Too many ideas, can't choose one.

T

tleisher

Member
So, for the past five years I've been learning about screenwriting and while I've written a short or two it's time for me to tackle a feature.

The problem is that I have too many good ideas that I'm paralyzed when I try to choose one, some days Ill feel good about one idea and start it but then feel better with the other and start that one instead, never getting very far.

I have about 30 right now that I think are great, and I'm sure half of those aren't as good as I think they are. But I know I have at least 10 solid ideas.

Has anyone else had this problem? How do you choose what story to tell first? None of them particularly call out to me and they are all around the same budget.

Anyone have any advice for overcoming this/choosing a first screenplay to write?
 
I work on several at a time...impossible to pick one sometimes. I'll do a draft of one then put it aside while I work on another...then come back to the other script so I can take a fresh look at it. Get those ideas out of your head and onto paper. Plus, I'm always writing scenes for several other scripts at the same time. When it comes to you you have to write it down. I keep folders for each script idea where I collect the bits and pieces.
 
tleisher said:
Anyone have any advice for overcoming this/choosing a first screenplay to write?
Click to expand...

Which one do you relate to most?

Not: Which one will win an Oscar? Which one will make the most money? Which one will look great in 3D? Which one will have the coolest scenes? Which one is the most quotable?

Which one can you - should you and only you - write. It will be that one that is precious to you. That means it resonates with you. And it's the one you relate to most.
 
I agree with Jscott. Write what is closest to your heart. Go with the subject you can write the most about and the one you have with the most experience with. Having an intimate understanding of your subject will add life to your writing and engage the viewer/reader.
 
why not write the loglines out for 10 of your best projects and create a poll here on DVXuser, let some of the filmmakers in the community comment . I'd do the same in the forum at www.savethecat.com they have a great bunch of writers there who help narrow down your options. You could go with a project that resonates with you emotionally the most if your wanting the spec script to be something that shows off your writing ability or if the goal is to actually get a screenplay made into an actual film then maybe you need to choose a topic that other people like distributers get excited about.
 
jscottprice said:
...that one that is precious to you. That means it resonates with you...
Click to expand...

Fine perhaps, but also a very slippery slope IMO. "Precious" is a well-deserved pejorative in many instances, describing a film (or song, or other creative work) that is so inwardly directed by its creator that it has almost no interest to anyone else. For example, a movie about the filmmaker's relationship with a parent (or whoever) that is loaded with ultra-specific, ultra-personal details and 'emotional cues' that have hyper-intense meaning to the filmmaker, but are unfortunately non-universal to the point of being almost 'coded'. People making such works often mistake its profound meaning to themselves for actual depth and value. Which would be great if most people 'got it'. But in these cases they almost never do.

So beware of the Precious...

I much prefer Terry Rossio's (co-writer of numerous megabuck films) imperative: "create interest". That puts the emphasis where it belongs IMO: on the *audience*.

So 'something close to your heart' is fine, but not if it's *too* close...

But mainly *entertain people*. It's what they want in exchange for their ten bucks and two hours, and they deserve it.

Plus, for me as a writer, I find it quite liberating to get out of the intensely personal and into the *what would entertain others* headspace. Doing so might actually help the OP get past some of his indecision, which was the main point of his original question.

Fortune cookie version: "Get Out Of Your Head!"

: )
 
Last edited:
idea schmea

idea schmea

The least important part of a screenplay is the idea. Black Swan is about a ballerina who goes nuts. Kings Speech is about a king who wants to make a speech.

Pick any idea, doesn't matter. What makes a script good is the execution.
 
Yep, agree with those who say "it's not what, but how". Tons and tons of very successful movies, movies that launched careers prove this. Take Reservoir Dogs - really, it's all in the dialogue; the "events" or plot, such as there is, are all completely standard and very sparse; but it launched Tarantino. Go over some of your favorite movies and you'll see that. What's such a good idea in "El Mariachi"? Nothing, really, it's super standard - but the execution...! It launched Rodriguez. Take "Sex, Lies and Videotape" - what's the great big idea there or what's the plot? But it launched Soderberg. And so on. You worry overmuch about great ideas - I guarantee you, tons of very bad or mediocre movies had "better" ideas than many very successful ones. The idea is the least of it. I got tons of great ideas. But once you start trying to put it on paper you discover that either they are not really "great", or that in the end, it's about execution. Great characters drive many scripts - and a great character is not an "idea".
 
I'm currently writing a novel while editing another one, doing three animation teleplay specs and eight screenplays. As it pertains to screenplays specifically, just nestle up into a scene in one of your stories with a pad of paper and start everyone talking. Doesn't matter which "idea" they're in. I'm vaguely understanding your concept of "idea" (as in there are a race of super people, one of which who has metal grafted to his bones?), which doesn't amount to much. But if "idea" means you have some semblence of a structure (point A leads to B leads to C in an interesting and newfangled way), then what's important now is just to get to know your characters. Even if the scene you write never makes it into the final draft you need to know the Who in your What.

