Today’s GUEST ARTICLE comes from stellar long-time contributor MulesandMud, who often offers the best advice on the board. Even I get jealous of his vast knowledge at times. Since some of you have been asking what the hell treatments are and how to write them, Mules has kindly offered to write a guest article about the elusive little buggers. Hope you enjoy it!
I know some of you think that loglines are the ugly babies of the screenwriting world, but a logline is an adorable toddler compared to the deformed, puberty-stricken creature that is a film treatment.
A treatment is by definition incomplete, even moreso than a screenplay. It’s a work in progress, an idea on its way to becoming a script (which in turn is on its way to becoming a movie).
That’s the reason that treatments are so much harder to find than screenplays. Most writers have no desire to show their treatments to anyone. They are almost always ungainly and imperfect documents, so seeing one is a peek behind the curtain of a writer’s process.
And as you all know, it’s not very pretty back there.
Still, whether we like treatments or not, a pro scribe needs to know how to write them, full stop. Anyone who claims to have a screenwriting career that doesn’t require treatment-writing is either lying or living a charmed life that has no relevance to the rest of us.
So, with that in mind…
WHAT IS A TREATMENT?
Like a lot of film industry jargon, the term “treatment” is intentionally ambiguous, so that important people can toss the word around without quite knowing what it means.
To understand what a treatment is, it’s helpful to understand it in the context of other story-building documents often used in the development process. Here’s a quick and not-at-all-comprehensive list:
BEAT SHEET – This is exactly what it sounds like, a list of the major story beats. That list might be just a series simple words or phrases at first, and rarely exceeds a page.
STEP OUTLINE – This is also essentially a list, only more elaborate, charting out each individual scene of your script with descriptions for each entry, often detailing things like locations, characters present, and dramatic or thematic developments.
SYNOPSIS – This is a short prose description of your story. It typically ranges from one to five pages in length. Depending on the size and the purpose of the document, it might also be called a SUMMARY or ONE-PAGER (hint: don’t call it a one-pager if it’s three pages long).
TREATMENT – This is a longer and more comprehensive prose version of your script, normally around 10 to 30 pages long; the level of detail varies accordingly. As with step outlines, longer treatments may attempt to detail each individual scene. The longest ones might also include lines of dialogue or scene headings, at which point the document is probably more of a SCRIPTMENT, a hybrid of prose and screenplay formatting.
Now, you’re likely to hear all of the above terms used vaguely or interchangeably. And to make things especially confusing, the word OUTLINE can be used to refer to any or all of the above. Don’t go crazy over the semantics, just try to be consistent about what you refer to as what.
Also, never be afraid to ask for clarification when someone requests a particular type of document from you. To paraphrase a great swordsman, they might not think it means what you think it means.
When asked to write a treatment/outline/whatever, your smartest move is to ask the asker to send you a sample treatment/outline/whatever that they’ve received in the past, to show you exactly what format they’re looking for.
Framed properly, this request won’t sound amateurish, it’ll prove you’re a pro who knows how unreliable these terms can be. Plus, it might give you a chance to see another writer’s treatment, which is always interesting.
WHEN TO WRITE A TREATMENT
Almost without exception, treatments are written early in the development process, before you start writing the actual script. If a producer asks you to write a treatment or outline for an existing script, they probably mean a synopsis (see above).
Here, we need to understand that there are two very different reasons why you might write a treatment:
1.) Because you find treatments useful for your own story development.
In this case, the treatment is a WORKING DOCUMENT, a writing tool for the eyes of you and your collaborators. This is a purely optional tool, and its value depends on each person’s individual writing process.
Personally, I tend to create all sorts of outline- and treatment-type documents before beginning a script. I’ve also been known to make look books, research binders, etc, plus unique documents tailored each project (e.g., for a TV pilot I made an elaborate family tree mapping the genealogies of my characters; for a contained horror script I used drafting software to mock up a small town police station).
Again, this is a completely optional version of a treatment, whereas the second reason makes a treatment trickier, if not impossible, to avoid.
