4 rules for screenwriting by Aaron Sorkin

A virtuoso of dialogue and dizzying action, a rare superstar screenwriter, on whose account Steve Jobs, the News Service and the Social Network shares professional advice: how to reveal the character of the hero, how to overcome the creative stupor and why it is useful to go to the shower eight times on the day

  1. Make the viewer work

The Social Network begins with a fast-paced dialogue that gets the audience to work hard to capture the point. The worst crime you can do against a viewer is to tell them what they already know. Therefore, in dialogue, move forward as quickly as possible. It is not so important whether the viewer understands what the characters are talking about. It is important for him to feel that the characters understand what they are talking about.

  1. What does the protagonist want?

There is no single right way to reveal the character of a hero. Everyone does it differently. For example, instead of telling what kind of hero he is, I prefer to show what he wants. In this case, it all comes down to intention and obstacle: someone wants something, but something gets in his way. And here it doesn’t matter what exactly the hero wanted – a girl, money, to go to Philadelphia – the main thing is that his desire is really strong. The hero is hindered by something formidable, and the way in which he overcomes this obstacle will reveal his character.

  1. Characters are not really people

The characteristics of people and the characteristics of the characters have almost nothing in common. True. Of course, it seems to us that people and characters are one and the same, but in reality a normal person does not communicate with such dialogues as in the movies. And human lives do not consist of scenes from the series that form the hero’s arch. The laws of drama are very far from how reality works. This is perhaps especially true of Shakespeare.

  1. Make a story, not a guide to action

The characters I create tend to be quixotic. They will have to make a lot of mistakes and failures, but their aspirations are laudable, and there is a dose of romanticism in this. Perhaps the way I write and what I write about, whether the action takes place in the White House or on the news channel, can give the impression that I am giving a lecture on the topic of “how to live.” But in fact, when I compose, there is nothing of the kind. I am not offering a guide to action. All the more political.