Scripts for short films

[Jon O'Brien]

I want to start making short narrative (drama) films. If any turn out good enough, I'd like to start entering them in short film festivals.

All of them will be shot on film -- Super 8, 16mm, or 35mm 2-perf. Most likely on S16.

I'm good at camera operating and lighting. I've film-tested the cameras and lenses. I have good experience directing.

I've figured out how to get the film processed and scanned, and I'm getting better all the time at editing and colour grading.

It's been a long road... but I'm now ready to start making proper films. The real deal.

... except for one little thing ...

I'm not much good at coming up with stories. If I can get a good short film synopsis or basic plan, I can fill out the details of the shots -- I'm good at that bit.

I just need some basic scripts to work with.

How do you go about getting a short film script written? I've contacted the Screenwriters Guild in Sydney but no response so far. I suspect they might consider my request for information on how to get a script written to be beneath their institution's dignity as my "productions" would sound to them more like an amateur thing. And maybe it is an amateur thing. But I don't care. Because I'm determined to film some short films, whether amateur or not. 

Unusually for a short film maker, I'm first and foremost a cinematographer. As someone said to me the other day, at Panavision Queensland on the Gold Coast (during a film loading workshop), it's unusual for a camera operator/cinematographer to be the driving force behind creating a film. Normally a director, producer, or actor is the energy behind the production, and a camera operator is then engaged to film the production.

But, because I'm 'camera-focused', or camera-centred, I don't necessarily know how to shape stories -- I only know how to film them. Thus, I need help with getting a story together. I know the generalities of the sorts of films I want to make -- the types of stories, the approximate number of actors, the types of locations, and the general genre. But I need a script writer or some type of screen writer to actually come up with a story that I can film.

My films would of necessity be quite short. For example, somewhere between 4 minutes and eight minutes long. They'd, in effect, be like the 'Haiku poems' of the film world. Short and simple, but with meaning.

So, any advice on how to go about getting a good story together for a short narrative film?

 

 

Edited April 11 by Jon O'Brien

[Tim Chang]

Hi Jon

Try this site. Plenty of unproduced scripts by a range of writers from amateur to professional (so a great variation in quality). Free and easy to read as a guest, but I think you'll have to sign up to the site in order to contact the writers you're interested in to obtain a license. Most of the writers are unproduced and many in the past have charged only a paltry fee (or even free) for a license in exchange for screenwriting credit, but that's entirely up to them.

https://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl

Tim

[Jon O'Brien]

Thank you Tim!

It looks just the ticket.

[Max Field]

I could write you a short comedy script if you want one

[Jon O'Brien]

Comedy is good. Definitely an option. I will think some more on this.

[Jon O'Brien]

I take back what I wrote at the start of this thread, saying I can't come up with a story. I've added script writing to the long list of film production jobs/roles I've taken on. I've got a great little one page synopsis written which I will now turn into a screenplay. After communicating back and forth with various film organisations and individual filmmakers I've finally realised that I will have to do everything myself when I start making short films. I've found that fellow filmmakers don't want a film shooter in their midst -- they are all digital shooters and I can only guess they're concerned that my films, shot on film, might look rather more interesting on the screeen than some of their digitally-shot films. And I've found that everyone else, the non-filmmakers, really truly have no idea that movies are still shot on film. And so they don't get it, and just stare at me and blink, when I say I shoot on Kodak motion picture film. The light is on but no one's home -- that sort of look. I tried to join an amateur/semi-pro movie making organisation recently and received a rude reply from their admin, saying their club stopped shooting on film back in 2010, and, basically, giving me a strong hint to nick off. So, I replied, and said, "Fine. Bye."

You can't make this stuff up. Reality is truly stranger than fiction. I've offered to shoot people's films for free. They only need to pay for the filmstock and processing and scanning. I give up. I will ignore other filmmakers from now on, as they're not worth the energy and time.

The only thing I need now is actors and locations. I can probably find the actors and the locations all on my own.

Edited Wednesday at 12:15 AM by Jon O'Brien

[Tyler Purcell]

Damn, yea I totally feel ya. This is a very common issue with creatives; not being able to prove their skills. I work with people all the time who are in the same boat, in fact one of them just wrapped their first narrative production on 4 perf 35mm. Very excited for them because I know that feeling and just completing something you worked hard to make, is a great feeling. Here in LA, it's almost comical how many people are doing "spec" shoots like this, just friends getting together with some actors making something quick and dirty to build a demo reel. If that industry stopped, I'd lose quite a bit of business because we scan a lot of those films. 