2.) Because someone asks you for a treatment.
In this case, the treatment is a PITCH DOCUMENT, a selling tool designed to convince someone else that your story would make a great movie. Most often, a producer or exec will request one of these after a pitch meeting or development conversation.
This kind of treatment (or outline, or synopsis, etc…see above) is inevitable; sooner or later, someone will ask you for one. I’ve done a couple dozen of these over the years, both for ideas of my own and for ideas pitched to me by producers or execs. A few have gotten me paid in one way or another, but most of them haven’t. That’s the nature of the beast.
It’s important to note here that good treatments take serious time and effort.
Most folks who ask you for a treatment won’t want to pay for it, even though they realize it’s a lot to ask. In my opinion, once a tight treatment has been written, all of the hardest parts of the screenwriting process have essentially been done. You need to think long and hard about whether the project in question is worth that kind of commitment.
It may be seem worthwhile to write a treatment for a concept that a manager or producer has sent your way, even just for the sake of building a relationship. Depending on the situation, that may be true, especially for an unproven writer looking for industry access or representation.
However, make sure you don’t go in blind. Do your best to understand who you’re getting involved with, and what the realistic prospects are for the project.
HOW TO WRITE A TREATMENT
This bring us back to the distinction between a WORKING DOCUMENT and a PITCH DOCUMENT. That is, a treatment you write for yourself vs. one you write for someone else.
Though we could call both of these documents treatments, they have nearly opposite goals.
What’s the difference? In short, BULLSHIT.
When you write a working treatment, bullshit is your enemy.
Here, you need to be brutally honest with yourself. Lay your story out in graphic, unsexy detail, leaving nothing out. Identify all of its flaws. Make its weak points clearly visible. Figure out which beats you’ve left half-considered and which ones you may have overthought.
This way, when it comes time to write the script, you have solutions in mind, or at least a firm grasp of the problems. Otherwise, why bother?
On the other hand, when you write a pitch treatment, bullshit is your friend.
Let’s say a producer or exec was intrigued by your pitch, and is now asking for a treatment to see if your idea can go the distance. The document you present may decide whether or not you make a sale.
That means you need to bring the sexy in a big way.
You probably won’t know every detail of your story, but the treatment needs to read like you do. You’ll need to gloss over plot gaps or character issues, hiding any problems you haven’t solved yet (fact: no matter how much work you do, there will always be problems left to solve).
The treatment needs to be paced right, giving enough specifics to suggest that you know what you’re talking about, but not so much that it gets bogged down in a rushed list of plot and scene ingredients. Don’t try to cram everything in there: for the sake of clarity and rhythm, you’ll have to leave some things out.
These pages need to read like a movie, in some ways even more smoothly and cinematically than a screenplay does.
Most importantly, the treatment needs to nail the tone of your story. It can’t be just a list of characters and scenes. You need to get your script’s personality across. Give the thing a little sizzle, as they say.
The good news, sort of, is that you basically have to write a version of this document anyway as preparation for a good verbal pitch, which normally amounts to a 10-minute monologue in which you, the writer, introduce your concept and walk listeners through the entire story, hopefully without boring the hell out of anyone.
In most ways, a great pitch treatment reads exactly like a great verbal pitch sounds: as though someone were telling you the story a film so well that by the end it felt like you’d just watched the actual movie.
If that sounds hard, well, it is. Most treatments, even by great writers, tend to be boring reads, more functional than entertaining. In some ways, treatment writing is harder than scriptwriting, since you’re forced to accomplish a screenplay’s worth of story in just a fraction of the words.
Finally, a quick word on treatment length:
For a working treatment, the longer the better. That doesn’t mean pad the thing unnecessarily; it means make an effort to get everything relevant down on paper, without prejudice. There’s no such thing as too much information here. It’s all grist for the mill of the actual screenplay.
