THE MOVIE ON THE PAGE · WEEK 15 OF 32 · DRAFTING
SCREENWRITING STUDIO

Beat Sheet →
Step Outline

A story isn't a sequence of events. It's a chain of causes — and if any link says "and then" instead of "therefore" or "but," the chain is broken.

The Movie on the Page Phase 2 · Drafting · Week 15 of 32
Commitment
10–14 hours
Craft Focus
Causality: every beat must cause the next beat
Cinema Lens
The invisible logic that makes the audience feel the story is inevitable
Page Craft
Outlining on the page vs. off the page
Exercise Output
40–60 beat step outline with causal connectors
Budget Dial
Your chosen tier

Welcome to Phase 2. The foundation phase is behind you. You have a premise, a theme, a protagonist, an antagonist, world rules, a promise map, an 8-sequence outline, a chosen midpoint, and seven written scenes. Starting now, you build the screenplay itself. But before you write FADE IN on page one, there's one more structural document between your outline and your draft — and it may be the most important document you produce in this entire curriculum. The step outline is the beat-by-beat map of your screenplay: every scene, every turn, every transition, laid out in sequence with a single connective test applied to every junction. That test is causality. Between every beat and the beat that follows, you must be able to say "therefore" or "but" — never "and then." "And then" is coincidence. "Therefore" is consequence. "But" is complication. A story built from consequence and complication feels inevitable. A story built from coincidence feels random. The causality lock is the tool that ensures your chain holds.

If two consecutive beats in your outline can only be connected by the words "and then," one of them doesn't belong.

Craft Lecture

The "therefore/but" test. The test is devastatingly simple. Take any two consecutive beats in your step outline. Connect them with a word. If the correct word is "therefore" — meaning the second beat is a direct consequence of the first — you have causality. If the correct word is "but" — meaning the second beat is a complication that disrupts the expected consequence of the first — you have causality with surprise. If the only word that works is "and then" — meaning the second beat follows the first in time but isn't caused by it — you have a broken link. Fix it before you draft.

Examples. "Nora files a public records request for the plant's water data" — THEREFORE — "the plant's lawyer contacts the school board to flag Nora's inquiry." Causality: the request caused the flagging. "Nora collects water samples from three sites" — BUT — "the samples show elevated levels that are concerning but not conclusive." Causality with complication: the collection was supposed to produce proof, but the evidence is ambiguous. "Nora collects water samples" — AND THEN — "Nora has a nice dinner with her daughter." Broken link: the dinner is not caused by the sample collection. It's a separate event placed in sequence by the writer, not by the story's logic.

This doesn't mean every scene must be a direct, obvious consequence of the previous one. Subplots run on their own causal tracks. Scene transitions can move laterally — from the investigation to the home life, from the protagonist to the antagonist. But within each causal track, the "therefore/but" test must hold. And when you jump between tracks, the audience must feel a connection — thematic, emotional, or informational — that justifies the transition. The dinner scene isn't automatically broken. If the dinner scene exists because Nora is trying to maintain normalcy while her world fractures — if her behavior at dinner is shaped by what she discovered in the lab — then the connective word isn't "and then" but "therefore": she collected the samples, therefore she's rattled, therefore she overcorrects at dinner by performing normalcy, and the performance cracks.

What a step outline is. Your Week 11 outline was organized by sequence — eight large narrative units, each described in a paragraph. The step outline expands that document into individual beats. Each beat is a scene or a scene fragment: a single dramatic event described in two to four sentences. The beat names the location, the characters present, the scene-level goal, the turn, and the causal connector to the next beat. A feature screenplay typically contains 40–60 beats (roughly matching the scene count). Some beats are full scenes running three to five pages. Others are half-page transitions or single-image moments. The step outline doesn't specify page length — it specifies event and consequence.

