcase for her and her 8-year-old daughter, Jane. Margaret grabs her art supplies and all her paintings from the wall, but leaves a picture of her and her husband on their wedding day. Margaret and Jane bolt.

P. 2: Margaret and Jane speed down the interstate.

P. 2: Inside the car, Margaret’s expressions reveal worry and possible regret for leaving.

P. 2: Back to 1958, Margaret and Jane sit in a car outside a furniture store where Margaret has a job interview. Margaret leaves the car for the interview after a well-wish from Jane.

P. 3: Inside the interview, Margaret reveals she’s never had a job before, but she’s separated and needs the money to help support her daughter. The interviewer is unsettled by her energy and naiveté.

P. 4: Margaret landed the factory job. She’s one of many painters painting Humpty Dumpty on baby cribs.

P. 4-5: Margaret meets up with an old friend, former bridesmaid, Dee-Ann in a Beatnik part of San Francisco. Margaret reveals more of her naive side when she doesn’t know what espresso is.

P. 5-9: Margaret sits with Jane in an Art Show booth, trying to sell her Big Eye paintings. Margaret meets an arrogant Walter Keane for the first time, is smitten. He’s selling his Paris street scene paintings in a nearby booth. Walter dotes on Margaret’s work.

P. 9-11: Margaret and Walter are on a date at a French bistro. Walter brags about his time as a free-bird in Paris studying art. Margaret admits to never have flown before and her identity has always been relegated to a daughter, wife and mother. He further dotes on Margaret’s talent and admits her paintings are better than his. Their attraction to one another deepens.

P. 11-13: Margaret and Walter are set-up to paint in a park. Margaret paints Jane, Walter hasn’t started yet. Margaret explains her fascination with eyes stems from a brief period of deafness when she was young and her need to rely on eyes for understanding. After a conversation with a passing man, Walter is forced to admit that he sells commercial real estate and is not the hot-shot painter he passed himself off to be. Margaret is charmed by his honesty in coming clean.

P. 13-15: Back at Margaret’s apartment after a date, Margaret opens mail informing that her ex-husband is fighting for custody of Jane. The letter cites Margaret as an unfit mother because she can’t provide more than an apartment to live in. Walter seizes the opportunity to propose marriage, she accepts.

P. 15: In front of a Hawaiian waterfall, Margaret and Walter marry, Jane the Maid-of-Honor.

P. 15-16: Margaret and Walter lie on the beach, Margaret head-over-heels for Walter. They both admire the beauty of Hawaii.

P. 16: Still drunk with love for Walter, Margaret paints a guest on the hotel grounds, she signs the canvas, Keane. Walter sees it, Margaret looks at him playfully.

P. 16-17: Back in San Fran, Margaret talks to Dee-Ann about Walter over lunch. Dee-Ann is critical of Walter, tells Margaret he’s slept around quite a bit. Margaret insists she knows who she married, reiterates her appreciation of his emotional and financial support. Margaret’s fortune cookie says she’s, “on the threshold of untold success”.

P. 17-20: Walter tries to find wall space at an art gallery for his London street scenes. Ruben, the gallery manager, finds Walter annoying and his paintings too. Rejects him. Walter whips out Margaret’s Big Eye paintings for consideration. Ruben pans those too, sends Walter away shocked.

P. 20-22: In a trendy nightclub, the Hungry I, Margaret and Walter wax about the state of the art scene, Walter disenchanted. Walter approaches the owner of the nightclub, Enrico Banducci, about renting space on his walls for his street scenes art and Margaret’s waifs. He goes for it.

P. 22: Walter and Margret pose for promotional pictures with their paintings as their display at the nightclub draws near. Walter is really pumping up their image.

P. 22-25: The art display at the Hungry I was disastrous, the owner put them outside the bathrooms and Walter sold one waif painting to a drunk couple who thought he painted it. Walter ended the night depressed and with a physical fight against Banducci. Walter smashed a big eyes painting over his head.