For a pitch treatment, less is more. Try to keep things short, around 15 pages, otherwise the treatment may get bogged down in minutiae. This may sound like less work than the longer version, but in my experience, it’s actually more work, since you usually have to write it all before you know what you can omit. Especially with complex genre plots, paring down a verbal pitch or treatment to a streamlined length can feel impossible at times.
As I mentioned yesterday, I’m not posting anything this week due to Scriptshadow 250 Contest duties (FINALLY finishing all the scripts!). But I haven’t forgotten about you guys. Here’s the deal. Today is a day for you to share your loglines, pages, entire scripts, whatever, and get feedback from your peers. But there’s a bonus! “Bonus, you say, Carson? Whatever could this bonus be?” Whichever idea or pages get the most up-votes in the comments section, I will read and give notes on the first ten pages of your script. So the challenge is on. If you don’t win, you can always hire me for a full consultation. So all is not lost!
Okay, I’ve got good news and I’ve got bad news. The good news is, I’m finishing reading the Scriptshadow 250 contest scripts this week. The bad news is, that means I won’t have time to post the rest of the week. But this leads us to some better news. Next Wednesday, I’ll be posting a list of the TOP 25. And from there, things will move rather quickly, as I post the top 5 soon after, and finally the winner, who will get an option from Grey Matter. So buckle up everybody. The day you thought would never happen is finally within reach. I’ve found some amazing writers so I’m really pumped to finally share them with the world!
Genre: Superhero
Premise: Pretty sure the title gives it away.
About: Batman vs. Superman came out this weekend, and while the critics didn’t like it, it pulled in 170 million dollars. That doesn’t beat out some recent big earners (like Star Wars), but it’s a very strong opening for a superhero film. The film has been in development for 20 years. It took Marvel’s success with The Avengers to finally push WB over the edge to commit to the film.
Writers: Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer (Batman created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger) (Superman created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster)
Details: 2 hours and 30 minutes long
One of the commonalities I’ve noticed in the reviews of this film is how dazed the reviewers are. You know in war movies how the soldiers are on the battlefield and a bomb blows up near one and we hear that ringing noise and the soldier kinda looks around, bullets whizzing by his head, wondering what the hell just happened? That’s how I imagined most reviewers looking after they left their showing of Batman vs. Superman.
Count me amongst that group.
The best way I can describe this movie is – imagine Warner Brothers receiving five separate screenplays, one each for Batman, Superman, Lex Luthor, Wonder Woman, and Lois Lane, and then a studio head came in and said, “What if we mixed all these together?” And another studio head said, “Yeah, and what if we started shooting it in a month?”
And so some poor writer was tasked with cramming all these individual stories into a single nonsensical monstrosity that was unleashed upon an unsuspecting public who just wanted to see a cool superhero film.
I don’t even know if I should try and summarize the plot, since only a teensy bit of it makes sense, but to the best of my abilities, here’s what I think goes down. Batman is angry that Superman accidentally killed all those people in his city battle with Zod in the previous movie. So he becomes obsessed with killing Superman.
Superman, on the other hand, thinks BATMAN is the irresponsible killer. This is based on how Batman ‘brands’ the villains he catches, which is supposed to be a ‘death sentence’ to those villains once they go to prison.
Meanwhile, Lex Luthor doesn’t like Superman either, and finds some kryptonite in one of the ships Zod brought to earth. When Batman learns about this kryptonite batch, he wants a few scoops, cause that way he’ll have a fighting chance in his cage match against Superman.
The big battle finally happens (spoiler), but as you already know after watching many of these So-and-So vs. So-and-So movies, nobody technically wins. The two end up becoming BFFs just in time to face another threat – that being some crazy-ass villain named “Doomsday” who Lex Luthor created. Enter other superheroes like Wonder Woman who decide to help, and the real battle in Batman vs. Superman begins.
Three years ago, when this movie was announced, I wrote an article titled, “Is Batman vs. Superman The Single Hardest Screenplay to Write In History?” – Not to toot my own horn, but after re-reading that article, it’s scary just how accurate it was. Everything I predicted happened.