The difference between a beat and a scene. For outlining purposes, a beat is any discrete narrative event that changes the situation. Most beats correspond to scenes — a single location and continuous time. But a beat can also be a montage (multiple images compressed into one narrative event), a sequence of very short scenes linked by a single dramatic action (a chase, a search, a series of phone calls), or a single moment within a larger scene that's significant enough to warrant its own line in the outline. The organizing principle isn't formatting — it's consequence. If it changes the story's trajectory, it gets its own beat.

How to build the step outline. Start with your 8-sequence outline. Expand each sequence into its component beats. For Sequence 1, you might have six beats: the opening image, the protagonist's introduction, the establishment of the world and its rules, the introduction of a secondary character, the inciting incident, and the protagonist's initial response. For each beat, write two to four sentences: what happens, who's involved, and what changes. Then apply the causality lock: between every beat and the next, write "→ THEREFORE" or "→ BUT" and verify that the connector is honest. If you find yourself reaching for "→ AND THEN," the beats on either side of that junction need revision. Either the preceding beat needs a consequence that leads to the following beat, or the following beat needs to change so that it's caused by the preceding one, or one of the two beats needs to be cut or relocated.

Common causality problems. Three patterns account for most broken links:

The coincidence beat. Something happens that the protagonist didn't cause and couldn't have anticipated — and it conveniently solves a problem or opens a door. A character they need to talk to shows up unexpectedly. A piece of evidence falls into their lap. A news report provides the exact information they need at the exact moment they need it. Coincidence is acceptable at the inciting incident (the story has to start somewhere) and almost nowhere else. After the inciting incident, every new piece of information, every shift in the situation, must be caused by a character's action or by a previously established world rule. If you need the protagonist to learn something, make them do something to learn it.

The orphan beat. A beat that doesn't connect forward — it happens, but nothing in the subsequent story is affected by it. The protagonist discovers something, but the discovery doesn't change their strategy. A confrontation occurs, but the relationship after the confrontation is the same as before. Orphan beats are structural dead ends. They take up pages without contributing to the causal chain. Fix: either give the beat a forward consequence (the discovery forces a new strategy) or cut it.

The skip beat. Two beats that should be causally connected but have a gap between them — a missing intermediate step that the writer has assumed the audience will fill in. "Nora discovers the internal reports" — and then, two beats later — "Nora confronts Graham at the plant." What happened between discovery and confrontation? How did she get access to Graham? Why did she choose confrontation over another strategy? The skip beat leaves the audience doing work the writer should have done. Fix: add the intermediate beat that connects discovery to confrontation — the moment of decision, the failed alternative, the event that made confrontation the only remaining option.

