• MWSM Home
• The MWSM FAQ
• The MWS FAQ (from the un-moderated misc.writing.screenplays)
• MWSM Charter
• MWSM Moderation Policies
• Contests, Fellowships, Web sites
• Trolls, and how to filter them.

Frequently.Asked.Questions

This page addresses the most common screenwriting-related questions that appear on MWSM. It's a good idea to at least scan this document before posting to MWSM for the first time, as many basic questions are answered here.

We have another, very informative page, provided by Neal Marshall Stevens. which is of such general interest that we didn't want to chop it up to fit it in the FAQ. Neal's advice should be required reading for anyone wanting to break into the Hollywood system, or wanting to market a screenplay.

If you have comments or suggestions for this document (or if you want to contribute a section on some relevant topic), please forward them to Alan Brooks (e-mail address: chips at panix.com).

Contents

• Mechanics
• Basic Screenplay format; paper, margins, fonts
• What's a brad?
• Oh, come on. Does anybody really care about format?
• What Screenwriting Software is available? Do I need it?
• Craft
• Does 3-Act structure matter?
• What film schools are out there? Are they worth it?
• Got any great screenwriting books to recommend?
• Business
• How do I protect my work?
• If there are so many great scripts out there, why do such stupid movies get made?
• I just finished my first script. How do I get an agent?
• How do I market myself (once I'm really marketable)?
• I have this great idea for a movie. I just need someone to write it for me.
• Do I have to live in LA to work in the movies?
• Are contests worth it?
• What online resources are available?
• Agents and Managers

Mechanics

Accepted screenplay formatting changes over time. If you're trying to learn formatting, don't use screenplays from the 1940s. Don't use screenplays from directors who write for themselves, as they aren't trying to market their scripts to anybody but themselves and their often small set of financiers. Robert Altman makes terrific movies, but this screenwriters -- Joan Tewksbury, Robert Altman himself, etc. -- aren't writing to sell in Hollywood, they're writing for themselves. If rigid formatting bothers you, then write any way you want, but if you want to sell your screenplays in the general marketplace, format them in the acceptable way before sending them out.

How do I present my script?

You should print your script on one side of the page only.

The title page should have the name of your script and your name. (The only word separating those two should be "by"). Your name and address can go in a lower corner; I've seen both right and left. I use left. When you have representation, you agency contact will go here instead.

Use solid brass brads. These are the metal fasteners with a little round head and two little prongs that stick out the other side. Do not use a three-ring binder or chicago screws. While your paper has three holes, use only two brads.

Make sure you're using the solid brass brads, not the brass-plated ones. The brass-plated brads are not strong enough to hold your script together. The solid brass ones are harder to find, but are available online.

You should cover your script with card stock. Basically, any heavyweight paper will do. It should be white or off-white. You can buy white cover stock (which is technically a bit lighter than cardstock, but should probably be heavy enough) at Staples or any similar store.

The cover should be blank. Your title page does not have a number on it. Typically, the first page isn't numbered either, so the first numbered page is page 2 (screenplay formatters like Movie Magic Screenwriter will do this automatically).

Should I use parentheticals?

Parentheticals are widely discouraged. Although an occasional parenthetical is useful, an inexperienced screenwriter should be very careful about over-using them.

Many professional scripts will have only two or three parentheticals per script. If you have a scene with two or three parentheticals, you're probably using too many.

Why are they a problem? Well, for starters, they're "directing from the page" i.e. telling the actor how to do his job. As the writer, it's your job to tell the actor what to say, not how to say it. The exception is when the meaning of the line would be unclear without the parenthetical.

A typical (but extreme) bad use of a parenthetical is this:

     INT. ALLEY  - DAY

     Jack pushes Jim up against the wall. He grabs him by the throat.

                                JACK
                           (Angrily)
                    Tell me where my money is you
                    Son-of-a-bitch!

Kind of obvious that he was angry even without the parenthetical, wasn't it?

