The Script Lab Presents

DIE HARD: Why the Script

Works

1
 Introduc on
Welcome to The Script Lab’s official script analysis of the action classic Die Hard.

Die Hard, written by Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souza, has stood the test of time as
not only one of the best action films in cinematic history but also as one of the best
scripts ever written.

The film debuted in 1988, released during a decade in which the action genre was at its
highest, having given birth to action icons like Arnold Schwarzenegger (Commando)
and Sylvester Stallone (Rambo). Those two figures dominated the action genre with the
likes of other action stars later in the decade — Dolph Lundgren, Jean Claude Van
Damme, Steven Seagal, and even Chuck Norris before them.

During this decade the action genre was pretty simplistic, with the exception of Lethal
Weapon, released the year before Die Hard. You had your nearly invincible hero, with a
seemingly endless amount of ammunition and skills, facing a fairly typical villain that had
somehow wronged the hero — launching them on a mission of revenge, to rescue
someone close to them, or to just solve that case that no one thought possible. The
stories varied, but the results were the same. Bullets and fists would fly, and the bad
guys would pay with the hero coming out virtually unscathed.

Die Hard changed all of that.

It’s strange at first because if you look at the bare bones of the concept, story, and
character, Die Hard doesn’t sound very different from something Arnold and Stallone
would have starred in. Ironically enough, both were considered for the role of John
McClane (as were others like Nick Nolte, Don Johnson, and Richard Gere). We have a
cop, terrorists, and many bullets. Sounds like an ‘80s action flick to the core. Perhaps if
Arnold or Stallone had signed on, it might have been a run-of-the-mill ’80s action feast.

However, Die Hard was different.

Here we will analyze lessons that Die Hard can teach us about writing action and thriller
scripts — or any scripts in any genre. These lessons collectively offer screenwriters
ways in which they can add more depth to the characters and stories.

So sit back, put on some Christmas music (this is a Christmas movie, mind you), and
let’s take a look at why the script for Die Hard works.

2
 Chapter 1: The History of Die Hard
Trivia Question: Who was the first actor to play John McClane?

If your mind quickly went to the answer of “Bruce Willis” — with an added shake of your
head as you thought, “There’s only one person who has played McClane!” — you’re
kind of right and kind of wrong.

The character of John McClane is actually from Roderick Thorp’s best-selling novel The
Detective, which was made into a 1968 film starring, yes, the answer to the trivia
question, Frank Sinatra. But in that book and movie, the detective was named Joe
Leland. The name was changed to John McClane in Die Hard.

The Detective was a hit and 20th Century Fox — the studio that produced the film
adaptation — stated that if Thorp wrote a sequel to his book, they’d buy and continue
the franchise sequel. Thorp stated that he was in the process of writing a sequel book,
once again featuring the same character.

That eventual book, Nothing Lasts Forever, was inspired by the novel The Glass Tower,
which would eventually be adapted as The Towering Inferno. Thorp decided to change
the fire from that concept to terrorists. And what would become the concept of Die Hard
was born.

Frank Sinatra turned down the chance to return to the role he played in The Detective,
and the sequel book was not the best-seller the studio and Thorp hoped it would be.

Fifteen years later, producer Joel Silver was looking for an action project. While going
through Fox’s archives, he found Nothing Lasts Forever. A film adaptation was
commissioned and Frank Sinatra was approached to reprise his role — the second time
he rejected the chance to return to the character.

Joel Silver changed various story elements — namely altering the father and estranged
daughter conflict of the novel to the husband and estranged wife storyline we know and
love from Die Hard.

After offering the lead role to many Hollywood elite male stars, Bruce Willis was finally
approached and the rest is Die Hard history.

3
 Chapter 2: Make Your Heroes
Vulnerable
Like Lethal Weapon before it (both of which were produced by Joel Silver), the hero of
Die Hard wasn’t as invincible as his ‘80s action genre counterparts. Watch Commando
and Rambo: First Blood Part 2 and witness how those heroes were virtually
invulnerable. Sure, we’ll give Stallone’s original First Blood early kudos for allowing
some depth and vulnerability in an otherwise outright action hero — he did suffer from
Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome and even cried (we’ll get to that later) — however, Die
Hard took it up a notch.