As was mentioned, though, with some rare exceptions, ideas are a dime a dozen so it's not confusing that you would have so many. We all do. It's our audience-self that can distinguish between the mediocre and the pretty good. After 5 years of writing and studying it shouldn't be an effort stepping away from your ideas and understanding which ones are really worth a polish and presentation.

Alien is the same "idea" as a hundred other movies.

(and don't forget that there's no such thing as wasted writing time. Even if you're working on something that you someday decide to never film or sell or have read, you were still WRITING, which is much, much, much more important than deciding/trying/thinking about writing something "great")
 
The thing is that "what" and "how", when done well, get all tangled up in each other. Which is what you want (and how you want it!).

So sure, how you do it is hugely important, and you can make a successful and interesting full-length feature film that consists entirely of two people sitting at a table talking (My Dinner With Andre). But few people are going to be all *that* interested if you "pick an idea" that bare-bones. It's storytelling after all, and while it's largely true that 'all the stories have been told already', it's more than just execution that sets one apart from another. "Star Wars" succeeded (among other reasons) because Lucas took the storytelling aspect of it *very* seriously. Sure, you could just call that 'execution' as well, and there we'd go into the wonderful world of semantics, but my point is:

The underlying story that you tell, however many times it or something very much like it has been done, is of immense importance, and the failure to deliver on that score is what defines the problem with many, many films that otherwise feature fine acting, characters and dialog. Steven King, in his excellent book "On Writing" (IIRC), explains his fundamentally simple idea-generating process as "putting people in a situation and seeing what they do". This of course is nearly identical to the "situation comedy" paradigm, except that King doesn't write comedies...

But it puts the jumping-off point on *story*, as in *what happens in the situation*. Point being, he does *not* start with character, or 'two people talking', or what-have-you. Instead, for example, he puts those people in a snowed-in shed in Maine (situation A), makes one an author with a freshly broken leg (situation B), the other a deranged 'number one fan' of the first (situation C), and *then*...lets the fur fly ("Misery").

Story first, then everything else.

Hitchcock, a master of film if there ever was one, always put story first, as is attested to by his saying (regarding his process), "...after the script has been written, and the dialog added..."

For me, the number one thing that has me pressing stop on the DVD player and sending the thing back to Netflix half-watched (or even less) is the lack of a compelling story (which, if it hasn't been set up pretty well by then, almost certainly never will be).

For a more authoritative voice on this, read McKee, or Dara Marks' superb "Inside Story".

My $.02
 
Last edited:
Ted Spencer said:
The thing is that "what" and "how", when done well, get all tangled up in each other. Which is what you want (and how you want it!).

So sure, how you do it is hugely important, and you can make a successful and interesting full-length feature film that consists entirely of two people sitting at a table talking (My Dinner With Andre). But few people are going to be all *that* interested if you "pick an idea" that bare-bones. It's storytelling after all, and while it's largely true that 'all the stories have been told already', it's more than just execution that sets one apart from another. "Star Wars" succeeded (among other reasons) because Lucas took the storytelling aspect of it *very* seriously. Sure, you could just call that 'execution' as well, and there we'd go into the wonderful world of semantics, but my point is:

The underlying story that you tell, however many times it or something very much like it has been done, is of immense importance, and the failure to deliver on that score is what defines the problem with many, many films that otherwise feature fine acting, characters and dialog. Steven King, in his excellent book "On Writing" (IIRC), explains his fundamentally simple idea-generating process as "putting people in a situation and seeing what they do". This of course is nearly identical to the "situation comedy" paradigm, except that King doesn't write comedies...

But it puts the jumping-off point on *story*, as in *what happens in the situation*. Point being, he does *not* start with character, or 'two people talking', or what-have-you. Instead, for example, he puts those people in a snowed-in shed in Maine (situation A), makes one an author with a freshly broken leg (situation B), the other a deranged 'number one fan' of the first (situation C), and *then*...lets the fur fly ("Misery").

Story first, then everything else.

Hitchcock, a master of film if there ever was one, always put story first, as is attested to by his saying (regarding his process), "...after the script has been written, and the dialog added..."

For me, the number one thing that has me pressing stop on the DVD player and sending the thing back to Netflix half-watched (or even less) is the lack of a compelling story (which, if it hasn't been set up pretty well by then, almost certainly never will be).

For a more authoritative voice on this, read McKee, or Dara Marks' superb "Inside Story".

My $.02
Click to expand...

