Writing Your Script � Breaking In

Category: Writing Your Script

Jan 10

Nickelodeon Fellowship Interview with Karen Kirkland

I found this great interview online through Amanda The Aspiring Writers Blog about the Nickelodeon Fellowship. For those of you that don’t know what this fellowship is please check out their website at http://www.nickwriting.com

“It’s amazing to me how few television writers actually know about this fellowship, especially because it’s a paid program!” says Karen Kirkland, Executive Director of the Nickelodeon Writing Fellowship. Karen’s looking to spread the word, so I sat down with her to chat about what she’s looking for, what sitcoms writers should spec, what happens during the fellowship, and what previous fellows have gone on to do.

Do you think writers decide not to enter the program because they think “Oh, it’s Nickelodeon, and I don’t want to write kids’ stuff”?

It’s unfortunate, but I think a lot of writers don’t enter the program because they believe there’s a big difference in writing for Nick as opposed to writing for more “adult” network shows. If you’re a fan of our programming, you’ll notice it’s pure entertainment for kids, but there’s also a wink every now and then for the adult or older sibling who’s watching along. Keep in mind the stories are written by adults, but the one thing we do not do is dumb anything down for kids.

In order to submit to the program, you do NOT have to submit a spec script for a Nickelodeon show, it doesn’t even need to be kid-friendly. We accept spec scripts based on any ½-hour comedy out there currently on-air and in production on primetime network or cable.

Great story-telling is great story-telling. The content might be a little bit different, but I don’t think it precludes one from then going on and pursuing a career outside of Nickelodeon – if that’s what they so chose.

Bottom line – it’s about the work. The writers who have come through the program and have been staffed on Nickelodeon shows are doing well and are very happy – as are the writers who have come through the program, been staffed on our shows and have since moved on to primetime network shows.

Nickelodeon has been able to put kids first in almost everything we do. Having stories that are kid-relatable, stories that are funny and stories that originate from character – that’s what it’s all about.

How is writing for a Nickelodeon show different than writing for more adult shows?

In my opinion, it’s not really all that different. I think from a story perspective, making sure you understand the tone of the show, having a solid grasp of the character’s voices, having a unique story to tell and injecting the script with a huge dose of funny – it’s all the same.

I would say, however, that writing for our animated shows has proven to be a challenge to some of the writers that come through the program. For any writer who writes short stories, they know it’s not easy to clearly and concisely convey an action-packed story in 11 minutes.

I want to work with a writer that can give me a fresh perspective on the show they’re writing for. However I still want the tone of the show to remain intact and I still want the character voices to be accurate, but I’d want to get a sense of the writer’s voice, in terms of his or her point-of-view on a specific topic. That’s not an easy thing to do whether you’re writing for Nickelodeon or primetime network.

Do the fellows generally stay at Nick or move onto other kinds of shows?

Our 2009-2010 Writing Fellows “graduated” in October of 2010 and two of them got staff writing jobs. One got staffed on Fanboy and Chum Chum and the other got staffed on The Penguins of Madagascar. The third fellow is writing freelance on a new show for Nick.

When it comes to writers who have graduated from the program, some of them get staffed here at Nick and some of them don’t. Some of them get staffed here first and stay for a few years, then move on to other staff writing gigs once production has ended on the show they were writing for.

As a result of being in the fellowship, the majority of the writers who have come through the program have received multiple produced credits on Nickelodeon shows. However, our main objective is not only to get them produced credits, but also to get them staff writing jobs.

In the last six years, we’ve been successful at staffing the majority of our writers on Nickelodeon shows. In addition to those that are still writing for Nick (Jonathan Butler, Gabe Garza, Jessica Gao, May Chan, Ron Holsey, Ivory Floyd, Kerri Grant, Stacie Craig), others who have come through the fellowship are currently writing on or have written on shows like Modern Family, The Cleveland Show, Mr. Sunshine, Sesame Street, Everybody Hates Chris, My Boys, Arrested Development, and Aliens in America to name a few.