P. 25: A headline of the San Francisco Examiner shouts about the fight between Walter and Banducci.

P. 25-26: Margaret posts Walter out of jail. Walter admits that he sold one of her paintings and let the buyers think he painted it. Margaret is ticked, tells him never to do that again.

P. 26: Walter returns to the nightclub to retrieve paintings he left behind. Banducci spots him, runs to Walter and drags him the kitchen.

P. 26: Banducci is stoked, the headlines packed his club and the patrons wants to see more waif paintings that “made grown men fight”.

P. 26-27: Walter and Banducci stumble out of the kitchen, pretending to be bitter at each other. Interest from the patrons heightens. Dick Nolan, a gossip reporter for the Examiner, lassos Walter for an interview. He wants to know about the waif paintings, assumes they are Walter’s works. Walter is at first miffed, then continues the interview, withholding the truth as the Big Eyes are just signed, “Keane”.

P. 28: Walter bursts through the bedroom late, drunk. He tells Margaret they sold out of her paintings at the club and he needs more stat. His future plan is for her to paint at the apartment while he sells the Big Eyes out on the market. She assumes she was given credit for her paintings.

P. 28: Margaret is painting away at night, lost in her art.

P. 28: Walter makes lots of money selling the Big Eyes at the club.

P. 28. Margaret paints by day peacefully, a blonde girl in a blue dress, half done.

P. 29: Walter gets measured for a new suit.

P. 29: Margaret reflects on the paintings she finished, signed with “Keane”, and is filled with happiness. She realizes there’s no one around to share in her glee as Walter is at the club selling her waifs. She finds a babysitter for Jane.

P. 29: Margret is in a taxi, holding her finished waifs, elated with life.

P. 29-33: Margaret arrives at the Hungry I and is overwhelmed with joy as she sees her waif paintings covering all the walls. She notices Walter talking with some Big Eye fans and overhears Walter take credit for painting the waifs. Still unnoticed, Margaret has a near panic attack. She confronts Walter after the fans move away. Walter talks in circles, minimizing his dishonesty and turns it around on her, suggesting she has an ego if she wants credit and too much of an emotional connection to her paintings. Suddenly, Dino Olivetti, a wealthy Italian business magnet, enters the club and is taken by the waif paintings. He wants to know who painted them, Walter takes credit in front of the crowd after Margaret can’t muster the confidence to do so. Olivetti pays $5,000 for one. Walter shows Margaret the huge check, reassures Margaret that they both are named Keane, so the deception is fine, as they are one.

P. 34: Walter burns all the brochures of him and Margaret in a fireplace as he begins developing the identity of the artist behind the Big Eyes.

P. 34: Walter gets a write-up in the Examiner by Dick, as he’s a celebrity artist now. It says Walter is up to something big.

P. 34: Walter presents an uneasy Mayor with a Big Eyes painting, “on behalf of the children of the world”.

P. 34: Walter gives a Soviet Diplomat a ballerina painting, “in the interest of peace through culture”.

P. 34: Dick from the Examiner is on the phone in a phone booth, mentions a reservation for Joan Crawford at The Purple Onion.

P. 34: Joan Crawford is dining with friends at The Purple Onion when Walter suddenly appears and gives her a painting, “in recognition of your cinematic craft”.

P. 34-35: As Margaret paints in the apartment, Walter beams about Joan’s positive response to the waif given to her. Margaret questions Walter’s tactic of wanting to be so commercial with selling the paintings by so aggressively going to the people as opposed to the people coming to them. He puts her mind at ease with his selling, diverts her attention by being physical with her, they dance.

P. 35-36: Margaret, Walter and Jane are plastering posters advertising the Keane Gallery on Broadway. Jane mentions that she remembers when her Mom painted the picture on the poster. Margaret and Walter are stunned as it was a long time ago that Margaret made the painting. They lie and tell her that Walter painted it.

P. 36: Margaret is walking San Fran’s North Beach neighborhood where waif posters are everywhere. She’s disenchanted, sees a Catholic church, heads in.