With that said, I've been involved in the local community here in LA for a long time, so finding scripts is so easy, it's almost like the streets are paved with them. So I understand how frustrating it can be if you can't find something to shoot. Where I do write a lot of scripts, I've found my personal work to be overly complex to make, which is the main reason I haven't personally invested in any of them outside of multiple drafts and shelving them. With SUPER short films like you're talking about, I think other writers won't take you seriously. Sure you can probably find something from one of the multitude of websites, but conversing with people directly to help, maybe more challenging. 

So if I were in your shoes, I'd take my time and write something. The main reason is simply due to your experiences and access to locations/people. As the filmmaker, your personal experiences should be in the story and you should frame it around what you have available resource wise. You may spin your wheels for weeks trying to find something shootable for the budget, crew, cast and locations you have available. It's far easier to get a list of things you know, places you can use, story concepts that work and mix it all together, especially when you're talking about 5 - 7 pages. Funny enough, I'm writing a story right now that has literally no on-screen audible dialog, partially because I'm going to be working with non-actors and partially because of shooting speed, you can do one take and move on, when its just physical actions happening on camera. 

I do like super short subject films, I think it's the best way to get your feet wet, hold audiences attention AND make your money spread over multiple subjects, rather than doing one big film. I have made the mistake of making "epic" short films way too many times, they just don't play because they're impossible to book at festivals and peoples attention span is too narrow these days. So being under the 12 - 13 minute cut-off time, is smart and I would try to find a script that has little to no dialog, so you don't need to worry as much about actor quality OR dealing with flubbing dialog lines. 

Anyway, those are my .02 cents. 

 

 

[Albion Hockney]

all the process of making films, the lights, the cameras —the part us technicians love is in service of artists telling stories.

the writing/the idea ....the thing on screen. this is the most important part of the whole deal.

 

 

[Jon O'Brien]

For fellow travellers on this journey, coming along after this, here is one little tip that is the golden standard for discerning who is a good person to network with -- someone who is serious about wanting to collaborate with you.

Here is the tip.

If they're scammers in some way, or not serious, or not true filmmakers, or they're jealous, or wanting only money out of you, they will in clear terms indicate to you that you should "reach out" to them. They will not contact you, other than to say that. They will not call you by your name, they will call you "mate" or some northern hemisphere equivalent. They will tend not to acknowledge you as a real person with a name. They will say to you or hint to you that you need to pay a membership fee and join their organisation.

They will say "reach out to ME/to my organisation ..." You will have to do all the "reaching out," as they call it. And you will do that for months. If, being naive, you do pay and join their organisation, you wil be ignored, and then you will leave if you're smart.

They are not worth the time. Ditch them and move on. Anyone who is serious will get off their bums and write an email to you or ring you up. If you have something real and concrete and of quality to offer, the truth is that they should be seeking you out. The arts has many scammers and wolves in sheep's clothing walking around pretending to be the 'real thing'. Ha!

Edited Wednesday at 11:00 PM by Jon O'Brien

[Jon O'Brien]

Another thing about organisations that claim to be there to help filmmakers. In some or perhaps many cases the truth is that these organisations have a core team of production people, the 'inner sanctum' group. They have one or two cinematographers that gets all or most of the work. The organisation is there to benefit this core group. They get money and status and they seek to control the local scene. Do better than them. Make better films than they do.

Edited Wednesday at 11:17 PM by Jon O'Brien

[Jon O'Brien]

2 hours ago, Albion Hockney said:

all the process of making films, the lights, the cameras —the part us technicians love is in service of artists telling stories.

the writing/the idea ....the thing on screen. this is the most important part of the whole deal.

 

 

Well, yes, but yesterday I went to see The Chosen at the cinema. Of course, the story is crucial in a narrative film. The cinematography was so good (using fantastic Cooke i series lenses, both spherical and anamorphic) that it really made that picture come alive. You can tell a great story sort of well, or you can tell it incredibly well. I think filmmakers in their current rush to say that story/idea/writing is the be all and end all have lately drifted somewhat from the wisdom of knowing that how well a story is told is absolutely critical. I feel that cinematography has become somewhat devalued since the digital revolution. There's an attitude that it's more a technical thing than anything else. Good cinematography is art. I mean by that the traditional meaning of art, going back many hundreds of years, not the modern meaning of art.

But sure, I get your point.

[Jon O'Brien]

7 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

".. As the filmmaker, your personal experiences should be in the story and you should frame it around what you have available resource wise. You may spin your wheels for weeks trying to find something shootable for the budget, crew, cast and locations you have available. It's far easier to get a list of things you know, places you can use, story concepts that work and mix it all together, especially when you're talking about 5 - 7 pages. Funny enough, I'm writing a story right now that has literally no on-screen audible dialog, partially because I'm going to be working with non-actors and partially because of shooting speed, you can do one take and move on, when its just physical actions happening on camera. 

