While I agree with things you said, I don’t think philosophical conflict alone is enough to find your voice. Voice is also about tone, the words and syntax you use in description and dialogue, genre, characters you create, etc. - All of this plays a part. Philosophical conflict is only a part of it. The best way to put it is: It’s not just about what you have to say, but how you say it. It’s not just about what philosophical conflict you have, but also about how do you convey that on page or screen using your words and visuals.
Facts! These people are arguing with me when I basically said the same as this, the writer’s voice is their own belief / distinctive point of view when it comes to a respective project 😂
It seems like you two agree with me, and that none of us agree with them. What they are talking about is plot. That's all. Yes, they are talking about their manufactured buzzword, to sound important, a 'philisophical conflict', and that is actually a legit concept. But that only relates to plot. All that does is confuse the issue here. Voice has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH PLOT. This video starts innocently, yet goes completely in the opposite direction, and the completely-wrong direction, at the ~2:14 point. Do not get caught up in this bull honkey. Do not listen to people fronting as experts who are in reality this effing confused and ignorant. Let me say that again: Voice has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH PLOT. Voice is about how you say what you say, and not about what you say. Not in any way, not in a billion years. They could not have this more wrong. I found my voice, and the way I did that was by ignoring absolutely everything for the first two years that I wrote. I just wrote, 7 hours a day every single day. I knew that if I went inside myself to find my voice, I would find my unique voice. Trial and error, from scratch, learning from my mistakes, until my voice emerged, on its own, through hard work and deliberate practice, which is the only way to do anything correctly. And I knew that if I solicited advice or tried to mimic every other voice out there, that I would never find MY voice. it would be nothing but a mashup of everyone else's voice. And that approach worked. After 2 years, this meant I had a defined platform, an actual unique voice that I could test against all the 'advice' out there, and against all the other voices out there. Had I started by soliciting advice or trying to copy all of the Aaron Sorkins and David Mamets out there, that would have failed miserably. My influence? The guitar player 'The Edge' from U2. Unlike 99.9% of fledgling guitarists in the US, who were listening to everybody else and trying to do what they were doing, The Edge was much more isolated in Ireland in the 80's, and he found his voice from within himself. Is he the best guitar player? No. The Edge can't run riffs up and down the fretboard like Eddie Van Halen. He can't bend notes like Hendrix. But that does not matter. What he plays is simple to play, but it is effective, bc it is unique, and it is unique bc he found his voice, by not looking to others to find it. And the fact that the other 99.9% of wannabees try to find their voice by mimicking everyone else is exactly why the state of popular music and the state of what comes out of Hollywood is in such woeful shape. Every Pixar script is exactly the same with the names changed. Every movie is as boring as Transformers. Stop trying to be Michael Bay. That voice is also a mashup. Nothing unique there. The most important thing is to have the courage to believe in yourself, that you can find your voice, and hiding behind the safety shield of trying to sound like everybody else is the absolute wrong way to attempt it. Why would anyone want to sound like anyone else? You need to sound like you, and anyone can do this if they try hard enough.
@@tomlewis4748 this is once again facts! I was studying what Tyler and others on here were saying and attempting to incorporate it into my process but it was killing me because I felt like something was missing. Until I actually started to research what it truly means to create a character and that’s is when I found out exactly how to emerge the writer’s voice (Thanks to the character building book by Dara Marks).
What you stated were skills you need to work on in order to develop your own voice. Understanding what your character’s philosophical conflicts are is what helps you build those skills. You can’t get dialogue and tone without having a knowing of who your characters are.
@@tomlewis4748 Well put Tom. I often use in my University classes Shane Black's script, "The Last Boy scout" as a prime example of a person's "voice" because his language, style and the way he puts words together really shows us a unique style of speaking...his "voice", his swagger, his attitude, his prowess, demeanor, his stance. What is The Last Boy scout about? I honestly don't remember but I remember how he wrote it, how he said it, the words and the shock and the impact and impression that was made on me by reading the "way" he put the words down on the page, the way he spoke the same language as me but in such a different and unique way that I was hooked in as much by that as I was by the story. You are correct, voice has nothing to do with the conflict, the plot, the ideas, or the goals or any of the other elements of story. Voice is the way we say whatever it is we are saying and that has nothing to do with subject or philosophical beliefs of what we are talking about.
