I've been on this site a long time, comparatively speaking, and I've seen threads on every topic you can imagine. I don't comment on every one of them, obviously, but I drop my two cents where two cents are due. I also know that this particular thread will disappear in a few weeks, but for a moment, I'll say something about all of these questions that fly around all the time. And by all the time, I mean that by the time this thread leaves the portal, another thread about at least one of these items will crop back up.

When it comes to writing a script, there are honestly only two things to keep in mind. One is the format. This is not because anyone is particularly anal. It's because movie making is an industry and it's far easier to make a movie if all your material looks the same way. Just like reports and such in the business world. The second is clarity. That's it. Clarity.

All of these questions that fly around every day here ask a million ways to write something, and they neglect the one thing they should keep in mind: what is the clearest and most visual way to portray my idea? Once you've written it, and it's completely clear on the page, you've achieved the best way to write it. Congrats.

INT. vs EXT.? OMG, who cares? Seriously. Let me tell you, if I am looking to produce your script, and I think a stadium is EXT and you think it's INT, it's not going to change what happens in the scene. Really. It's not.

All those discussions over -ING. Geez, they crop up everywhere. A little grammar lesson here. -ING is an English suffix used to make verbs progressive and some verbs into adjectives. The progressive verb tense is used when an action is taking place right now, or in the case of narratives, is occurring at the time the action is given focus. If the line states that "John is running up the stairs," then it can be inferred that John was running before we saw him the first time, so at the time we see him that action is in progress (hence the term, progressive). The verb tense most accepted is the present tense. If the line states "John runs up the stairs," then we can infer that John was NOT running up the stairs before we spotted him that first time and that action began once he was given focus, so at the time we see him that action is not currently in progress. There. Chew on that.

There are no rules. There is no forbidden language. You can write it however is best for you as long as it's clear. Once it's clear, you just make sure it isn't redundant. That's just smart writing. Redundant isn't clear. Oh, and please don't get worked up over "unfilmables." A picture says a thousand words, and you can film a lot more than people give credit for. You can't tell me that you can't tell if someone is "thinking" on screen. You can't tell what they're thinking, but you can tell that action is occurring.

Screenwriting is an art of brevity as well, so amidst all your clarity, you ensure that every word counts and don't trim out words for the sake of trimming and lose your clarity in the process. This is where the anti-wryly faction comes from. If a piece of dialogue has a wryly attached to it, you have to ensure the wryly is necessary. Does the scene naturally lend itself to the line being spoken as the wryly indicates? If so, it's unnecessary. As a side note, sarcasm will almost always need a wryly, since rarely is sarcasm clear.

So here's my opinion on all of these questions about how to write stuff. Just write it however you think is clear and best describes what you're going for. Post your final product (try to avoid the first draft), and if someone brings attention to it, then inquire as to a better way. If no one brings it up, then it's fine. I honestly think it would be better if no one asks anything about how to write stuff beforehand. We're a community of writers, and rest assured, if someone thinks you're off, they'll tell you.

If you want some basic guidance before you start, and don't want to look elsewhere, here: http://www.simplyscripts.com/WR_resource.html

We spend way too much time getting confused over differing opinions and not enough time writing. It's your idea, your language, your brainchild. Write it as you see fit and if it's really that good, no one will care whether your stadium turf is INT or EXT or whether your man runs or is running. The story will trump the comments if your writing is clear and concise.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled writing.

So you're saying a stadium scene is EXT?

Nothing about story structure here, George.

If people only understood that, then everything else would be clearer.

Quoted from George Willson Snreenwriting is an art

I've been saying that snreenwriting is an art for a long time.


Phil

Quoted from seamus19382 So you're saying a stadium scene is EXT?

No, definitely INT/EXT.

Quoted from Ralph Nothing about story structure here, George. If people only understood that, then everything else would be clearer.

Hey Ralph. I've noticed you've exhumed a lot of old threads posting, which is fine. Based on your comments, I'd say you might have something to offer the boards.

But keep in mind that this thread was posted at a very specific time in response to some very specific comments and requires a certain knowledge of how the boards operate in general. Not exactly something you can just jump into and comment on knowing nothing.

BTW, seeing as you're new, I'll do what everyone else does and suggest you read some scripts from your fellow members.

Quoted from Ralph Nothing about story structure here, George. If people only understood that, then everything else would be clearer.

It amazes me how underrated story structure is around here. Over the last year I have not only been reading hundreds of screenplays but have also been reading hundreds of articles, interviews, books and websites. And very, very rarely have I read anything at all that suggests anyone gives a fig about formatting, grammar or even spelling.

I have seen script readers that state they are primarily looking for a good story, told well and little else. This is the basics, anyone can think of a story, only good writers understand structure well enough to tell the story, how to create characters that are real, how to have every scene not only move the story forward but also reveal the theme and at the same time make it interesting to read.

