Diagnostic Consultancy I work internationally on all kinds of films, but I am often brought in to help with films that are having problems, particularly films that have structural issues, because I have a special expertise in structure of all kinds and in particular, non-linear and parallel narrative films, which most consultants do not deal with. My consultancies as ‘diagnostic consultancies’. By that I mean that I work with the screenwriter (and producer and director, if they’re on board) to establish exactly what they’re after and I provide feedback and structural suggestions (in a report and one to one either in person or by a phone call or Skye call) only after many readings of the script and after conferring with them. I don’t offer reader’s reports. Readers' Reports are short, low-cost reports on the commercial viability of a script provided by a professional script reader after reading the script cold, and usually after only one or two readings (which is why the cost is low - because relatively little time is spent on each script). Readers' Reports were invented by producers who, faced with a huge pile of scripts, hired someone to cull the good and the bad, 'the good' meaning those scripts that were worth reading with a view to production. They were designed to help producers, not writers, and that's why they don't usually offer much detailed structural advice or advice on how to proceed. As far as writers are concerned, Reader's Reports can be very useful indeed in helping you gauge the market-readiness of any given script and a professional reader's response to it. However, in terms of what Readers' Reports can offer in the way of advice to writers, there are problems. While readers will often give kindly make suggestions about how to proceed, any advice they give is necessarily based on second-guessing what the writer intended to do. This is where the problems may come in. In my experience, however well-intentioned this advice might be, and however experienced and astute the reader is, it can be highly counterproductive to pass judgment on a script or make suggestions about the next draft on the basis of one or two readings and without being aware of what the writer is trying to do. Why is this? The problem is that in my experience, it is far too easy for writers, even fine writers, particularly in the early stages of a script,to go off at a tangent and not to get what’s in their heads and hearts on to the page. In fact, it’s more common than not for even very skilled writers to be blithely unaware that they haven’t properly transmitted their ideas. Sometimes top writers will accidentally leave out vital bits of plot and forget to include crucial bits of dialogue. It sounds bizarre, but we all do it and it’s a not a function of being a bad writer but of factors like passion for the project; like a writer being overly-immersed in the script, like the pressures of time imposed on writers by the industry; and finally, the plain fact that writing a script is very much harder than it looks. As a reader, unless you know what the writer intends, you can utterly miss the point - because the point is not clear - and give advice that turns out to be disastrous. For example, I have often sat talking with a writer for a considerable period of time and been completely bewildered by their desire to keep a scene that seems to me to be utterly redundant. Eventually, the writer will explode with something like: 'But that's the scene where she realizes she's never loved him!' and point to a line like: 'She stares at him, blinks quickly and returns to what she was doing.' As a consultant you realize with horror that you and the writer have been talking at cross purposes. The writer has been utterly convinced something is clear when it's manifestly not. As a consultant, you know that without talking to the writer you (and any other reader) would have recommended ditching the scene. Now, you can advise the writer. But without knowing what they wanted you would have suggested utterly distorting their script. I think this kind of misunderstanding and its dreadful consequences happens often in script development, indeed, I think it's meant the death of many potentially fine scripts and it accounts for much of the bewilderment that writers have when their scripts are rejected with comments that seem, to the writer, to be utterly inappropriate or dense. The 'inappropriate' and 'dense' comments were perfectly appropriate and not at dense with regard to the script that the reader thought they were reading. I don't like risking giving destructive advice, and, truth to be told, if I see a structural solution, I like to share it with the writer. If all I'm doing is a reader's report I can neither talk to the writer, read the script more than a couple of times, or offer proper in-depth structural advice. To conclude, if what you want is a professional's view of whether the script is ready to sell, a reader's report is fine. However, if you want practical suggestions about where to go next with your script, or advice on where you might be going wrong, a diagnostic consultancy is for you. Personally, from what I have seen, I think diagnostic consultancy are more cost effective and time saving in the long run. What happens in a diagnostic consultancy Really, a diagnostic consultancy involves having a very experienced writer on board, giving you their full input, for the during or the consultancy. My procedure is that I read the script several times cold (that is, with no prior information about it whatsoever) while the writer (and producer and director, if they’re on board) complete a questionnaire about their aims and intentions for the film. As I read the script, I type comments in a different color font for each reading, so that the creative team can see my first response then later responses (the first response is particularly important). After I’ve done several readings, I read the questionnaire responses and compare them with the script. I use the questionnaire because: - it rapidly gets me up to speed with what the film-makers are intending to do (which is often not entirely clear on the page at this stage )
- because it helps the film-makers solve a lot of their problems and/or pinpoint where their problem areas are before I've even written the report.
Most film-makers are unable to finish the questionnaire, and this is particularly helpful because i isolates for all of us where potential problems lie and where they are stuck. Sometimes, after reading the script and the questionnaire answers several times I will ask more questions, sometimes not. Finally, after all of my readings and my work on the questionnaire are done, I write an extended detailed report on its strengths and problem areas, pointing out any discrepancies between what the creative teams think is in the script and what is actually there (hence the term ‘diagnostic’) and I give practical advice on how the writer can achieve what they’re after, with structural suggestions, including suggestions on how to fix or use parallel narrative. I often find that the structural model the writer is using is not the best to transmit what they are trying to say, so, depending on the sort of consultancy I’m doing I will offer suggestions for different more suitable structures. My aim as a consultant is to make sure that: - everyone knows what film they are in
- the film is vividly original enough to compete in a world market
- the film genuinely fulfills the pitch and that what is in the creative team's head and heart actually gets on to the page, in both scenario and themes
- the film's strengths are isolated and developed to the full
- that weaknesses and poorly thought-through decisions do not get locked in.
- that the film has the right structural form (linear or non-linear) to best tell its story and transmit its message
After the creative team has read the report, we then have a meeting or conference call (lasting a few hours) to discuss the report. ChargesI don't offer standard charges. I tailor the cost of the consultancy to what exactly you want me to do for you. Charges vary according to how much time and help you want from me and whether your script involves parallel narrative, which is very complex and time-consuming. Conventional linear narrative is cheaper, and the charge is less if you are happy to accept a report in note form, rather than a full written report ready to hand over to investors. Because of the amount of work and expertise involved (particularly with parallel narrative scripts) my fees are not cheap. As I have explained, I don't do fast inexpensive reads, but if you are at the stage of your script where you want detailed, high-level practical script advice to an international standard and with a special focus on diagnostic and structural solutions, including parallel narrative, that's what I do. My charges are based on me reading and providing diagnostic consultancies on one draft at a time. You may find that one consultancy is enough for you. With very complex scripts you might need consultancies after each draft. Every script is different. Don't feel hesitant about inquiring about what I can do for your project. Very often we can work something out. Screen CreditI also ask for a credit of ‘dramaturg' or 'script consultant' placed in accordance with how much work I have done on your script. Script EditingI very rarely script edit partly because I'm too busy, but also because the job description is too restrictive, which I find frustrating. See Script Editing Availability While I love consultancy work, I am a working writer so my availability for consultancy work is limited and I am usually pretty heavily-booked. Alternatively, I might not be running consultancies at all at the time you require, or I might be taking only major consultancies. I have to ask for your patience on this. It's best to book as far ahead as you can. To enquire about a consultancy contact . |