P. 36-38: Margaret is in a confessional booth, tells the priest she lied to Jane after being pressured by Walter, feels guilty. The Priest doesn’t let her finish, assumes it was a white lie. He says lying to children is OK if it’s to shelter them from the world and advises her to trust Walter’s leadership of the family.

P. 38-41: A packed opening night at the Keane Gallery and every painting is now signed “Walter Keane”. Walter basks in the attention of the patrons, Margaret is a waitress at the event and is uneasy the whole time. Walter starts to act like he really is the artist.

P. 41-42: At the apartment, Walter watches a NYT art critic, John Canaday, pan his work and his place in the art world. Jane is forbidden from ever entering Margaret’s painting room, but knocks and tries to enter anyway while Margaret is working. Walter stops her, sends her out for ice cream.

P. 42-45: Walter tells Margaret he’s going on TV to defend his artwork, but doesn’t know how to articulate his motivation for painting little girls and boys. Margaret is not too helpful as she explains the reasons for creating art are personal to the artist.

P. 45: During his TV interview on a public access show, Walter says he started painting children as he watched them go through the horrors of war in Europe as homeless, starving orphans. His interviewers are fascinated by his story.

P. 45: Keane posters are ripped off walls, buildings, wherever they are outdoors.

P. 45-46: Outside the Keane gallery, Walter is flooded with fans-now everyday people, not just the wealthy-wanting photographs and autographs on Keane posters. Walter sees Ruben down the block, who is looking on dumbfounded at the fan fervor, Keane flips him the bird.

P. 46: Inside the gallery, the gallery clerk tells Walter no one is buying because the crowd can’t afford anything. However, they are taking full advantage of the free posters. Walter things of a solution to get money out of them.

P. 46-47: Walter is on the phone with Margaret, tells her he started charging for the posters and people happily bought them. So he wants to start mass-producing copies of her waifs to sell all over. Copies of the waifs are now being sold in pharmacies, gas stations, etc.

P. 47: Margaret shops in side a supermarket when she happens upon copies of her paintings for sale. She’s listless, en empty shell of herself.

P. 47-50: Margaret paints a new type of portrait with almond eyes, based on herself, signs it MDH Keane. She wants to display her new portraits with her credited as the artist. When she brings up the idea to Walter, he balks at first, then relents after Margaret’s pleas.

P. 51-54: Margaret, Walter and Jane are set-up at easels for another photo-op with the Examiner, as they’re now called The Painting Keanes. To Margaret’s shock, Walter’s 10-year-old daughter, Lily, arrives at the house with an overnight bag. Margaret never knew Walter had a daughter from a previous marriage until then. Walter shows fake affection for Lily, who rarely sees Walter. Walter brushes off how he never told Margaret he had a daughter.

P. 54-56: Jane shares her room with Lily and Jane learns much from cordial small talk. LIly lives 20 minutes away, Walter visits Lily every week and Walter has never mentioned Jane (although Lily lies and says he does). They agree, both of their moms cry a lot.

P. 56: The Keane Gallery is packed for the introduction of “America’s First Family of Art”.

P. 56-58: Margaret tries to sell her new paintings at the Gallery gala herself. She clearly doesn’t have a “salesman’s touch” as she drives away a rich patron speaking about numerology. Walter chides Margaret, tells her to shut her mouth. Two nearby artists bad-mouth Walter and Margaret, bitter that they make so much money from the Big Eyes when they can easily paint something similar.

P. 58: Ruben walks buy a store’s window display of Big Eye paintings along with rip-offs of the waifs except with subjects like animals and hobos. Ruben is shocked but dismayed, “it’s a movement”.

P. 58: A montage: The Tonight Show announces Margaret and Walter as guests, a TV commercial for a crying doll that is a waif copycat, a Spanish channels shows a Keane painting being hung in Madrid’s National Museum of Contemporary Art.

