Interview with Michael Tucker

By Vikram Nijhawan

Creator of Lessons from the Screenplay

Michael Tucker is a filmmaker, screenwriter, and editor based in Los Angeles. After graduating from the University of California Santa Cruz with a degree in Film Studies, he embarked on many creative endeavors, including a job in film editing. He is best known for his YouTube channel “Lessons from the Screenplay”. In his videos, he analyzes cinematic storytelling, using various films as case studies. The channel has over a million subscribers, and his content regularly receives just as many views. In his podcast “Beyond the Screenplay”, Michael and the rest of his creative team dissect screenwriting in long-form discussions.

What inspired you to pursue screenplay analysis in the first place?

I always wanted to make movies, and my main emphasis was on directing. Even during my early filmmaking days, I was writing to direct. The main feedback I received on my short films and web series was always something like, “the directing is great, the production value is awesome…but the story is a little weak.” After completing film school and working in LA for several years making short films and doing documentary work, I found myself with some spare time on my hands.

I have a theory that different people approach filmmaking from different angles. Speaking for myself, I’m very much an editor at heart. When I first started screenwriting, I focused on the structural aspects of storytelling, such as conveying information to the audience, which related most to editing. I often use structure as the starting point when beginning to analyze a film.

What is one film you would consider to be a general template for excellent writing — something you return to time and again as an example? For what reasons?

There are two examples that come to mind. One film which I always return to is Inside Out. It’s a compelling story, and it makes me cry every time I watch it! But more importantly, the structure is so accessible because it’s right there on the surface: Joy must learn to embrace Sadness. The story’s text and sub-text perfectly parallel one another. It presents a very clear example of what a character arc is, and overall the film provides both an intellectual reference for learning screenwriting, as well as an emotionally-riveting experience for most other viewers.

The second film is Logan. The first act perfectly establishes the protagonist and all the elements in the story that will force him to change. It was really fun making the video in which I compare it with the first act of Children of Men.

You reference many books by screenwriting theorists in your videos, namely John Truby’s The Anatomy of Story, Robert McKee’s Story, and K.M. Welland’s Creating Character Arcs. In your experience writing screenplays, is there a danger in relying too heavily on theoretical knowledge over intuitive knowledge, derived from practice, trial and error?

I definitely understand the frustration with reading a book which tells you what to do beat-by-beat. What I have come to learn is the greater danger: shirking all theoretical knowledge, thinking you have all the answers, and wondering why your

If you read just one, you may have a jaded perspective. The idea is to read all of them, parse out the common advice, and hone your writing instincts. There’s a false duality between theory and intuition. You need both to be a good screenwriter. The more books and authorities you expose yourself to, the more intuition you will develop, and the less you’ll feel like you’re ticking off storytelling boxes.

In your podcast on The Social Network, you discuss your love of Aaron Sorkin’s writing (with which I can relate!) Can you reveal some aspects of Sorkin’s writing you like and dislike?

At this point, I think some of my favourite things about Sorkin’s style are also my least favourite things about him. Any creative person who has such a distinct style will grate on you with increased familiarity of their work. I used to watch episodes of The West Wing repeatedly on the DVD box set (back in the early 2000s). His writing style is very apparent, and remained so upon continued viewings. I love his use of rhythmic dialogue. I derive the same pleasure listening to it as I do from listening to a song. I also enjoy the wittiness of his writing, and his good sense of drama. Sorkin can squeeze an incredible amount of tension and emotion from just having two people in a room together talking to each other.

In your video Rogue One vs. The Force Awakens — The Fault in Our Star Wars, you discuss several important rudiments of screenwriting, including the importance of an active (as opposed to a passive) protagonist, and showing vs. telling. Do you feel these cardinal rules, if adhered to by the letter, can be constricting for screenwriters?

If you come into screenwriting and you are told blanket statements like “show don’t tell”, without understanding why these rules are important, it can be very distancing. Instead, what you should strive for is to understand the root idea behind these “cardinal rules”. Only then can you take liberties in your writing in an effective manner. Basically, you should learn the rules properly so you can break them intelligently.

Passive protagonists can definitely be done well – movies like Forrest Gump, Saving Private Ryan, and Apocalypse Now come to mind. But generally, the problem is that they inhabit a story where the structure should make them active. Jyn Erso in Rogue One exemplifies this issue. At every juncture, she’s dragged from one place to another with no input, she doesn’t make many consequential decisions, nor is her perspective particularly insightful for the audience.

Yet at the same time, it gets to the point where all of Sorkin’s iconic traits draw attention to the man behind the script, and this can be annoying. It doesn’t always make sense, depending on the story’s premise. Having smart people rattle off facts seems fitting in the White House (The West Wing), but not necessarily in a comedy writer’s room (Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip). Some of his works are definitely more engaging than others, in that respect.

What is the most important piece of advice you would impart onto an aspiring young screenwriter?

I impart advice thinking about a younger version of myself, and what I needed to understand back then. I’d say embrace that writing is hard. You will have to feel uncomfortable, and run into walls. It’s hard, but see it as a fun challenge. Develop the discipline to complete a project, regardless of how successful it turns out. Finally, recognize that editing and re-writing is not a bad thing, and it will almost always improve the final product.

learn the rules properly so you can break them intelligently

– Michael Tucker