Adventures In The Screen Trade (1989) - Plot & Excerpts
Man, William Goldman makes himself out to be a real asshole. He's so irritating, in fact, that after a two-week break away from Adventures in the Screen Trade I cashed in with over 100 pages left, because I couldn't stand the thought of going back to have him bitch at me like my worst film school instructors used to, bitter that a lack of work forced them into talking about their job instead of doing it.Goldman launches his first fart rocket within the opening 20 pages, tattling four anecdotes to illustrate that movie stars are bad people. He mentions that, out of courtesy, he's only naming two of the actors in question because some of them have recently died. But then he goes on to redact the identities of the deadies, while going right ahead and smearing the two performers who still have careers left to ruin.That strange blend of bitterness and false modesty permeates the rest of this farrago of a -- what is it, a memoir? A handbook? A two-inch thick advance check? Whatever it is, it's macramed into a few dozen short sections seemingly based on the order of the manuscript pages after a passing bus blew them across Goldman's parquet floor. Each of those section manages to take a swipe at individuals, groups, or imagined coteries of robed gnomes William perceives of having wronged him, the targeted loogies flying from behind a shield forged of "Oh well, what do I know? I'm just a regular guy who fell into a wacky business full of crazy Hollywood types [that also made me rich and famous and got me a book deal to write all about it, but trust me I'm just like you]."BIll's such a regular guy that, when he came to LA for his first movie biz meeting, he couldn't stand the thought of being picked up at the airport by a chauffeur-driven car and insisted on riding up in front with driver, because that's what regular guys like him and me and you do. I assume that Goldman, so proud of his New York City heritage, had never been in a cab before. Nor realized that lots of regular guys dream of being in a position where rich people send expensive cars to drive them around. But Will shares that story and others like it throughout the book to casually note what a humble, normal person he is, despite the fact that humble, normal people avoid constantly pointing out how humble they are in their books published by Time Warner.Anyway, Goldman goes on to cheerfully disparage studio execs, actors, directors, actors, audiences, and also actors. He finds page space to belittle the auteur theory and anyone who subscribes to it, insisting that all movies are a team effort, while still blaming his failed movies on everybody else that worked on them. Billy also loves to explain other people's decisions and character traits he dislikes by ascribing thought processes to them, while managing to ignore the fact that he's making shit up out of boogers and ego. Dustin Hoffman refused a scene in Marathon Man that required his character to keep a flashlight in his nightstand, Goldman insists, because Dustin thought it would make him look weak on screen, and every male movie star, deep down, will never allow himself to look weak on screen. I'm curious as to what Goldman thought of Hoffman's Oscar-winning performance six years later as an almost helpless savant in Rain Man.Between all the self-aggrandizing and payback that Willy skillfully disguises as friendly banter, he throws in some screenwriting advice. As a screenwriter myself, I can say that some of it's quite good, while some is just objectively crappy. He devotes a section to subtext but doesn't seem to have a clear idea of the difference between subtext and basic cinematic storytelling techniques. He writes a lousy four-page movie opening to demonstrate how to write a lousy movie opening and then, of all the scene's lousy features, pinpoints as lousy the only reasonably acceptable one.Luckily I doubt many writers ever end up taking much advice from Adventures in the Screen Trade, because the book isn't written for them. Actually, I have no idea who it's written for. I can't imagine that the same readers who want mouthfuls of dirt about starlets having affairs with directors or a prison guard's testimony that his wife would crawl on her knees just for a chance to fuck Robert Redford also want to read a glossary of screenplay slug lines or the entire script for Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. But if you're interested in the movie industry and are willing to weed through 600 pages (and twice as many ellipses), it's sometimes fun to watch the spray of Goldman's vindictive bloodletting. Too bad he leaves you to clean up the mess.
