BOOK REVIEW
BY ENG & EVANGELISTI

JASON(ENG): David, since the title of the book suggests 21 days to a completed script, which is what caught my eye in the first place, let's start there. What was your take on her schedule?

DAVID (EVANGELISTI): I tried her method on my second script and it worked for the most part. At the end of 21 days, I'd completed my first draft. However, I should have had a second draft completed by then, according to King. I believe it's not realistic to think that a "working stiff" can complete a script that is suitable for sending out to a producer or agent in only 21 days. I wouldn't have sent that 2nd script to my dog...and he's six feet under. However, I like her schedule and the fact that it forced me to finish "something" in 21 days. This is surely under the curve for most novice screenwriters.

JASON: I agree. It takes some of the intimidation out of the 120-page slab of white that has to be filled by breaking it down into small, realistic, manageable chunks. The first eight days of the schedule is great if writers can discipline themselves to stick to the schedule.

DAVID: What did you think about her pre-writing section of the book?

JASON: It was pretty good, but kind of sparse. It was only something like 25 pages of a nearly 200 page book. A lot of sweat goes into the planning stages of a script and she just seemed to hit the basics. Nothing to really get into the meat of outlining and planning.

DAVID: I think this would be much better for an intermediate writer. As it stands, it lacks depth. I think the beginning writer seeks clear, thorough information on outlining or alternative pre-writing methods. I would have recommended incorporating the pre-writing styles of professional screenwriters in this section. King only spends a few pages on this and therefore assumes that the writer has acquired this knowledge prior to picking up her book.

JASON: On the other hand, her "How to Write" section was very good. It filled out many parts of what to look for when structuring the screenplay and how to approach it. But it was kind of short. I would have liked to have seen more of this too.

DAVID: This is the best section of the book by far. This is where she maps out an approximate timeline for important events in your script. These events take place on the following pages: one, three, ten, thirty, forty-five, sixty, seventy-five, ninety and one hundred and twenty. She does a good job of explaining these points and providing examples. Simply put, I consider this section of King's book the cliff notes for screenwriting guru, Syd Field's "Screenwriters Workbook". It takes some of what is more abstract in the "Screenwriters Workbook" and expands and breaks it down into an easy-to-understand form. After all, when your writing gets to a point where you don't need the rigid structure, you can utilize certain aspects of what you've learned and manipulate it to fit your individual writing needs for your particular story.

JASON: Well, we both liked that section, you more than me, and agree that it is one of the stronger parts, but the re-writing stuff...what was up with that? It didn't seem like it addressed the fact that after doing a rewrite and making changes that there may be some impact to the script that would require a third pass. Many scripts require many rewrites to get it to a level that is ready to send off. The thirteen-day portion of her schedule needs to be repeated maybe thirteen times. Plus the title of the book suggests that 21 days will give the writer a completed script, ready for agents or producers.

DAVID: This section lacks a bit in content. Again, when a beginning screenwriter churns out a script in 21 days, you could take odds in Vegas and drop a c-note with little consequence, knowing that it will likely be a sour orange of a script. Normally, it is the pros that get their script close to great on a first draft. And to be honest, I don't think there are many that can do that, and surely not with any regularity. Thus, I would've liked to see more on what to look for when rewriting.

JASON: My take on this book is that it should be the second book a new writer reads, after Syd Field. It assumes that the writer already knows something about writing. It does give good deepening, contextual insight into many of Field's topics regarding screenplay structure. I wished that it spent more than roughly 25 pages on how to develop a story before writing. Which is often times where a large part of the effort is spent.

DAVID: I specifically identified with her ideas on whether you should work with a writing partner and how to choose one. From working with Jason on our script, "Treading Water", I would say the majority of her comments were almost frightening in their accuracy. JASON: King's discussion of the "outer obstacles" to writing is good. Touching on subjects such as routine, motivation, family and writing partners made for a more complete book. But again, some of it seemed brushed over. I did appreciate that she takes a sort of hard-ass approach. A swift kick in the pants, so to speak.

DAVID: I think King has a tendency to get a little deep into the philosophical aspects of writing. The majority of this isn't really necessary and her pages could be better spent elsewhere, like rewriting. It was a nice thought to include it, but there are plenty of books that focus on that topic exclusively and overqualified PhD's are writing them. I think this is a prime example of where King tries to be too much to everyone and it's simply ineffective.

JASON: I agree. This whole "inner obstacle" thing seemed like a bunch of philosophical hoo ha. Like the part about writers' block and how to deal with it. King provides a list with such suggestions as talking to Oak trees, sniffing soap at the grocery store, and taking a bath with incense and candles. This sounds like a recipe for how to be an eccentric, wacko artist. As if talking to a tree is going to be the key to ending writers' block. It's more like the key to a jail cell. I think it is good to discuss issues of motivation and how to stick to a schedule and be disciplined. But these are issues of an individual's psychology and I didn't get the impression that King was writing a self-help screenwriting book.

DAVID'S CONCLUDING REMARK: I would definitely recommend it for anyone that is either a beginning or intermediate level screenwriter. I think it would serve as very educational to the beginner and a helpful refresher for the intermediate screenwriter.

JASON'S CONCLUDING REMARK: Exactly. I still refer to it once a year or so. Anybody of any level could benefit from this book and the application of the schedule King proposes.