John McClane wasn’t just a cop in the wrong place at the wrong time. Okay, that’s kind
of John McClane’s thing, yes, but as a character, he was more than that. He was a
father. Beyond that, he was an estranged father. He was also a husband. Furthermore,
he was an estranged husband. He wasn’t cool about it. He wasn’t indifferent about it.
He was conflicted. He wanted his wife back, but he also struggled with her decisions
regarding their marriage.

And to top it off, he didn’t like himself very much. He comes off as overly confident.
However, he’s all too often talking down to himself under his breath.

He’s vulnerable. And what that does is allow audiences to relate to him.

We don’t relate to invincible soldiers of war with endless ammunition and skills that can
fire endlessly hitting every target — killing dozens with ease — while barely a single
bullet grazes their skin. We relate to the family man that is far from perfect.

Making your heroes vulnerable opens doors to a broader audience, which leads to the
ability to market the film to more demographics, which then leads to better odds of
getting your script purchased and produced.

When your heroes are vulnerable, that also offers more opportunity to inject more of the
key ingredient to engaging screenplays — conflict.

If a hero can survive any situation virtually unscathed, there is less conflict within both
the story and that hero’s characterization. And in screenwriting, conflict is everything.

4
 Chapter 3: Conflict, Conflict, Conflict
We’ll say it again — conflict is everything. While the core concept of the Die Hard script
had plenty of conflict to behold — terrorists, hostages, guns, etc. — the reason the
action film stands out so much is that it is peppered with even more conflict beyond the
central idea of terrorists taking hostages in a towering building. Those smaller details of
conflict are what makes this film stand higher than the rest.
Case in point, look no further than McClane’s bare feet. If you remember, when the
terrorists first attacked, he was barefoot making fists with his toes to combat jet lag.
CLICK HERE to Watch This Scene
This leads to a moment of minor conflict after McClane kills a terrorist and hopes to
utilize the dead man’s shoes, only to discover that the terrorist has “feet smaller than
[his] sister.”
This then leads to a significant conflict after Hans Gruber, the main villain, knowing that
McClane is barefoot, orders his men to shoot the glass during a shootout. McClane is
forced to run through the glass to escape, shredding his foot into a bloody pulp.
CLICK HERE to Watch This Scene
This conflict leads to a further moment of vulnerability (see previous chapter) as he
shares an emotional moment with his police officer companion on the outside, Al Powell.
CLICK HERE to Watch This Scene
It’s easy to see that the situation within the script seemingly already had enough conflict,
but even more depth was added to it with this very little, but significant detail.
As we showcased above with the vulnerability found in the main character, we’re given
even more conflict. Not only does the hero have to defeat the terrorists, but he also has
to save his wife and, in turn, his marriage, as their love is rediscovered amidst the chaos
of the situation.
Then, the hero has to deal with not only terrorists and the thought of having to save his
wife, he’s also confronted with a police authority figure that doesn’t believe his story and
wants him to stay out of their way.
As if that wasn’t enough, two FBI agents that are overly gung-ho threaten not only our
hero but the hostages as well, having accepted the idea of collateral damage.
And then we’re still given even more conflict with an arrogant news reporter looking to
break the story, which leads to even more conflict when the reporter outs John McClane
5
break the story, which leads to even more conflict when the reporter outs John McClane
on air while the terrorists are watching. This connects McClane to Holly “Gennero,”
otherwise known as Holly McClane. Hans makes the final connection when he sees a
picture of John, Holly, and their children.
On the flip side, not only do the terrorists want to eliminate the sole “cowboy” making a
mess of their plans, one of them wants blood in a vendetta that began with McClane
killing a terrorist that happened to be his brother. Now Hans must keep this terrorist,
Karl, on a short leash as he tries to deal with everything else.
And finally, down below in the parking garage, sits Argyle, McClane’s limo driver, stuck
behind closed gates in a building full of terrorists.
Other seemingly small sources of conflict pay off in spades, heightening the overall
tension and believability of the premise, and furthering the portrayal of McClane as a
regular Joe and an audience surrogate.
Examples:
1. McClane tied to the hose that, after saving him from a long fall off of the building, now
begins to drag him to his death.
2. Once McClane finally has a chance to save his wife with the element of surprise, he
only has two bullets left with two remaining armed bad guys so he can’t afford to miss.
Conflict is everything. Big or small. If you pepper your script with conflict that lies
beyond the central premise, you give the script continued depth, engaging the audience
with each and every turn of the page.