Probably the most useful take-home from this by now legendary book is the oft-quoted “no one knows anything” line. The reason why it’s a meme that has had so much traction is that it obviously provides solace to the armies of hopeful screenwriters out there — “my three-hour epic about a race of sentient badgers has been turned down by every ProdCo out there but what the hell do they know?”And it is essentially true of all creative industries. Those in charge of production, from publishing to film-making, simultaneously crave novelty while fearing it. They desperately need the next big thing but they don’t know what it is. No one does. And that’s because zeitgeist can’t be determined by any one human being, no matter how smart they are. It’s entirely down to an unpredictable mix of culture, politics, sheer accident and the wisdom of crowds.But that doesn’t mean, it should be noted, that these people are stupid. They’re not. They still know a clunker, or a crank-script, when they see one. It’s an expression that at one point was useful but has become too much of a mantra to devalue a significant part of the creative process.It’s also the only part of Goldman’s celebrated memoir that is still of any practical use. Screen Trade has long been held up as an essential read for anyone wanting to break into screenwriting. I’d argue that that is no longer the case. It’s now essentially a historical document. Interesting for some anecdotes about Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford but for giving you an insight into Hollywood film production as it is today, I suspect not. (I obviously can’t know this for certain, so please do correct me on this if I’m wrong.)Take Goldman’s use of the expression ‘comic book movie’. He uses to have a very specific meaning that has largely been superceded by current Hollywood trends. I’d actually be very interested in his thoughts on some of the modern, far more literally, comic book movies than the historical examples he gives. I suspect he wouldn’t be crazy about them.I’m also not sure that Goldman’s reputation as one of the screenwriting greats actually holds up that much today either. He’s written some great movies, but a great many of them haven’t really stood the test of time. Who really watches Butch Cassidy these days? Or Harper? And isn’t Marathon Man largely remembered these days for Olivier’s performance rather than the script? And All The President’s Men for the events it’s based on?The third section of the book, the adaptation of Goldman’s short story Da Vinci into screenplay format, is still well worth reading, although I’m not sure he comes out that well out of it. It offers some good advice on adaptation and of some of the thought processes the writer must go through when adapting a work from one medium to another. But it does throw up some real flaws in Goldman’s own reasoning.For example, some of the objections to certain plot points in the story by director George Roy Hill, such as the amazement of a schoolboy to his pal’s new haircut, strike me as very telling and very accurate. Of course, Goldman could argue that the conveying of the haircut is the director’s problem, not the writer’s but it still seems to me a core problem at script level.However, all in all, this is a quick and still essential read for anyone interested in the film industry at the late 70s/early 80s epoch-changing time. It’s just that it’s use as a road map for anyone interested in writing movies in 2015 is increasingly limited. But that’s OK. Would a book on screenwriting by, say, Dorothy Parker or Charles Brackett have been that much use to Goldman when he’d been starting out in the 1960s?
What do You think about Adventures In The Screen Trade (1989)?
Though published in 1982, the majority of this book by the writer of "Butch Cassidy" and the "Princess Bride" is still relevant today. And while minor details, like the film budgets and the stars at the time, are dated, the Hollywood machine hasn't changed much. Goldman teaches you what it means to write a screenplay whole describing the back stories behind some of the best moments put on camera, and he does it with beguiling humor and ascetic wit. You won't want to put this book down, but when you're finally forced to, you'll want to boot up Final Draft and type "FADE IN..."
—Bryan Maleszyk
Nobody Knows Anything.Goldman could almost have saved us the 400-pages of what is still one of the most insightful books about the movie-industry, and just printed his Law on a single page at the front.But then we'd have missed a glorious roller-coaster ride through Tinseltown stuffed to the gills with anecdotes of such toe-curling detail that you believe every word. And even now, 25 years later, it still all rings true. Read it, and you too might understand how lucky we are to get the occasional "great" movie. Because it's quite simple:Nobody Knows Anything.
—Scurra
Very much enjoyed William Goldman's honest take on Hollywood and screenwriting. It was interesting to read ADVENTURES IN THE SCREEN TRADE 30 years after it was written, as the entertainment business has changed so dramatically since 1982. Goldman's prose is fun, educational and entertaining. There is no doubt that he is a great writer...as evident not only in the book he has written, yet also in the BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID screenplay that comes with the book, as well as an excellent short story called "Da Vinci."If there is a fault, I would say that at times Goldman could be a bit vague about some of his Hollywood experiences. Goldman beautifully describes his work on films like BUTCH CASSIDY and A BRIDGE TOO FAR, yet his recollections on other films he worked on seem to just scratch the surface. Curiously, he does not once mention the two Oscars he had won for his screenplays on BUTCH CASSIDY and ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. Goldman tells you of the pitfalls, yet never mentions the triumphs.I also found myself confused at times when Goldman compared good screenwriting that studios would want to read, and bad screenwriting that studio heads would most likely toss in the trash. That said, I am very pleased to have read ADVENTURES IN THE SCREEN TRADE...as I feel I got a lot out of the book, and enjoyed my time exploring William Goldman's films.
—Paul Lyons