The conflict not being black and white is actually in the same veins as Craig Mazin teaches us about the Central Dramatic Question / Thematic Premise (Scriptnotes 403). That it has to be DEBATABLE. B/W is not debatable. And yeah, voice also means execution, verbiage etc... But still, this is a great video.
Philosophical conflicccttt! that is where the magic is, thank you brother, your videos have changed my perspective on how I see story structure in film, the way you break down things makes it so understandable especially for some of us who don't have English as our 1st language. Appreciate the content bro. God bless.
Its like crafting a persuasive argument which requires comparing and contrasting which requires stating both sides fully before offering your reason why one side is truer; the art of true debate - knowing the opponents argument as well as they do
Excellent video. This is one of the biggest things plaguing modern entertainment. Everyone is pushing the same narrative but no one is presenting the other side in an authentic way (or, often times, at all). This makes it so you just keep hearing the same empty narrative with cardboard characters that fall into one of two camps: Blatantly attacking those with different beliefs and values while preaching the author's beliefs at every contrived opportunity, or blatantly personifying the author's own negative image of people with different beliefs and values to the author's. This makes everything feel either soulless; devoid of any depth, nuance or unique perspective to most; or as the personal attack it is intended to be for anyone who happens to disagree with the author about anything. In that way, it is a perfect mirror to society, as this is exactly how so many of those who hold these beliefs actually see the world. Future historians will no doubt look at this period in human history as, "a time of ideological totalitarianism with no room for critical thought or nuance, at least in polite society." Sadly, they will not be mistaken. I do believe this time is coming to an end, though. The rise of independent developers is upon us, with people working tirelessly to push back against the echo chamber of mainstream entertainment that no longer reflects the diversity of values of the masses they are meant to appeal to. We may yet live to see the time when we can reasonable speculate what historians will say about us once more. Quite odd indeed to be alive in a time when some of the best writing advise so accurately explains the failure of modern society. Examining the other side in earnest is the only way to truly have an opinion about matters of philosophy. A common sense principle lost to so many in the present day.
I have written 5 movie scripts, I was getting ready to write a Batman one and Michael Uslan (Ownes the RIGHTS to BATMAN) tells me that I need a Lawyer and it has to be submitted to (in this case) Warner Brothers. Is it a big hassle to get someone to get it in front of the right people??
Hey Mike, I would suggest never ever writing a script for a character you don't have the rights for. No studio or rights holder will ever read it, because when they do want to make a new Batman movie, they send out a call to agencies to have writers pitch their take to them and then choose one off a list of approved writers. Instead, maybe turn that cool Batman idea into a public domain character idea? Like Robin Hood or Zorro.
@@EastwoodKLR most true stories, if they are older, are fair game. So a cool Howard Hughes movie would work, but you'd also be compared to The Aviator, so tread lightly with Mr. Hughes. But legal-wise, you'd be all good.
Find a comedic philosophical conflict, then go with want and cost flow in every line and action of characters in story then shows cost as the comedic point which slowly makes want comedic point to the journey being whole comic.
So you can’t have a pure evil antagonist? That has to be wrong. Obviously you don’t want to be writing them in every screenplay but has there never been a pure evil antagonist done correctly?
The writers voice isn’t formed from the philosophical conflict. It’s born and taken from the theme. The theme is based on what the writer believes and believes in. This is the writers unique voice and distinctive point of view. So these videos are starting to get repetitive and honestly you should stop misleading! Good luck 🍀
The theme literally comes from the philosophical conflict lmao. You just typed a bunch of nothing, thinking you sounded smart, but ended up agreeing with the video
What's a philosophy if it takes no stand? Who wants a judge who can't decide the case? An ambiguous lesson serves no one. A story with no clear moral argument is as bad as a hero with no clear goal. To take up a story because life gave you a unique perspective on the core issue, then leave us with our questions unanswered, that's to deceive us and waste our time. A morally ambivalent man is a kid with undefined values. Nobody's interested in folks with weak convictions. Make your stand clear, and your audience will find and follow you.