The main thing I knew would be trouble was how are you going to believably set up that Batman and Superman would want to fight. Of the two motivations, Batman’s is more convincing – that Superman killed all those people. But come on. There was that sort of important extenuating circumstance. As in the alien who could’ve killed everyone on earth if Superman didn’t stop him? Hasn’t Batman ever heard of collateral damage?
But Superman’s motivation – that was a head-scratcher. Batman was branding the bad guys he captured which meant they’d be killed in prison? First of all, they’re bad guys, so who cares. Second, it didn’t even make sense. If you were a bad guy with a Batman brand on your shoulder, I’d think that’d make you more of a prison celebrity than a target.
At first glance, this might not seem like a big deal. Who cares why they’re fighting? As long as they fight! But see, you’re wrong. Whether it’s the seasoned Hollywood reader or the twice-a-year moviegoer – when you overtly manufacture plot points in a story, the audience knows something is off. They feel the manipulation on a subconscious level. Which is the opposite of what movies are supposed to do. The best movies make you forget that you’re watching a movie. Anything you do to break that suspension of disbelief is a film-killer.
What confuses me is that they spent an entire extra year on “getting this film right.” That was a HUGE risk by Warner Brothers. To forego all that money in order to work on the script and make this the best movie it could be. Now that I’ve seen the film, I’m struggling to figure out where all that extra time was used? Was it so Snyder could bump the number of slow-motion shots in his film up from 30 to 60?
There were just a lot of sloppy or weird things about this film. I’ll give you three examples.
There’s a scene where Batman learns that Lex Luthor is shipping kryptonite from one location to another location. So he says, I’m going to get that shipment, and one scene later, he’s in his Batcar chasing after the shipment. It’s supposed to be one of the featured action set-pieces in the film, yet something about it feels empty, almost like by the time we catch up with what’s going on and actually care, it’s over.
There’s a reason for this. The setup was too fast. We only JUST HEARD about this shipment a scene ago, and therefore weren’t prepared when Batman decided to go after it the very next scene. The thing with action set pieces (and really any scene) is that they work best when they’re set up properly.
A proper setup and payoff requires two things: Time and frequency. Let’s say that Batman had heard about this shipment five scenes ago. Now we have five entire scenes to build up the importance of that shipment, to create anticipation in the audience. In addition to that, you want to FREQUENTLY mention the problem. If the filmmakers show Batman trying to figure out the logistical problems involved in obtaining this kryptonite, the audience is subliminally being reminded of the importance of this plan. NOW when the scene arrives, it’ll actually carry some weight.
To understand this better, look at the movie Taken. I know, I know, a lot of people hate Taken. But I want you to imagine, for a second, that Liam Neeson’s daughter is taken in one scene and then in the very next scene Liam Neesons bursts into the bad guy’s hideout and gets her back. How satisfying would that scene be? Not very, right? Because there was very little time between the setup and the payoff, and absolutely no frequency. So if you’re ever struggling with a big set-piece, the problem may be that you didn’t set it up properly.
We’ll now move from the technical to the bizarre. In the middle of Batman vs. Superman, Batman goes to some desert hideout where, for whatever reason, the bug-flying aliens from Star Wars: Attack of the Clones make an appearance. Who were these bug-flying peeps? Why were there all of a sudden bug-people in Batman vs. Superman? No idea! But I think this was some sort of dream sequence.
And therein lies a bigger problem. Every screenwriter worth their salt knows that you don’t write dream sequences. Dream sequences are meant to be left in film school. Outside of comedies, they are an indicator of the amateurs of the amateurs. You simply don’t use them. But the TRUE amateur move is to place major plot points inside of your dream sequences (“Lois Lane is the key” here in Batman vs. Superman). It’s lazy, it’s sloppy, and just plain lame.
Remember The Matrix 2? The whole thing was driven by this lame dream sequence plot point that Trinity was going to die. Same thing with Revenge of the Sith. Anakin’s motivations were driven by some lame dream sequence where he imagined that Padme was going to die. Are either of those films known for their deftly executed screenplays? No. And it’s because if you’re making a mistake that blatant, you’re usually making a lot more mistakes along with it.
