Robin Write at writeoutofla.com shares his favorite Best Screenplay winners at Cannes.
I am not fully aware of where the balance of power lies in this industry with regards to the writers. The screenwriters. Does anyone? Those whose words on the page simply have to exist if there are to be any performers, directors, producers. That is where it all begins. This is sometimes what isee beyond anything else. Good writing, really good film writing, can surpass (or aid) the talents of an actress, actor or film director. The character actions, where the story takes you, the spoken words. The screenplay. I still think, to many of us on the outside looking in, that many of the scriptwriters are perhaps not getting the coverage for their achievements they deserve. That and ninety-nine other problems in the movie business. Being in the screenwriting field myself, you have to forgive me for singing loudly in this choir.
The sheer range of winners in Cannes with the Prix du scénario (award for best Screenplay) is still impressive, even if limited by the fact this particular prize was not even awarded for nearly half the years it existed. The world is a huge place, and this great festival certainly covers many corners of it. That said, the screenplays winners do appear to be a little more opaque than some of the other categories (like acting and directing for example) – which is certainly not a bad thing. I did, however, have little trouble shortlisting five of my favorite winners in this category. Next time you see these movies, take note of the writing, if you have not already :
2014 – Andrey Zvyagintsev (Leviathan)
Worthy Alternatives:
Bruce Wagner (Maps to the Stars)
Damián Szifron (Wild Tales)
There are no bones to pick from Andrey Zvyagintsev’s Leviathan, a small town drama with wide-scope issues. The acting from the main cast is so incredibly raw, you almost feel their pain. Beautifully shot too, crashing waves and rock faces ebbing around the community tension. The story itself is inch-peerfectly executed. A steady pace is given to the air of doom facing the protagonist’s struggle to hold onto his home and land, not to mention his disintegrating wife, troublesome son, and who he thought was a loyal old friend. Zvyagintsev’s screenplay does not waste a single word either, so tight is the narrative it is a candle that burns slowly right in front of you. A candle that burns right down to the core, with hardly any whiff of a happy ending, leaving only an appropriately powerful and bleak closure. References to Leviathan as a masterpiece are not, then, unfounded.
1997 – James Schamus (The Ice Storm)
Worthy Alternatives:
Gary Oldman (Nil by Mouth)
Atom Egoyan (The Sweet Hereafter)
Ang Lee’s never-to-be-forgotten gem The Ice Storm is a tale so full of promise and innocence that in the end runs effectively cold as the array of characters collide with wrong side of their emotional climate. The coming of age cliche more then proficiently lands itself with the adults too, who at times seem clueless and lost, as the kids make their own mistakes, so naively eager to explore their futures in a hurry. So subtle and mellow is the touching drama on offer here, I suspect there are few out there that have forgotten how much of a classic AMPAS omission this was. Sure, Lee has been rewarded twice by Oscar since then (as Director wth no Picture win), but as well as the buzz Sigourney Weaver was getting the whole awards season that year, James Schamus’ screenplay was one of the best that year – and deserved a mention. The Cannes jury, however, made a great call among some other exceptional personal stories in competition.
1981 – István Szabó (Mephisto)
Worthy Alternatives:
Andrzej Zulawski & Frederic Tuten (Posession)
Michael Mann (Thief)
Also winning the FIPRESCI Prize that year, István Szabó’s Mephisto is an exhausting obsession movie. There’s a lot going on here too, like the rise of the Nazi party, while our protagonist has an affair with a mixed race woman. The elements that make this story truly mean something though are not just used flippantly, nor are they over-powering the narrative. What does scream louder than anything else is that this is a movie about acting (however deeply you want to look into that as a social theme) with the incredible lead performance by Klaus Maria Brandauer. “I need the German language, I need the motherland, don’t you see!” he declares in despair at one point, in a moment, like many others, that is the most important thing in the world. Watch it with Cabaret, you decide the order.
2003 – Denys Arcand (The Barbarian Invasions)
Worthy Alternatives:
Lars von Trier (Dogville)
Gus Van Sant (Elephant)
There’s nothing funny about terminal cancer. Or heroin. Or cheating on your wife. And there are many things less upsetting than a damaged, bitter father-son relationship. So The Barbarian Invasions might not appear to be a pleasing viewing prospect. Denys Arcand’s follow-on story from The Decline of the American Empire (nearly twenty years prior) is far from bleak as a whole. In fact, it is intelligent, compelling and inviting from the very start. The set-up is so immediately engaging and familiar you perhaps feel the film is way beyond the ten minutes you’ve watched so far. While the political backdrop and family history contribute to the movie’s narrative and form much of the script’s dialogue, one of the real perks is the dry humor that is also present. The bittersweet and frank interactions, that often tend to be about the main character Remy’s outlook on women, fit perfectly, and ground us to the human story.