Regarding your point on Elysium, you'll be shocked at how many people defend the rich. I also noticed a similar take from Tyler from his Avatar video. Sometimes, when the evils of capitalism are major themes in the movie, it is just black and white. Your suggestion of giving them a "justified" reason for being up there ignores the everyday reality. Most of the time, the rich hoard their wealth just because they can 🤷🏽♀️ So from what I could tell from the clip you showed it all seemed pretty realistic.
Hmm maybe having it be so that the rich are so caught up with their own squabbles (with real consequences) that the main conflict between the rich and poor, through their eyes, isn't even an issue? Like maybe a good screenplay for that might have a semi-good, but still self-centered rich person going against some others in some sort of conflict, (maybe the consequences can be not only personal but also go against something they believe) and the main character somehow breaks the situation to a degree? I'm not sure how it could work, but I think theres probably some sort of way of showing a point of view that is so disconnected from reality, but simultaneously real, and fleshed out, that you can understand it? I think it could be more effective that way, so the audience can sort of get entranced with the luxury and the charisma of it, but then at the turning point bring reality in, finalizing some sort of build up, having an internal conflict.
Get Practical Tools to Write Your Great Screenplay: www.practicalscreenwriting.com
While I agree with things you said, I don’t think philosophical conflict alone is enough to find your voice. Voice is also about tone, the words and syntax you use in description and dialogue, genre, characters you create, etc. - All of this plays a part. Philosophical conflict is only a part of it. The best way to put it is: It’s not just about what you have to say, but how you say it. It’s not just about what philosophical conflict you have, but also about how do you convey that on page or screen using your words and visuals.
Facts! These people are arguing with me when I basically said the same as this, the writer’s voice is their own belief / distinctive point of view when it comes to a respective project 😂
It seems like you two agree with me, and that none of us agree with them. What they are talking about is plot. That's all. Yes, they are talking about their manufactured buzzword, to sound important, a 'philisophical conflict', and that is actually a legit concept.
But that only relates to plot. All that does is confuse the issue here. Voice has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH PLOT.
This video starts innocently, yet goes completely in the opposite direction, and the completely-wrong direction, at the ~2:14 point. Do not get caught up in this bull honkey. Do not listen to people fronting as experts who are in reality this effing confused and ignorant.
Let me say that again: Voice has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH PLOT.
Voice is about how you say what you say, and not about what you say. Not in any way, not in a billion years. They could not have this more wrong.
I found my voice, and the way I did that was by ignoring absolutely everything for the first two years that I wrote. I just wrote, 7 hours a day every single day. I knew that if I went inside myself to find my voice, I would find my unique voice. Trial and error, from scratch, learning from my mistakes, until my voice emerged, on its own, through hard work and deliberate practice, which is the only way to do anything correctly.
And I knew that if I solicited advice or tried to mimic every other voice out there, that I would never find MY voice. it would be nothing but a mashup of everyone else's voice.
And that approach worked. After 2 years, this meant I had a defined platform, an actual unique voice that I could test against all the 'advice' out there, and against all the other voices out there. Had I started by soliciting advice or trying to copy all of the Aaron Sorkins and David Mamets out there, that would have failed miserably.
My influence? The guitar player 'The Edge' from U2. Unlike 99.9% of fledgling guitarists in the US, who were listening to everybody else and trying to do what they were doing, The Edge was much more isolated in Ireland in the 80's, and he found his voice from within himself.
Is he the best guitar player? No. The Edge can't run riffs up and down the fretboard like Eddie Van Halen. He can't bend notes like Hendrix. But that does not matter. What he plays is simple to play, but it is effective, bc it is unique, and it is unique bc he found his voice, by not looking to others to find it.
And the fact that the other 99.9% of wannabees try to find their voice by mimicking everyone else is exactly why the state of popular music and the state of what comes out of Hollywood is in such woeful shape. Every Pixar script is exactly the same with the names changed. Every movie is as boring as Transformers. Stop trying to be Michael Bay. That voice is also a mashup. Nothing unique there.
