Interview: Dana Coen — Part 4

I have the pleasure of working with Dana Coen as a colleague through the Writing for Screen and Stage program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a dramatic writing minor for which Dana is the director.

Dana has an extensive background in television, penning episodes for “The Wonder Years” and “NCIS,” as well as eight seasons on the CBS series “JAG” [co-executive producer] and the Fox series “Bones” [co-executive producer].

Dana is also a produced playwright and freelance screenwriter, currently about to go out with an original thriller screenplay.

Today in Part 4, Dana talks about his turn to screenwriting and his take on some keys to the writing craft:

Scott: In the last few years, you’ve shifted your focus to writing movie screenplays. What’s your thinking behind that move?

Dana: Having one or more of my feature specs produced is the last item on my career bucket list, which, of course, is a movie reference… an indication of how much impact the industry has on our culture. There was no time for feature writing when I was employed in TV. But, in recent years, I’ve been able to write three and rewrite another. When I was on television staffs I was serving someone else’s vision. Since then I’ve returned to my playwriting objectives and now write for myself.

Scott: You currently have an original script out to buyers called “Mr. Messiah.” How would you describe that story’s plot?

Dana: I’ll give you the set-up. When the President of the United States suffers a fatal heart attack, the Vice President, who has been grieving the death of his campaign manager wife, resists stepping up…until her voice emerges from the beyond and guides him through a series of radical appointments, personal lifestyle changes and policy innovations…the most significant being a plan to remove all the private money from the federal campaign process.

Scott: “Mr. Messiah” is a political satire, probably one of the single hardest sub-genres to pull off. Were you at all nervous about taking on such a challenge?

Dana: Very. It took me twenty years to muster the courage to write it.

Scott: What was the inspiration for this story and for this particular character to find himself in the Oval Office?

Dana: I had long been intrigued by the idea of a politician in a power position who was able to recapture his idealism. Unlike “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” however, the consequences resonate in an unintended way.

Scott: How did you come up with the idea of the President of the United States communicating with his deceased wife? Why did it appeal to you as a writer?

Dana: I was looking for something that was both edgy and emotionally accessible. Satires allow for heightened ideas to inform important questions. The presence of his wife’s voice asks the audience to choose whether the President is mad or inspired, which I hope is not easy for them. There is clinical evidence to suggest that many of our great leaders manifested some form of controlled mental illness. Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King were depressives. Franklin Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy exhibited manic traits.

Scott: What’s the current status of the script?

Dana: My manager began submitting it just after the November election to development executives at A-list companies. There’s been considerable interest. In March I was in L.A. for the couch-and-water-tour. Most are looking for “tent poles,” stories that match their brand, and foreign sales potential. Overseas dollars are particularly relevant these days. Action movies, thrillers and films with foreign locales tend to play best in those markets. An American political satire is out of that box, but the meetings were promising.

Scott: So TV, now feature films. What are the biggest differences you’ve discovered between writing a TV script and a movie script?

Dana: Movie scripts are generally self-contained stories with three defined acts. A current, hour-long, network episode can have as many six. Network television scripts are constructed to lead the audience to the commercial breaks, although that’s evolving due to DVRs, pay cable, subscription series and condensed viewing. Television series also develop established characters over an extended time frame. With the exception of sequels, feature stories are driven by original characters and are not obligated to create additional problems beyond the ones established.

Scott: Okay, some craft questions. How do you come up with story ideas?

Dana: It’s always different. Sometimes an idea is generated by reflection over an issue. “Mr. Messiah” was motivated by my frustration with Washington politics. My second play “Bunches of Betty,” was a title before it was a story. I pretty much dreamed my current spec. As the theatre producer in Shakespeare in Love is fond of saying, “I don’t know. It’s a mystery.” In general, though, I think it helps to be observant, analytical and open.

Scott: How important do you think the story concept is to the overall strength and commercial viability of a screenplay, specifically a spec script?

Dana: A good friend, who knew the late studio head/producer Richard Zanuck, quoted him as saying, “I’m not interested in the script. I’m interested in the story.” Strong stories do not become weaker as a result of shifting market trends, so I prefer to focus on the storytelling, leave judgments about commerciality up to the executives and producers, who are on the front lines, and be patient enough to wait for the stars to align.

Scott: How much time do you spend in preparing to write a script? Which of the aspects of prep, like brainstorming, outlining, do you tend to devote the most time and focus to?

Dana: The process tends to happen organically. With feature scripts I’ll just start thinking about an idea. Once I have the central characters and a general story-shape in mind, I might tell it to a few people, not necessarily for their feedback, but as a way of allowing me to hear it. I’ll then outline it so I won’t lose my way or trap myself into a corner when I’m writing. I’ll construct three acts, break them down into eight sequences, list the scenes for each sequence, and describe the action in each scene by moving from one major action beat to another. My feature outlines tend to be about nine to ten pages and can take considerable time to design. I find that if I play with all the story possibilities in the outline I have less of a tendency to second-guess myself down the road. That said, outlines are not written in stone. I don’t feel obligated to obey them word for word. I allow myself the liberty to change things during the writing process. If I find myself making wholesale changes, however, my outline is likely faulty or I’m not trusting myself. Research is an ongoing process and is essential to writing authentically.

Tomorrow in Part 5, Dana delves into more aspects of the writing craft.

For Part 1, go here.

For Part 2, go here.

For Part 3, go here.

Please stop by comments to thank Dana and ask any questions you may have.

Dana is repped by Rosa Entertainment.

Comment Archive