P. 59: Margaret works on waifs and her MDH portraits in her studio in a new, high-end California ranch.

P. 59-61: Dee-Ann pays Margaret a visit, Dee-Ann is a bit condescending about Margaret’s rich life. Dee-Ann spies Margaret’s painting room, wants to see what it looks like. Margaret tries to stop her, but Dee-Ann makes her way in.

P. 61-62: When Dee-Ann sees the MDH portraits and the waifs, she’s confused. Margaret tells her Walter paints in the studio too. Dee-Ann doesn’t buy it, she sees a Big Eye on an easel with a wet brush nearby. Learning Walter isn’t home, there’s heavy tension as Dee-Ann waits for Margaret to come clean with the obvious truth when Walter suddenly arrives home and walks in the studio. He’s ticked Dee-Ann is there, says he doesn’t like people seeing his work before it’s finished. He grabs the wet bush and attempts to finish the painting, a little confused on what to do at first. He makes a dot on the canvas and then calls it finished.

P. 62 Margaret, Walter and Dee-Ann sit in the living room drinking, silent, lots of tension.

P. 62-63: That evening, both drunk, Walter throws Dee-Ann out of the house in a tirade. They exchange insults, Walter calling her a fraud, Dee-Ann telling Walter he’s full of it. Walter tells Margaret never to invite Dee-Ann over again, Margaret sadly agrees.

P. 63 Margaret and Walter are in bed, not speaking.

P. 63-64: Jane is playing with their dog, a poodle named Rembrandt, when Margaret tells her she has to go to work. Jane wants to go to work with her, then pouts that she’s never allowed to before Margaret could answer. Both are sad.

P. 64-66: As Margaret closes her studio door, she doesn’t realize Rembrandt made his way in. She lets him stay, but needs to find a carpet for him to lay on in lieu of the new couch. She rummages through the closest, finds a battered crate filled with street scene paintings signed by a S. Cenic. Margaret runs to a street scene painting on an easel, flecks W. Keane off the painting to reveal that Walter has been putting his name over the original artist’s name on his street scenes. She realizes that she never actually saw Walter paint before.

P. 66-69: Margaret waits up late for Walter to arrive home. When she confronts him with what she found, Walter makes up a story about how S. Cenic was a name he used to be called. Margaret won’t believe Walter’s story, asks if he’s ever even been to Paris. Walter is defeated, only answers that he’s always wanted to be an artist.

P. 69: While waiting for the breakfast Margaret is cooking, Jane notices that Walter slept on the living room couch that night.

P. 69-70: Margaret is making her bed as Walter appears in the doorway. She’s fed up with the lies and tells Walter to take another bedroom. He’s somber, agrees.

P. 70: Margaret looks around the house walls, shell-shocked at all the framed photos, articles of Walter and the waifs. She opens a drawer containing the first-ever waif of Jane, gets emotional.

P. 70-72: Walter approaches Margaret in her studio and asks her to teach him how to paint the waifs and their problems would be solved. Margaret, annoyed, starts to teach him sternly, knowing he won’t be able to do it.

P. 72-73: Montage of Margaret starting a waif from scratch while Walter tries to copy her every trace. He can’t hack it, he resorts to tracing her sketch on a light table, then paints the sketch. His final product looks like child’s play and he becomes enraged and throws his failure against the wall. He then makes like he’s going to punch Margaret but destroys her canvas instead.

P. 73-75: Walter enters the Keane gallery in a huff, questions the clerk about the inventory on-hand and how long it would last. He has an existential crisis, does all the fame and fortune even matter? The clerk rings up a customer, Walter sees they’re buying an MDH portrait, gets miffed. He becomes interested in a newspaper headline about an upcoming World’s Fair.

P. 75-77: At the restaurant where they had their first date, Walter threatens to kill Margaret if she ever ratted him out as a fraud. He then convinces her to paint his magnum opus to debut at the World’s Fair.

P. 78-79: Margaret conceptualizes the painting for the World’s Fair on an 8’ canvas. Walter pipes in, wants to see waifs of all cultural backgrounds to fit the UNICEF mission, a main sponsor. He mentions he needs all kinds of old material for a Life Magazine article on him, Margaret agrees to it, throws him out of the studio in anger so she can work.