Craft Principle: Between every beat in your screenplay, the words "therefore" or "but" must be true — if only "and then" fits, the story has broken its own logic.
MICRO-EXAMPLE 1: CAUSALITY CHAIN — 8 BEATS WITH CONNECTORS BEAT 12: INT. NORA'S LAB - EVENING Nora runs the water samples. Results show elevated chemical levels — concerning but below the threshold that would trigger mandatory reporting. → BUT BEAT 13: INT. SCHOOL LIBRARY - DAY Nora researches the specific chemical compound and discovers that "below the threshold" means below the FEDERAL threshold — the state standard, which hasn't been updated since 1998, is significantly lower. Her samples exceed the state standard by a factor of three. → THEREFORE BEAT 14: INT. PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE - DAY Nora brings the state standard data to Torres, using Marcus's science fair project as a proxy subject. Torres deflects. (The subtext scene from Week 14.) → BUT BEAT 15: INT. SCHOOL HALLWAY - CONTINUOUS Leaving Torres's office, Nora passes the donor wing entrance. The clearance keypad has been changed. New code. Someone changed the locks since she was last inside. → THEREFORE BEAT 16: INT. NORA'S CAR - SCHOOL PARKING LOT - EVENING Nora sits in her car, staring at the donor wing windows. She calls the state environmental agency again. Voicemail. She hangs up. Dials a different number — her ex-husband, who works in municipal water management two counties over. → THEREFORE BEAT 17: EXT. RIVER PARK - NEXT MORNING Nora and her ex, DAVID, walk along the riverbank. She shows him the data. He's alarmed but cautious: "If you take this public without the plant's internal data, they'll say your methodology is compromised. You tested with school equipment." He tells her she needs the plant's own reports. → BUT BEAT 18: INT. SCHOOL - DONOR WING CORRIDOR - NIGHT Nora stands at the new keypad. She doesn't have the code. She tries her old code. Red light. She tries Torres's birthday (she helped plan the party last year). Green. She's in. → THEREFORE BEAT 19: INT. LIAISON'S OFFICE - CONTINUOUS Nora finds the monitoring reports. Three years of data. Rising levels. And attached: the memo to the school board. They already know. [MIDPOINT] → Every "→ THEREFORE" and "→ BUT" is honest. Beat 13 follows from 12 because the ambiguous results caused further research. Beat 15 follows from 14 because Nora's visit to Torres triggered the antagonist's countermove (changing the locks). Beat 18 follows from 17 because David told her she needs the plant's own reports, and the only way to get them is to break in. The chain is locked. No "and then" survives.
MICRO-EXAMPLE 2: DIAGNOSING A BROKEN CHAIN BROKEN VERSION: BEAT 22: Nora copies the monitoring reports and hides them in her car. → AND THEN BEAT 23: Nora attends her daughter's soccer game on Saturday afternoon. → AND THEN BEAT 24: On Monday, Nora is called to a meeting with Graham at the plant. DIAGNOSIS: Beats 22→23 and 23→24 are connected only by time passing. The soccer game has no causal relationship to the investigation. Graham's meeting invitation has no stated cause. FIXED VERSION: BEAT 22: Nora copies the monitoring reports. Hides them in her car. Drives home. Can't sleep. → THEREFORE BEAT 23: At her daughter's soccer game, Nora watches the kids drink from the park water fountain. She pulls her daughter aside after the game: "Don't drink from the fountains at school this week, okay?" Her daughter asks why. Nora can't answer. Her daughter's face changes — she knows her mother is scared. → BUT BEAT 24: Monday morning. Nora arrives at school to find a message: Graham wants a meeting. Not at the school. At the plant. Today. Nora checks her car — the copied reports are still there. But the folder feels different. Thinner. Someone has been through it. → Now beat 23 is caused by beat 22: the reports made Nora afraid for her daughter. Beat 24 is caused by a consequence of the break-in that hasn't surfaced yet — Graham knows, and the thinned folder suggests someone accessed her evidence. The "and then" links are replaced by "therefore" and "but." The soccer game now does dramatic work: it externalizes Nora's fear and damages the one relationship she's trying to protect.

Page Craft

The Micro-Skill: Outlining On the Page vs. Off the Page

There are two schools of outlining, and this is the week to decide which one you'll use for drafting — because starting next week, you're writing screenplay pages, and your outlining method determines how you navigate.

On the page means your outline lives inside your screenplay document. You write beat descriptions directly into the file where you'll eventually write scenes — placeholder paragraphs that you'll expand into full scenes during drafting. The advantage: you always see the outline's context. When you're writing Scene 23, you can scroll down and see what Scene 24 needs to accomplish. You never lose track of the plan. The disadvantage: the outline can become a crutch. Some writers find that having the outline visible inhibits discovery — they write toward the outline rather than allowing scenes to evolve organically.

Off the page means your outline lives in a separate document — or on physical index cards, a whiteboard, a corkboard, a notebook. The screenplay document stays clean: only finished (or in-progress) scenes, no placeholder text. The advantage: the outline is a reference, not a script. You consult it between sessions, not during scenes. This creates space for discovery — the scene can surprise you because you're not reading the "answer" while you write. The disadvantage: you have to manage two documents, and it's easy to let the outline fall out of sync with the draft as changes accumulate.