Nevertheless, you see this kind of parenthetical all the time in amateur scripts. Cut it.

Going further, it's important to recognize the contribution everyone else brings to the script. It can be worthwhile to understand how an actor approaches a script. When an actor is given a script, the first thing he or she usually does is cross out all the parentheticals.

Sound absurd? It isn't, actually. Because parentheticals describe the surface, and the actor usually isn't interested in the surface, he's interested in the life underneath the lines. If he gets that right, the surface will work just beautifully. But thinking about the surface often results in a stilted performance.

But the simple truth is that parentheticals are very rarely necessary, and that alone should be a solid reason to cut them out.

That aside, they should be kept when the meaning of a line is otherwise unclear.

And what about (beat)?

(beat) is a very common thing to find in amateur screenplays. It occurs, less often, in professional scripts. It should be avoided.

Like with other parentheticals, it really amounts to directing from the page. It's your job to tell the actor what to say, not how to say it.

The other issue with (beat) is that it tends to be used as excuse to avoid writing something more interesting. Usually, when somebody writes a line with a beat in it, it's because something happens during that moment of time. But if the writer is just writing (beat) we don't get to learn what that something is.

     INT. TAXICAB  - DAY

     Jim and Julie sit in the back seat.

                                JIM
                    I'm late for the office already.
                           (beat)
                    I guess we could stop by the hotel.

This is a very different scene if it's written like:

                                JIM
                    I'm late for the office already.

     Julie slides her hand up Jim's thigh, giving him a light squeeze.

                                JIM (con't)
                    I guess we could stop by the hotel.

Or:

                                JIM
                    I'm late for the office already.

     Julie stifles a small sob.

                                JIM (con't)
                    I guess we could stop by the hotel.

Very different scenes, huh? And that, in a nutshell, is the problem with (beat): there's something interesting happening, and rather than show it to me you're writing around it.

That aside, there are times when (beat) is appropriate. When there is a story point that can not be referenced by an external action, but changes the meaning of the line, then (beat), or something similar, is necessary. But don't include it just because that's how you imagine someone saying the line.

Can I use camera directions?

Again, the general rule is "when in doubt, leave it out".

Nobody wants to read a script cluttered up with comments about closesups, MCUs, OTS shots, and garbage like that. It makes for a poor reading experience, and remember that scripts exist to be read.

Furthermore, most writers who do include camera directions are generally not doing so in an interesting way. In other words, they're adding words to their script that don't convey any meaningful or useful information.

The exception is when somebody writes a shot which actually is an interesting shot that doesn't hurt the flow of the reading experience and actually adds useful information. But I feel obligated to warn you just how rare these shots are: that long dolly shot through the crowd in the club isn't interesting or original.

And what about "We see"?

As a general rule, you should ignore any reference to the audience. Rather than write:

     We see Katie run up the stairs to her apartment.

you should write:

     Katie runs up the stairs to her apartment.

Or instead of:

     We see Bill, a tall, lean athlete. He walks up to Katie and
     kisses her.

try:

     Bill, a tall, lean athlete walks up to Katie and kisses her.

Shorter. Tighter. It reads better.

People are sometimes tripped up by this when dealing with technical issues.

     We open on a black screen. We hear the sounds of breathing,
     and then we see white text fade in which reads: Blah Blah
     Blah

Instead:

     Black. Darkness. An animal's panting breath, nearby.

     SUPER
     Blah Blah Blah

I think most people would agree that the later reads better.

This last example is a bit more of a marginal case; unlike with the Bill and Katie examples, you're not doing anything wrong here by saying "we see" except insomuch as you're doing something clumsy.

This isn't such a big deal except that a lot of script readers have very highly-developed bad-script detectors, and "we see" is one of those things that tends to set them off. It's the sort of thing you see a lot in bad scripts, and rarely in good ones, so it's very possible that someone will make assumptions about your script based on the use of "We see," particularly in the first few pages.