P. 79: Jane, in her teen’s, finds no one around and finally enters Margaret’s studio.

P. 79-80: Jane is amazed at the sight of all the paintings, she finds her mom asleep on the couch. She wakes up Margaret, who then tries to convince Jane that the paintings are Walter’s. Jane knows she’s lying, runs out. Margaret runs after her and they both break down.

P. 80: A Life Magazine spread reads, “The Man Who Paints Those Big Eyes.”

P. 80: The NYT Art Critic, John Canaday, reads the Life Magazine article and is disgusted, sees the mention about him at the World’s Fair, picks up his phone.

P. 80: At the World’s Fair Hall of Education, where the crème de la crème should be, Canaday views the large Keane painting with a civic leader in charge, it’s titled “Tomorrow Forever”. Canaday thinks it’s terrible. He learns Walter just had to call and ask if he could be featured there. Canaday is fuming that the World’s Fair wasn’t more discriminate in who they let into the Hall of Education.

P. 81-82: Margaret and Walter attend a high-society party at a New York mansion. Walter basks in the glory of being at such an exclusive event. Margaret disagrees, prefers selling her paintings in a park. She says she’s filing for divorce on Friday, Walter doesn’t take her seriously. A man approaches Walter and ask if he’s seen the Times. He hasn’t.

P. 82-83: Walter, Margaret and the man are in a den, looking at a review of the “Tomorrow Forever” painting: “Grotesque”, “Appalling”, “Lowest common denominator”. Both Walter and Margaret are hurt. Walter wants to have words with the author. The man tries to suggest that the Keanes leave since the author is at the party.

P. 83-84: Back at the party, Walter shocks the crowd, demands to know who wrote the review. Canaday has no problem revealing himself and standing behind his review. Walter is livid, grabs a fork as if about to stab him but stops himself. Him and Margaret leave the party, crowd stunned.

P. 84: “Tomorrow Forever” is taken down from the Hall of Education.

P. 84-86: Back at the Keane’s house, Walter is drunk and goes out of his mind. He blames all his woes on Margaret, starts lighting matches and throwing them at Jane and Margaret. They bolt for the art studio and lock the door behind them.

P. 86-87: Walter tries unsuccessfully to enter the studio, his verbal assaults are unrelenting. He tosses another lit match threw a keyhole. Margaret and Jane make an escape through the sliding glass doors in the studio.

P. 87: Walter notices moving car headlights from his front window, he’s confused.

P. 87-88: As Margaret and Jane are driving, Margaret tells Jane they’re going to Hawaii to make a new life because it’s paradise there.

P. 88: Jane stands on her porch overlooking a Hawaiian paradise while Jane hangs out with some local teens.

P. 88-89: Margaret is painting ferns inside the house when Walter calls her, Margaret is shocked. Walter is miffed about separation papers he got in the mail. He says he’ll grant a divorce if Margaret assigns all rights to the paintings to him and paints 100 more waifs in his name for “future revenue stream”. Margaret agrees.

P. 90: Margaret heads to the Post Office to mail off a waif painting to Walter. Margaret warns Jane that her friends aren’t allowed in the house so they don’t see the paintings.

P. 91-93: Two Jehovah Witnesses hit Margaret’s house. She lets the ladies in and Margaret unloads emotionally on them, searching spiritually. Margaret is interested in the honesty and truth factor of their religion.

P. 93-94: Jane reads the literature left behind by the Jehovah Witnesses. Margaret mentions how it says lying is forbidden and you should be speaking truth. A Eureka moment between them.

P. 94: Walter is partying at his house with women, tells them he’s better than Warhol. His delivery of a Big Eye painting arrives.

P. 94: Walter unpacks the new waif painting and to his horror, Margaret signed it with her signature: MDH Keane. Walter is ticked.

