SCRIPTWRITING: IN SEARCH OF GOLD (WILLIAM GOLDMAN TO BE EXACT)

I feel really honored when another writer asks for my opinions on their scripts because there’s so much talent out there! Often, I give a page-by-page breakdown on:

• storyline + structure
• characters
• format
• style
• dialogue

There’s an adage in the film sector that’s attributed to Mr. Goldman: NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING.
For me, this wisdom can’t actually be true because if you read some of the scripts I have…writers know all sorts of obscurities about history, philosophy, politics, science, the construct of the CIA, how men and women are supposed to fall in love…

Following is an example of initial script development notes which I provided to a talented American Ph.D. who’s written a script about Hitler.

************************************************************

These are some of the most analytical notes I am ever likely to write and for good reason. It’s just as well I’m educated because…

Any script that is about Hitler in 1923, has its German protagonist compared to Kant instead of Nietzsche and discourses Catholicism with such depth tells the reader it’s AMBITIOUS. This is an intelligent and well-paced drama with the potential to be great, but I have BIG BIG issues with it and it may be too philosophically clever and dialogue intense in parts to find an audience. Alas, I may be clever enough for the challenge…so here goes. I REALLY HOPE IT HELPS THE CLEVER CLOGS WRITER!

The premise is highly original: an examination of Hitler’s failed coup d’etat of 1923, its consequences and the seeding of his propaganda (against the Jewish Weimar Republic and Communists) long before WWII through the eyes of a newspaper editor, Dr Fritz Gerlich. By rooting the story in 1923 instead of the usual 1938-1945 period, the audience is privy to a previously unexamined aspect of Hitler’s life and lies, including the mysterious suicide of his half-niece. Gerlich’s characterisation is strong and distinct: the voice of Kantian reason. His personal campaign to mock Hitler and highlight his travesties is well-conceived and realised.

However, this otherwise solid script is let down by VERNACULAR, VERNACULAR, VERNACULAR and the misconceived portrayal of Hitler himself during the first 15 pages.

German patterns of speech are similar to English English rules, not American English, and although the dialogue is excellent in places (notably Putzi’s and the putsch speeches), it is sorely let down and under-developed in others. English journalists in the 1920s did not use “old boy”, they used “old chap”.

In particular, Hitler comes across as weak and inconsistent during his first meeting with Gerlich. He makes bold prejudicial statements about the Jewish race, but then uses words like “grace” and a deferential tone re Conrad the Second? SORRY, BUT NEIN NEIN NEIN! When he speaks of his mother’s dignified grace during cancer P24, fine but NOT HERE!

From the get-go, the character development of Hitler SHOULD indicate his dismissiveness of his predecessors and his forthright nature. He is directive, never reactive because already he’s a man possessed by absolute conviction in his beliefs and actions.

He could also be charming. That’s what made him a powerful orator. This could be demonstrated when he’s introduced by saying Dr Gerlich’s doctoral thesis was “excellent” or “superior” (This then hints at Hitler’s obsession with superiority – of literature, art and race).

There are also MANY typos, missing conjunctions and absent words throughout, e.g. P 1 THE mail wrapper and GoEring (e is needed unless you use umlaut on the o). Instead of fine-combing all 110+ pages, I will make broad improvement suggestions on the first 10 pages and some glaring mistakes as a guide for the next draft. I hope this helps.

Detailed page-by-page breakdown follows.

Now…onto the tone and emotional content of this GARGANTUAN! Firstly, the speeches by Hitler and his henchmen hit the emotional nail. They do incite the passions of Hitler believers.

There are also nice touches between Gerlich-Oliver, especially the exchange about Catholicism P48 but MUCH MUCH MORE emotion needs to be injected in Gerlich’s relationship with his wife. Otherwise, how can the audience understand her despair when his eyeglasses appear in the post? Also, as a husband who knows she cannot conceive he would surely be more sympathetic and gentle towards her? Even Kant ADORED his wife!

FEMALES IN THE AUDIENCE WILL FALL ASLEEP OR LEAVE IF ALL THEY HAVE ARE KEYNOTE NAZI SPEECHES AND NO AFFECTION!

Next…The Theresa strand is a good way of exploring Gerlich’s concept of belief (religious as opposed to political). In the eyes of some Germans, Hitler was regarded as messianic and it is interesting to have Gerlich think about the real Messiah via this story conduit. Also allows revelations about how he draws on his renewed faith to write the truth about Hitler.

FINALLY…The denouement of Gerlich being found guilty of high treason and beaten to death whereas earlier Hitler, convicted of the same accusation, is only imprisoned (where ironically he writes ‘Mein Kampf’) is simply tragic. WE NEED MORE GRIEF FROM SOPHIE. HER HUSBAND HAS BEEN IN DACHAU FOR OVER A YEAR…HOW IS SHE COPING? WHAT DOES HER TORMENT FEEL LIKE? WHAT NEWS DOES SHE RECEIVE?

All in all, this is one of the most intelligent and demanding scripts I’ve read so far and I hope my suggestions will make it an even stronger script. Best of luck with it!

************************************************************

It’s always more advisable to be positive and helpful and to highlight improvement possibilities than to be completely negative about a script. There are usually redeeming factors — whether in the plotline or character development or simply originality of concept.

************************************************************

Link: The Rise of Evil, CBS programme