Agreed. That's why I said if his "idea" has some concept of A to B to C then he should get his characters in a room and see what happens.

In the end story is always paramount. There can be some wiggle room in film because so much of it is exhibition (opposed to, say, a novel), so if the camera sat on someone doing interpretive dance on the beach and it didn't in any way advance the story or progress the plot, there are going to be filmgoers who are okay with it. But unless you're the one actually directing the film, I'd say these kinds of visual asides probably don't have a place in the written draft.

$.025
 
Right. The girl doing interpretive dance on the beach, who always wanted more than anything else in the world to be a dancer, and *deserved* to be, but was unjustly prevented...

That's story...

And you still get the pretty pictures...

Just *much* more powerfully...

On the other hand, there's also B-Roll...

: )
 
ironically, tho, the idea that kicks starts the movie need only be simple, but the ideas that go INTO the script need to be fresh:

Reservoir Dogs:

simple idea- botched bank robbery

ideas that went INTO the script:

they discuss madonna
told out of sequence you don't even see the robbery
ear cut off to "stuck in the middle with you"
retro radio show underscores the film
miles of quirky, sounds real yet memorable dialog
awesome movie within a movie within a movie when he tells the cop in a kamode story
one of them defends the rat with his life, who is also a cop
guy bleeds on the ground for like 3/4 of the movie
everyone dressed in black suits except for one dude in a big colorful sports jacket
color names for codenames.

whew
 
I definitely agree that the story is an absolutely essential piece- not just how well it's written. I once read a couple of short online books by a producer who said that the most important thing in a screenplay was to deliver on a compelling promise. He then tried to sell his screenwriting class, but he was right. He was really talking about setup and payoff. Without it, nothing happens. I once read a friend's screenplay for a silent 3 minute short. It was a space launch... but that was it, the shuttle just launched. Nothing happened. In 3 minutes you don't have a lot of time to set anything up or pay anything off but it is certainly possible (and necessary).

I'm a stand up comic and the way we break down jokes is more or less the same principle: Premise (exposition) Set up (set up) and punchline (payoff). It's easier for me to show an example with a joke:
[I'm an actor as well]- Premise [I'm probably best known for my role as Othello]- setup [in an off broadway production of Board Games: The musical]- payoff


So ideas are great, but they are just ideas. If all you have is a premise than it's not really a story yet. I'd go with the one that you know best has legs- one that you already know the set up and payoff for, or one that you're sure will have a solid one. I don't want to disrupt your method, but I'm big on outlining- if you outline some of your favorite ideas you can see what takes the best shape.
 
Yes to outlining, treatment, index cards - any way to (relatively) simply and quickly get an overview of your entire story. It's so much easier to see what isn't so hot about it *and fix it* in that form. Keep working it until you have it *really* great, *then* write the script. That process will take you new places of course, and that's (almost) always a good thing. But if you've got the 'heavy lifting' done on a really solid 'road map' before you type the first slugline, the scriptwriting process goes *so* much faster. And better...
 
I also have a bazillion ideas. Some are screenplays, some are novels, some are animations, it never ends. I just bounce back and forth to what I'm liking best at the time. I keep a notebook of just random ideas in the form of a directory full of .txt files. Just random tidbits that need to be saved. These really come in handy later as you can sometimes chain them together and use them somewhere.

Something I find very helpful to do is act out my characters. I go in my living room, get in their heads, and see how they'd behave in the situation. This always brings out new things for me, and I'm able to push a story forward based on what the characters FEEL and then what they DO based on that. This really helps you SHOW your audience, not pander to them or tell them in an information dump. If you love (or hate!) your characters, your audience will too.

(PS: my neighbors think I'm the weirdest person alive for talking loudly in a pirate voice for most of a Saturday, but I got some great material for my novel!)
 
i think personally the last thing you want to do is write about something you will grow tired of in 2 months. Features don't pan out like shorts. Their time lines are different. You have a luxury of having a bunch of ideas. I would think really hard about which one speaks to you the most and go with that. Like i said earlier, the last thing you want is to be 40 pages in and not want to write anymore.. Anyhow, good luck on your script man! exciting times!
 
I also have a lot of ideas for movies. Ideas for the most part are worthless, you need a solid story. Take your ideas and come up with solid outlines, the best outline you can come up with, flesh that out and write the screenplay. I have a really great idea yet I've struggled coming up with an outline for it. So until that day comes, it's useless. Whereas other ideas I have, I came up with great outlines for and wrote them out. It's all about the execution of a great idea.
 
I am in a bit of the same boat right now, and what I am trying to do is create a process where I create loglines for all the ideas I want to work on, then create summaries / synopses / beat sheets, then create treatments... not all ideas will be developed enough to survive the process, so I shelve those for later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top