Since it's easy to avoid (I've only seen a handful of "we sees" that could be written out with a little bit of effort) why run the risk? Get rid of it and save yourself a potential headache.

How long should my screenplay be?

90-120 pages.

That's the official guideline. Given the old page-a-minute standard, that should result in a feature that's between an hour and a half and two hours long.

Anything shorter than 90 pages probably isn't long enough to make a feature. And while movies longer than two hours get made, the longer a script gets the harder it is to get made. Most amateur writers who write 140 page scripts lack discipline, and so the first reaction of any reader when given an (even) 125 page script is going to be, "Oh no. This is going to be flabby." They'll approach it knowing (probably correctly) that things need to be cut.

But it gets a little more complicated than this. In reality, anything under 100 is going to look "thin" to an experienced producer. Their first reaction is going to be, "This is going to need to be fleshed out a bit," even before they start reading. I know several established and produced writers who absolutely will not turn in a draft under 100 pages, and I think this is a sensible guideline.

Similarly, since the old page-a-minute thing is just that (old), the truth is that given the way screenplays tend to be written today, they run long. That means a 120-page screenplay is likely to be over two hours if shot.

Which means that even an 120-page screenplay may be too long. Those same writers who suggest that you need to be at least 100 pages also say that you really should max out at no more than 115-117.

Part of this is psychological. If I get a 119-page script, I suspect that the writer may be cutting corners to stay under the magic number. The same with a 101-page script: is he padding to get three digits?

These are brads:

    [Section under Construction]

The Golden Age of Hollywood occurred long before the invention of the personal computer. You can write a screenplay with nothing but a typewriter and a ream of letter-sized paper, so don't fool yourself that it's a lack of specialized software that's preventing you from writing.

What are the best screenwriting programs out there?

The two most popular programs in Hollywood are "Movie Magic Screenwriter" and "Final Draft".

While there are other programs, these two dominate the field. Which one you prefer is really a matter of taste. The differences between the programs are minor, and you'll quickly get used to (and come to prefer) whichever one you use.

Five or so years ago, Final Draft was THE standard. However, MMS has been gaining a lot of ground and may now be the more popular program. (As a completely personal aside, even though I use Final Draft, I've found the people behind MMS to be more friendly, accessible, and professional, and even though I use FD myself, if I owned neither of these programs and was trying to decide which one to get, that would tip me towards MMS.)

These programs are expensive. There are student rates, but those are still in the range of $150. Therefore, I feel compelled to mention one other program:

"Hollywood Screenwriter" is a reduced-feature version of Movie Magic Screenwriter. It doesn't contain a lot of the production features of MMS, but has everything that an aspiring writer working on spec would need. While it lists for around $60, I've seen it on the web for as low as $35, including shipping.

What are the advantages of a screenwriting program?

Screenwriting programs make the process of formatting your script simple.

Both FD and MMS are highly-intuitive programs that help you produce a professional-looking script. They allow you to get your thoughts down on paper faster and easier than other methods.

But bear in mind that the formatting that screenplay software helps you do is a trivially small part of the process of getting a script done well, and it's possible to make a horribly-formatted script with even the best screenwriting program.

Do I need a screenwriting program?

Absolutely not. It's relatively simple to create a few macros which will turn a standard word processor like Microsoft Word into an effective screenwriting program. And, of course, more successful scripts have been written on a typewriter than any other way.

A screenwriting program is an OPTIONAL tool. It's very useful. Personally, I wouldn't want to write without one. But in no way should it be considered essential, necessary, or the mark of a professional.

Does anybody have a crack for (blank)?

What? You're too cheap to pay $35 for Hollywood Screenwriter. Don't claim you can't afford it. Save up.

Look, if you're an aspiring screenwriter, you plan on making your living by creating and selling your intellectual property. Doesn't it seem slightly ironic to start that process by stealing someone else's intellectual property? Pay the $35. If you're serious about writing, this is a program you will be using almost every day. Don't steal it.