This doesn’t even get into the fact that there’s no reason you should need a dream sequence in a superhero film!!! Dream sequences are there to add funky supernatural weird shit that you wouldn’t otherwise be able to fit into your main plot. But with a superhero movie, you have fucking superheroes!!! You already have the weird, the strange, the macabre. Why would you need to create a dream sequence? The whole movie is a dream sequence.
Finally, I want to bring up the scene that should’ve been one of the best scenes in the movie, but fell short for the very reason the entire movie fell short – because they overcomplicated it. The scene occurs when Batman and Superman meet each other as their alter egos (Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne) at a public gathering.
What we have on display here is one of the most powerful devices in screenwriting – dramatic irony. To refresh everyone’s memory, dramatic irony is when we know something the character does not, usually that they are in danger. So if Jill is heading into her house and we already know that the killer is inside waiting, that’s dramatic irony.
The thing with the Clark-Bruce meeting though is that instead of only knowing what one character doesn’t, we know what two characters don’t. We know that Clark Kent is actually talking to Batman and that Bruce Wayne is actually talking to Superman. This “double” version of dramatic irony makes things a little more complicated and it’s up to the audience to decide if they like this better than your traditional one-sided dramatically ironic situation.
But where things really get weird is that both characters approach the conversation like they DO KNOW who the other secretly is. You see this in their accusatory subtextual verbal sparring. This begs the question: Do these guys know who the other is? Am I missing something? Or is this just the actors misplaying the scene? The point being: even in the simplest slam dunk scenes in the movie, the writers and director found a way to make it more complicated than it should’ve been.
I could honestly talk about this movie all day. I don’t even think it was a bad movie so much as it was a sloppy one. And Chris Terrio is a great writer. He’s got a script up in my Top 25 right now. It’s a reminder that screenwriters on these mega-pics are thrown into a meat-grinder. Whether what comes out is a soggy Big Mac that’s been sitting under a heat-lamp for three hours or a fresh-off-the-grill Double Double from In-and-Out, is often out of their control. So it sucks when we, indeed, get that Big Mac. Maybe once they split these DC movies off into singular adventures, the writing will get better, and we’ll start getting meals worthy of our appetite.
[ ] What the hell did I just watch?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the price of admission
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: When a subplot isn’t working, DROP IT. When a character isn’t working, DROP THEM. There’s no faster way to decimate a script’s pace than to keep a subplot that isn’t working. Every time you cut to that subplot, you are essentially putting your movie on pause. Excising Lois Lane’s pointless investigation into a bullet that framed Superman could’ve shaved 20 minutes off this film. Oftentimes, writers believe that just because they’ve spent a lot of time on a character/subplot that they have to keep it/them in. No no no. A thousand times no. If it’s not working, chop it out. I guarantee that you won’t even remember that it was there in a month.
Batman vs. Superman. Pft. How bout Time Shark vs. Dude, Where’s My Ferret?? Now that’s a real showdown! Not that it’ll ever happen but still.
Before we get started, I thought I’d bring you into my world for a moment. I’m honestly trying to do good here. But I still get 1 to 2 e-mails a week that read like this gem I received yesterday: “Carson, I’ve been reading you for years and I’ve sent you several high quality screenplays to read, but I get no response. You pick out the worst dreck you can find and review it. Now I’m done with you.”
Don’t you realize e-mails like this make me feel like Sad Affleck?
Look, we all believe our ideas are better than everyone else’s. Or else why would we write them? But if you’re not getting a good response from sending your logline in (to me and others), there’s probably something wrong with it. The bar some weeks is really low. Sometimes it comes down to, “Can the writer form a cohesive sentence with his logline?” I’m not hiding away a series of brilliant scripts here. If you’ve got something that even sounds capable, it’s probably going to make the site.