ON THE PAGE — outline embedded in the draft file: INT. NORA'S LAB - EVENING [TO WRITE: Nora runs water samples. Results show elevated levels but below federal threshold. She's relieved for a moment — then suspicious. She starts researching the threshold itself. TURN: state standard is much lower. Her samples exceed it by 3x. The relief evaporates.] INT. PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE - DAY [TO WRITE: Nora brings state data to Torres using Marcus's project as proxy. Torres deflects. TURN: Graham called — he knows she's been in the donor wing. See subtext version from Week 14.] OFF THE PAGE — separate card/document: CARD 12: LAB / EVENING Samples → elevated but below federal. Research → state standard is lower. She exceeds by 3x. CONNECTOR: → THEREFORE (she now has proof by state standards → she needs to act) CARD 13: PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE / DAY Torres meeting. Proxy: Marcus's project. Torres deflects. TURN: Graham already knows. CONNECTOR: → BUT (she expected institutional support → she got a warning instead)

Neither method is superior. The choice is temperamental. If you're a planner who draws confidence from seeing the whole structure, outline on the page. If you're a discoverer who needs room to surprise yourself, outline off the page. Some writers use a hybrid: the step outline lives in a separate document, but they paste the next three to five beats into the draft file at the start of each writing session, then delete the placeholder text as they write the actual scenes. Try what feels right. You can switch methods during drafting without penalty.

10-minute drill: Take five consecutive beats from your step outline (this week's exercise). Format them two ways: first, as on-the-page placeholders embedded in scene-heading format with bracketed descriptions. Second, as off-the-page index cards — short, compressed, with the causal connector noted. Compare the two formats. Which one makes you want to start writing scenes? Which one gives you more structural confidence? Note your preference. Total output: five beats in two formats. Time yourself.

Core Reading

Screenplay Reading — Week 15

Assignment: Read 2 produced feature screenplays, chosen for tight vs. loose causality.

Script Pair Brief: Select one screenplay where the causal chain is airtight — every scene clearly caused by the preceding one, with no coincidences or unmotivated events after the inciting incident — and one where the causality is looser: a film that relies more on atmosphere, character accumulation, or thematic association to connect its scenes, with some events that feel placed rather than caused. The first demonstrates the propulsive power of locked causality — how "therefore" and "but" create the sensation that the story is a falling domino chain. The second demonstrates what's gained and lost when causality loosens — the trade-off between drive and texture, between inevitability and surprise.

Where to find scripts legally: IMSDb, The Script Lab, SimplyScripts, studio FYC releases, and public library systems.

Why this pairing: Not every great screenplay has airtight causality. Some of the most celebrated films in cinema use associative logic — scenes connected by mood, theme, or visual rhyme rather than strict cause-and-effect. But loose causality is a high-wire act: it works when a master calibrates it, and it collapses when a less experienced writer mistakes "I don't know how to connect these scenes" for "these scenes don't need connection." By reading both tight and loose causality, you'll understand the spectrum and choose your own position on it deliberately.

Reading Lens (track these while reading):

1. Apply the "therefore/but" test to ten consecutive scenes in each screenplay. How many pass? Where does "and then" appear? 2. Identify any coincidence beats after the inciting incident. Does the writer earn the coincidence (through planted setup or thematic necessity), or does it feel like a convenience? 3. Find the longest causal chain — a stretch of beats where each one clearly causes the next without interruption. How many beats does the chain sustain before breaking? 4. For the loose-causality screenplay: what connective principle replaces causality? Is it thematic (scenes connected by idea), emotional (connected by mood), temporal (connected by chronology), or something else? 5. Which screenplay maintains stronger forward momentum? Is momentum correlated with tight causality, or can loose causality produce its own kind of drive?