I do like super short subject films, I think it's the best way to get your feet wet, hold audiences attention AND make your money spread over multiple subjects, rather than doing one big film. I have made the mistake of making "epic" short films way too many times, they just don't play because they're impossible to book at festivals and peoples attention span is too narrow these days. So being under the 12 - 13 minute cut-off time, is smart and I would try to find a script that has little to no dialog, so you don't need to worry as much about actor quality OR dealing with flubbing dialog lines. 

Anyway, those are my .02 cents"

 

 

Excellent advice, thank you Tyler. I can tell from what you write and the way you write it that you're sincere and that you've walked the creative path, as any artist must.

My personal experience of the world is something special I indeed have. I've done a lot of jobs so far in my time and experienced a lot of unique and interesting adventures in 'the outback' as that's what I used to do. I've met lots of wonderful and wild and woolly characters. I have reams of good stories there. That's why I'm interested in Australian filmmakers getting back into the sorts of stories we use to tell back in the 70s and 80s which was our filmmaking golden period. We were fantastic at making period films, our 'Aussie westerns' if you can call them that. Films like The Man from Snowy River. I'm not into the more unhappy sorts of stories like the Kelly gang type stories. Aussies have some more great stories to tell!

But I can do 'city'/'urban' and modern films too. I like those as well.

Edited Thursday at 12:29 AM by Jon O'Brien

[Tyler Purcell]

3 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

Aussies have some more great stories to tell!

Yes, they do! 

If you ever need any encouragement or want me to read something, plz let me know. 

I'm a big proponent of making short films. 

 

[Uli Meyer]

If you haven't made a short film before, my advice would be to keep your first effort short and simple. Plan each shot, create a storyboard and a shot list, especially when shooting on film. You. don't have to tell a complex story. I've got lots of scripts I've written for longer films but the ones that you can actually implement are those you can get done in a weekend. Luckily here in London there are lots of people who relish the idea of shooting on film and you can find a crew to help you out. As an example, I shot 'The Discarded' on a weekend in my flat. Just under 3 minutes long.

 

[Tyler Purcell]

12 hours ago, Uli Meyer said:

Just under 3 minutes long.

Couldn't agree with you more, the shorter the better. Tell a story that is simple and you'll win over the hearts of your audiences. Also, comedy works great. 🙂

[Jon O'Brien]

18 hours ago, Uli Meyer said:

If you haven't made a short film before, my advice would be to keep your first effort short and simple. Plan each shot, create a storyboard and a shot list, especially when shooting on film. You. don't have to tell a complex story. I've got lots of scripts I've written for longer films but the ones that you can actually implement are those you can get done in a weekend. Luckily here in London there are lots of people who relish the idea of shooting on film and you can find a crew to help you out. As an example, I shot 'The Discarded' on a weekend in my flat. Just under 3 minutes long.

 

A great little short film, beautifully done. Thanks for posting it, I hadn't seen it before.

London sounds great! Most Aussie filmmakers I meet or talk to via email or in posts are totally sold on digital. Totally, completely, end of conversation. The very concept of analog or film seems verboten to their thinking and outlook. Hmm. Wonder what that's about. I get the distinct impression it's a solid lack of curiosity, which isn't a good thing in the arts. I did meet some dedicated film people the other day at Panavision, for a film loading workshop, but man, that was the first and maybe last time. The general thinking was one of nostalgia, and 'wouldn't it be nice, but it ain't gonna happen.' Those taking the workshop were great but the mood was "well, back in the day ..."

Everyone else I meet is totally non compos mentis when it comes to film. I don't get it because they often use expensive digital gear. It's not as if it's about the cost. And in a lot of cases digital certainly doesn't look much to write home about. And there's something inherently unfascinating about a totally digital workflow.

Edited Friday at 01:47 AM by Jon O'Brien

[Jon O'Brien]

And anyway, I am totally happy with film. I'm just going to keep using it.

[Tyler Purcell]

3 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

And anyway, I am totally happy with film. I'm just going to keep using it.

Here in So Cal the "film" scene is dying fast. Not long ago, I had commercial agencies knocking on my doors non stop for shoots, even double booking sometimes by accident. Now, all they want is digital and they want fast/cheap. It's really unfortunate. I actually had to buy a real digital cinema camera because otherwise, I would get no work. It's really sad, but I hope to keep shooting film. I got dehancer and a few other tools to help make the digital camera look more "filmic" and it's working, but inside I know it's not film.  

Edited Friday at 05:27 AM by Tyler Purcell

[Jon O'Brien]

Yes, I got into digital too. It's easy and quick. I will write scripts and make my own short narrative stories on film. I have digital for everything else.