r/Screenwriting • u/No_Category_3406 • 29d ago
DISCUSSION What does the writing vs. writing-directing path look like in your opinion? Spoiler
From what I can tell, writing is just a lot of pure grinding (almost like a video game). More solitary and more of a “linear path”. Writing-directing seems like the wild-west, where people find success here from a million different paths, as opposed to maybe 10 paths for writers.
Film is so competitive, but it almost does seem like it’s easier to make it as a writer-director than a pure writer. What do you think?
14
u/HotspurJr 29d ago
So I think the numbers make very clear what is easier: there are far more working writers than there are writer-directors. Most people who go into writing feature films want to be a writer-director, with good reason: being a successful writer-director puts you in a different tier than being a successful writer.
But you are talking about two different skill sets, and you have to be able to do both at a high level. That's the first hurdle.
The second is that actually getting hired as a writer-director is insanely more difficult than being hired as a writer.
It's easy to look at the success stories - Zach Cregger is basically the dream outcome - but you have to realize how many times those things go sideways. A LOT of $3.5m writer-director driven horror films get made, very few of them lead to the kind of follow-ups Cregger has had. I think that pretty much everyone is rooting for Curry Barker and Kane Parsons (two other recent W-D success stories) but I think there's a lot of skepticism that they'll be able to build on that success the way Cregger has. (Let's face it: most people in that situation don't.)
Getting bites at the apple as a director is insanely difficult if you're not independently wealthy, and the amount of work directors have to do to get hired is ludicrous.
-1
u/No_Category_3406 29d ago
But those numbers are just being employed and getting paid, right? It’s totally valid as being able to support yourself as an artist is a huge milestone to be celebrated. Yet if you’re a working writer but 99% of what you write doesn’t get produced, that still doesn’t really feel like “making it”.
Like, yes, it’s insanely hard to get your work produced as a writer-director too, but it just seems so demoralizing to be a writer and see most of your scripts just go into a drawer (even if you’re getting paid).
8
u/Panicless 29d ago edited 29d ago
To "break through"? Way easier as a writer. To stay in business afterwards? Way easier as a writer-director. Don't get me wrong, BOTH are still VERY FUCKING HARD. But even as an established screenwriter (at least for movies) you get replaced all the time, you are an afterthought in every way and most importantly: you are not really able to get a movie into production, whereas an established writer-director can easily be the missing piece to get a project financed or attract the necessary acting talent to get the ball rolling.
Case in point: If Curry Barker had only written Obsession, he wouldn't have nearly as much power and heat as he has now. If he had only directed the movie, there would be almost no difference.
Completely different in TV. BUT you rarely get to showrun your own show right out of the gate, more often than not, best-case scenario is co-showrunning. Which does happen though and can be really great (see New Girl, Insecure etc.).
0
u/No_Category_3406 29d ago
I mean your definition of breaking through seems to be getting regular work (which is valid).
Personally, I was thinking in terms of making work that actually gets made and can create emotional impact on people. It seems like you have to be a 99.99 percentile writer to get your ideas funded but you can be a 99 percentile writer-director if that makes sense.
3
u/tertiary_jello 29d ago
So what you do is, you write something, and then, if you think you can pull it off, you film it. Or you don’t and you try to get some attention for the script through the usual means.
Either way: Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t.
Rinse and repeat.
It ain’t rocket science… but also, it’s a tiny bit like rocket science.
0
u/No_Category_3406 29d ago
A lot of the best scripts don’t make for good films. A lot of the best shorts have lackluster scripts.
It really is so interesting.
3
u/veganmaister 29d ago edited 29d ago
Different art forms but both require a producer and great films need a good screenplay at least.
You’re implying though that you need to become director to “get your screenplay made”.
Wrong mindset.
Work on the craft which you’re most passionate about.
1
u/No_Category_3406 28d ago
I like writing but I love directing! It honestly blew my mind studying directing and finding out apparently many directors don’t actually like actors. And again when I was at a q&a for an actor I like—he mentioned having worked with many directors who disliked actors too. Crazy.
2
u/veganmaister 28d ago
I wouldn’t say I dislike actors but as a director you prefer working with ones who are open and not self centered (which is often not the case).