P. 94-95: Margaret and Jane sing happily at the local Jehovah Witness hall.

P. 95: At Margaret’s house, she pours her liquor down the drain, throws out her cigarettes, she’s pleased.

P. 95-96: During an in-studio radio interview, Margaret finally comes clean publically that Walter is not the painter of the Big Eyes, she is.

P. 96: Jane and Margaret walk away thrilled, particularly Jane, who proudly hugs her mom.

P. 96: Canaday is beside himself, reading the news of Margaret’s admission coming off the wire services.

P. 96: Dee-Ann reads the headline in the Examiner, she “knew it!”.

P. 96: Dick Nolan reads the headline about Margaret, chokes on his drink.

P. 96: Banducci at the Hungry I finds the news hilarious.

P. 96: Ruben responds sarcastically, “who’d want credit?!”.

P. 97: Walter reads the news at a coffeeshop, is beyond mortified, heads out.

P. 97: Walter is at a bar with Dick at night, trying to convince Dick to report his side of the story, that Margaret is lying. He abides.

P. 98: Margaret sits at her house with her Jehovah Witness friends as she reads Dick Nolan’s article on Walter, that names Margaret as the fake. Jane suggests they sue Walter.

P. 99: A circus outside the Honolulu Federal Courthouse as the trial against the Gannet newspapers and Walter starts. Walter expects the charges to be dropped by Noon. Gannet is being sued for libel because of the latest Nolan article, Walter for slander and related charges.

P. 99-101: Walter is at the courtroom table with the Gannet legal team. The charges against them for libel are quickly dropped as they present evidence of Margaret attributing Walter as the artist to them in several hundred articles. The Gannet legal team gets up to leave. Walter then learns that Gannet’s legal team isn’t there to represent him as well, he’s rattled. Walter decides to represent himself.

P. 101: Wire Service headlines, Keane trial takes shocking turn, “He’s a Painter’s and a Lawyer?”

P. 102: Dick Nolan types up a piece critical of Walter.

P. 102-104: Inside the courtroom, Walter questions Margaret, who is on the witness stand. Margaret reveals that she let Walter take credit for the work because he was so domineering, even threatening her life if she ever told the truth. Walter looks like an annoying, arrogant fool representing himself.

P. 104: One of the two courtroom artists sketches his figures with Keane big eyes. He laughs with the other artist about it.

P. 104-107: Walter takes the witness stand, he questions himself. He goes into a long, dramatic, bizarre life story, mentioning many details of his alleged storied life. The judge interrupts him, says the only way to settle the case is for both of them to paint. Walter is worried, Margaret pleased.

P. 107-111: Margaret and Walter each have easels set up for them near their tables, the jurors look on. Margaret doesn’t hesitate to move to her easel and get to work on a waif. Walter has no idea what to do, he sits in his chair, making people wonder why he won’t move to his easel. He then fakes a shoulder injury “flare up” and says he can’t paint. Shockwaves through the courtroom, Walter sits back in his chair, lifeless, he knows his end is near.

P.111-112: Outside the courthouse, Margaret emerges victorious with Jane by her side. They’re hounded by reporters. Walter was found guilty of defamation, emotional distress and damaged reputation. He leaves the courthouse, insults everyone and drifts off into the background. Margaret autographs a book of her work that Walter was given credit for. She’s proud.

P. 112: Margaret has a new gallery, The Margaret Keane Gallery, filled with waifs and MDH’s. The waifs have a different aura about them, defined by lush gardens and brighter colors.

P: 112: Title cards: Walter never admitted guilt, insisting he was the artist for the rest of his life. He passed away in 2000, penniless. Margaret remarried, moved to San Francisco and opened a gallery. She paints everyday. An image of a waif is shown, smiling this time.

Writing Exercise: I encourage you to read the script, but short of that, if you’ve seen the movie, go through this scene-by-scene breakdown. What stands out to you about it from a structural standpoint?

Major kudos to Rachel Sheridan for doing this week’s scene-by-scene breakdown.

If you’d like a PDF of the Big Eyes scene-by-scene breakdown, go here.