But for the writers who don’t get staffed, I don’t abandon them either. For instance, there was one writer this last cycle that didn’t get staffed, so I put her on a six-week script schedule and she started writing a Community spec. She completed that spec and now she’s on a new six-week script schedule for Modern Family. My door remains open… Even for the finalists who make it to speed interviews but don’t get chosen as Fellows, they know they can always pick up the phone and call – or come in for a Script Review.

What are some rookie mistakes you see writers make?

But it’s my opinion that in order to succeed in this business as a writer – you’re going to have to develop a thick skin. I know it can be tough at times because there are some execs out there who are frustrated writers themselves and they want you to take their notes, and commit entirely to their thought process.

Within the confines of the Writing Fellowship – a writer needs to be able to come to the table with the understanding that this is going to be a collaborative process. We’re going to have a conversation about structure, tone and dialogue and we’re also going to talk about what my “take away” is as a reader, as an audience member. I’m diving into your story with an open mind. What am I feeling? Is this what you’re trying to convey? What are the character motivations here? What kind of story are you really trying to tell? I think those questions are important ones. Also, on the flip side of that, a writer shouldn’t just agree with everything I’m saying. You can’t. You have to be committed to and stand-up for your creative vision. And I think that’s the fine line. The writers may not be as savvy coming into the program, but once they leave, they know exactly what that fine line is and how to navigate it. They understand the difference between not fighting for everything, but picking and choosing their battles and fighting for enough.

What are you looking for in the applications?

I don’t look at applications or bios and resumes until the very, very, very end of the application/submission process – which is usually about an hour before I’m about to get on the phone and do a phone interview with a writer. And the reason is that I want the work to speak for itself. When the scripts come in, we will tear off the cover page so we don’t know if you’re from California, Utah or New Jersey. We don’t know if you’re male or female.

Our selection process is very rigorous! There are three ‘rounds’ of reading. During round-one, all of the scripts are read by professional readers who are experienced at doing coverage and who understand the sensibilities of the fellowship. They understand precisely the qualities that make for a good script. Scripts that make it through the first-round are then moved into the second-round. The second-round scripts are read in-house by the coordinators and managers within Network, in both development and current series (both live action and animation). The third-round of reading is done by the Directors, EICs and VPs within development and current series, again both live action and animation.

After the scripts have gone through the several rounds of reading, I then read the scripts that have come through the sifter. At that point I may or may not “pass” on a few more. The writers of the remaining scripts become the semi-finalists. Keep in mind that at this point, we still haven’t even looked at the application, the bio or the resume for the writer. We don’t know anything about the writer other than his or her writing ability. All semi-finalists have a phone interview with me and it’s usually during this time I’ll take a look at the bio, resume and application so I can start to get a feel for who they are, what their passions are, etc. I’m intrigued by people and I want to find out what motivates writers and what drives them to create. During the hour-long phone interview is when I ask for a second spec (hint, hint). If the writer doesn’t have a second spec – they’re immediately disqualified. It’s my belief that if you’re a writer – you’re constantly writing, and if you’re a television writer – you should have more than one television spec. Once I read your second spec, you’re then called in for an in-person interview. If all goes well during the in-person interview – you’re then a finalist and moved into speed interviews. Speed interviews are a super intense series of interviews (with show creators, head writers, line producers and network executives) that take place over the course of a few days. Eleven interviews over a course of 4 days to be exact…

Would you read half hour pilots, or just specs?

Just specs. For submission to the fellowship you must submit a ½-hour spec script based on ANY comedic television series currently on-air and in production on primetime network or cable. Any ½-hour spec. It does NOT need to be for a Nickelodeon show, nor does it need to be kid-friendly. Keep in mind that we don’t accept pilots, original material or feature-length scripts.

A writer’s best bet is to write a spec script for 30 Rock, Modern Family, The Office, Parks and Recreation, Community, Curb Your Enthusiasm, It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, How I Met Your Mother – just to name a few.