6
 Chapter 4: Loca on Is a Character
Make no mistake, The Nakatomi Plaza is a significant supporting character in Die Hard.
If the terrorists are the personification of evil within the story, Nakatomi Plaza was the
otherwise neutral force of nature within the situation, confining the hero and forcing him
to survive amongst its “elements” of steel, drywall, and glass, not to mention the
building’s most terrifying hurdle for McClane, its height.
No different than the thrillers The Towering Inferno and The Poseidon Adventure
before it, Die Hard offered one of the most significant examples of the importance of
location.
Location is a character. It offers added conflict, another hurdle that the hero must
overcome. There’s a reason that this film gave birth to a sub-genre (“Die Hard on a…”)
that flourished with the likes of Under Siege (aircraft carrier), Passenger 57/Executive
Decision/Air Force One (airplane), Speed (bus), Sudden Death (hockey rink),
Cliffhanger (mountains), The Rock (Alcatraz), Olympus Has Fallen/White House
Down (the White House), etc.
If you can find an interesting location to set your vulnerable characters in, it only adds to
the conflict that you can create.
And the location is something that can engage an audience as you explore the
idiosyncrasies of that special featured location.
A skyscraper is intimidating. Especially due to the fact that the only way out is from the
bottom floor — unless a screenwriter is creative enough to conjure alternative escape
routes. (Die Hard, The Towering Inferno, Skyscraper)
An airplane is confined, with less places for the protagonists to hide from threats.
(Passenger 57/Executive Decision/Air Force One)
The ocean is vast, especially when a giant shark is trying to kill you. (Jaws)
Alcatraz, or any well-known location of mystique, wonder, and history, intrigues the
audience and the characters. (The Rock)
Location can be a vital element to the success of your screenplay, especially in the
action genre.

7
Chapter 5: Suppor ng Characters Need a
Li le Depth
Supporting characters with a little of their own depth and story is important to give
added depth to the overall script. Notice that we say little, in reference to how much
story and character depth should be given to supporting characters. You can’t give each
supporting character major screen time. However, you can offer small moments that add
to the big picture.
Let’s examine the supporting characters of Die Hard beyond John McClane, his wife,
and Hans Gruber.
Al
McClane’s newly-minted partner — via radio — opens up to McClane about how he
once shot a kid. He’s haunted by it. He doesn’t want to draw his weapon on another
person again.
Argyle
The limo driver, is stuck in the garage watching and listening to the chaos around him.
Ellis
Holly’s sleazy coworker, is an egotistical jerk that thinks he can negotiate his way out of
anything.
Karl
The terrorist who lost his brother at the hands of McClane.
Each of these little stories has their own beginning, middle, and end. They each have
their own payoff.
Al saves the day by firing his weapon, something he swore he never would do.
Argyle saves the day by crashing into the terrorists’ van and punching out one of the
remaining bad guys.
Ellis succumbs to his moronic ego by overestimating his ability to negotiate — later
dying at the hands of Hans himself.
Karl faces off against the man that killed his brother — later “dying” at the hands of

8
Karl faces off against the man that killed his brother — later “dying” at the hands of

McClane, only to be resurrected for vengeance as Al shoots him dead once and for all.
Even on a smaller level, we’re given characters that stand out with their own
personalities.
We have Deputy Police Chief Dwayne T. Robinson, a jerk authority figure that gets in
McClane’s way.
We have Agent Johnson and Agent Johnson (no relation), two FBI agents that are
overly gung-ho about their approach to the terrorists.
We have Theo, the comic relief bad guy that cracks jokes.
All of them stand out amongst the many other supporting characters in similar action
thrillers. If not because of the little stories of their own, then due to the little character
traits that make them stand apart from the clichéd cookie-cutter bad guys, whom some
screenwriters and industry insiders call bullet catchers.
So a little goes a long way.
However, if you push too much supporting character back-story and depth into the
framework of the A story and the major characters, it gets to be too much.

