2014 Screenwriters Roundtable (Part 4): Chris Borrelli, Brian Duffield, F. Scott Frazier, Chris McCoy, Justin Rhodes, Greg Russo
A special treat this week and next as I will be posting excerpts from an extensive screenwriter’s roundtable I did in December 2014 with a group of talented Hollywood screenwriters: Chris Borrelli, Brian Duffield, F. Scott Frazier, Chris McCoy, Justin Rhodes, and Greg Russo. How good are they? Between them, they have sold more than a dozen spec scripts and have multiple original screenplays on the Black List.
This is the fourth GITS screenwriters roundtable with this group of writers, the first three of which you can read here, here and here. This has become something of an annual event as it’s a great way to take the pulse of what’s happening in the screenwriting universe, track the careers of these talented writers, and benefit from the many insights into the craft they share.
Here is Part 4:
Scott Myers: Justin, let’s jump to you, because you’ve got several projects we can’t talk about yet because they are still hush‑hush. One that we can discuss is Unmanned. As I understand it, you wrote that specifically for Keanu Reeves. How did that come about?
Justin: Originally, I had this idea for a sci‑fi project, but it’s more of a war movie. If you extrapolate some of the stuff that’s going on, like the drums, and then the vision, what is it going to be like, in another 30–40 years, it’s kind of a Saving Private Ryan story in that environment. I talked to Chris Morgan about that originally, and he had thought, Keanu might be right for it. They had worked together on 47 Ronin.
I had a meeting with Keanu, and he gave me some of the smartest notes I’d ever heard. It was a really interesting process, just in terms of creativity. I hadn’t written it yet, and originally, it was conceived as something for a 18‑year‑old rookie soldier, and I was talking to a guy who was about to turn 50, what does that do to your conception of what the character is?
The whole thing turned on its ear. He had this reputation for being great at development. He developed a script called, Passengers, which is one of my favorite sci‑fi scripts in the last five years.
He had done that with John, and so, just the chance to see what that was like, and what working with him was like, was exciting. The thing about is, now that I know who is going to play this part, I know exactly what this is, from the get-go, and I am actually talking to the guy that’s going to do it, about what he would like to see in the role, and how it works. It’s a really interesting process.
After the first draft, we did a revision with him, and he acted out, essentially the whole script in his living room. What it showed me was, the screenwriting muscles of structure and seeing how everything fits together, and what the purpose of this is, the whole macro thing.
As an actor, what he is amazing at is, seeing every single moment from a centered place of, “What am I looking at?” “Why am I looking at it?” “How am I processing what I am looking at?” “How do I move from here?”
Even in the subtle things like blocking the script, you would realize that, there are moments and depth, things that were there to be found, that didn’t occur to me. Like the revision, in terms of working with him was like a thousand little tweaks, that the result of which, took the script to a whole new level.
In my mind, it’s the best thing I ever wrote, a large part of it is all the really, really smart moment, character stuff that he brought to it. It was one of the best experiences I’ve had, to be honest.
Scott Myers: Going forward, is that something you would like looking at characters in other projects that you are writing?
Justin: Yeah. It taught me a lot. When I work, I am very structure first, and I come into the character, second. A lot of stuff that I am doing, big summer action kind of scripts, you are approaching it… at least, I am, from that macro viewpoint: this is what we do, this is the party IP that we have to include, or not include, and on and on.
This was a whole lesson in this is that movies actually live and die in these little beats, and that you can get so much out of… “he does this first, or that second” stuff that feels trivial or after stuff, or what the director figured out, actually, you can put that in, and it does take you to a new level.
Ever since, the last couple of things I’ve been working on this year, I’ve been trying to include as much of that as I can. Just the conversations we had, at least he gives me a framework for how an actor uses this thing, because he was very generous with his time in that way.
Scott Myers: Seems like a natural progression for you. As you move up the development ladder, you are getting these movies made, and then, eventually, getting a position where you are interfacing with these actors, that you are seeing this side of the whole process. Generally for the group, working with actors, have you learned anything in terms of your writing? How you approach your writing?
Chris Borrelli: Yes, for me. Actors come at things, I am going to say, being very general here, more emotionally. Sometimes, as screenwriters, we get into structure as we should, and all these character moments, but then, an actor looks at it from a different point of view, and it can be valuable. What’s the emotion? What’s the motivation?
I’d say, with actors, that’s the number one thing they are thinking, whereas, as a writer, honestly, it’s probably when I am, especially when I am writing a spec or whatever, it’s number three, four, or five, for me.
It’s good to have that. I’ve had that now and I’ve changed a little bit where I try to do an “actor pass” in my head as I read it through, making everything about emotion, and at that point, the script, putting the structure, and story, just a little to the side, making it more emotion-heavy than structure-heavy.
Chris McCoy: Yeah, it’s interesting when you are working with them, because it is such an art to be a good actor, and many actors are so internal. If they really care about the material, they are thinking about it in terms of motivations: “This happened, and therefore I am in this emotional place, which means I am doing this.” There are times when you are writing, when you tell yourself, “Okay, I know I need to have a certain kind of scene here to tie the script together structurally.” But the character motivations in that scene have to make sense. It can’t just be structural filler, or else solid actors will call you out on it.
These actors are taking their job seriously and unless you can look them in the eye and tell them exactly why something is happening and why their character is in the place where they are, then you are not doing your job. Your characters always need to want something, need to care about something.
You need to be able to communicate those motivations with an actor. Directing gave me more insight into how actors look at scripts, and knowing the kinds of questions they’ll be asking puts a little bit more pressure on me as a writer, because I need to have those answers. Understanding some of the methodology of actors is something that I feel like will inform my future screenwriting, because one way or another, a movie doesn’t get made unless you have actors in it.
Each day this week, I’m going to highlight one of the writers. Today: Chris McCoy.
Chris McCoy has had three scripts on the Black List — GET BACK, GOOD KIDS and GOOD LOOKING (Dreamworks). Other projects include R.A. (Dreamworks), LITTLE WHITE LIE (Laika Entertainment), YEAR ABROAD (Strange Weather Films) and GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY (Marvel). His first book SCURVY GOONDA (Knopf) was published in 2009, and his next book THE PROM-GOER’S INTERSTELLAR EXCURSION (Knopf) will be published in April 2015. He co-directed the short film THE BICYCLE (Austin Film Festival, Mecal Barcelona, InterFilm Berlin) and recently wrapped production on his debut feature GOOD KIDS (Depth of Field/Voltage Pictures) from his 2011 Black List script, to be released in 2015.
For my March 2012 interview with Chris, go here.
Please take time to leave a reply with your observations and follow-up questions, and while you’re there thank these writers for taking time out of their busy schedules to do this roundtable for GITS readers and the wider online screenwriting community.
For Part 1 of the Roundtable conversation, go here.
Part 2, here.
Part 3, here.
On Twitter:
Brian Duffield: @BrianDuffield
F. Scott Frazier: @ScreenWritten
Chris McCoy: @thatthere
Justin Rhodes: @twopointfour
Many thanks to Wendy Cohen for logistical help with the roundtable.
Tomorrow: Part 5 of this exclusive screenwriter’s roundtable.