The most important thing is to have the courage to believe in yourself, that you can find your voice, and hiding behind the safety shield of trying to sound like everybody else is the absolute wrong way to attempt it. Why would anyone want to sound like anyone else? You need to sound like you, and anyone can do this if they try hard enough.
@@tomlewis4748 this is once again facts! I was studying what Tyler and others on here were saying and attempting to incorporate it into my process but it was killing me because I felt like something was missing. Until I actually started to research what it truly means to create a character and that’s is when I found out exactly how to emerge the writer’s voice (Thanks to the character building book by Dara Marks).
What you stated were skills you need to work on in order to develop your own voice. Understanding what your character’s philosophical conflicts are is what helps you build those skills. You can’t get dialogue and tone without having a knowing of who your characters are.
@@tomlewis4748 Well put Tom. I often use in my University classes Shane Black's script, "The Last Boy scout" as a prime example of a person's "voice" because his language, style and the way he puts words together really shows us a unique style of speaking...his "voice", his swagger, his attitude, his prowess, demeanor, his stance. What is The Last Boy scout about? I honestly don't remember but I remember how he wrote it, how he said it, the words and the shock and the impact and impression that was made on me by reading the "way" he put the words down on the page, the way he spoke the same language as me but in such a different and unique way that I was hooked in as much by that as I was by the story. You are correct, voice has nothing to do with the conflict, the plot, the ideas, or the goals or any of the other elements of story. Voice is the way we say whatever it is we are saying and that has nothing to do with subject or philosophical beliefs of what we are talking about.
Wow! One-of-a-kind informational content. Indispensable. Great job. And thank you!
The conflict not being black and white is actually in the same veins as Craig Mazin teaches us about the Central Dramatic Question / Thematic Premise (Scriptnotes 403). That it has to be DEBATABLE. B/W is not debatable. And yeah, voice also means execution, verbiage etc... But still, this is a great video.
Philosophical conflicccttt! that is where the magic is, thank you brother, your videos have changed my perspective on how I see story structure in film, the way you break down things makes it so understandable especially for some of us who don't have English as our 1st language.
Appreciate the content bro.
God bless.
Its like crafting a persuasive argument which requires comparing and contrasting which requires stating both sides fully before offering your reason why one side is truer; the art of true debate - knowing the opponents argument as well as they do
Excellent video. This is one of the biggest things plaguing modern entertainment. Everyone is pushing the same narrative but no one is presenting the other side in an authentic way (or, often times, at all). This makes it so you just keep hearing the same empty narrative with cardboard characters that fall into one of two camps: Blatantly attacking those with different beliefs and values while preaching the author's beliefs at every contrived opportunity, or blatantly personifying the author's own negative image of people with different beliefs and values to the author's. This makes everything feel either soulless; devoid of any depth, nuance or unique perspective to most; or as the personal attack it is intended to be for anyone who happens to disagree with the author about anything. In that way, it is a perfect mirror to society, as this is exactly how so many of those who hold these beliefs actually see the world.
Future historians will no doubt look at this period in human history as, "a time of ideological totalitarianism with no room for critical thought or nuance, at least in polite society." Sadly, they will not be mistaken. I do believe this time is coming to an end, though. The rise of independent developers is upon us, with people working tirelessly to push back against the echo chamber of mainstream entertainment that no longer reflects the diversity of values of the masses they are meant to appeal to. We may yet live to see the time when we can reasonable speculate what historians will say about us once more.
Quite odd indeed to be alive in a time when some of the best writing advise so accurately explains the failure of modern society. Examining the other side in earnest is the only way to truly have an opinion about matters of philosophy. A common sense principle lost to so many in the present day.
What happened to the competition
died
I have written 5 movie scripts, I was getting ready to write a Batman one and Michael Uslan (Ownes the RIGHTS to BATMAN) tells me that I need a Lawyer and it has to be submitted to (in this case) Warner Brothers. Is it a big hassle to get someone to get it in front of the right people??