The script will mainly be judged on story, humor, dialogue, character development, structure and originality.

Do you think being good in a room is just as important as your writing?

I think so – but being “good” in a room is only relevant to the writer’s room you’re in. Every room is different. We’re looking for strong writers with great personalities. A writer that has a creative point-of-view, a writer we’d want to spend an entire year with, a writer that we’d feel comfortable sending into one of our writer’s rooms, someone who can hold his or her own. A writer that is able to pitch out jokes and break story. You have to know when not to be annoying. And for most writers who have never been in a room, it’s a little bit intimidating. But each of our productions have great creative teams that will help you along the way.

Did some of your previous applicants of fellows lack room experience but impress you anyway?

Yes. The majority of writers who become writing fellows don’t have any “professional” experience to speak of. In addition, to be considered for the program, you can’t have had any network or cable produced television credits. The program is here in part to help writers gain room experience.

So people shouldn’t be worried that they might not be ready for this?

No! I want writers to exercise their creative visions and realize their dreams. You are ready – right now!

Does diversity play a big part in choosing your fellows?
Yes it does! Writers sometimes think they shouldn’t apply because they’re not “diverse” – but “diversity” is inclusive of everyone. What does that mean? It means that we’re giving everybody a fair share and equal opportunity. That’s really important.

What is it that really impresses you in the scripts that are submitted? Is it a fresh unique point of view, a writing style, etc?

It’s a combination of all of that. I love it when I can read a 30 Rock spec where the writer has not only given me a fresh perspective on the show in terms of the story idea and the premise, but that I can still feel the tone of the show, the character voices have remained intact, but the writer’s voice – in terms of his or her perspective, is also coming through in that script. That’s a really difficult thing to do. And of course, your script has to make me laugh out loud! It has to be funny. The dialogue needs to be witty. Your story, the arcs and your characters all need to be multi-layered. I can always tell when a writer’s had fun writing their script because I have fun reading it.

So do you think it’s a bad idea for writers to spec shows they don’t love?

I think yes and no. For entrance into competitions such as this one – to showcase your best work – yes, I think it’s best that you stick with a show that you absolutely love. Pick a show that you find humorous and a show that you can relate to. But on the other hand, once you get into the program, it’s not always going to be that easy. We’ve had writers in the past who were assigned to write specs for shows that they were not necessarily big fans of. But what if you get hired on a show you don’t like? The showrunner doesn’t care whether or not you like the show – they care whether or not you can deliver a good script. For programs like this, yes, write something that you love, but be prepared that you may not always be able to do that.

So what happens when the fellows are actually in the program?

The Fellows begin in October every year, and they come into the office every day from 10am to 5pm.

We feel that one of the most beneficial tools a television writer can have is the working knowledge of the creative process of getting notes from an executive and learning how to incorporate those notes into their scripts. To that end, we assign the Fellow to an Executive in Charge of a show (an EIC). The Fellow will spend a week researching that show and coming up with 3 story ideas. The Fellow will then pitch his/her story ideas to the exec. The exec will choose one of them, give the writer some notes and then the writer will have two days to write a premise based on that story idea. Once the premise is complete – we’ll then put the Fellow on a six week writing schedule. During this time, they’ll have two weeks to write an outline, and turn it into the EIC. We schedule yet another notes meeting and the writer will either need to revise the outline, or move on and write the first draft. They’ll have a week to write the first draft, followed by a notes meeting, then two days to write a second draft, then a notes meeting… They’ll continue on this path all the way through to the final draft. Each fellow does this for both a live-action show and an animated show.

In addition, during the first few months the writers are inundated with meetings with everyone at the Studio, from executives, to show creators, to head writers, to line producers and even folks in our post-production department. These are elongated one-hour meetings, and the writer must come to the meeting prepared with at least 10 questions for the person they’re meeting with. The fellow is then free to network and nurture relationships, which is something we encourage.