Journal Prompts:

1. For the tight-causality screenplay: find the moment where the causal chain is most satisfying — where a consequence arrives that feels both surprising and inevitable because the cause was planted ten pages earlier. What made the setup invisible until the payoff arrived? 2. For the loose-causality screenplay: find a scene that would fail the "therefore/but" test but works dramatically. Why does it work? What is the audience responding to if not causal logic? 3. Apply the "therefore/but" test to ten consecutive beats of your own step outline. How many pass? Where do you find "and then" links? For each broken link, note whether the fix is adding a consequence, adding an intermediate beat, or cutting a beat entirely. 4. If you converted the loose-causality screenplay into tight causality — connecting every scene with "therefore" or "but" — what would be gained and what would be lost? 5. Where on the tight-to-loose spectrum does your own screenplay fall, based on your step outline? Is that position deliberate, or did you default into it?

Writing Exercise

Your Project Progress

Deliverable: 40–60 beat step outline with causal connectors.

Constraints: Expand your 8-sequence outline into a beat-by-beat step outline. Each beat should include: a beat number, the scene heading (INT./EXT., location, time of day), 2–4 sentences describing the event (who's involved, what happens, what changes), and a causal connector to the next beat ("→ THEREFORE" or "→ BUT," with a brief phrase explaining the causation). Organize the beats by sequence — label the sequence boundaries so you can see the 8-sequence architecture within the step outline. Total: 40–60 beats, 6–10 typed pages.

Requirements: every promise-map item from Week 10 must appear as a specific beat (note which item each beat delivers). All five escalation-ladder levels must be visible as beats. The midpoint (from Week 12) must appear as a clearly marked beat. The protagonist's Wound activation, Need surfacing, and Line test should each be identifiable in specific beats. No two consecutive beats may be connected by "and then" — every junction must pass the causality lock.

Quality bar: The causality lock must hold across the entire outline — every "→ THEREFORE" and "→ BUT" must be honest. If you find a junction where neither connector works, either the preceding beat needs a different consequence, the following beat needs a different cause, or one of the beats needs to be cut. Your beat count should fall between 40 and 60 — fewer than 40 suggests your beats are too large (each one is trying to cover too much ground), and more than 60 suggests your beats are too granular (you're outlining individual lines rather than dramatic events). Each beat should correspond roughly to a scene of 1.5–3 pages in the finished screenplay.

Estimated time: 8–12 hours (expansion from 8-sequence outline: 5–7 hours; causality testing and revision: 2–3 hours; Reader feedback integration: 1–2 hours).

Human Draft Reminder: You write the pages. AI helps you think, test, and decide.

AI Workshop

Phase 2: Two Readers — Draft Mode

Welcome to Draft Mode. From this week through Week 22, the AI Workshop shifts focus. In Phase 1, the Two Readers evaluated concept documents — premise, character, structure. In Phase 2, they evaluate the material you're actually drafting. This week, that material is the step outline. Starting Week 16, it will be screenplay pages.

Two changes from Phase 1: first, your prompts should now include more context — the Readers need to evaluate new material against the existing foundation. Paste relevant prior documents (theme sentence, character dossier, escalation ladder) so the Readers can test alignment. Second, starting next week, you'll add an optional third prompt: the Producer Pass — a production reality check that evaluates your pages for budget-tier compliance and practical filmability. The Producer Pass isn't a creative reader. It's a practical one. More on that in Week 16.

This week, the Two Readers evaluate the causality of your step outline. Submit a 10–15 beat section (choose the section you're least confident about) and let the Readers test the chain.