1998 – Hal Hartley (Henry Fool)
Worthy Alternatives:
Vincenzo Cerami & Roberto Benigni (Life Is Beautiful)
Paul Laverty (My Name Is Joe)
From where I am sitting Hal Hartley appears to be one of the under-rated film-maker forces in the business. Of course he is not the only one. He appears to be one of the rare few though that continues to make movies his way, and mostly for peanuts. His unique dead-pan, but very witty dialogue, and his intentionally amateur-dramatic, but very charming performances, are just two of his consistent ingredients. Henry Fool came nearly ten years after his debut (The Unbelievable Truth), but this is the film, if I had to guess, non-avid Hartley fans (unlike myself) know him for. It spawned two follow-on projects, the more transparent Fay Grim, and the recent return to form Ned Rifle, with the same principle characters. This first oddball and utterly intelligent adventure then takes the disruptive stranger in town element (Hartley seems so fond of), and has the title character dissect the Grim family. Heny, who already has a troubled past catching up with him, leaves in his path an even more perturbed poet son, and impregnates his sister – which is where Ned comes in. The screenplay is snappy, smart, and funny in some of the wrong places. Which is what makes it irresistible.
===
Robin Write, longtime fixture at AwardsDaily, runs his own site at writeoutofla.com
You can follow him on twitter too.
Thanks for offering, Robin! I’d be honored *and* sure to keep my mouth shut because I took first-year English in college and that–was–it. 🙁
– “Being a writer myself I am constantly obsessed with how the words I write (in the moment) will turn out on screen and sometimes that’s my downfall.”
– “Welcome to my world as a screenwriter.”
Stephen Kane, Robin Write. I feel ya.
Of course every freakin screenwriter adviser’s Rule #1: “keep your damn stage directions to a minimum; that’s the director’s job; don’t try to direct your own screenplay with tips and suggestions for the actors and director”
and sure, that’s true, but man, that makes for some dry reading. that’s why early drafts of screenplays written by writer/directors are among the dullest of all: The Coens or Aronofsky already have the visuals marinating in their heads and their scripts are basically note-free dialogue wire-frame schematics.
(later drafts, cutting continuities, and published screenplays have more onscreen ‘business’ cues fleshed out, but that’s why they’re no good for learning the craft)
on the other end of the spectrum, there are writer/directors who seem to be writing specifically with their fanbase in mind, so we get to hear the director’s “voice” pitching us the whole movie for 2 hours. Which is great if you like sitting devotedly at the feet of that director, but that’s annoying as hell if the director himself can sometimes be annoying as hell. (not that I’m talking about Tarantino, not at all. whatever gave you that idea?)
really good advice for a screenwriter who dreads the thought of seeing his work co-opted and bastardized? become a director first, you big silly. problem solved.
(of course even then you still have to worry about Weinstein buying your baby for distribution)
Trailer for an In Competition berth shoo-in, Paolo Sorrentino’s YOUTH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJmKymMFuhA
Koles – On the same page with you on No Man’s Land, easily the best film of 2001. Even better that nobody saw that one coming.
Oh, A Touch of Sin is so fucking incredible. God, what a movie. Should’ve been up for Oscars, should’ve won Original Screenplay (Her is an entirely acceptable winner, however), should’ve made real money. God, what a despicably underappreciated film.
I say writers are invaluable. Without the writers, there is no script, and without the script, there is no film.
Robin, I haven’t seen any of your choices, but I like a couple of your alternatives, Maps to the Stars, and Life is Beautiful. I have wanted to see The Ice Storm though, since I like the later films of Ang Lee’s.
Ryan, I know exactly what you mean when saying a script can be drastically different from the finished film. Being a writer myself I am constantly obsessed with how the words I write (in the moment) will turn out on screen and sometimes that’s my downfall. I’ll sacrifice my written vision for a potential one…if that makes any sense. My first long-short film I made was from a script that was almost too difficult to film and I was let down by the finished product. Then I realized some things shouldn’t be made into films. So now I start writing something and then part way through I decided if it’s something I’d like to just remain on the page or something I’d like to make down the line.
“It’s a rare screenplay that can convey the slightest hint of what the eventual movie made from it will turn ou\t to be.”
“Want to see a drastic disconnected chasm between a bland screenplay reading experience and a spectacular movie?”