Interspersed with their writing and their meetings are in-house workshops on how to break story to how to write for comedy to how to succeed in Hollywood – and that’s over the course of 4 or 5 months. Then we send them to UCB, where they take improv classes. Then we send them off to the Robert McKee “Story” weekend.

By March or April, they are ultimately placed on a show – where they get experience in the writer’s room – which is so incredibly valuable. Within the first few weeks of being on the show, the fellow is usually pitching out story ideas and/or they’ve been assigned another script to write (this one getting produced). Ultimately, the fellow stays on that show until their fellowship is over in October, and hopefully – like many of our past writers, will then segue onto the show as a staff writer.

Has the program changed at all over the past few years?

I think the program has grown by leaps and bounds! There are now distinct systems in place that help to ensure we’re staffing as many writers as possible within a given year. When I first began at Nickelodeon six years ago, the program was not very well-known within the industry at-large. I was amazed by how few writers, executives and agents knew about the program. Especially because it was such an amazing opportunity for writers to get paid while doing what they love to do – write! Unlike before, now many of the writers that graduate from the program are either being staffed on our shows, or they are leaving well-equipped to get staff writing jobs elsewhere within the industry.

The way in which we recruit writers has changed as well. We now take a very active approach in discovering new writing talent. We spend hours & days at film festivals exposing writers to our How to Tell a Story workshop and giving Script Reviews. I travel a lot throughout the year to various colleges around the Country spreading the word about the program and encouraging graduating students to apply.

Just this year we finally have a presence on Facebook and on Twitter. We’re attempting to take advantage of as many social media outlets as possible. We’ll most likely be starting a blog soon.

I would say that now after many years of marketing the program and after many staffing success stories – we’ve begun to nurture relationships within the industry as a whole and folks are starting to take notice.

What feedback have you gotten from the showrunners and show creators about the program?

I think I’m really lucky (and so are the Writing Fellows) because I oversee (and they are a part of) a program that the Network and the other Producers here at the Studio absolutely love. A huge amount of value is placed on the program and the Network is completely committed to helping us place the most talented writers into the program and ultimately onto our shows. I think of this program as a talent pool, and when an exec or a production is in need of a writer, they know exactly where to go!

I think part of what makes this program so successful and why we’re able to staff so many writers on our shows is that we’ve gotten complete buy-in down the line – from our exec team to our show creators, to our line producers and from the other writers on each of our shows.

Anything else people should know if they’re thinking of applying?

Have multiple 1/2-hour television specs written – assuming you want to write for television.

Beware of typos – they are not your friend!

Do your research – it’s not enough to watch a couple of episodes. Watch them all – multiple times!

Before you write your spec, do yourself a favor – write a 1/2-page premise first, then an outline, then (and only then) should you write your first draft.

Have a unique premise, a well told story, a clear A, B and C story, clearly defined character motivations, scenes that move the story forward, and a solid structure.

The Nickelodeon Writing Fellowship is definitely a fun program to be in, but it’s also a very tough program – a boot camp of sorts. The program is geared toward writers who are seriously committed to their craft, to becoming better writers, to learning more about the business and to being open to the process. The writers that are in this program work really hard to be successful.

The deadline to apply for this year’s program is February 28. For more information, check out the Nickelodeon Writing Fellowship official website, follow them on Twitter and find them on Facebook.

Also for great writing tips check out http://aspiringtvwriter.blogspot.com

3
comments

Posted in Screenwriting, Writing, Writing Your Script Breaking Into Entertainment Fellowship Film Los Angeles Nickelodeon Nickelodeon Writing Fellowship Production screenwriter Television television production TV Writer writer writing

Sep 17

Interesting Article

I found this interesting article from ScriptShadow. Check it out:

How To Write For An A-List Actor

A question I always like to ask people in the know is, “What kind of character should you write to give yourself the best chance to attract an A-List actor?” The reason I ask is because there’s no quicker way to get your script sold or made into a movie than to attach a star. Chances are that manager, agent, or producer who’s reading your script right now is wondering, “Who can I get to play this part?” Unfortunately, so far, nobody’s given me a clear-cut answer. Maybe that’s because actors, like anybody, are all different. They have different interests, different needs, different tastes. But that doesn’t mean we can’t find commonalities in their choices. Maybe, if we can identify these common factors, we can write scripts that have a better chance of selling.

