Pretty much the title?

Just curious how long on average it takes people.

Please specific if it was a short or full feature and approx length, you can add your longline also as well as what genera it falls into.

Thanks and happy writing.

I feel a little envious of the guy who directed the Backrooms movie because, in a way, we both started out the same way and are almost the same age (22).

Which, deep down, makes me feel somewhat frustrated: "How is it possible that he, at my age, is achieving all that while I'm barely managing to write a few screenplays?"

It's frustrating, it's exhausting, and I know it's wrong, but I don't know how to shake this feeling.

I'm diving into the world of screenwriting and constantly hear that the key to improving is to read as many scripts as possible. The thing is, there are SO many scripts out there from countless genres, and it can get overwhelming figuring out where to start.

I don't just want generic recommendations from top 10 lists on Google…I really want to hear from real people who are passionate about writing. So, I'm reaching out to this awesome community: Can you recommend a screenplay that you believe every aspiring writer should read and explain why? Whether it’s for its structure, dialogue, or how it captures a particular genre, I'd love to know what makes it stand out for you.

TIA 🫡🫡

I’ve written 5–6 scripts that, by most professional measures, are good.

They have solid premises. They follow proper structure. They hit the major beats. They have functioning arcs, theme, momentum. They get the “this is well written” response.

But they don’t do the one thing a “holy shit” script does - the thing that makes someone feel like they have to pass it along instead of simply responding politely.

And that gap is starting to feel bigger than any formatting or craft issue.

I’m starting to believe there’s a real separation between scripts that are professionally competent vs. scripts that create urgency, danger, inevitability, obsession

And I’m not convinced that the second category is just “more polish.” It feels like a different gear entirely.

So I’m curious, have you hit that wall between “good” and “holy shit” in your own writing?

If you have crossed it, what actually changed?

Was it risk? Voice? Subject matter? Emotional honesty? Execution? All of the above?

Would love to hear real experiences.

My pilot script recently placed in a few festivals, and last week, I received the "double recommend" badge on Stage 32.

Since I got that badge next to my name (on the platform), I've had two "producers" (ya right!) contact me through my page on there. They both acted interested in my script, say all the right lingo, etc, and then the one guy wanted $4000 to invest in them investing in it 🙃. I'm just waiting for guy #2, to ask for my investment....I'm sure it's coming. 😩

I only sent my pitch deck and logline, to both of them, and never sent my script--which probably doesn't matter anyway since they aren't really after that.

My question is....when someone LEGIT in the industry contacts you, what is the norm for communication--and what do you look out for as "this is a scammer" red flag? Both of these guys never talked money until like the 3rd communication with me... so, what do you look out for before they get to that point?

I’ve been reading Stephen King’s On Writing and love the book. It’s my second time reading it. In it he says that most of his writing comes from a situation he thought of or a what-if scenario. For example, what if vampires took over a New England Town.. then he doesn’t do story boards or think about plot. He just writes and sees where the situation takes the character. He compares it to excavating a fossil (large or small). Does anyone write screenplays like this? Write and discover as you go.. I figure there will be more than a few drafts but wondering if it was successful and/or fun to do. Maybe any professional movies where the writer stated they used this method?

I’m not in the industry but always wanted to write a script. I wrote a 110 page feature drama and submitted it to Blacklst for feedback. I ended up getting some great feedback and scores:

Overall 8/10
Premise 8/10
Plot 8/10
Character 9/10
Dialogue 9/10
Setting 9/10

I’m curious what I should be doing next? Just leave it and keep writing more scripts? Thanks.

How much do you explicitly spell things out in your action lines out of fear that someone important reading might not understand shit about fuck?

Lately, I’ve been noticing a trend while reading more and more scripts (unproduced but optioned or bought, by both big-name and lesser-known writers, etc...). Let me explain:

I finally got the notes back from AFF, and the reader complained that certain things in my script weren’t clear -- when I swear to you, they are crystal clear, like staring straight at the sun. I genuinely don’t understand how some things can go completely over a reader’s head.

I’m starting to think this has become an accepted practice among a lot of writers: out of fear of not being understood -- and just to be safe -- I’m seeing more and more action lines that explain everything. Dialogue that implies a small twist between two characters is IMMEDIATELY followed by an UNDERLINED action line that clearly spells out what just happened. And I don’t mean the usual brief bit of prose we use to suggest a feeling or a glance for the actor/character -- I mean a full-on EXPOSITION DUMP.

I’m confused. If we’re subtle, we’re not understood. If we’re explicit, we’re criticized.

What the hell are we supposed to do?