Every time I see a review on this site that mentions format, grammar and spelling and yet totally neglects to discuss structure, character and story a little piece of me dies. Nah, of course it doesn't, but I do laugh though. Not out loud, like an idiot. But a suppressed little giggle, like an old woman.

There are no rules.

Great scripts say "we see" Spec scripts sell all the time with all kinds of weird format and directions and we hears and bold slugs and montages that are not like Syd Field tells us they should be yada yada yada.

Story. Structure. Characters. Nothing else matters. Only to failed hacks who want to sell books. It is high time that lie was put to sleep for good and people round here concentrated on storytelling, I guarantee it would make better writers out of all of us.

There are valid points to be made about format, grammar and spelling just as there are valid points to be made about structure and story.   The two go hand and hand in a script and while the story is very important, so is being able to read and understand it.

People contribute very often by telling you what they see wrong with your script.  And I'm sorry that I actually have to say this but very often it's difficult to get past tons of typos, inappropriate capitalizations, and badly worded passages.   Sometimes you can't see the story through the weeds and you've just got to tell that author to get their weed-wacker out.

Quoted from dogglebe I've been saying that snreenwriting is an art for a long time. Phil

As is spelling.

R xo

ps All art is quite useless.

Quoted from mcornetto There are valid points to be made about format, grammar and spelling just as there are valid points to be made about structure and story.   The two go hand and hand in a script and while the story is very important, so is being able to read and understand it. People contribute very often by telling you what they see wrong with your script.  And I'm sorry that I actually have to say this but very often it's difficult to get past tons of typos, inappropriate capitalizations, and badly worded passages.   Sometimes you can't see the story through the weeds and you've just got to tell that author to get their weed-wacker out.

I agree that there are valid points to be made with regard to typos and grammar, but they are at the bottom of the pile compared to more important aspects of a script.

I was reading an interview with a script reader just this week who stated that it was bad form to even point out typos and errors when giving coverage. Typos are fine as long as they are not so much that it ruins the read.  These are the guys who decide whether a script gets passed or sent upstairs for someone else to read, and they place grammar and format well below story and structure, in fact they go so far as saying it should not even be mentioned.

I honestly think we could all benefit from having a shake-up in the reviewing on this site, It is pretty awful compared to others. We should ban comments on format and grammar and just refuse to post scripts that are too bad to read. I doubt that anybody is actually learning much when posting scripts here.    

Quoted from Murphy I honestly think we could all benefit from having a shake-up in the reviewing on this site, It is pretty awful compared to others. We should ban comments on format and grammar and just refuse to post scripts that are too bad to read. I doubt that anybody is actually learning much when posting scripts here.

Is this a serious comment? This one of the worst things I've ever read on the boards. Don't think you even have a case about story structure after suggesting that unwritten rules become actual rules and certain scripts should be deemed "too bad to read" and not get a chance to be posted. In fact, I think any point you'd want to make is negated by said implication. Do you even want people to learn or are you just trolling?

Or did you just forget to put a preposition somewhere and I'm just overreacting?

Quoted from James McClung Is this a serious comment? This one of the worst things I've ever read on the boards. Don't think you even have a case about story structure after suggesting that unwritten rules become actual rules and certain scripts should be deemed "too bad to read." In fact, I think any point you'd want to make is negated by said implication. Do you even want people to learn or are you just trolling?

What? That makes no sense at all. I am being serious, of course I am.

When I say too bad to read, I mean just that, too badly written to be read, i.e. every word spelled wrong, not in a script format, not readable. But we never get them anyway.

My point is that we should ban people mentioning spelling, grammar and format in their reviews. Because quite frankly I read so many reviews on here that only talk about it, some contain several posts detailing every single "mistake" and yet never bother to even address story, which is far more important.  I think it is to the detriment to people here improving as writers, which is what I thought we were all here for?

People need to learn to fix errors before publishing, this should not be a place for people to submit first drafts. We can email each other stuff to check before posting. But once a script it published here then it should be about the story, the characters, the structure etc... This is how people improve.
  

Quoted from George Willson You can write it however is best for you as long as it's clear. Once it's clear, you just make sure it isn't redundant. .

That's the point. I agree. I've seen every rule broken in a pro script. Rules we try to correct ourselves at. I, personally ,try to just comment on story.

People like that ass-wipe Jeff, Will nail you for passive verbiage. Too many "He's or she's". Too many "ly" words. Unfilmables!!!!!! Lord have mercy on your soul.

Kiss, kiss Jeff. Thinking about going gay. Seems like 50 % of this site is already.

Whatever. It's about telling you what makes sense to the reader. Read a good deal of scripts this OWC that I really couldn't grasp what was happening on screen.

I have no problem with people correcting my format, or action sentences because they're unclear. They're always clear to the writer. I want to be clear to the reader. No matter how I write. If you can do that, You've written a good script IMO.

Of late, I've tried to limit my comments to story. People who take the time to point out format errors or bad writing, typos, are working harder then I. And, they should be thanked IMO. Especially if it helps you gain clarity to your audience.

