Thanks, everybody.  It's been fun.

Quoted from c m hall you really think so?

What did you take it to mean?

And I suppose when we are thinking of a ballarina, don't we automatically think of the bun when we think of Degas for instance?  Right?

Kind of like a no brainer and uness?

See, I thought it was the hair in a bun, the woman propped up by a cane.  

Yeah, it was an awkward line, but I think he meant the hair was propped up with a cane...like the ballerina's do.

Cathy, I thought it was oddly worded when I first read the script as well.

Maybe because i don't know or rad much about women's hairstyles.  I visualized her with a cane as well, but quickly dismissed it and just moved on.

I thought the shoe description was one of the most powerful I've ever read in a script. In one line, we know who this girl is. I have not seen the movie, and only read the first 10 or so pages of the script. But I see a girl who has not grown up or moved on from her girlish dreams. That she keeps all these on the wall indicates a woman of profound insecurity, a person who has compartmentalized aspects of her life as a self defense mechanism. I see her as someone who lives largely in a reality of her own making, a castle with fragile walls.

(Rick, in some ways she's like the girl from the doll script you have)

So the question is would I have got that just from a physical description of her room, without the added line to explain it. And I don't know. I might have. I certainly would have got it if I saw it in film. I think this is an example of where rules are meant to be broken if you pick your moments. An image with that much power, that is so important in setting up the script, can't be taken for granted. I think the writer is wise to take the extra line to make sure the reader gets it.

If the whole script is like this, and it adds 20 pages, then that's a problem. But in regards to this one line, it left a lasting image in my mind. I don't trust that I would have picked it up without the help. Sometimes I read things like physical descriptions of a room pretty fast, skip to the dialogue. I might not be the only one in the world to do that, so it's probably good the writer accounts for people like me.

I agree with Jeff there should not be many of these.

Quoted from Dreamscale The visual of the shoes is great.  The aside, "they testify to how long she has been a ballet dancer" is what I am against.

But the reader might come to all kinds of conclusions in that scene if it weren't written. Yes, they might think the obvious, but they might not. They might think the shoes are merely a collection. I once knew a girl who had horse pictures plastered all over the place.

Also, the actor can read that and get a quick look at who they are supposed to be. It's clear, not like where I have problems in my writing-- diverging all over the map and out of focus.

Sandra

OMG.
I don't understand what's so difficult to understand about the line or why anyone cares because the director is just going to butcher and chop up the entire screenplay and story into coleslaw.
Did you guys not pick up on that?



ERICA's hair is in a bun with chop sticks in it.
or
ERICA's hair is in a bun - and ERICA is propped on a cane.

Whatever.
Doesn't matter.

Ya'll need to quit being so anal.
This silly sh!t isn't fundamental to the story.

It's in. It's out.
Who cares.
Doesn't matter.

Same for all the other goofy sh!t ya'll are arguing over.

Put it in your screenplay to fluff it up.
Don't put it in to slim it down.

When I'm going out on a date I really, really, don't give a flying fig if my wife or girlfriend's earrings coordinate with her general motif.
I just want a good doinking later.
I don't care if her bra matches her panties.
I just want 'em both on the ground.
I don't care if her hair is in a bun or not.
I don't plan on spending much time up there.

Directors don't care about none of this sh!t.
We see it time and time again.

How many [expletive] differences are there from script to screen?
A bazillion!
Why?
I dunno?!
Stuff happens!

Good Lord.

STORY!
STORY!
STORY!
STORY!

More Black Swan. Less White Swan.

NINA's idea of perfection is not the same as YEVNA/THOMAS' idea of perfection.

I'll take the latter vantage point, perhaps to my professional detriment.

Interview with Mark Heyman (skip to 36:30)

The whole interview is quite interesting, but at the time mentioned above, Mark Heyman talks about theme.

At around 50:00 Heyman would appear to confirm my statements about "reality" and subjective perspective to some point.

And DMC, they talk about her dad at 1:03:00

Heretic, I missed that part completey!  Maybe it does matter.  Whoops!  LOL

Ray, please I am so not trying to be a smartAss here, and I do know how important STORY is, but if it is all about story and not how it is written, then why is it so damn hard to write a screenplay.

I have written only a couple, I am working on my 3rd, (first to scrapped).  But this one is good, the story is good, I am just now up to my incident before act 2 and it is HARD.  It is hard to find the right words.  

Since they rip it up, then why can't they be a little more lenient with the scripts then.  Why do some make it and some get tossed - even if the story is good.

It is too confusing really.  So now I am just trying to get thru this first draft, then I will try to tighten it up and make it readable and interersting but that is the hardest part.

Heretic, what do they say... I sent the movie back to netflix already.  Is it in the script though, aobut her dad?  

Hey DMC,

The link to the podcast is in my post above (the bold sentence is the link).  They don't really say anything about the importance or lack thereof of her father in the final version; they just talk about it a bit, which may or may not affect your opinion at all!

I didn't realize the bold text is a link.  I clicked it, does it take awhile to open??