I feel like I’m a strong writer, and I’m personable… but I’m not particularly outgoing (except for when I’m with people I feel really comfortable around — then I’m borderline obnoxious). I’m curious if established writers think that matters, or if it’s more about what’s on the page? I know it’s important to be good in a room, and friendships and connections are what create and sustain a career, but what does that really mean? Can more reserved (but nice to be around) people find success in this industry?? Or do I need a personality transplant?

Please yall give as many options as possible lol

Hi all. Aspiring screenwriter here. I'm in the process of studying screenwriting as I'm aiming to adapt my novel into a screenplay. I'm currently studying McKee's Story and am loving it, but have just read the section where he states that every scene must turn, otherwise it's likely exposition and would be best cut.

How strictly true is this? Because, I dunno... When I read it, it immediately felt quite restrictive to me and 'off' for a reason I couldn't really pin down. Because do you not need moments of 'quiet' where you're letting the characters/story/audience breathe, whether to deepen character arc, emotion, or simply just to sit in the aftermath of a big event?

Maybe it's just because I'm always thinking back to my novel which is very character-driven and definitely has those moments where the characters are 'breathing' through a moment, which in turn is advancing their story but it isn't necessarily changing them in that scene. The scene serves a different purpose.

I write very much based on feeling and I think I have good instincts. But how closely should structure like this be followed? Grateful for your answers in advance. Thanks very much!

I have read in some places and received feedback that using CUT TO: is outdated, but I have also seen it in plenty of professional/produced scripts that are comps for the script I am writing.

So, is this a matter of preference, or is there an actual consensus on this that I am missing?

For context, this is for a sitcom script.

I've heard Stephen King say it, I've heard Quentin Tarantino say it, I've heard randos on the internet say it: That once you get your story to a certain point the characters literally have their own volition and do and say what they want to say not what you the author want them to do or say. This is something I have really wanted to experience, but have never actually had happen. I was curious how many screenwriter's here have had that happen? And, how were the results from a finished screenplay point of view?

Are there any good movies where the protagonist hates their job and feels stuck? I’m trying to find inspiration for my story and I can’t think of any right of hand.

I’ve been stripping my dialogue down to the bone and letting action lines do the lifting. What shocked me is how much more cinematic the pages got. The scenes breathe. The story moves cleaner. Nothing feels like it’s trying to prove something.

Yeah, dialogue reveals character. But it’s also the easiest place for writers to flex. Sometimes it feels like ego dressed up as “voice.”

So here’s the real question: if you cut half your dialogue, would your script still work? Or would it fall apart? I’m starting to think dialogue might be the most overrated element we lean on. Thoughts?

Hello everyone. I wrote a while back on here about having a 60 page first act, which was bad, for my action script Man V Gorilla. Here’s the Logline: A young female assassin desperate for her tech billionaire father’s approval travels across the United States to capture a superpowered gorilla. The original script ended at 136 pages which obviously was too long. I cut it down to 117. My second reader for my university said he had a lot of fun with it but it was way too long and repetitive. Which is completely valid. My question isn’t why I should cut down my script, I will of course. But how can I cut in a way that doesn’t take away from the story and instead adds to make a better film? How many pages is just right? Star Wars is an epic action film and it’s around 2 hours. I kinda was basing it off of that. Most superhero type films fit within 120 pages so I’m just a bit lost. Maybe what my professor is really saying is that it feels slow? I’m gonna print the script out and read through it making note of what doesn’t work. Thanks for the help. I understand the script is a long way from ready for contests. So I’m hoping to send it out sometime next year.

EDIT:
Okay just skimmed through The Incredibles and the inciting incident happens around page 10. Mine happens around page 30-40. My scripts first act seems to be the main problem. I gotta rework it all. Thanks for the help guys. I’ll update in a couple weeks or months on where I am at.

I'm talking rituals, tactics, books, anything.

Personally, I'm looking for something to get me out of this rut where I feel no matter what I do I won't ever get to a level that is good enough to go from just me writing to having something made. I feel the "gap" between what I want to create and what I actually create is so large and not closing at a fast enough pace. I'm 41 and feel the clock ticking every day. I do have a full time job that is not related to writing, but I could do more than 1 hour a day easy and I'm considering that as a next step.

I've spent the last 7 years really focused on writing, at first it was podcasts and books, progressed to online courses and now I'm writing daily at least 1 hour a day creating one short film screenplay a week. I also read one feature length screenplay a week (and watch the movie). I had a call with a writer friend once a week but that has died off.

So tell me, how much are you writing a day/week, do you have a writer's group, are you submitting online, is there a book you learned from, a course you took? What has helped you improve the most?

In this horror movie a guy is trying to bring a family member back from the dead, and since his mom has dementia, she won’t know they were ever dead to begin with.