Now there’s no perfect way to go about this so this is how I’m gonna do it. First, we need to agree on what an A-List actor is. An A-list actor is someone who can open a movie to at least 20 million dollars on his name alone. People go to see the latest Denzel movie. People go to see the latest Will Ferrell movie. These are actors who get you to open your wallet. Shia LaBoeuf’s name can certainly scrounge up enough money to make a low-rent thriller, but no one out there says, “Man, I gotta go see the latest Shia LaBoeuf movie,” so he and other actors of his ilk are out.

I also needed a systematic way to choose the roles I’m going to break down. So what I’m going to do is take eleven A-list actors and dissect their last starring role. I know some of you are going to whine about the actors I left out but with 25 A-List Actors, I had to cut a few folks. These eleven represent the actors whose roles I know best and therefore can give the best breakdowns of.

Also, I am quite aware that actors sign onto movies for reasons other than the character itself. I think it’s a safe bet that Leo wanted to work with Christopher Nolan bad enough that he would’ve made a movie with him as a deaf librarian trapped in a meat locker. But even in cases such as these, it’s likely that the actor shaped the character into a part he wanted to play. So that character is still relevant to this discussion. Let’s not waste any more time. Here are ten stars, plus one, with the last role they chose to play and why.

Actor: Will Smith
The movie: Seven Pounds.
The part: A gritty role where a man wants to commit suicide to donate his organs to seven needy individuals.
Why he likely chose it: At first glance, this part simply seems like an opportunity for an actor to emote. He gets to cry, he gets to look depressed. It’s a serious role that on the surface gets an actor some street cred. But if we dig a little deeper we find something interesting: Smith is playing a role where he sacrifices himself to save others. Can you think of a more heroic act than sacrificing your own life to save other people? This may sound crazy but actors have big egos and what better way to massage that ego than to play God, which is what Will Smith is doing here.

Actor: Denzel Washington
The movie: Book of Eli
The part: A loner delivering the last bible in a dangerous post-apocalyptic world.
Why he likely chose it: Actors like to be the badass. They like to kick ass. And they like to look cool doing it. What’s cooler than a loner who cuts down his attackers in samurai-like stylistic flourishes? But that’s not the only thing going on here. Denzel’s character rarely speaks. Now younger actors always want a lot of lines. They equate more lines with more screen time. Older actors, particularly A-listers, like to occasionally tackle roles where they have very few lines, the reason being that it stretches their acting muscles. They have to act with their eyes and their bodies, which is much harder to do. Oh, and not to be outdone by Will Smith, did you notice that Denzel is also playing God? He’s delivering the bible in order to save the world. How much more heroic can you get?

Actor: Tom Cruise
The movie: Knight and Day
The part: A mysterious super-agent who must include a woman on his mission when he mistakenly involves her.
Why he likely chose it: First of all, actors love to play spies. The reason for this is that spies are inherently conflicted. They’re always lying to everyone. They’re always having to keep secrets from the people closest to them. That inner struggle is very appealing to an actor. On top of that, Cruise’s character is a cape short of a superhero. He’s capable of superhuman feats – jumping on cars, leaping out of planes, killing dozens of enemies without breaking a sweat – What actor wouldn’t want to play someone so badass? And the cherry on top? The role allows Cruise to be charming and funny, creating the ultimate movie star role.

Actor: Brad Pitt
The movie: Benjamin Button
The part: A man who ages backwards.
Why he likely chose it. Well in this case, we know exactly why Brad Pitt chose this role, as he’s talked on record about it numerous times. He chose the role under the stipulation that he get to play every single part, from Benjamin in his 80s to Benjamin as a baby. In the end, Fincher didn’t let him do this – but you can bet he told him he’d be able to. Out of all the characters I’m covering here, this one is probably the most unique, but it’s clear why Pitt chose it. It’s the ultimate acting challenge – playing a person at every age of their life. What actor wouldn’t be interested in that?