Hey Mike, I would suggest never ever writing a script for a character you don't have the rights for. No studio or rights holder will ever read it, because when they do want to make a new Batman movie, they send out a call to agencies to have writers pitch their take to them and then choose one off a list of approved writers. Instead, maybe turn that cool Batman idea into a public domain character idea? Like Robin Hood or Zorro.
@@multigeekmedia what about writing a script centered around a famous person who's deceased ? Like Howard Hughes for example.
@@EastwoodKLR most true stories, if they are older, are fair game. So a cool Howard Hughes movie would work, but you'd also be compared to The Aviator, so tread lightly with Mr. Hughes. But legal-wise, you'd be all good.
@@multigeekmedia How are you holding up sir?
@@EastwoodKLR Hey, totally forgot was in this thread.
PLZ make video how to write comedy short film
Find a comedic philosophical conflict, then go with want and cost flow in every line and action of characters in story then shows cost as the comedic point which slowly makes want comedic point to the journey being whole comic.
@@ritamacwan5351 thanks
Or uniqueness vs originality
I love how you put this. I use this to build my philosophical conflicts in my stories but I call it 'my view vs societies norm'
First🎉
second 🥳 🎉 🪅 🎊 🍺 🍻
Yoooo
So you can’t have a pure evil antagonist? That has to be wrong. Obviously you don’t want to be writing them in every screenplay but has there never been a pure evil antagonist done correctly?
The writers voice isn’t formed from the philosophical conflict. It’s born and taken from the theme. The theme is based on what the writer believes and believes in. This is the writers unique voice and distinctive point of view. So these videos are starting to get repetitive and honestly you should stop misleading! Good luck 🍀
"The writers voice isn’t formed from the philosophical conflict. It’s born and taken from the theme."
The difference being?
By the way, philosophical conflict creates the theme
The theme literally comes from the philosophical conflict lmao. You just typed a bunch of nothing, thinking you sounded smart, but ended up agreeing with the video
@@PixelateThat by the way, do you have job? Because it looks like you need one, so you can get off!
@@ritamacwan5351 I’m agreeing with you. What are you even saying? I’m replying to the Manny guy
What's a philosophy if it takes no stand? Who wants a judge who can't decide the case? An ambiguous lesson serves no one. A story with no clear moral argument is as bad as a hero with no clear goal. To take up a story because life gave you a unique perspective on the core issue, then leave us with our questions unanswered, that's to deceive us and waste our time. A morally ambivalent man is a kid with undefined values. Nobody's interested in folks with weak convictions. Make your stand clear, and your audience will find and follow you.
from all your videos, why this one feels the mlst shallow? Finding your voice is much more than just conflict....
Hey, how about this for philosophical conflict inspired by the video - uniqueness vs equality
ANOTHER VIDEO!!!!! Thank you so much!!! 💪💪💪💪🔥🔥🔥
Thank you for your video!
SOUR???
I'm a young and aspiring writer, and honestly, I really needed this.
I think Elysium probably wasn’t the right example to contrast with the earlier points. Really enjoyed the video though.
Every writer should watch this. And storyteller.
Regarding your point on Elysium, you'll be shocked at how many people defend the rich. I also noticed a similar take from Tyler from his Avatar video. Sometimes, when the evils of capitalism are major themes in the movie, it is just black and white. Your suggestion of giving them a "justified" reason for being up there ignores the everyday reality. Most of the time, the rich hoard their wealth just because they can 🤷🏽♀️ So from what I could tell from the clip you showed it all seemed pretty realistic.
Hmm maybe having it be so that the rich are so caught up with their own squabbles (with real consequences) that the main conflict between the rich and poor, through their eyes, isn't even an issue? Like maybe a good screenplay for that might have a semi-good, but still self-centered rich person going against some others in some sort of conflict, (maybe the consequences can be not only personal but also go against something they believe) and the main character somehow breaks the situation to a degree? I'm not sure how it could work, but I think theres probably some sort of way of showing a point of view that is so disconnected from reality, but simultaneously real, and fleshed out, that you can understand it? I think it could be more effective that way, so the audience can sort of get entranced with the luxury and the charisma of it, but then at the turning point bring reality in, finalizing some sort of build up, having an internal conflict.