James

Quoted from Murphy My point is that we should ban people mentioning spelling, grammar and format in their reviews. Because quite frankly I read so many reviews on here that only talk about it, some contain several posts detailing every single "mistake" and yet never bother to even address story, which is far more important.  I think it is to the detriment to people here improving as writers, which is what I thought we were all here for?

Detriment or not, I don't think anything script or review-related should be banned. I agree with you that plot, characters, story structure, etc. is important but once you start talking about banning reviews, banning scripts, banning anything, really... I honestly don't care what you're arguing at that point. Why put a limit on what people can or cannot contribute?

Banning reviews and scripts would ruin the boards, plain and simple.

Quoted from James McClung Detriment or not, I don't think anything script or review-related should be banned. I agree with you that plot, characters, story structure, etc. is important but once you start talking about banning reviews, banning scripts, banning anything, really... I honestly don't care what you're arguing at that point. Why put a limit on what people can or cannot contribute? Banning reviews and scripts would ruin the boards, plain and simple.

Simply because during my first two years as a member of this site I thought I could write scripts. Because I could format slugs and not say "we see" I honestly thought I could write. There was no other discussion, no other aspect of scripts really delved into. We tried to review sold scripts and it always ended up the same old crap and not once I ever get any inclination of how these sold scripts were different, what made them stand out.

It was only this past year, after staying away from this site but reading everything I could about screenwriting that I realised how far away I was. How much there was too screenwriting that had never been mentioned here, ever.

It is a simple equation, we ban people reviewing scripts based on format and spelling and thus make people learn to give real reviews, real coverage that will help everyone, including me learn more.

If this is not a good idea to the board then fair enough, I put it out there, I made a suggestion. I'll just continue my education elsewhere and post my scripts when I need someone to check my formatting. No big deal.

It's not as if everyone here comments on spelling errors or formatting. You ever look at one of George's reviews, you'll see that it's packed with info on story and character. I use George as an example because although Jeff is one of the boards' most thorough reviewers, people reject his reviews just because they're rude, they don't like him or whatever.

Classic example of lumping everyone into one category. People here do it all the time.

It's also not as if every thread that gets posted in Screenwriting Discussion is about format or whatnot. Plenty of juicy threads on character development, story structure and what have you even at this very moment. If that's not good enough, you can always dig.

Also, you learn the most from actually writing. That's where you experience what works and what doesn't work firsthand. So write. Drop the "pussy on a pedestal" complex that so many prospective writers have for their first screenplay and write. Something. Anything.

Then post it and see what people say. If it's the same shit, at least whatever muckraking you wanna do will have some genuine credibility.

In any case, you learn the most from actually practicing your craft.

Other than that, there's worthwhile info here if you look for it. Banning reviews just sounds stupid.

I thought this was an interesting and important thread and I had a couple of thoughts.  Just as film making is a collaborative process, so is the critique process.  Not all readers are equipped or capable of responding to all aspects of a given work.  

If you're really good at spotting errors of formatting, punctuation, or spelling, bring it on.  I need to know that.  And thank you for lending me your eyes.

If you can look past that, and want to comment on structure, pace, or plot, and have suggestions along those lines my ears are equally open and I am just as thankful.  

Shut up Conwall.  You're new!!!

All kidding aside, though.  People review things differently and we have to let it go at that.  I generally don't comment on spelling and punctuation unless I know someone is going to submit a script somewhere.  If you post your first/second draft of Phlegmdogs on the boards, there will be more important things to talk (characterization, story, dialog, pacing).  Should you go back and rewrite it, you're going to have a whole new batch of misspellings and grammatical errors.

Besides, you should have a spellchecker somewhere in your damn computer.  Use it!


Phil

Quoted from conwall Not all readers are equipped or capable of responding to all aspects of a given work.

Goodness, Murph.  When did you become such a crotchety old grump?

I seem to remember commenting on at least a few of your early works, and am so glad to learn my time was wasted.

And, as James says, a piss-take OWC is a big part of the problem, not the solution.  Grumpy aussie speak with forked tongue.

Anyways, I do feel you on scripts that are too poor to read.  We have chased Don around many times on that issue, but his mindset is closer to Conwall's up top.

Rather than barring the door for those who are low on the curve, he seeks instead to raise them up.

I do not always agree with him, but respect his reasons for doing what he does.

Quoted from bert Rather than barring the door for those who are low on the curve, he seeks instead to raise them up.

This exactly why banning scripts and reviews would be a horrible, horrible idea. SS gives amateurs the opportunity to grow and improve. This is true in theory as well as in practice. I speak for myself as well as other writers I've watched sharpen their writing skills over the years. There's a few who joined SS around the same time I did who started out without a clue but grew into good writers (at the very least competent writers). Some of them whose work now compared to their work then is the difference between night and day.

This is the primary reason why your talk of banning, Murphy, struck me as so shocking and repugnant.