9
 Chapter 6: Create Cra y Plants and
Payoffs
“If, in the first chapter, you say there is a gun hanging on the wall, you should
make quite sure that it is going to be used further on in the story.” — Anton
Chekhov
The Plant and Payoff is a technique in screenwriting that offers added depth and
meaning to two or more moments in a story and engages the audience with a more
satisfying viewing experience.
The roots of plant and payoff — also known as Setup/Reveal, Plant/Reveal,
Setup/Payoff — stem from foreshadowing, a literary device in which a writer gives an
advance hint of what is to come later in the story.
For screenwriters and filmmakers, it is a tool that not only enhances your scripts, but
makes the challenge of writing a compelling and engaging screenplay all the more fun
— like spreading little Easter Eggs throughout your whole screenplay for readers and
audiences to enjoy.
They can be significant, subtle, or just add to the style of the writing. They can take a
routine action, drama, or suspense sequence and create more memorable moments
that audiences will take home with them and discuss in those “water cooler” sessions at
work or online. They can set up a weakness in a hero, a scare within a horror flick, a
laugh within a comedy, a clue in a mystery, or an answer to the problem within a drama.
And even more important — when written effectively — plants and their payoffs can
legitimize the twists, turns, and surprise endings of your screenplays.
The concept behind using plants and payoffs is to introduce a story point, visual, line of
dialogue, character trait, or object early on within the script — usually in subtle fashion
— and have that element return with the reveal that it is actually important to the events
that come later on in the story.
Remember the smaller elements of conflict that are peppered throughout the Die Hard
script? Each of them is properly and brilliantly set up early on.
In the opening scene of the film, the fellow passenger sitting next to McClane on the
plane tells him that the secret way to get rid of jet lag is to make fists with his toes while
barefoot and walking on the carpet.

10
CLICK HERE to Watch This Scene
This, of course, leads to an ongoing series of pivotal moments throughout the whole
script.
CLICK HERE to See These Pivotal Moments
Nakatomi Plaza solidified that point over and over, as it foreshadowed future events in
various locations of the plaza throughout the script. The elevators, the parking garage,
the lobby desk, the executive bathroom, Holly’s office (with the picture that she
overturned early on), the staircase where Karl and McClane fight, etc. These are all
brilliantly set up early with an eventual payoff.
Lastly, one foreshadowing moment that is all too often left forgotten, the watch that Ellis
so arrogantly points out to McClane that he gave to Holly, plays a pivotal role in the
narrative, leading to one of the greatest villain deaths in cinematic history.
CLICK HERE to Watch This Scene
Die Hard masterfully executes the concept of plants and payoffs. The audience
appreciates it when the screenwriters and filmmakers pay attention to detail, even in
subtle fashion.

11
 Chapter 7: Conjure a Worthy Villain
It's one thing to create a compelling protagonist and a whole different beast to conjure a
worthy adversary for that hero to go up against. Lesser scripts present a flashy
individual that who impedes upon the protagonist's journey towards whatever thing they
are striving for — be it a treasure, a piece of information, revenge, survival, redemption,
or any number of other needs or wants.
But that's not enough.
The best antagonists, villains, and nemeses are those with additional qualities,
backstories, character arcs, and connections to the protagonist.
"But wait, what's the difference between a nemesis, antagonist, and villain?"
It's an important question to answer because there are true differences between the
three.
Antagonists are defined as characters that work in opposition to the protagonist (the
hero).
Villains are defined as “evil” characters intent on harming others.
A Nemesis is defined as a long-standing rival; an archenemy.
Samuel Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones) from The Fugitive is the antagonist by definition —
he is in opposition to Richard Kimble’s (Harrison Ford) escape — but he is not the villain
because there are no evil intentions.
Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) from Die Hard is the villain by definition — an evil
character intent on harming others for his own benefit — but he is not a nemesis to
John McClane (Bruce Willis) because there is no personal and long-standing
connection.
Darth Vader (James Earl Jones, David Prowse) from the original Star Wars trilogy is
Luke Skywalker's nemesis by definition — a long-standing rival and archenemy —
through the whole course of the original trilogy. In the first film and second film, he is a
rival and archenemy because Luke was told that Darth Vader killed his father. When
Luke learns that Vader is his father, that connection obviously evolves.
Antagonists don't have to be evil. They just have to be in the way of the protagonist's
goal.
Villains are always evil — or at least have evil intentions (harming or killing innocence).