Actor: Angelina Jolie
The movie: Salt
The part: A CIA officer who’s accused of being a Russian spy.
Why she likely chose it: Again, we have another spy role. So the reasons for choosing it are similar to Knight and Day. The conflict of lying to those closest to you. The fun of performing superhuman acts of heroism. Indeed, it’s not surprising that Cruise was once attached to this role. It’s also of note that the actress gets to play a female part that isn’t typically cast for females (and in this case, was actually written for a man). I think that appealed to Jolie in an “I can do that too” way. The one difference between this and the Knight and Day role is that there’s no humor here. But that’s because Jolie doesn’t have a sense of humor.

Actor: Johnny Depp
The movie: Alice in Wonderland
The part: The Mad Hatter
Why he likely chose it: First off, you’re playing an iconic character. Every actor wants to play an iconic character. But outside of that, Depp’s reasoning was probably similar to Pitt’s. It’s another “ultimate acting challenge.” In general, actors like to play characters who are mad/insane because it allows them to go crazy with the character. Well The Mad Hatter’s the ultimate version of this. He’s got “mad” right there in his name! So to be able to have the latitude to go batshit crazy and challenge every fiber of your acting muscles is, indeed, the ultimate challenge. Also, a character this wacky and different doesn’t usually present itself in mainstream fare, so when it does, actors want to snatch it up. (see also: The Joker)

Actor: Leonardo Dicaprio
The movie: Inception
The part: A criminal who builds dream worlds in order to steal from others.
Why he likely chose it: More than most actors out there, Leo values the character arc. He wants to dig into a character and resolve some internal problem just as much as he wants to resolve the outer one. Indeed, it can be argued that the inner journey here is more important than the external journey. Cobb must come to terms with the loss of his wife before he can achieve his goal. Huge portions of Inception are given to his character battling this problem – most of which were ordered by Leo himself. Also of note is just how tortured Cobb is. Tortured characters always appeal to serious-minded actors as a lot of actors are tortured in some way themselves.

Actress: Sandra Bullock
The movie: The Blind Side
The part: A well-off wife who takes in a troubled homeless teenager.
Why she likely chose it: To this day, I don’t know why people liked this movie. I also have no idea how the role won Bullock an Oscar. The character isn’t a particularly complex one other than that she speaks with a southern accent. What I can gather is this. Women are more inclined to help those in need than men. For that reason, I can see why this role would appeal to Bullock. She gets to save someone who otherwise wouldn’t have been saved. Ahhh, wait a minute. Maybe there’s more to this than meets the eye. Not unlike our friend Will Smith in Seven Pounds, Bullock is *saving* another human being. Maybe roles really are a chance for actors and actresses to massage their egos and play God. Before I get hit with a blind side myself, it should be noted that women rarely get offered roles where they’re not dependent on a man in some capacity. So actresses are going to jump on these roles when they pop up.

Actor: Steve Carrel
The movie: Dinner for Schmucks
The part: An obsessive clingy mouse taxidermist.
Why he likely chose it: In most comedies, there’s the straight guy and there’s the crazy guy. The more innovative you make your crazy guy – the more likely an A-list comedian is going to want to play it. Remember, there’s not as much range in comedy as there is in other genres, so comedians often play the same role over and over again. They yearn for something different. This role is different in that it’s not a character who’s overtly funny (a la Jim Carrey in Liar Liar) but more weird. Getting to play someone strange and “off” is probably a big draw to a comedic actor, because the character has more going on than the typical “Look at how funny I am!” character.