There is not a big market for screenwriting software. These guys are not selling tens of thousands of copies a year, and yet they still have to put a lot of work into their products. Let's respect that and hope that other people will treat our work with the same level of respect.

Craft

    [Section under Construction]

What are the best film schools?

Bear in mind that when somebody talks about film school, they are usually talking about a graduate-level program terminating in an M.F.A. degree. While most of the schools on the above list offer B.A. and/or B.F.A. degrees, a bachelor's in film is nowhere near as rigorous as a master's.

What about (blank)? Isn't it a good school, too?

A good resource for aspiring film students is the book "Film School Confidential" by Kelly and Edgar. The problem with this book is that it is substantially out of date; the description of the program at USC (to pick just one example) describes only a few students being able to make thesis films every year. This is simply not the case: almost every student who wants to direct a thesis film and can afford to does.

Nevertheless, despite this caveat, the book is worth perusing as it has a lot of good basic information.

One more thing. Having recently talked with several faculty members at a major film school, I heard the same refrain again and again. These faculty, when asked what their advice would be for high school student who wants a career in film, almost universally said the same thing:

"Get the best liberal arts education you can, then come here for a graduate degree in film."

Do I really need to go to film school?

Look at it like this: USC admits 100 graduate production students a year, which means that, three-four years down the road, it graduates 100 production students a year, all of whom want to be directors. And that's just one film school.

And how many features by first-time directors are distributed a year? I'd be surprised if it was 20.

Why would I want to go to film school?

Hollywood is not known as a place where people like to help each other out.

You can spend years as an AC and the Camera operator doesn't want to teach you what he does because then you're competing with him for work.

All the major film schools build their curriculum in roughly the same way: making short films and writing scripts, and then discussing them with faculty, combined with the study of successful films. There's usually some (but not a lot) of academic study thrown in as well, but don't be fooled: film school is a pretty blue-collar place. You'll be making films and writing constantly.

Some people claim connections are a great reason to go to film school, and I can't completely agree. You'll certainly meet a lot of people who share your goals and interests, and some of those people will become valued colleagues down the road. The film school name will certainly open some doors for you. But by far the biggest reason to go to film school is to get better at making films.

The difference in quality between first-semester films and thesis projects at any of the major film schools is staggering. That alone implies that students learn a heck of a lot about the craft of filmmaking and is the best single reason to go.

And the down side of film school?

And unlike medical school or law school, most film school graduates do not have immediate prospects for high (or even medium-) paying work in their field. After three years of paying a lot of money and working very hard on your craft, you're still basically near the bottom of the ladder.

While you may well have some excellent instructors at film school,you're likely to have some very poor ones, also. Some instructors at even the major film schools are has-beens, or very bitter never-wases, or people who aren't excited about being in the classroom. While I had three or four of the best teachers I've ever had at film school, I also had one or two of the worst. You have to be proactive about doing your research and finding the right teachers.

What about the for-profit schools like Full Sail And NYFA?

I will say this, however: a month after graduating from USC, a friend of mine was teaching at NYFA. He's a bright and talented guy, but you should understand that's who's teaching at places like this.

    [Section under Construction]

Business Matters

There are heaps of misconceptions about copyrights, ownership and the protection of material. This is a brief attempt to clarify some of these issues and to dispell some of the more popular misconceptions involving copyright.

First, you can't copyright an idea. You can't copyright a thought, a notion or an opinion. You can't copyright a title (though you might be able to trademark it). You can't even copyright a story, until you've written it down. A copyright is basically the right to control copying (duh) and therefore use, and that right resides with the creator of a written material the instant it is laid down in fixed physical form. You write it, you own it. The difficulty is not in having a copyright, but in protecting your copyright, and to protect it you need to be able to prove that you wrote it, to establish when you wrote it, and to demonstrate that the person who you claim infringed on your copyright had access to the material.