Reader A — Developmental Editor
Prompt
You are Reader A — a developmental editor evaluating a step outline for causal integrity. Here is a section of my step outline (beats [X] through [Y]): [Paste 10–15 consecutive beats with causal connectors] For context: THEME SENTENCE: [paste] PROTAGONIST WOUND: [paste] ESCALATION LADDER: [paste relevant levels for this section] Evaluate along these lines: 1. CAUSALITY LOCK: Test every "→ THEREFORE" and "→ BUT" connector. Are they honest? Is there a junction where the writer wrote "therefore" but the real connector is "and then"? Flag every broken or weak link. 2. COINCIDENCE AUDIT: Are there beats where something conveniently happens without being caused by a preceding action? After the inciting incident, every new event must be caused by character action or established world rules. Flag any convenience. 3. ORPHAN BEATS: Are there beats that don't connect forward — events that happen but don't affect subsequent beats? An orphan beat is structural dead weight. Flag any beat whose removal wouldn't change what follows. 4. SKIP BEATS: Are there gaps where an intermediate step is missing — a beat that should exist between two others to make the causal link credible? Point to any junction that feels like a logical leap. 5. COMPRESSION OPPORTUNITIES: Are there adjacent beats that could be combined into a single, denser beat without losing dramatic content? Consolidation makes the chain tighter and the outline leaner. Break every weak link you can find.
Reader B — Resistant First Reader
Prompt
You are Reader B — a resistant first reader. I've written a step outline for a feature screenplay. Here's a section: [Paste 10–15 consecutive beats with causal connectors] PREMISE: [paste] GENRE: [name it] Evaluate along these lines: 1. DRIVE: Reading these beats in sequence, do I feel propelled forward — the sensation of a story accelerating toward something? Or does it feel like a list of events that happen to be in order? Where is the momentum strongest? Where does it stall? 2. PREDICTABILITY: Can I guess what's coming next? The causal chain should feel logical in retrospect but not predictable in advance. Point to any beat where I correctly anticipated what would follow — and suggest what a more surprising (but still causal) alternative might look like. 3. DENSITY: Are the beats rich enough to suggest full scenes, or are some so thin that I can't imagine what the scene would actually look like on screen? Which beats feel most ready to draft, and which feel like placeholder notes? 4. EMOTIONAL TRACKING: As I read through the section, can I track the protagonist's emotional state at each beat? Do the beats create emotional variety — tension followed by release, progress followed by setback — or is the emotional register flat? 5. THE "I'D SKIP THIS" BEAT: Is there a beat where, if this were a screenplay, I'd start skimming? A beat that feels dutiful rather than compelling? Point to it and explain why it doesn't earn my attention. Tell me where the outline excites you and where it bores you.
Disagreement → Decision

Add this week's entry to your Disagreement Log. A new divergence pattern emerges in Draft Mode: Reader A may find the causality airtight but Reader B may find the outline predictable — the very tightness of the chain making it feel mechanical. This is a real tension. Airtight causality can produce a story that feels like a machine: efficient, logical, and soulless. The fix isn't to loosen the causality (broken chains are never the answer) but to make the consequences more surprising. "Therefore" doesn't mean "therefore the obvious thing happens." It means "therefore something happens that's caused by what came before but arrives in a form the audience didn't predict." If Reader B flags predictability at a specific junction, keep the causal link but revise the consequence so the logic is honored and the delivery surprises.

Student Self-Check

Before You Move On
Does every junction in your step outline pass the "therefore/but" test — with no "and then" links surviving?
Are all 9 promise-map items placed as specific beats in the outline? Can you point to each one?
Are all 5 escalation-ladder levels visible as beats — and do they arrive in the correct escalating order?
Is your beat count between 40 and 60? If it's outside that range, have you checked whether your beats are too large or too granular?
Have you chosen your outlining method — on the page, off the page, or hybrid — and set up your drafting workspace accordingly?

Budget Dial

Production Reality Check

Budget tier this week: Your chosen tier, now tested at beat-level granularity.