12
A Nemesis doesn't have to be evil, but they often are for concept-sake. While Darth
Vader or Lord Voldemort are undoubtedly great evil nemeses, Principal Rooney in
Ferris Bueller's Day Off is not evil, but he's an excellent long-standing adversary to
Ferris, which makes him a worthy nemesis.
The best antagonists, villains, and nemeses do not live in a black and white world in the
realm of cinematic and literary storytelling.
There's no one answer to how you can create a stellar antagonist, villain, or nemesis,
but here we've collected three intriguing approaches you can take to develop the best of
the best.
1. Using the Protagonist's Shadow
Go Into the Story blogger Scott Myers offers a fascinating approach to creating not only
an excellent nemesis but also as a way to create amazing antagonists and villains as
well, in his blog post The Nemesis as the Protagonist’s Shadow.
Myers states:
The shadow is all aspects of an individual’s psyche that exist outside the light of
consciousness. While there can be positive energy associated with it, more often than
not the shadow expresses itself as a negative dynamic, deriving from the least desirable
facets of a person’s psyche.
He later quotes Carl Jung:
It is a frightening thought that man also has a shadow side to him, consisting not just of
little weaknesses and foibles, but of a positively demonic dynamism. The individual
seldom knows anything of this; to him, as an individual, it is incredible that he should
ever in any circumstances go beyond himself. But let these harmless creatures form a
mass, and there emerges a raging monster; and each individual is only one tiny cell in
the monster’s body so that for better or worse he must accompany it on its bloody
rampages and even assist it to the utmost. — “On the Psychology of the Unconscious”
(1912).
When you read that excerpt ("... there emerges a raging monster"), it's relatively easy to
envision the creation of an excellent evil nemesis. This can be applied to the creation of
a villain as well since they have evil intentions.
It's clear that Darth Vader was a shadow of both Obi-Wan Kenobi and Luke Skywalker
— an almost literal dark versus light comparison. Anakin Skywalker chose the dark side
of the Force — which turned him into Darth Vader — while Obi-Wan and Luke chose
the light. Vader represents what Obi-Wan and Luke could become if their shadow
dominated their storyline.
In short, take a look at your protagonist and see what possible shadow side of them
exists — that Jekyll and Hyde dynamic. You may just find your villain or nemesis lurking

13
exists — that Jekyll and Hyde dynamic. You may just find your villain or nemesis lurking
in that shadow.
2. Mirror Images and Doppelgangers
Similar to the shadow approach, finding your protagonist's mirror image — or
doppelganger — is an easy way to conjure an intriguing antagonist, villain, or nemesis.
In Batman Begins, Bruce Wayne goes up against Ra's Al Ghul, who can be perceived
as a dark reflection of Wayne's Batman. They have the same skills and training but
follow a very different path to eradicate crime.
In Superman II (and later, Man of Steel), General Zod is a mirror image of Superman.
He has the same powers and comes from the same planet, but his viewpoint is the
mirror reflection (opposite) of Superman's. He thinks of humans as ants that can and
should be exterminated. Superman serves humanity. He protects them and cherishes
them. It's his greatest weakness and strength.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe — despite some criticism from fans — has embraced
the doppelganger approach in creating the villains and nemeses that go up against their
superheroes, but for a good reason.
Marvel President Kevin Feige told Screenrant, "You want to have characters that
inhabit the same world when introducing a new world, a new mythology for lack
of a better term. You want to explore that as much as you can."
He really hits home with this approach and how it can benefit screenwriters and their
screenplays when he brings up the notion of the MCU film Doctor Strange and its
villain Kaecilius. "Kaecilius doesn’t know Strange from a hole in the wall. He
predates him. But when you’re teaching an audience about sorcerers and that
reality and you’re going to talk about the past anyway and you’re going to get
into their history anyway, much better to tie-in your bad guy with that instead of
laying all this groundwork of parallel dimensions and sorcery and say, by the
way, a meteor hit on the other side of the world, it went under the water, and this
evil thing developed. What does that have to do with magic?"
This approach offers an exciting way to tie your antagonist, villain, or nemesis story arc
into the larger narrative without having to tell both a protagonist set-up and a full
antagonist, villain, or nemesis set-up — which would add many pages to your script.
When you focus on mirror images or doppelgangers, that helps the storytelling aspect of
your writing too — not just the characterization. You can explore the dynamics of right
versus wrong, dark versus light, and choice versus choice.
In Die Hard, if you compare Hans Gruber and John McClane, you'll see some mirror
image qualities to those characters. McClane is reckless and flies by the seat of his
pants. Gruber is methodical and overly prepared — which leads to his downfall because
he did not include a rogue character like McClane in his plans.