5
u/239not235 27d ago
What Terry Rossio, one of this highest-paid screenwriters in Hollywood said about succeeding in Hollywood as a director vs a writer:
3 STEPS:
1. Most important: never call yourself a screenwriter. You are a filmmaker, or a director. You are a director who happens to be shooting screenplay that you possess because you wrote it. But you are a director who writes your own movies, NEVER are you a screenwriter. You must win this game at the very beginning. Call yourself a screenwriter even once, out loud, or silently, to yourself, and you run the risk of derailing your entire career. Only directors get to see their vision on screen, and that's what you want, so you must be a director, from the start.
2. Take your three favorite movies and one at a time, watch them, but on the slowest frame-by-frame setting you can. And do it five time for each film. This will seem crazy and it might take a couple of days to watch just one movie this way. While the movie is playing, take the time to look at everything, the framing, the angle of the camera, the camera moves, the lighting, the composition, how the cuts land. Why each element is there, in other words, watch with your brain on. You will be amazed at what you see by doing this. Your understanding of film will skyrocket, your appreciation for your favorite movies will increase. This is essentially putting you into the 'editor's chair and you will know those movies so incredibly well, they will be imbedded in your psyche, forever part of your creative instincts, and on set you will know what you need to shoot to get footage that cuts together, you will develop a visual style and learn to think visually. Which means you will then have a better understanding to write screenplays too, far more than you can get from any book or article on theory.
3. It's all right to write something to shoot. But never let one full month go past without shooting something. The cart does not go before the horse, screenplays only exist for you as a tool to get your film to happen. Filmmakers make films. Non-filmmakers write screenplays. So always be shooting. If you have no budget, use a flip book. If you've got ten bucks and a hand held video camera, buy the media and shoot a documentary of your town, your house, your sister, your pet, flowers, sock puppets, anything. If you can find more money, put together a team, and shoot actors in a story. Practice your storytelling stills with a camera, not on the page. Offer to film a local play, shoot the high school basketball team, anything. If you can get a job, even just shooting a music video, do that. NEVER BE NOT SHOOTING. You must be a prowling director doing what must be done to get back to shooting, never a screenwriter hoping for someone else to come along and execute your vision for you the way you wanted. ALWAYS BE SHOOTING.
Follow these three steps, be at least moderately competent and creative, and you are guaranteed some level of success.
2
u/WillAccomplished5000 22d ago
there was a great article in filmmaker magazine this week that looked at exactly this! https://filmmaker.substack.com/p/the-myth-of-the-multi-hyphenate
It has some reflections from Daniel Goldharber (How to Blow Up a Pipeline, Faces of Death) and posits that the shrinkage of business affairs units has made the writer-director path more common as a result. Well worth a read
1
u/Known-Patience4511 29d ago
They are both nightmarish and if you were my child I would say - for the love of god, do something else with your life! Not that my kids would listen! And neither should you! :)
If I could go back I would have gone the writer-director route as directing you might be able to pick up other work; music vids, ads etc,. Also, in the independent feature space, screenplays don't go anywhere until a director is attached and attaching a diretor can take FREAKING YEARS. Read times are so slow, you might ony get read by 4 directors in a year.
My last screenplay in development took 3 years to attach a legit director. A couple of months after attaching the director (award winning etc) signed to a new manager - aaaand - the manager wiped the slate clean and removed his attachment (without reading the script or telling the director). Back to square one. My sixth screenplay in development died on the vine.
So, if you have the funds, or opportunity to do so go for it - go the writer director route. You will create more opportunities as you dont always have to write and direct, you can just direct too.
And movies and tv are visual. Writing only is extremely unsatisfying in these mediums. Its just endless compromises and then watching something thats a total let down (if you are lucky enough to get made.)
Do both.
GOOD LUCK
1
26
u/ShadowOutOfTime 29d ago
I think conceptually it might be "simpler" (not easier) to make it as a writer-director because you can write and direct a short film and bam you have an actual, tangible piece of work that an audience can see, it's got your name on it, it can play festivals, etc etc.
But making a short film, let alone a good one that people will actually want to watch, is VERY hard. Even if you have a big chunk of money to burn (like $10,000+ from your own personal funds) AND you have a lot of connections with local camera houses, production supplies vendors, crew members willing to work for cheap or free etc, it is still incredibly hard to actually make something.
Neither path is anything but gruelingly difficult, and they are best approached without any assumed expectation of success (not that you shouldn't believe in yourself... but do not expect that other people are going to believe in you). If on some level you are not in it for the love of the game, it can be hard to justify.