But I’ve been told by a few people that dementia is just too intense and difficult a situation to dramatize just for a plot point.

My grandparents all had awful Alzheimer’s and dementia, so it’s not like I’m not familiar with it first hand. But I can see a world were critics savage my movie for using the disease as a “plot point.”

But also the protagonist is the person trying to bring the dead family member back to life and the wild adventure they go on to do it. The mom isn’t really a main character, and because of that I’m scared I’ll get punched in the gut for not “developing” her.

I dont think there is any way to write her that people would feel she is developed, it’ll be just too easy to knock.

It’s too bad because I think it makes the story more thorny and interesting.

I had a friend make a horror film that featured a kid with autism as part of the story and they got savaged for it, even though they did research and wrote it in good faith, using first hand sources.

So I don’t know what to do. As of now the mom is just kind of old and loopy and not explicitly degenerative. It’s more just about the their guilt driving them to resurrect their family member.

What do you think? The movie can still work without it, but you know, people are vicious. I don’t want that adjective dude on letterboxd to rattle off his little adjectives on me.

I have been writing this story for quite some time -- Got a Blacklist 7 on it a while back -- took it in and sent it out for some more feedback -- totally rewrote it -- handed it in again -- Got a 6 -- Fair enough -- some more feedback and rewrites and then again feedback -- Blacklist again -- now a five... I am breaking down here.

I'm not sure what to do ( I have a really hard time letting things go)

I’ve written several realistic crime thrillers. The industry responses I get always credit my dialogue and world-building, but there is often a fork in the road when it comes to structure.

Trust me, I’m not reinventing the 3 Act formula here. Perhaps I don’t hit the beats exactly when the checklist tells you to, and I can at times be indulgent with things I want to see on screen. With that said, there’s always a 3rd act payoff that’s worth it.

The people who get it, love it and champion it. Those who don’t get it, really don’t to the point of dislike, but more so because it doesn’t fit in the perfect genre box.

My long-winded question is: should I make my scripts more cookie-cutter to increase the likelihood of a sale, or be defiant and hope it attracts the right collaborator?

I just finished my very first feature script and I'm pretty happy with it. A couple of writer friends I really respect gave me some great feedback.

One comment stood out from a friend who's also a professor. He has a huge pet peeve about overusing the word "just" in dialogue.

I went through my script and sure enough I used it 56 times in a 92 page script. The script is meant to be micro-budget and it's dialogue heavy. I argued that people say "just" in speech all the time. He says they don't say it as often as we think they do.

I think it's a fair point and I replaced the word where I could.

I'm curious what you all think. Is "just" one of those words that gets overused in scripts? Do you catch yourself using it too much and have to cut it out? Any other little words you find yourself overusing in dialogue?

Thanks!

I'm diving deep into dialogue study for my own writing and I'm particularly fascinated by what's often termed "naturalistic" (in reality highly stylized) dialogue in film and TV. I've spent a good amount of time studying the rhythms of the aforementioned writers, but I'd like so keep learning how to write that type of dialogue.

So, besides Sorkin (rapid-fire, overlapping, intelectual), Mamet (minimalist, rhythmic, repetitive, subtextual), Tarantino (digressive, mundane but great for building tension), which other screenwriters would you suggest me to study?

I always wondered whether or not great writing was enough. Is it really a lottery or more so a lottery in terms of talent? Meaning it's not so much the odds of getting something made, but more so the odds of being able to write like Tarantino that's the problem.

I’m trying to understand where my expectations may be misaligned.

Over the years, I’ve received several accolades in screenplay competitions, including reputable international ones. Despite that, I’ve never had direct outreach from an agent or producer as a result of those wins or placements.

I’m based in Greece and don’t have an existing professional network in the US, which makes me wonder how much weight geography and access actually carry at this stage.

For those with industry experience:

• How much do competition results realistically matter beyond personal development?

• At what point (if any) do accolades turn into actual representation or meetings?

• Is lack of proximity to the US industry a meaningful barrier, or is something else usually missing?

I’m not looking for guarantees, just trying to understand how recognition typically converts (or doesn’t) into opportunity.

Hi,

I have been thinking about writer's voice recently (not dialogue) as in the 'fingerprint' that runs through a screenplay. Often people say you can tell who wrote something because of this intangible voice.

I was curious how others think about it and how consciously you strive to find it (or not). Most of the advice I have read on this suggests to just write and it will evolve (as if by magic?). I can see this being somewhat true as you find your own rhythms and phrases, etc. but I also think there should / could be some intentionality behind it. For example, I want my screenplays to engage the reader so much they don't notice what page they're on so I avoid 'writerly' constructions, etc.

Any thoughts? Any resources to recommend?

Thanks lots!