Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #4854 in Books
• Published on: 2005-11-29
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 336 pages

Customer Reviews

The worst book I've ever read
I would have thought that someone with years of experience in writing and reviewing screenplays and teaching about the subject would be a decent communicator, but it feels like the book has been written by a 14-year-old. Over and over again, Syd starts by making a point and then he drifts off by telling totally irrelevant stories about himself or reciting plotlines that have nothing to do with the point being made.

Syd Field seems to have a lot to say and he takes about 300 pages to say it. Sadly, the book is full of repetition, contradictions, bad analogies and name-dropping. When you strip all that away, you are left with very little. The book can easily be condensed into about 30 pages.

It looks to me like Syd has "invented" a formula and convinced himself that it applies to all screenplays/films. He then applies a generous amount of selective thinking and finds examples that "prove" that he is right. Obviously, there is no need to search for examples that would cast doubts on the theory. It's a bit like reading your horoscope and finding that it's a perfect match.

My advice: If you read critically, don't waste your money on this, unless you want a perfect example of how not to write a book.

Very readable and inspiring
I work as a speechwriter and I bought this book to see if I could branch out. I subscribe to the DVD rental scheme with Amazon, so I could get out those films I hadn't seen which he mentions. I like the prescriptive nature of his advice. It got me thinking about plot points and working backwards from the ending.

I've started analysing the films I watch more closely. It's a good start.

I wish it was a pamphlet!
Lets get this out of the way first; the book is helpful and I highly recommend it to novices (as I am). Actually, I just recommend it.
The issue I have with this book, and Syd Field, is the way it has been written. The editor should have chucked it in Syd Fields rag-to-riches smug c*nt of a face and got him to re-write it.

Whats the problem? Its simple and boils down to two things- repetition and analogies. If we cut out the repetition alone it would have been the size of a Franz Kafka book. I lost count of the times I heard the same thing about the same movies, and saw that same paradigm which always looked exactly the same. Maybe Syd Field is as good at writing books as he is screenplays.

Next to the analogies- Which were over the top and superfluous... 'Context holds content in much the same way the cup holds coffee, tea, milk, squash, water...' alright we get it, a cup holds liquids. In fact I got it when you said context holds content. There is no need for analogies, you've told us the fact, why feel the need to compare it to something else. Just have a little faith in us and trust we got it the first time.

On a final note, Syd Field I know the chances of my work getting published are infinitely small, please don't keep reminding me.