So, the task becomes one of establishing these facts. In short, you want to establish a paper-trail. In support of this there are various ways to register your work which will allow you to demonstrate a timeline for its creation.

To clear up the first and worst misconception about copyright; mailing a manuscript to yourself in a manila envelope, and leaving it sealed, is completely and utterly worthless. People call this "poor man's" copyright registration, and the poorest man will be the one who wastes the $3.00 to do it. There are simply too many ways in which this "copyright registration" could be gamed: you could have mailed yourself an empty envelope, then after Titanic came out, stuck a copy of James Cameron's script inside, sealed it up and taken it to court, claiming you'd written it years before Cameron had that billion dollar gleam in his eye. Sure, kid.

The real way to register your script is by sending a copy to the United States Library of Congress. You can (and should) read all about it at www.copyright.gov, which is the Copyright Office at the Library of Congress. Screenplays can generally be registered with the Short Form PA. US Copyright registration was really invented for US writers, but the LOC has become the de facto standard for screenplay registration worldwide. This makes sense because you'll want your script registered in the place you'd most likely need to bring somebody to court for an infringment, so if you're going to distribute your screenplay in Hollywood you want a USA registration regardless of whether you live in Wyoming or Wangaratta.

The Writer's Guild of America, West Coast Division and the The Writer's Guild of America, East Coast Division also offer script registration services. These services are designed to establish who wrote what during credit arbitration disputes, and WGA registration is regarded by many as a subsitute for LOC registration. But it's not. There are specific abilities to recapture lost income if you bothered to register your copyright with the LOC, which are not available to you if you only registered with the WGA. You'll have to make a decision about where you want to register your script, and some people decide to register with both the LOC and WGA (East or West, but not both). Others decide that one or the other place offers sufficient protection. The choice is yours, but we will offer this gem of a posting from a lawyer who frequents MWSM. He was responding to a writer who claimed that the dialogue didn't matter in establishing ownership, and this is what he opined:

   But it is the identical snippets of dialogue that will make the jury
   say "ah-ha!" The closer the registered version to the stolen version,
   the stronger the case will be.
 
   WGA v. LoC registration:
 
   WGA registration was created to assist the guild in resolving delivery
   date and credit disputes. It's been expanded by the guild as an easy
   way to make money.
 
   However, a substitute for proper registration in the US Copyright
   Office it is not.  Unlike WGA registration, Copyright Office
   registration provides: (1) an official registry where options and
   assignments can be registered with legal effect; (2) automatic
   authentication in a courtroom; (3) an award of attorney fees in
   infringement lawsuits and (4) automatic minimum damages in infringement
   lawsuits.
 
   Spend your money on Copyright Office registration. If you still have
   money left, go out for lunch.

Mind you, he is not your lawyer. And neither is the MWSM FAQ. But we hope this has cleared up some of the basic issues for you.

One last item on protection: Establish a timeline. Once you've copyrighted your script, registered it with the WGA and started passing it around, you'll want to keep a record of who you've sent it to. You'll want this for your own purposes, so you don't go sending it repeatedly to the same person, or to different people at the same agency. It's just good business to know where your material is. But you also want this paper trail because in the unlikely event that some executive at Lamprey Entertainment suddenly has a brilliant idea for a film exactly like the one you just sent him, and brings "his" idea in, and it gets it greenlighted, and you find yourself 4 years later watching your story acted out in front of your eyes on the big screen, that you can prove that said executive read your material the week before he brought it in as "his" idea.

There is another issue about copyright that is especially relevant to screenwriters, and it is that of putting the copyright notice on your work. A proper copyright notice contains the following:

• Either the word "Copyright", the abbreviation "Copr." or the copyright symbol, "©".
• The year the work was created
• The name of the copyright holder

In other words, you'd put something like this one your script:

© 2007, Maynard G. Krabs

That's fine, but the point where you want to protect your script is when you send it out to producers and agents. And it's just at this point that you wnat your work to seem as fresh-off-the-Underwood as it can. Nobody wants to read a script that's been knocking around for a decade, and that "proper" copyright notice will work against you in this regard. An MWSM regular took the bold step of calling the Library of Congress Copyright Office general information number (202.707.5959) to clear up this question, and this is what she learned (the following is a lightly-edited version of her post to the group:

The question: In marketing a script in Hollywood, do I have to show the copyright symbol and year on the flypage of my work? Hollywood isn't very interested in anything more than two weeks old.