I am looking for volunteers to read a script and provide a scene-by-scene breakdown for it to be used as part of our weekly series. What do you get? Beyond your name being noted here, my thanks, and some creative juju, hopefully you will learn something about story structure and develop another skill set which is super helpful in learning and practicing the craft.

The latest volunteers:

12 Years a Slave – Georgevine Moss
Beasts of No Nation – Jacob Holmes-Brown
Big Eyes – Rachel Sheridan
Bridge of Spies – Scott Guinn
Carol – Jillienne Bee
Celeste and Jesse Forever – Ryan Canty
Diary of a Teenage Girl – Cynthia
Ex Machina – Nick Norman-Butler
Frozen – Doc Kane
Gone Girl – Ashley Lara
Inside Out – Katha
Legend – Olivia
Leviathan – Piotr Ryczko
Locke – Megaen Kelly
Macbeth – Trung
Man Up – Kristy Brooks
Monsters University – Liz Correal
Mud – Kevin
Nightcrawler – DJ Summitt
Pawn Sacrifice – Michael Waters
Steve Jobs – Angie Soliman
Straight Outta Compton – Timm Higgins
The Big Short – Richard KomanThe End of the Tour – Steve Fabian
The Iron Lady – Leslie
The Way Way Back – The Deuce
Trainwreck – Joni Brainerd
Wreck It Ralph – Kenny Crowe

Thanks, all!

To see examples of scene-by-scene breakdowns, go here. Part of the goal is to create a library of breakdowns for writers to have at their disposal for research and learning.

You may see the scripts we can use for the series – free and legal – by going here.

To date, we have analyzed 55 movie scripts, a great resource for screenwriters. To see those analyses, go here.

Thanks to any of you who will rise to the occasion and take on a scene-by-scene breakdown.

And for those of you who have volunteered, please send me your scene-by-scene breakdown as soon as possible!

Circling back to where we started, reading scripts is hugely important. Analyzing them even more so. If you want to work in Hollywood as a writer, you need to develop your critical analytical skills. This is one way to do that.

So seize this opportunity and join in the conversation!

I hope to see you in comments about this week’s script: Big Eyes.

Classic 30s Movie: “Bride of Frankenstein”

May 25th, 2016 by

May is Classic 30s Movie month. Today’s guest post comes from Marija Nielsen.

Title: Bride of Frankenstein

Year: 1935

Writers: Mary Shelley (novel), Adapted by William Hurlbut and John L. Balderston, Screenplay by William Hurlbut

Lead Actors: Boris Karloff, Colin Clive, Valerie Hobson, Ernest Thesinger, Elsa Lanchester

Director: James Whale

IMDb Plot Summary: It is revealed that both Henry Frankenstein and his Monster have survived their Arctic adventures. Dr. Frankenstein is then approached by Dr. Oretorius, a mad scientist who gleefully shows off his own creations. Pretorius then kidnaps Frankenstein’s wife and promises to release her after the good doctor creates a mate for his lonely creature.

Why I Think This Is A Classic 30s Movie

Bride of Frankenstein is a subversive sequel to James Whale’s Frankenstein (1931), both part of Universal’s Classic Monsters series released on beautifully restored DVD and BluRay in a 2012 box set. This series comprise such legendary movie monsters as Dracula, the Wolf Man or the Mummy and were made during the decades of the1920s through the 1950s. Bride is widely regarded among both directors and film historians as the “crown jewel of Universal’s Classic Monster movies” and is actually more of a tragic love story than straight out horror. Also, the SPFX for that time are nothing less than impressive (on a par with those of The Invisible Man, 1933).

My Favorite Moment In The Movie

Well, since this movie is one of my all-time personal faves, I’d say “the whole thing”. But here are just a few:
When Dr. Pretorius shows Dr. Frankenstein his creations: miniature people enclosed in glass jars (a moment of joyful wonder at the special effects and also at the extent of Pretorius’ mad geniosity).

When Dr. Pretorius welcomes the Monster to the lab with a drink and a cigar (both funny and sad since the Monster is treated with what appears to be kindness but is actually domination as will become clear later on).

