All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
I got a message from someone who was in the process of reviewing my script, and it said:
"There are some things you should immediately fix in your script then update your posting. It will make reading your script much easier for reviewers. Delete any and all camera directions. They do not go in a spec script ever, and they also needlessly waste script space. Delete all the CUT TO, DISSOLVE TO. Absolutely never put those in a script. Also, limit your FLASHBACKS to one. They are used rarely in scripts, and only if absolutely necessary."
Yeah, sure, I know that they're not necessary in spec scripts especially since the director would decide those, but is it really that big a violation that this person makes it seem? Does it really make it that much more difficult to read if there is a transition written in? I also found it especially strange that he said to limit flashbacks and that they are rarely used. Flashbacks are done in films all the time, especially depending on what type of film it is.
I'm just curious, because a lot of people makes it seem like a huge no-no if you write things like that into your script, but to me it seems very minor. To me, it's just like me indulging my creative visions. If a director wants to film it and add his own camera directions, then that's fine with me, but until that actually happens, what's wrong with doing it for now?
Just to clarify, I don't flood my scripts with camera directions, I only rarely use them if I envision a scene a particular way, but I don't do that often. I just wanted ask this because this guy made it seem like it's a really bad thing to do, and one should absolutely never do this and that... it just seems so restrictive, why can't people just write the way they want? I don't get it.
(ps - also, would it be considered 'taboo' or a big screenplay 'no-no' to include a note at the beginning of the script saying it would be shot in black and white, or something along those lines?)
My scripts:
Façade: In a "film noir" set in the 1950's, a detective investigates the murder of a teenage boy in the quintessential 50's American suburbs, and as he slowly peels back the veneer of the picture perfect family, he realizes nothing is what it seems, unaware of what secrets he will uncover.
When people use words like, "absolutely never", they are seldom correct.
... and people get very excited about these things -- but as far as camera angles go - certainly on a spec script I'd do every thing I can to leave them out for two reasons:
1) Creatively there's normally a work-around.
2) The script represents what you see on screen - you don't see a camera, so why mention it? It just really takes you out of the story - if you are caught up in the story - let's say something romantic, and you write CAMERA PULLS IN - then you've suddenly got an image of some dirty-big camera-man when you previously had this cozy romantic image - it just doesn't play right.
When I'm reading a script, it plays in my mind as it would on screen. CUT TO's aren't needed.
Add to that, the director's vision may be totally different to yours - if you do a shooting script, you may well have discussed ideas with the director and have some idea of what they want, what they don't want, and what your creative input is ... you're not offering your work to the general market at this stage, so you've got more flexibility.
Before you hit that stage, I'd keep the script as 'clean' as possible - in some ways it's just etiquette - your script is for a very 'general' audience as a spec, so avoid stuff that may well turn people off unnecessarily.
If you're all three, great, you can write whatever you want in a script but I understand it to be somewhat of a deterrent to your script if you add all the extra fluff.
A spec script should be about the story. If it gets picked up, people who get paid a hell of a lot more than us will figure out direction and camera angles.
1. Can you show me how to properly format a flashback? Anyone who ever tells you to not use them seldom knows how to format for one -- hence why they try to tell you not to use them.
As I have trumpeted a thousand times... advice is not a straight-up, one person one vote, democracy. Take the people who are giving it, and weight them according to relevance.
And in this case... whoever "they are" is clearly giving out inaccurate information. That's right, i said it... whoever you are... identify yourself.
I think I can guess who sent that message. I won't, don't worry Bert. But it looks like the language of a member who's been active lately, a new member I think.
That was actually sent to me by a member on Zoetrope. Just fyi..
My scripts:
Façade: In a "film noir" set in the 1950's, a detective investigates the murder of a teenage boy in the quintessential 50's American suburbs, and as he slowly peels back the veneer of the picture perfect family, he realizes nothing is what it seems, unaware of what secrets he will uncover.
If you're all three, great, you can write whatever you want in a script but I understand it to be somewhat of a deterrent to your script if you add all the extra fluff.
A spec script should be about the story. If it gets picked up, people who get paid a hell of a lot more than us will figure out direction and camera angles.
Shawn.....><
Thanks for the <arrow" of astute direction, Shawn!!
Recently, I had some good advice re: Real Counterfeit Witches of the 21st century. It was:
Pick up a camera and try shooting the scenes.
I say it's good advice not because I want to do that, but because I need to "think" more in the terms of a camera man/woman. This kind of advice is really important, but some people might not understand how it is meant to be taken. I get that.
Before I digress too much as always, I want to say that I would rather share worlds with others and not try and "be" them. (Pick up a camera and become the CAMERA PERSON) In other words, I don't want to re-invent myself or others. It's like this: Would I like to turn Einstein into Lennon? Lennon into Van gogh? The band Queen into Nickelbakck? The Beatles into Crowded House? Etc...
Ultimately, you, The Writer, need to determine your role, be it solely writer, or a combination of any of the above mentioned roles in the post (as above) or any other numerous possibilities that could be conceived by way of immeasurable counting, virtual, physical, or otherwise.
However:
I do hold sincerely to Ledbetter's words.
I think one must determine their primary forte.
This does not mean that they must give up other avenues of interest; rather, it just means they have decided, for themselves, that one curvature appeals to themselves more than others. In other words: They have identified a "part" or "parts" of their strength/s.
Should we all be so lucky? If we are, then let us ponder that.
Pages: 1, 
Author
Is it really that important?
Logged
Locked Board