LOC Answer: You do not have to show ANY copyright information on the fly page of your script. Your work is fully protected without it. You do not have to give copyright information until a work is published for sale to the public. Motion picture studios, television studios, production companies, literary agencies, movie producers or directors are NOT "the public." Your work is fully protected.

Then she went on to explain (once prodded) that you do not have to register your copyright until an infringement occurs, then you can register it before going to trial and have full benefits as if the copyright had been registered the day of the final polish. [Ed.: Of course this does not address the value of establishing a paper-trail that documents the creation date of your work...]

We also learned that there is an interesting new form of "preregistration." Here's an excerpt from the LOC site:

IMPORTANT: Preregistration is not Registration. Before you submit an application for preregistration, make sure you want to preregister your work rather than register it.

   a.. For the vast majority of works, preregistration is not useful.    b.. Preregistration is not a substitute for registration. If you do preregister your work, you are required to register it when it is published.    c.. You may register an unpublished work for $45, without preregistering it. The nonrefundable filing fee for preregistration is $100.

You may benefit by preregistering your work if:

   a.. you think it's likely someone may infringe your work before it is released; and,
   b.. you have started your work but have not finished it.

You can preregister your work only if:

   a.. your work is unpublished; and,
   b.. creation of your work has begun; and,
   c.. your work is being prepared for commercial distribution; and,
   d.. your work is one of the following: motion picture, musical work, sound recording, computer program, book, or advertising photograph.

from: http://www.copyright.gov/prereg/help.html

As of this writing (fall, 2007), it costs a hundred bucks a pop for pre-registration. When the copyright office assistant was asked whether it would be easier to just copyright a short story or an outline or a treatment instead of using pre-registraion, she said something like, "That will work!"

    [Section under Construction]

This question has been asked and answered so many times on MWS and MWSM that we've got a special page for it, provided by Neal Marshall Stevens. It's must-read material for anyone trying to break into Hollywood or market a screenplay.

    [Section under Construction]

But also, see the above section -- you'd do well to read Neal Marshall Steven's FAQ for this question as well.

    [Section under Construction]

    [Section under Construction]

    [Section under Construction]

One of the most valuable things you can do as an aspiring screenwriter, is to read as lots of screenplays. Before The Web, it was often difficult to get your hands on real screenplays, but now there are many sites online where real, professionally-written screenplays can be found. Not all scripts are written to "industry" standards, and some are transcriptions rather than original material. Transcriptions won't conform to industry standards, and the descriptions will often not match those of the original writer. With those caveats in mind, here are some online sources for scripts:

• http://www.movie-page.com/movie_scripts.htm
• http://www.scriptcrawler.com/
• http://www.script-o-rama.com/
• http://www.joblo.com/moviescripts.php
• http://simplyscripts.com/
• http://sfy.iv.ru/index.html
• http://www.scriptcity.com/
• http://www.13idol.com/store/scriptsfeature.html
• http://www.scriptshack.com/shop/enter.html
• http://www.scriptpimp.com/screenwriting/home.cfm
• http://www.weeklyscript.com/

The problem with the word "Managers" is that it encompasses a lot of people who do very different things.

The people I met at companies like Untitled (where I'm managed), Brillstein-Grey, Management 360 all are, basically, agents. Some of them may have fewer clients. Some of them may produce on the side. But, really, my sense of it is that they're really agents, except without the state/WGA seal of approval. They know people. They strategize. They'll help figure out who to send your stuff to. Etc. Having these guys is, basically, like having an agent. I happen to have one of these guys and an agent, because I figure now, when it's cheap, it's worth it to have multiple people working for me.