Top 3 cost drivers visible in the step outline: 1. Total scene count — count your beats. Each beat that corresponds to a new scene heading is a potential camera setup. A 55-beat outline with 50 distinct scenes is a big shoot. A 55-beat outline with 35 distinct scenes (some beats share locations and can be combined into continuous sequences) is more manageable. Look for adjacent beats in the same location that could play as continuous scenes rather than separate setups. 2. Location diversity per sequence — if Sequence 3 requires six different locations across eight beats, that sequence will dominate your shooting schedule. Consider whether some of those beats can be relocated to spaces already established in other sequences. 3. The causal chain's production footprint — a tight causal chain sometimes creates production demands: "therefore she goes to the plant" requires the plant location; "therefore she calls her ex" requires only a phone. When two causal paths lead to the same narrative outcome, the cheaper path is usually the better one for your tier — unless the more expensive path is dramatically superior enough to justify the cost.

Cheaper equivalent: A step outline where the protagonist physically visits five different people to gather information (five locations, five actors, five setups) can be restructured so that three of those conversations happen by phone, one happens in a location already in the film, and only one requires a new location. The causality is preserved — she still gathers the information, each piece still causes the next action — but the production footprint shrinks from five setups to two.

Worth-it spend: Your inciting incident beat and your midpoint beat. These are the two moments that define the audience's relationship to the story — the entry point and the pivot. Both should be set in locations that feel significant, with enough production value to signal that the story is escalating. If you're spending location budget anywhere, spend it on these two beats. Everything else can be lean.

Editorial Tip

The Reader's Eye

Professional screenwriters are sometimes asked to submit a step outline before drafting — by producers, showrunners, or development executives who want to approve the structural plan before pages are written. These industry outlines are evaluated for one thing above all others: does the reader feel, at every junction, that the story must continue? Not that it could continue — that it must. That feeling is causality. A step outline where every beat causes the next creates the sensation of inevitability — the reader finishes the outline convinced that this story, told in this order, with these consequences, could not have gone any other way. That's what you're building this week. Not a sequence of events. A chain of necessities.

Journal Prompt

Reflection

While applying the causality lock to your step outline, where did you find the most "and then" links — which section of the story had the weakest causal chain? Write about what that weakness reveals. A cluster of broken links usually indicates a section where you know what you want to happen but haven't figured out why it happens — where the events are placed by the writer's plan rather than caused by the story's logic. That section is where your drafting will be hardest. Name the weakness now so you can work on it before the pages demand it.

Week Summary

What You've Built

By the end of this week you should have:

• Read 2 produced screenplays with a focus on tight vs. loose causality
• Written a 40–60 beat step outline with "→ THEREFORE" or "→ BUT" connectors at every junction
• Placed all 9 promise-map items and all 5 escalation-ladder levels as specific beats
• Marked the midpoint, Wound activation, Need surfacing, and Line test as identifiable beats
• Completed the outlining format drill (5 beats in on-page and off-page formats, 10 minutes)
• Chosen your outlining method for drafting (on-page, off-page, or hybrid)
• Submitted a section of the outline to both Reader A and Reader B prompts
• Updated your Disagreement Log with this week's entry

Looking Ahead

Next Week

Week 16: Draft Act I (Pages 1–30). The outlining is finished. The preparation is complete. Next week, you write FADE IN and begin drafting your screenplay's first thirty pages — the opening image, the protagonist's introduction, the world establishment, the inciting incident, and the Act I break. The craft lecture teaches the specific skill of opening a screenplay: how the first ten pages make promises the rest of the script must keep. The AI Workshop introduces the Producer Pass — a third prompt you can use alongside the Two Readers to check your pages for production reality. From here to Week 22, you are a screenwriter with pages. Everything changes.

Your Portfolio So Far
Week 1–4: Film journals + budget-tier choice ✓ PHASE 0 COMPLETE
Week 5–14: Premise, theme, character, antagonist, world, promise map, outline, midpoint, 7 scenes ✓ PHASE 1 COMPLETE
Week 15: 40–60 beat step outline with causality lock (THIS WEEK)
Week 16: Draft Act I — pages 1–30
Week 17: Draft Act IIa — pages 31–60
✦ ✦ ✦