Archive for November, 2009

Cinders and laws of pantomime.

Saturday, November 14th, 2009

It was another packed week at the LCW with people forced into corners as a fresh stock of actors took to the stage.  With Christmas just round the corner it seems fitting that this week’s feature script was a modern retelling of Cinderella dubbed Cinders.   The finished product is due to be performed in Primrose Gardens, Belsize Park on the 12th, 13th, 18th (adults only special) 19th and 20th of December (more details soon). The big lesson for other writers at the LCW to learn from this reading is how beneficial a polished cast actors are to a reading. Although we try to cast scripts ahead of the meetings, we don’t have the time to rehearse them, so to some extent much of the reading is done on sight. Sarah and Tom took the time to put together a cast who were fully aware of what the roles required and were thus able to give a confident performance.

Moving onto the script itself, there was much debate about traditional pantomime laws (someone said the army had to be involved, someone else said you can no longer throw out sweets as health and safety wants to prevent blindness by Haribo). A phrase often used is “You must know the rules before you can break them”, and in the case of ‘Cinders’ while there was a nod towards the panto genre, there was much that seemed missing.  There was no audience participation song, no cries of “behind you you”, very few double entendres and the Ugly Sisters were woefully underused as villains to rile up the crowd and make Cinders’ life a misery. But all of these points are easily fixed in rewrites and after all that is why a script comes to the group.

Structurally the script suffered from a large ensemble cast all fighting for attention.  The traditional role of Buttons was split between him and a new character dubbed ‘Narrator’, Buttons came off worse in this deal.  Instead of being the best friend and confident of Cinders he just wandered in every now and again giving him very little opportunity to interact with the audience or become a character we cared about.   In this humble writers opinion the two characters would be better off if they merged into one serving the duel purpose of guiding the audience and also showing us why we care about what happens to Cinders.

As mentioned before the ugly sisters were underused, they should be more involved in Cinder’s miserable life so we can see why she wants to escape to a better life.  However this use of introducing something and not using it to full effect within the story was perhaps the biggest problem.  With so many ideas being thrown on the table many of them felt like weird insider jokes rather than tools of story telling. The lesson here is if you introduce an idea, you should pay it off. In Cinders one of the characters can read minds, it is repeated over and over again and in the end the skill is used to find Cinders in the basement… except like a real mind reader, he only claims that she is in there after she burps and someone says “that must be her!”  So there was no reason for the character to have this skill.  A comparison would a Bond film where Bond gets given a car that can go underwater and then gets in a boat to cross a river. Sometimes these things remain in a script because it is hard to bite the bullet and kill your darlings, but sometimes it has to be done.

On the plus side Cinders is an ambitious project with a very talented cast, there are some fantastic characters such as the Supreme Makeover Fairy (an excellent modernisation of the fairy god mother) who really lift the script up.  I have no doubt that the production will have successful run, so stay tuned for details in the near future.

Finally there is no pantomime law that says the army has to be involved.

Questionable Character

Wednesday, November 11th, 2009

After all the work we put into developing our series, we are still surprised by the revelations we have and the mistakes we made.  First we had to re-write a major A story in episode 3, episode 1 needed re-constructive surgery on the first ten pages and the main character in episode 2 was woefully underwritten.  Since I have already blogged about episode 3, today I will turn to episode 2.

Episode 2

On reading the new draft we were struck by how absent the main character was in the script. So we went back over the pages tracking what the character did and how he was feeling in each scene and how he moved the story forward.  Taking those story notes a redraft was done and we still had the same problem. Using Final Draft’s statistic feature we were able to identify that that main character was talking for about 10% of the script, while his friend clocked in at 20% of the script.  Imagine Robin over shadowing Batman to that extent and you understand why this is an unacceptable situation. Now we started to question whether we had a bigger issue, did we need to rewrite the storyline or were we missing something.

Before sitting down to write all our storylines we spent many weeks crafting well rounded characters.  Sadly for you, our technique is a trade secret that shall only be released when I am drunk and good luck trying to understand me then. However, put basically we try to explore what the character would be like in different situations. So meeting someone for the first time would he be cocky or shy, when things are going well what are the things the character does to ensure that state. All of that provides a great tool when writing, but a problem arises from characters who are more introverted. For the character in question we had used words like ‘shy’, ‘avoid’, ‘ wet’, ‘doesn’t speak up’, ‘good listener’, ‘doubting’, ‘sensitive’ to describe him; many of these words are very inactive making it difficult for us to do much with the character. So we went back to drawing board  to explore ways we could make him active.  So ‘avoidance’ became ‘avoidance by distraction’, ‘doesn’t speak up’ became ‘ struggles to speak up’.  Then knowing the character is heavily defined by his imagination we looked at how that manifested itself in good ways bad ways.  So his imagination when used for good becomes ‘enchanting’, when used for bad it becomes  ‘makes a crisis out of drama’ or he becomes a ‘romantic fantasist’.  All these new words gave us more character to play with making him drive the plot rather than just getting pulled along by the louder characters.

So all that sounds easy, but what you miss is how much we fight over words. ‘Enchanting’ for example was a big battle, we came up with words like ‘captivating’, ‘enrapturing’, ‘magical’ but none of these words said what we wanted.  The idea was that character’s imagination is not for show, but people are drawn to him.  The other words suggested hinted at manipulation, we didn’t want people trapped by his imagination, rather we wanted the mesmerised, they could leave any time, but they don’t want to. Take that debate and now apply that to every word we came up with and you start to understand why takes a day… or not.


Graham Does Writing is proudly powered by WordPress, Install WordPress. web hosting
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

Privacy Policy