Why, oh why, would anyone dedicate a chapter to made-up genres relevant to nothing?
Snyder stresses the importance of knowing your market and knowing your audience. He recommends approaching strangers within your target demographic to ask what they think of your logline. So why, oh why, does he describe a ridiculous genre of 'Man With a Problem' and crowd Die Hard, Titanic, and Schindler's List under that dubious umbrella? To me, this makes no sense.
Audience aside, Snyder refers to traditional genres: romantic comedy, drama etc., throughout the book, and defines 'genre' as such in his own glossary. So, what, oh what, is the point of chapter two?
Chapter three reveals that a movie needs a hero with a goal. Hmm, okay, nothing startling about that piece of news.
Chapter four discusses structure and uses Miss Congeniality as an example. By now, I'm thinking Mr. Snyder and I are not quite on the same sailing ship, but one of us is obviously at sea.
The visual tools Snyder recommends in chapter five, I found useful. The concept of writing plot points on index cards and arranging them in five acts is by no means original, but I appreciate the practical and visual methods recommended by the author, and I confess, I have tried it.
At around page 121, 64% of the way through the book, Snyder finally caught my attention with the fun advice about the 'Pope in the Pool,' and the 'Double Mumbo Jumbo.' I chuckled at the irony of 'Laying Pipe' and 'Watch out for that Glacier,' and I don't really remember much about the rest of the book.
I give Save the Cat, 5 out of 10. I won't deny I learned something, and it's always worth reading a book if it sends you away with one useful tip, but half of me wishes I had taken the advice of the title and donated my ten bucks to the Snow Leopard Trust.
Erica, good review -- I appreciate your thoughts. I first heard of this book with a revisions group I worked with. A couple of the authors actually had the math calculations to figure out where in their MS their beats should be applied. I knew, since I was completely clueless what they were talking about, I needed to give this book a read. While I don't think he's the deity of writing, I do think the advice is pretty darn good for writing a book that keeps a reader engaged with a good pace and active plot. If I ever tackle another project of fiction, I'll probably buy it and apply it more directly.
ReplyDeleteAnd here I was thinking I was an analytical person. Your revision group sounds like fun.
DeleteYou've raised a fair point about pace. I don't mind reading a slow book if the writing grips me, but a screenwriter's voice and style are generally not the things we watch for in a movie. You're right, it's pace and plot that keep us watching. (Or is that just me?)
Thanks for the comments. I'm off to check out the other reviews.
Hi, Erica.
ReplyDeleteWe think your comments about Snyder's book are just. And we, too, found the second half of the book more useful. But we should keep in mind that this a book targeting aspiring screenwriters, not writers already traveling down roads using other media such as novels.
But, as you note, it's still all about storytelling, and we've tried out his card strategy to help shape more efficient outlines for our novels. And that strategy does produce tighter, more well-thought out lines of narrative.
So we'd rate it higher than you did, adjusting for its intended newbie audience in the first half.
(Love the big cat art at the bottom of your post.)
I agree, the book is for aspiring screenwriters. The gimmickry that didn't appeal much to me, I think is appropriate for the intended audience.
DeleteI also agree that Snyder's visual approach is a great tool for those of us who may get wrapped up in words, rather than images. Not only that, it's fun and provides a welcome break from the screen. If the card strategy helps, even just one little bit, than that's a good thing.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Thanks for posting this Erica. I liked your take on this book, but yes, it's target audience is screen writers, not writers.
ReplyDeleteAll the best!
Absolutely. The (unapplied) genre thing still doesn't make sense to me, but if it helps a new screenwriter see things more clearly, that's great.
DeleteThanks for the heartfelt view Erica. Although I enjoyed this book a great deal, and found it helpful, you do have a point about the fact that even Snyder doesn't go back to his genre list.
ReplyDeleteIt's an easy book to read. I think I'll enjoy it more the second time round now I know what to focus on.
DeleteI think what Snyder was trying to do with his 'guy with a problem' genre list was show that just because stories (films) seem different, the basic issue can still be the same. And he was writing about screenplays and not novels.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this book has much that wasn't relevant to novel writers, but because his logline and beat sheet portions gave me such ah-ha moments, it was really helpful to me. I guess it's all about where we are in our journey as writers that causes us to see the same book so differently.
Your last statement sums it up perfectly. We pull abit of something from this book, and pull abit of something from that one until our toolboxes are loaded with stuff. We may upgrade tools, toss some out after a year, and so it goes.
DeleteI saw by your review that Snyder's visual tools are proving valuable to you. Good stuff.
Made me laugh! I've been feeling a bit out in the cold, because I reacted more like you did, and everyone else is so enthusiastic.
ReplyDeleteI think Snyder really mean "archetypes" rather than "genres" in that discussion. Or something. I found that part so annoyingly reductive that I almost put the book down, though I'm glad I didn't since, like you, I came away with one or two ideas that may improve my writing.
Phew, I'm glad I made someone laugh. Luckily, the book is an easy read otherwise I may have abandoned it, too. I guess Snyder follows his own advice in this respect. He really did save his best stuff for last.
DeleteLOL - great review and you have some very valid points. I have to admit I didn't quite get the way he grouped movies, but kind of skimmed past that point thinking it was just me because I'm not a film buff. Bit relieved to discover it's not just me!
ReplyDeleteI'm relieved to hear it's not just me, too.
DeleteI can't remember why I went awol during the discussion of this book but I missed it. I'm glad to read your review. I never brought myself to buy the book and now I'm glad I didn't. If the opportunity ever comes up, I'll give it a read, otherwise, I'll let it go.
ReplyDeleteActually, most other people raved about it, so I'm not sure if my views represent the majority. It's worth borrowing from the library if you can. In between the Hollywood gimmicks are a few pretty cool ideas.
DeleteI do plan to read the other reviews and keep an open mind. Thing is the library didn't have a copy and neither did the whole county library system. I guess living in the sticks sucks sometimes.
DeleteI can totally relate to that. (I live on Guam.) Aha, now I see where your snowflake-flower-thingie comes from. Very nice.
DeleteVERY insightful, Erica! I still haven't gotten to it yet, but look forward to these chapters from your opinions expressed.
ReplyDeleteAgain...sorry I was such a bad host during this book. Just because I wrote a little about the issues, didn't make them magically disappear.
No, unfortunately things seldom magically disappear... unless you write fantasy.
DeleteI'll be very interested to hear your take on the book. The club didn't completely fall apart with you - there were some great reviews - but you were certainly missed.