My previous Lego film, We Can Get You Some Really Cheap Gear, taught me a lot about filmmaking, mainly through the mistakes I made. The biggest mistake in retrospect was trying to create something too complicated, with too many sets, characters and effects.
This post is about what I was trying to achieve when making In Nature, not about whether I succeeded - others may be the best judges of that when it has its premiere screening at Horror On Sea on 24th January 2027. Watch out for the festival programme which will go live on 31st October 2026.
When writing and editing the script I also found Kurt Vonnegut's writing advice helpful. This list first appeared in the preface to Bagombo Snuff Box, a collection of short stories, and can be applied just as easily to short films and probably most art forms.
1. Use the time of a total stranger in such a way that he or she will not feel the time was wasted.
This is more of an inspiration. Value the time that your audience has given you and make the best film you can for them.
2. Give the reader at least one character he or she can root for.
I tried to make both of my scientists understandable and human, rather than focussing on, say, their intelligence. Cazaban's motivation is worth rooting for, while Dressler's frustration, and his weaknesses, hopefully make him relatable as well.
3. Every character should want something, even if it is only a glass of water.
For me this was the most helpful thing of all. Firstly it changed Cazaban and Dressler from cutouts to individual characters. Once I had their motivations - recognition for Dressler, saving lives for Cazaban - this led easily into their personalities and some natural conflict between them.
Secondly, it led me straight to the ending, where, as recommended in Blake Snyder's Save The Cat! both goals are achieved but not quite in the way they might expect.
Thirdly, it reminded me that every character has a motivation - not just the two humans. Their orchid nemesis definitely has a desire, and I had a motivation for the mouse who appears in the opening scene as well - while I later cut parts of this section, having the motivation in my mind helped me a lot with the animation.
4. Every sentence must do one of two things—reveal character or advance the action.
This is helpful when ruthlessly cutting a script from 6 pages down to 3 pages.
5. Start as close to the end as possible.
My original script started with Cazaban and Dressler setting up tent and talking about their expedition around a fire, revealing their motivations and conflicts in doing so. While this might have been a fun scene it was completely unnecessary - better for their action to start as they approach the orchid and discuss their views as they work.
6. Be a sadist. No matter how sweet and innocent your leading characters, make awful things happen to them—in order that the reader may see what they are made of.
Great rule for any horror movie as it allows you to cause as much pain as you want - and gives you a good narrative reason for doing so. My own twist on this was, make awful things happen to your characters other than the obvious ones. It occurred to me that a human might react differently than a mouse to a plant toxin, which led to a great way to cause pain to one character and give the other character a need to exert themselves out of desperation - before returning to the obvious awful thing.
7. Write to please just one person. If you open a window and make love to the world, so to speak, your story will get pneumonia.
I can honestly say I wrote this film in the hope of creating something I would enjoy if someone else made it for me.
8. Give your readers as much information as possible as soon as possible. To heck with suspense. Readers should have such complete understanding of what is going on, where and why, that they could finish the story themselves, should cockroaches eat the last few pages.
This is in direct contradiction to one of the most famous horror film rules: the Jaws rule, or Don't Show The Monster. So a few words about why everyone else is wrong and Vonnegut is right.Don't Show The Monster probably began with production budget issues - perhaps it's expensive to create monster effects so you want to use them for maximum effect. If this is the case, don't put them at the end. Be like Steven Spielberg and Jurassic Park, where there are only 15 minutes total of actual dinosaur footage.* These didn't go all at the end. They're spaced throughout the movie and edited in a way that gives the illusion of much more dinosaur.
Holding back the vision of the monster causes frustration for the viewer - particularly if the characters in the film can see it. It just feels like a cheap trick to build suspense, as if the filmmaker doesn't know of any other way to do this.
I also learned from watching and trying to make music videos that you can make any concept, however surreal or nonsensical, acceptable to the viewer provided it is introduced early in the video. If there is no early reveal of the monster then there's a greater risk that it will appear silly or unrealistic when it makes its late arrival. I can think of plenty of examples of movies where the anticipation builds up and then the actual reveal in the last few minutes is a disappointment.
The late reveal of the monster is an overused, boring movie trope and there are plenty of alternatives. Reveal glimpses of it. Reveal part of it. Reveal it, but hold back a second, bigger monster. Gradually reveal its capabilities, or allow them to increase through the movie. Build tension through human conflict, or through atmosphere or music. Or just don't worry and make a film that is horrific and fun for as long as possible.
*Technically there are zero minutes of actual dinosaur footage in Jurassic Park - due to highly restrictive health and safety rules imposed to protect animal wellbeing, Spielberg was forced to use CGI and animatronics instead of real dinosaurs.
Posts