If you’re really struggling with why your pitch isn’t getting traction, post your idea in the comments and let others tell you if you have the greatest logline since Jurassic Park. Or get a friend’s opinion. Make sure to INSIST they be honest with you (or they won’t). But seriously, take some responsibility for your stuff instead of passing it onto others. I guarantee you that your writing will improve.
Okay guys, you know the drill. Read the scripts below (or read as far into the script as you can), then vote for your favorite in the comments section (“I vote for BLAH BLAH”). But if you want to be a really helpful dude or dudette, give feedback to the writers. It’s particularly helpful for writers to know where you stopped reading and why. Oh, and if you’d like to enter your own script for a potential Amateur Saturday slot, send me your title, genre, logline, why we should read, to Carsonreeves3@gmail.com. We need some fresh submissions so get those scripts in!
Title: FOUND FOOTAGE
Genre: Animation/found footage
Logline: “A group of trainee scout ants who find themselves battling to stay alive after a training exercise in a suburban home goes horribly wrong…this is the found footage”
Why You Should Read: Haunted by all the ants that I’ve killed, I found myself with no choice but having to write this script. I hope it does justice to all the ants that have fallen in battle, most specifically the ants from the Eighth Antiment: For Queen and Colony. Hoo-hah!
Title: Vultures ‘N’ Doves
Genre: Action/Heist
Logline: An estranged group of musicians, of a once successful band, reunite in order to pull a series of robberies at major concert venues, all in one night, in an attempt to take back the millions they feel were stolen from them by their ex-manager, who now runs the venues they target. Their greatest hits, are robberies.
Why You Should Read: I love heist films. Primarily, grounded heist films. Shit that could happen. Shit that, if we put our minds to it, and had just the right opportunity, for just the right reason, we might be able to pull off and would risk doing so. Any heist situation is absolutely nuts to attempt, so it has to be about more than the money. There has to be something so wrong with the system, the person, the past or the present where it seems there is no other choice. Vultures N Doves is unique twist on the heist film, something I’ve never seen in a movie before, it’s amped up fun, there’s a couple of outrageous set pieces, and most importantly, a main character with a rockstar ego, who is struggling to keep his band, marriage, and life together.
Title: Scary Monsters
Genre: Horror/Comedy
Logline: When citizens of a small town begin transforming into werewolves, vampires, ghouls and goblins, the only person who seems to notice is the town’s narcissistic black sheep.
Why You Should Read: The Universal monsters will be creeping their way back into theaters over the next few years. “Scary Monsters” is the comedic answer to this. The script is an R-rated monster mash that I’ve been working on for about three years. It’s heavy on humor, while still maintaining its heart. I feel like the story veers in some interesting and offbeat directions as it goes on, especially in the final act. My style of humor is on full display here, as is three years’ worth of depression, addiction and self-loathing. Fun. If you do read the script, I hope you enjoy it and I would love some feedback.
Title: John Brown’s Body
Genre: Historical Fiction (Based on True Events)
Logline: After a lifetime of failure, John Brown attacks the United States Armory at Harper’s Ferry in one last ditch effort to free the slaves.
Why You Should Read: In earlier forms, this script placed in the top ten in Final Draft’s Big Break, was a semifinalist in Page and received a “Consider” from Coverage Ink. I’ve worked hard on the notes I’ve received and I think I’ve made it better. I understand that it’s a period piece (but isn’t Catherine the Great?), however it’s a really cool moment in history that has been ignored on the big screen. I like to think of this story as the American version of Braveheart.
Title: Sinkhole
Genre: Comedy
Logline: A self-centered, good ol’ boy chooses getting a pool over fixing the house, resulting in him falling through a sinkhole into another dimension where things are deceivingly better.
Why You Should Read: Brandi didn’t leave a “Why You Should Read,” so this is Carson explaining why I picked this. I’m obsessed with sinkholes. I’m not kidding. I think they’re fascinating. So there was no way this wasn’t getting onto the site. (p.s. If you have any sinkhole pitches or scripts, send them to me!)