They say, in theory, that a manager is thinking more about your long-term career, your agent more about the next job, but I'm not sure that's the case, not with one of these guys.

Then there's slightly smaller companies: Nine Yards, Fuse, etc. These guys, I suspect, are a little bit more focused on their clients. Their clients are lower on the pay scale. I'm willing to believe that these guys fit the model of the stereotypical good manager a little better. They're less about knowing people, more about working with you.

Then there's the producers-without-money guys. eg, so-and-so was a jr guy in Scott Rudin's office forever, is now breaking out on his own. He has some contacts. He knows some agents. What he's looking for is writers with which to develop projects that he can attach himself to as a producer.

There are a lot of these guys, and they get the biggest "stay away" from me. The best way to think about it is that not only are they looking for free options, they're looking for financially favorable options. (That deserves a little bit more explanation. When a producer sets up a project at a studio, he gets $12.5k in walking around money. That's it - until the project goes into production, in which case they get their fee, or is killed, in which case they get the rest of their development money - another $12.5k. But, of course, as a writer you're making your money during this period. So what these managers do is get to supplement their $12.5k with 10% of your paycheck ... which you get back if the project is a go because it's recoupable against producers fees. But it doesn't take a genius to see how this can make development - as opposed to production - much more profitable for them.)

By and large, those guys have very strong ideas about what sort of work you should be doing, because it's the sort of work they think they can effectively produce. It's about their career, not yours, although in theory, of course, they're not opposed to helping you if it helps them.

Then there's a last category of manager, which is sometimes hard to distinguish from that last group, and that's the legitimate, good-natured single-person management company. He's genuinely interested in working with writers he likes. Connections ... well, he's got some, but, really, most of the time this guy is someone who either was an agent for a few years or didn't get promoted to agent. He sees himself as creative (which can be a plus, if he's talented, or can be a minus, if he's not - and heck, Terry would say it's a minus anyway). But if he's smart and dedicated, and you're the kind of writer who likes having people to work with while you put your scripts together, this guy can probably help you. Probably he's less helpful (because he's less connected, has less of a track record, etc) than the guys in that second tier of management companies, but there are exceptions. (A key to seeing if he's the exception is that he's actually been an agent for a while, has a legitimate reputation, and has a roster full of working clients who aren't all repped by the same agent) but otherwise he's really selling access to his agent friends, and for somebody who's bad at the self-marketting thing, one of these guys could be a lifesaver while you're getting started.

Both the later two managers will probably claim to get your represented "at the biggest agency we can." Generally, this means that they have a friend who's a jr. agent at CAA. The guy at CAA is happy to take you on as a client, because he knows the manager is doing a lot of the work, and he'll get to take credit for you with his bosses if you get any work. The jr. agent sees it, meanwhile, as a favor to his manager buddy, something at no real cost to him.

This stuff is really stressful because you feel like you can make a decision which can screw up your career prospects for a long time to come, but the truth is that people change managers and agents all the time. If it doesn't work out, you can re-evaluate, and, so long as you are VERY CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT YOU SIGN you should trust your gut and not spend a lot of time second-guessing yourself.

But do not sign a management agreement without having a lawyer look over it first. That's very important.

There are lots of other great screenwriting sites online, some offering a community experience, peer reviews, advice from experts and much more. This is far from an exhaustive list:

• The Writer's Guild of America: This page is basically the WGA's FAQ, with professional writers giving answers to basic questions about the business, format, story development and marketing. Great stuff.
• American Zoetrope: Francis Copolla's virtual studio, offering peer reviews, discussion, chat, contests and much more.
• Wordplayer: The home of Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio, writers, producers and advice-givers par excellence. Be sure to read all of the "Columns" section.

This document was compiled by various MWSM posters. Copyrights as noted.