Welcome to my world as a screenwriter. Wanna read some of my works Ryan and Bryce (cowers into a dark corner)? 😀
And for the record, A Touch of Sin, Volver, and No Man’s Land almost made that Cannes list.
It’s interesting that you mention Dogville, Bryce, as an exception to the ‘screenplays generally don’t read as great literary feats’ rule. I wonder if it hasn’t to do with the fact that Von Trier (wisely) chose to leave so much up to the imagination and participation of the viewer in the actual film? That means that all we really have to work with is the actual words of the script (the voice-over is very helpful in that sense) and not much exterior to the actual words and the performers’ utterances of them.
In that sense it’s a very ‘pure’ script and if anything, Von Trier is a very ‘pure’ director by being so completely dedicated and in thrall to his own vision.
This is so far the only major film festival award ever won by Steven Spielberg (for Sugarland Express, in 1974).
I think NO MAN’S LAND is worth a mention here. Certainly a film that deserves every single alocade and award it has been given, but it’s the brilliance of the screenplay that makes this film what it is. It’s basically a very dark comedy, with a very serious undertone, that in a grander scale is a perfect reflection on the absurdities and pointlessness of war, and not just the Balkan War, but war in general. With a rather simple story, the movie takes the viewer on a very emotional ride, where the ammount of hope for a positive resolution of the conflit between the two men (sides) is dosed very carefully, just enough to come back with a vengance at the very end. Shattering, sad, but also feverishly funny at times and very thought provoking. IMHO it should have been Tanovic, not Moretti, wielding the Golden Palm at the end of that festival.
I don’t find the experience rewarding/interesting in the least
It’s a rare screenplay that can convey the slightest hint of what the eventual movie made from it will turn out to be. Really the only screenplay I’ve ever read that was fascinating or even very compelling was Synecdoche, New York — and that was probably partly due to its parallel column structure on the page. Something magical about that screenplay makes it satisfying as a literary experience in its own right.
Want to see a drastic disconnected chasm between a bland screenplay reading experience and a spectacular movie? I got hold of the script for Black Swan several months before the movie opened, and for over an hour it was hard to concentrate on the printed words because the voices in my head were yelling ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME WITH THIS TRASH? from first page to last. Then, of course, onscreen that story was transformed into all kinds of amazing.
I like to think I can usually tell a good blueprint from a messy one, and I used to like to to play Visualize This! But it’s not a lot a fun for the effort required. Pretty much a whole lot easier and more fulfilling to just watch the movie.
The last time I was dead wrong about about a screenplay’s potential was when I read the script for Burn After Reading. I was so disappointed in the way that screenplay read in my head, the sour feeling of dashed expectations actually ruined the movie itself for me on first viewing. Luckily, Burn After Reading played on HBO about 20 times one month and every time it aired I rewatched it, and every time I rewatched it I loved it more and more.
All that said, though, for 99% of movies, there simply is no movie without the screenplay framework — and part of the genius of genius directors is their ability to recognize a brilliant blueprint in screenplay form when they see one.
I can’t think of who said this: “Lots of bad movies have been made from great screenplays. But never has a great movie been made from a bad screenplay.”
(Maybe it’s ME who said that. Sure sounds like something I would say.)
Here’s who would reap the most benefit from reading great screenplays: most screenwriters.
Going over the list of winners. I’ve got to say the last twenty years this award has had a massive run of films which I’ve heavily favored:
LEVIATHAN, A TOUCH OF SIN, POETRY, THE EDGE OF HEAVEN, LORNA’S SILENCE, VOLVER, THE THREE BURIALS OF MELQUIADES ESTRADA, THE BARBARIAN INVASIONS, MOLOCH, THE ICE STORM and A SELF MADE HERO stand among a few others that I liked as well — before this period tho I haven’t seen as much and, conspicuously, not able to find such clusters of beloved works.
Frankly, I tend to relativize the importance of the script to the final “product”; it truly depends on the directors’ methodology indifferently of whether it’s their own stuff or someone else’s. Give James Wan the script of THE SOCIAL NETWORK and see how he presents you with a turd. I’ve only ever read a handful of screenplays. I don’t find the experience rewarding/interesting in the least. Having said that, the screenplay for DOGVILLE is as enthralling on the page as anything I’ve read.
“I am not fully aware of where the balance of power lies in this industry with regards to the writers.”
Like most precious commodities on Earth, a writers value is recognized and pursued by people in top positions of power. And like most precious commodities, a screenwriters value is often wasted, abused and exploited by people in top positions of power.