14
Put your protagonist up to a mirror and find those doppelganger traits that present
themselves.
3. Utilize Accomplices to Enhance the Arc of Your Antagonist, Villain, and
Nemesis
To showcase your antagonist, villain, and nemesis even more, consider adding
accomplices and peers that can further portray their power, influence, and tyranny.
In Ferris Bueller's Day Off, we learn a lot about Principal Rooney through his
interactions with school secretary Grace.
In Die Hard, we learn a lot watching the way Hans Gruber manages his henchmen.
In The Lord of the Rings, we see Sauron's true reach across the lands of Middle Earth
as he uses various dark wizards, orcs, and humans to spread his darkness.
This gives you multiple opportunities to show different facets of your antagonists,
villains, and nemeses. How do they use these accomplices? How do they interact with
them?
Perhaps your villain showcases some true loyalty to their henchmen, which will, in turn,
add some more depth to that villain.
These accomplices, peers, or henchmen (depending upon the genre), are extensions of
your antagonists, villains, and nemeses — giving them more of a reach through the
whole story while also offering some variety of opposition throughout your story.
Going back to Die Hard specifically, in which we have perhaps the greatest villain of all-
time in Hans Gruber, we see that Gruber is a worthy adversary for McClane. He’s
compelling, engaging, and has elements that mirror McClane. He also utilizes
accomplices — various henchmen — that enhance his own characteristics and what he
is capable of as their leader.
These are just three ways that you find your ultimate antagonist, villain, or nemesis. You
can create a hybrid approach to these three and make them even better as well.
The key thing to remember is that you need to put the effort in. It's not enough to just
have someone in the way of your protagonist's goal. You need to pay as much attention
to your antagonist, villain, or nemesis as you do to your protagonist.

15
 Chapter 8: Structure Is Universal,
Delivery Is Key
There’s nothing particularly special about the structure of Die Hard. Too many
screenwriters put too much stock into structure. The fact is, structure is universal. There
are certainly different types of structures you can utilize — which lead to many different
after-effects.
In most action scripts, the villain’s plan is the center of the concept. You want to build
from that.
The character of John McClane could just as easily have been replaced by any other
type of character because the villain’s plan is the center of the concept. There is no
concept without the villain’s plan. The hero (McClane) reacts to each and every conflict
that the villain’s plan forces him to confront.
In the script, Hans Gruber’s plan is what drives everything. It is the cause of every
major conflict within the story — thus it is integral to the overall structure.
The general action script structure of bad guys doing something bad and the hero
undertaking the challenge to stop the bad guys is fairly simple and universal. There’s
nothing really special about Die Hard’s concept of terrorists taking hostages within a
building and a cop tasked with saving them.
The delivery of that concept and basic story structure is the key to the script’s success.
All of the elements and lessons we’ve featured in Chapters 1-7 are key to the delivery of
the script and eventual film. Structure is universal. The delivery comes into play when
you tweak that structure with your own style and choices. That’s why many “Die Hard
on a…” movies thrived through the nineties and into the 21st century. The basic
structure was always the same, but the screenwriters made their heroes vulnerable,
peppered the script with conflict, picked a standout location, gave some of their
supporting characters some more depth, created crafty plants and payoffs, and usually
conjured a worthy villain.
But Die Hard was the first — and arguably remains the best.
CLICK HERE to Read a Draft of Die Hard!
Note: Different drafts may not fully represent the shooting script and the points
made in this analysis. We referred specifically to the final cut of the movie for

16
made in this analysis. We referred specifically to the final cut of the movie for
each observation shared here.
Follow The Script Lab and Subscribe to TSL 360, the LARGEST screenwriting
education content library, and dive in! Featuring masterclasses, deep-dive interviews
and lectures from Academy Award-winning screenwriters, TV show-runners, producers,
literary managers, agents, studio executives and leading educators - all in one place.
Learn from over 100 of Hollywood's working professionals! And every month we're
adding new classes and interviews!
For all the latest from The Script Lab, be sure to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and
Instagram.

17