Writing and Selling Thriller Screenplays

A Screenwriter's Guide for Film and Television

Lucy V. Hay

• Publisher: Creative Essentials
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781842439722
• Topic: Mezzi di comunicazione e arti performative
• Subtopic: Scrittura di sceneggiature per il cinema

Writing and Selling Thriller Screenplays has the lowdown not only on getting your thriller feature script on the page, but getting it in front of producers and investors.

From premise to resolution, Lucy V. Hay guides you through the craft of thriller writing, citing classic thrillers such as Psycho, The Shining, The Sixth Sense and Fatal Attraction and lesser-known gems like Red Eye, Desperate Measures, Impostor and Deviation.

The book also considers how the screenplay might be sold to investors, looking at high concept ideas, pitching, packaging and the realities of film finance.

Lucy V. Hay asks: what is flight vs. fight? What is the difference between horror and thriller? What are the different sub genres of thriller? What part do actors play in film finance? How can limited locations create new opportunities in storytelling and financing? Why is the lone protagonist so in demand? Why are female characters so popular in thriller? And much, much more...

'Really hones in on the specific genre of thrillers with expertise' - Write So Fluid

'A must-read for any writer, producer or director looking to create (or in the process of creating) a thriller production. It could also be immensely useful for those generally curious about the genre or looking to learn more' - Film Doctor

'This book should form part of the armoury for any screenplay writers bookshelf' - Stephen Hall

Check out Lucy V. Hay's other screenwriting books: Writing & Selling Drama Screenplays and Writing Diverse Characters for Fiction, Film and TV

PART ONE

WHAT IS A THRILLER?

‘Nine million terrorists in the world and I have to kill one with feet smaller than my sister.’

John McClane, DIE HARD

MARIE: Do you have any ID?

JASON: Not really.

THE BOURNE IDENTITY

‘Smile, you son of a bitch.’

Brody, JAWS

NATALIE: What’s the last thing you do remember?

LEONARD: My wife…

NATALIE: That’s sweet.

LEONARD: …Dying.

MEMENTO

‘I’m gonna save the motherfucking day.’

Cameron Poe, CON AIR

DEFINITION OF THRILLER

Thriller has to be the most misunderstood genre in the spec pile. Despite getting the hang of horror, being clued-up on comedy and down on drama, screenwriters don’t always seem to understand that their thriller screenplays need to thrill. Such a small thing, yet it means everything. I’ve read hundreds, probably thousands, of screenplays that have sought to call themselves ‘thrillers’, yet very few bear any kind of resemblance to the thrillers I see at the cinema, on DVD or via streaming services like LoveFilm et al. Yet thrillers being ‘thrilling’ is something we all demand at a grass-roots level, as noted in this straightforward (albeit rather non-illuminating) dictionary definition:

Thriller (noun)

1. A novel, play or movie with an exciting plot, typically involving crime or espionage.

2. A person, thing or experience that thrills.

Thriller is an incredibly broad genre, so attempting a thriller screenplay for the first time – or, indeed, rewriting one – may seem like a daunting task to screenwriters. The problem is immediately apparent: what is deemed ‘thrilling’ to one person may make another claw his/her eyes out with boredom. Looking to produced movies in isolation may not help either, since everyone has different views on what makes a ‘good’ film (never mind what makes thrillers ‘thrilling’!) and this includes the actual people who write and make them. Similarly, while thrillers have so many subgenres and cross-genres, not to mention various common elements, they nevertheless have lots to set them apart from one another (more about that in a minute).

So how can we look at the thriller genre, when it is so broad and complex? Jon Spaihts, one of the writers of Prometheus (2012), whose spec thriller Shadow 19 sold to Warner Bros in 2006, tweeted this excellent and concise summary of how thrillers work:

‘In thrillers the hero is reactive; a firefighter. The villain is the fire. The villain’s plan is in some ways the soul of your story.’

