Quoted from Dreamscale So, Giles, am I correct in assuming that you are saying you agree that camera directions, asides, and the like should not be written in spec scripts?  If that's where you're going, I'm with you 100%. Was that quote all from "Mystery Man" or was some of it your commentary on his comments?  I was a bit confused.

No, I was just quoting an article I think does  very good job on the subject, I do tend to agree with him however. He is essentially saying that yes, we should be writing camera angles into our scripts but not actually naming camera angles. We should be writing cinematically and visually and should be able to describe the shots as we want them to appear on screen without actually using any technical film-making terms in our script. I do agree with that, the man makes a lot of sense.

I have been digging the hell out of this site lately, from another thread that got very little attention:

http://scriptshadow.blogspot.com/

It is a treasure-trove for good, fresh unproduced scripts that are attracting attention.

Camera angles?  Pfft.  Who gives a rat's butt?

Read freshly minted and sold scripts.  See what is selling.  Use that format.

It is that simple and that hard.

Damn good website.  A shame more people did not notice it.

Quoted from bert I have been digging the hell out of this site lately, from another thread that got very little attention: http://scriptshadow.blogspot.com/ It is a treasure-trove for good, fresh unproduced scripts that are attracting attention. Camera angles?  Pfft.  Who gives a rat's butt? Read freshly minted and sold scripts.  See what is selling.  Use that format. It is that simple and that hard. Damn good website.  A shame more people did not notice it.

Awesome. Very cool stuff there, and THE ORANGES is on the list. Good script that one.

Wow, thanks Gary, that was a very useful link. It's sort of simple but cool at the same time. I will see if i can try some of the technique in my current script.

Then we are in agreement, Giles.  It's not difficult to write visually, cinematrically, etc., and not using camera directions.  When this is done effectively, the read is much stronger...and downright better.

I think alot of it has to do with how mcuh it's happening, and whether or not it occurrs early on, and continues.

The post has new life!

Quoted from Dreamscale Then we are in agreement, Giles.  It's not difficult to write visually, cinematrically, etc., and not using camera directions.  When this is done effectively, the read is much stronger...and downright better. I think alot of it has to do with how mcuh it's happening, and whether or not it occurrs early on, and continues. The post has new life!

There are times when you have to go WIDER, then WIDER STILL, and then STILL WIDER.
Your focus is on one item, tight, then you don't understand until you go with a wider shot, then you still only get part of the picture, but suspense builds, and you have to go wider for the full shot. Now you get it. Now you get the whole picture. There could be no other way to write it in a screenplay. ANGLE ON, yes, not needed, but TIGHT ON, or WIDER, yes, absolutely. ON JEFF as he bangs the phuck out of his keyboard. WIDER, he's in jail. WIDER STILL, it's a jail in his own house.

Quoted from cloroxmartini ON JEFF as he bangs the phuck out of his keyboard. WIDER, he's in jail. WIDER STILL, it's a jail in his own house.

JEFF, a face full of concentration as he bangs the fuck out of his keyboard.

The BARS on the window, The Heavy STEEL DOOR of a jail cell. Jeff looks up at the window for a moment and thinks.

From outside the window looks just like any other cell window, only this isn't no ordinary prison,  Jeff's cell is just a room in an otherwise normal suburban home.

Kids play in the street outside, next door someone is hanging clothes on a line. The sound of Jeff HITTING THE KEYS can still be heard over the more usual sounds of suburbia.


Or something like that anyway, the point is you do not need to write WIDER or any camera angles at all. The idea is to write how the film looks in your head and trying to get that on the page in such a way that it is clear to the director what you had in mind but without telling him his job.

Haha!  Yes, I do seem to live in a jail in my own house...scary, but true.

Yeah, "TIGHT ON" or "WIDER", or even a less intrusive, "pull back to reveal" at times defintely does work and maybe even helps or strengthens the script itself, and the read as a whole.  But for some reason, these "camera directions" feel much less intrusive than others, that have been discussed here.

I'm not disagreeing with you, Clorox.  For me, it's how it's done, how it's incorporated into the script, and hopefully, how well if flows into the read itself.

But in the original example from Lake, I think what I put together in a minute or so, said the same thing, took up less than half the space, and was much less intrusive.  

Just MO, of course, and we know what's that worth.

Yes, Giles!  I agree.  Alot of camera direction is actually something that is assumed or "known" by a director, or even the readers.  If it's written in such a way that it makes sense, and is visual, then you're golden.  

What you're not getting Dream is that the technical components in that script are part of the story.  The way the scripted is styled is just as important as any of the character relationships in that script.

Bert referenced the scriptshadow blog and if you check out the highest rated script on the site, Everything Must Go, you have an opening scene that is a series of CLOSE ONs.  It could have been written without them but it's part of the story.  It's conscious BEAT, BEAT, BEAT.

Quoted from Lakewood What you're not getting Dream is that the technical components in that script are part of the story.  The way the scripted is styled is just as important as any of the character relationships in that script. Bert referenced the scriptshadow blog and if you check out the highest rated script on the site, Everything Must Go, you have an opening scene that is a series of CLOSE ONs.  It could have been written without them but it's part of the story.  It's conscious BEAT, BEAT, BEAT.

Reading that first page though Lakewood there is not a single CLOSE ON that actually needs to be there, the script would lose nothing by removing them and the beat's would still work exactly the same way. They are pointless and thus should not be there.

Yeah I read the first page of that script, and if I was writing it I wouldn't put any of the camera directions in there.

I can't believe we are still arguing about this! I suppose it is important though. Some readers say if they see camera directions in there, they don't read much further. Others say they don't care. Hmm.

Lake, based on your example, you obviously only incuded a few lines...a few passages.  based on that, I or no one else would have a clue about how or why those camera angles are so important, because, in the example, they're just not.

I do understand how they can be important , and how they can work.  But, I also know that there ways around using them that usally work just as well if not better.

There are instances where a camera shot or direction is needed.  While I haven't seen the script for Apocolypse Now, I'm willing to bet it opens with BIRD'S EYE SHOT OF MARTIN SHEEHAN LYING IN BED...or something like.

If there's no other way to show what you want to show, then go for it.  Just remember that, should your script get produced, the director will throw out most of your shots anyway.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe There are instances where a camera shot or direction is needed.  While I haven't seen the script for Apocolypse Now, I'm willing to bet it opens with BIRD'S EYE SHOT OF MARTIN SHEEHAN LYING IN BED...or something like. If there's no other way to show what you want to show, then go for it.  Just remember that, should your script get produced, the director will throw out most of your shots anyway. Phil

That's assuming the writer saw it that way.  They may have just written that a guy was lying on a bed.  The director may have seen that shot the way it was finally done.