Actor: Matt Damon
The movie: Green Zone
The part: An officer in Iraq looking for WMD’s.
Why he likely chose it: It’s no secret that Matt Damon is a political guy. He forces it down your throat whenever he opens his mouth. So I’m guessing that was a big factor in why he chose this role. He basically gets to live out his dream – being the guy who *literally* discovers that there are no WMDs in Iraq. But that’s not all that’s going on here. There’s another trait that A-listers love in a character: The “My way or the highway” character. Characters that stand up to authority or refuse to follow orders will always appeal to actors because most actors are rebels themselves (they all rebelled against more conventional career choices when they gave acting a shot). You’ll notice that a lot of Matt Damon characters are like this, starting all the way back with Good Will Hunting.

Actor: Ben Stiller
The movie: Greenberg
The Part: A formally suicidal man who moves into his brother’s house.
Why he likely chose it: A lot of our funniest actors are also the most tortured. Judging by the roles Stiller plays outside the comedic arena, I’m guessing he’s one of these people. Greenberg is all about a character who hates the world around him, hates the people around him, hates his own life. He complains and whines about the most mundane of societal etiquettes. My guess is that Stiller is using this character as a surrogate to deal with similar feelings and frustrations. Indeed, a lot of actors use their roles as therapy, as a way to tackle things that they haven’t been able to resolve in their personal lives.

CONCLUSIONS
One of my biggest weaknesses as a writer is not seeing my story through an actor’s eyes. I just try to write the best story possible. That’s a problem because your script usually doesn’t get sold or made unless it has an A-List attachment. So you have to ask yourself when writing a script: Is this a role an actor would want to play? I’m not sure we can make any universal conclusions here, but I did pick up on some trends that might help us answer this question.

First of all, the role has to be challenging in some capacity. True, many of these actors are slapping down product in the middle of the summer where mediocrity reigns supreme, but that doesn’t mean they want neutered down roles. These thespians have gotten to the top of the heap by playing dozens if not hundreds of characters. They’re looking for something new and different. Brad Pitt plays a character not only at many different ages in his life, but plays those ages on a reverse timeframe. That’s challenging stuff. Denzel Washington plays a character who rarely speaks, who emotes only with his eyes and his actions. That’s a challenge. DiCaprio operates in a dreamworld where he’s imprisoned his wife. Every time he then goes into that dreamworld, he’s faced with a sea of conflicting emotions.

Next up, I think your character needs to be heroic. A lot of these characters are saving other people. I hate to state the obvious but actors are very egotistical. They want to play God and save others. There’s nothing more heroic than that. Just remember, heroism doesn’t always mean stopping an asteroid from hitting earth. It can mean delivering the last bible across a post-apocalyptic U.S. It can mean committing suicide to have your organs save seven other people. Whether you’re saving a nation or saving others, look for ways to make your characters heroic.

The last thing I noticed was that characters should have something going on inside of them as well as outside. Running around shooting people is fun but it’s not stretching any acting muscles. You gotta give’em some toys to play with upstairs. Benjamin Button has an ongoing physical transformation as well as having to deal with the realities of being different from everyone else. Denzel Washington gets to shred people into sushi yet must learn to open himself up to others. Tom Cruise gets to fly around on cars but still must learn to be selfless before he can find happiness. Note how in two of these cases (Cruise and Washington’s) the internal stuff is tied to the character arc and in Benjamin’s case, it’s more of a general internal battle that never arcs. That’s fine. Whether you’re arcing your character or not, at the very least, give them some kind of issue they’re struggling with internally.

Now by no means is this a conclusive study. The sampling is too small. I encourage you to look at some of your own favorite actors, the ones you envision playing heroes in your scripts, and break down their last ten roles like I did here. See if you can find any patterns in their choices. That could be the key to making them say yes to you.

The most important thing I take away from this is, before you write a single word in your next screenplay, ask yourself if an A-List actor would be interested in playing the hero. I believe this is such an important element to a saleable screenplay that from now on, I’m adding a new feature to my reviews. If the script I’m reviewing has an A-List attachment, I’m going to discuss why that A-Lister probably took the role. Now what are you waiting for? Get back to writing.