As a script editor and reader, I couldn’t agree more. Putting the villain or antagonist in the driving seat is what sets thrillers apart from all other genres, including horror. Making your protagonist/s work to foil the antagonist’s ‘plan’ (or similar) is the foundation of your story; all other elements are then piled on top of it, including subgenre, characters and even how the plot is executed, as illustrated by this very good Wikipedia entry on the thriller genre:

‘The aim for thrillers is to keep the audience alert and on the edge of their seats. The protagonist in these films is set against a problem - an escape, a mission, or a mystery. No matter what subgenre a thriller film falls into, it will emphasise the danger the protagonist faces. The tension with the main problem is built on throughout the film and leads to a highly stressful climax. The cover up of important information from the viewer and fight and chase scenes are common methods in all of the thriller subgenres, although each subgenre has its own unique characteristics and methods.’

So whether your protagonist is female and fighting home invasion (as in Panic Room, 2002); or a male protagonist attempting to expose his mafioso bosses (The Firm, 1993); or a child, tortured by visions of dead people (The Sixth Sense, 1999); or an ensemble cast of doctors fighting disease (Contagion, 2011), your thriller screenplay must ensure that your protagonist overcomes all the obstacles put in their way by the antagonist/s, not to mention the situation at hand.

START AS YOU MEAN TO GO ON

‘A thriller must thrill. And I would get that first thrill, the one that sets the tone, the one that starts the setup, to play out on page one.’

– Chris Jones, writer/director (@livingspiritpix)

Before we really put the thriller genre under the microscope, stop! Forget all you know – or think you know – about thrillers. Forget about those cool set pieces you want to write in the second act; forget about your brooding heroes or your haunted heroines. Forget about ‘refragmenting the narrative’ or ‘vertical writing’ or ‘rising action’ or whatever the cool screenwriting buzz phrases of the moment are. Think instead about your story’s identity.

Arguably the biggest issue I see in thriller screenplays is that they don’t ‘feel’ like thrillers in the first instance. The reasons for this can be varied and complex but, generally speaking, the writer has neglected to set the tone and the rules of the story world we are dealing with. More often than not, the writer believes erroneously that we must be introduced to the characters first, THEN the story. They’ll frequently attempt this via dream sequences, flashbacks and early morning/getting ready for the day montages (all three if the reader’s *really* lucky!).

First, remember: tone is everything. How do your favourite thrillers begin? What do we see? Is there a prologue? How do the characters interact? Are they happy, oblivious? Or do they have other problems? What is the ‘feel’ of the piece? Is it unstable, threatening from the outset? Or are we plunged from a happy home into a living nightmare? Whatever the writers and filmmakers choose – and writing and filmmaking is about choices: this is a craft, not magic – the audience must be left in no doubt about the tone and the story world they are entering.

BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END

‘Keep the script lean and pacey, don’t get bogged down with unnecessary set up, scene description and (especially) exposition. Structure the action around exciting set-pieces; don’t let the story slow to a grind with introspective character studies or indulgent dialogue scenes.’

– Danny Stack, script editor & writer/director (@ScriptwritingUK)

Structure. An element of screenwriting that never fails to have people gnashing their teeth with frustration and rage. All manner of accusations are levied at it, from the notion it’s horribly formulaic, through to its even being responsible for killing one’s creativity. Generally, I tend to think of structure as the three acts described by Aristotle in Poetics, simply because it makes the most sense to me and because the industry (as I’ve experienced in meetings and similar) tends to talk about ‘acts’.

Before I go further, however, it should be noted I am not a purist. I believe whatever works for the individual screenwriter is valid, be it three acts, five acts, Syd Field’s Paradigm, John Truby’s 22 Steps, Chris Soth’s Mini Movie Method, Blake Snyder’s Save The Cat! Approach, or something else. As far as I’m concerned, all a story really needs is a beginning, middle and end (and not necessarily in that order). I’m a passionate believer in the notion of story counting above all else, which is why I always stop short of ‘page counting’ for turning points, etc, preferring instead to rely on ‘intuitive script editing’, i.e. does a particular moment in the story ‘feel’ as if it is in the ‘right’ place?

So, those disclaimers...