When the bandages are taken off the Bride and she is finally revealed (Elsa Lanchester was just… wow…).

When Drs. Frankenstein and Pretorius introduces their female creation to the lovesick Monster and she screams in fear (no comment necessary, I believe). Oh, and the way she hisses… Even though she’s only present in the final moments of the movie, that was enough for this glamorous female monster to gain instant iconographic status among horror movie fans and artists to this day.

My Favorite Dialogue In the Movie

Dr. Pretorius (toasting Dr. Frankenstein): To a new world of gods and monsters!

Blind Man to the Monster: You’re welcome, my friend, whoever you are. (Full disclosure: this sequence never fails to bring tears to my eyes… The sheer humanity of it is a shocking contrast to the loneliness and harsh rejection of the Monster that precedes it.)

Dr. Pretorius: Do you know who Frankenstein is, and who you are?
The Monster : Yes, I know… made me from dead… I love dead… hate living.

Dr. Frankenstein: She’s alive, alive!

Key Things You Should Look For When Watching This Movie

The inspired prologue of Mary Shelley (played by Elsa Lanchester who also plays the Bride) discussing her Frankenstein novel with Lord Byron and Percy Shelley. Obviously, the amazing sequence of the miniature people in glass jars. The humorous touches that take the edge off the “dark stuff”. The set pieces – despite being filmed on the Universal back lot, we’re immediately transported to Bavaria.

Both Frankenstein and this follow-up are certainly fascinating in that they focus on much more than simple scares through their similar storylines revolving around life and death, love, hubris, acceptance, rejection and medical evolution. In this, they are very much early examples of what today we would consider elevated horror. Also, the brilliant use of Black and White and the directing – studying these movies a little more closely makes you realize just how much story the director told visually (movies are a visual medium, yes, but telling the story that way is a lost art in the majority of today’s CGI fests).

As a final note, remakes of the Universal Classic Monsters are in development and some have already been slated for release (The Mummy in 2017, starring Tom Cruise; The Invisible Man in 2018, starring Johnny Depp). As for Bride of Frankenstein, Angelina Jolie is in talks for playing the Bride but no official statements have been made yet.

The following YouTube clip is a tad spoilerish since it shows the Monster meeting his intended Bride. Such memorable moments…

Thanks, Marija!

To show our gratitude for your guest post, here’s a dash of creative juju for you. Whoosh!

We already have a set of classic 40s movies, 5os movies, 60s Movies, 70s movies, 80s Movies and 90s Movies. This month, we’re working on 30s movies. And thanks to the GITS community, we’ve got at least 22 movies in the works and hopefully!

Those who I put in bold have already sent me their posts. If you haven’t sent yours to me, please do so as soon as you can!!!

All Quiet on the Western Front – Michael Waters
Bride of Frankenstein – Marija Nielsen
Bringing Up Baby – Melinda Mahaffey
Captain Blood – John Arends
City Girl – Adam Westbrook
Dracula – Sheila Seaclearr
Duck Soup – David Joyner
Gone With The Wind – W. H. Morris
Gunga Din – Steve Huerta
It Happened One Night – Joni Brainerd
Make Way for Tomorrow – Susan Winchell
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington – Amber Watt
Rebecca – Katha
Snow White and the Seven Dwarves – Will King
Sabotage – Jeff Xilon
Stagecoach – Thenewlight
The 39 Steps – Felicity Flesher
The Adventures of Robin Hood – Clay Mitchell
The Petrified Forest – Rachel Sheridan
The Women – Liz Clarke
Topper – Wayne Kline
Vampyr – Megaen Kelly

I am still looking for volunteers. If there’s a 30s movie you’d like to write about, please post your suggestion in comments or contact me via email.

Thanks to everyone who steps up for this ongoing project!

For the original post explaining the series, go here.

For all of the 30s movies featured in the series, go here.

Click REPLY and see you in comments about today’s classic 30s movie!