What do Script Writers doHow are screenwriters doing?
So what's the big deal between a screenwriter and a filmmaker? So where does the work of a screenwriter end and where does a stage designer begin? So how does a filmmaker use a script? How come a screenwriter can't make a film?
Indeed, you could say the same for any imaginative subject - most imaginative individuals I know don't just keep away. Simultaneously, the direction of a movie is another ability than the composition of a movie, and good authors are not necessarily good or not. But the fact is that I have seen writers trying to make their own (good) screenplays and not doing a good work.
It is likely that there are a multitude of elements, such as the nature of the person, the degree of expertise (everyone needs exercise to be a good director) and much more. It' really difficult to determine qualities for what makes a "good director" or author, I've seen a lot of folks who do it well.
Anyway, you might think that the author knows his own script better than anyone else, but actually I know writers who don't seem to be able to see what's good about their own work. Here the young couple of the film' s eye can be helpful. You have no emotive luggage and react to the script like someone who reads a script for the first tim.
Using writers, although I have seen that they think they are typing some kind of film, but actually end up with something else. You could try to shoot the film the way you wanted instead of looking at the script in an objective way and asking what the best thing to do is.
It' fun because the same thing happens to filmmakers when it comes to filming. If the movie is filmed once, then it is, so to say, "what it is". In this case, the writer is the one who tries to keep the filmmaker from holding on to a certain place, which "really is the keys to the comprehension of what the characters went through when they were 4-month-olds.
I' d say that writers in general have a tendency to be quite valuable about their own work, perhaps more than any filmmaker I've known. That' s not really good for a picture, because the script often has to be brutalized to get a good picture out on the other side.
This seems to be the scarce person in whom the qualities of creativeness and the capacity to be recklessly truthful with oneself are equally present. In this context, it is interesting that you have a tendency to get filmmakers and filmmakers, but hardly any of them. You' ll get write-writers who are deeply into it.
However, they work more like a script writer, Kurosawa's write was to get a number of authors to make their own versions of a scenes. They did this for every shot in the film, then he chose his favorites for the film. There is something about them, I think, and it seems as if there is an almost compensatory range between "writing ability" and "editing ability", as if they were in some way contradictory mindsets.
Also, very important to keep in mind that for some films, it is the contrasts between the author?s and the director?s styles that actually makes the movie good. Look at the collaboration between the author Charlie Kauffman and others. He has a rather dark musical genre, but if you compare him with the fantasy of filmmakers like Michel Gondry or Spike Jonze, you get interesting results.
But the point is that someone who interprets the script'differently' from the author is not necessarily a wrong-do. Have a look at the Saving Mr Banks for a really interesting feature on just this one. I have worked as a D.P. and cutter on a number of movies and each of the filmmakers I have worked with has been so different.
Movie is a very cooperative media and what counts is that the movie is done well. Irrespective of how it happened, it does not make any difference who made what contribution.