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.
Hi! This is my first post :) Thanks in advance for the help!
1. If I put MUSIC UP: (Insert music here) in my script, do I need to fade out the music in the end of the scene? For example:
------ INT/EXT CAR - DAY
MUSIC UP: You Make Me by Avicii
Rhonda drives down the SAN DIEGO FREEWAY.
INT LIVING ROOM - SAME DAY
On a beat-up couch sits Rhonda and Jackson... ----
Should I fade out the music after the car scene somehow? What does that look like? Also, what if I wanted the music to continue into another scene? How would that look?
2. How are parentheticals used correctly in regards to (re:), for example:
DARREN (re: Christianne) I think the lady doth protest too much.
I've seen these used in multiple character conversations, but I wonder if it needs to be used if the dialogue is obviously toward another character. And do I separate parentheticals to a separate line from the rest of the dialogue?
3. How are quick cuts and montages different from each other? I'm having a difficult time structuring a montage, as well, since I've seen it done two ways so far:
a) It says:
BEGIN MONTAGE
-Christianne running toward the beach
-Christianne going skydiving
-Christianne playing hopscotch
-Christianne punching a boy
OR
b)Or it doesn't say montage at all, but in the previous scene it just says:
The following montage begins:
EXT LAGUNA BEACH - DAY
Christianne runs happily on a beach.
INT/EXT PLANE - DAY
Christianne puts on skydiving gear and goggles, and gets ready to jump.
She JUMPS.
EXT. PLAYGROUND - DAY
Christianne grabs chalk and makes squares to play hopscotch.
INT HOUSE - DAY
Christianne looks pissed. She punches a boy in the face.
---
Are both okay to use? I feel like a) is wrong because it doesn't have sluglines to give context? Also, could I put dialogue in a quick montage?
Thanks for the help! These are just some tricky ones :)
--Christianne
"The unexamined life is not worth living." --Socrates
As for question #1, I'd advise not using music in a Spec script. You don't own the rights to it and it's just not necessary. Tell your story and let whoever wants to film it, worry about the music.
#2 - Parentheticals, also known as wrylies. Use them as little as possible, as they are a space waster and they also irritate readers. For the most part, they aren't going to be necessary unless you have a character speaking in a foreign language or it's important to note how someone says something. You could easily write a feature and have zero wrylies.
#3 - Montage - lots of ways to pull this off, but again, I'll tell you, don't use them unless you really need to. When I use a montage, I do it more like B with complete Slugs. You really don't have to even label it as a montage, but you can.
IMO, a montage will play over a song or the like and be a certain length of time, which means limited details.
Now, after saying all that, I actually have a feature that starts out with a montage playing over a very popular and well known song, so...you can do it, but I don't recommend it, especially if you're just getting started.
Hope that helps and best of luck here on the good ship SS.
Welcome aboard! Great place to post your work, get involved and learn!
As far as music goes, you cannot mention a specific song you want unless you own the copyrights yourself. If you feel the need fora song to be playing in the car it should read something like this:
INT. CAR - DAY
Rhonda drives down the SAN DIEGO FREEWAY. A slow love song plays on the radio.
As far as having the song continue into the next scene? Unless you plan on directing this yourself, it really isn't necessary to have the music continue on. That's at the discretion of the director.
As far as music goes, you cannot mention a specific song you want unless you own the copyrights yourself.
Not to split hairs or be a dick, but you shouldn't think that "you cannot mention a specific song" in a script. No one is going to sue you or anything over using specific songs/groups in a Spec script.
The issue comes when it gets filmed. Certain songs (if they're important enough to go after) can be costly to use and could make a potential investor think twice about going with your script. But...really? That's the least you need to worry about now, as you write your script.
Now, after saying all that, I actually have a feature that starts out with a montage playing over a very popular and well known song, so...you can do it, but I don't recommend it, especially if you're just getting started.
So let me get this right, Jeff: Don't do it. Don't do it. I did it.
Christianne,
Dreamscale is correct. You really shouldn't mention an specific song unless it's a critical to your story.
Use parentheticals sparingly, once again, only if it's critical to the story.
As far as montages: There's more than one way to do it. If you Google how to do a montage in a screenplay, you'll get a dozen answers and all of them will claim to be the correct way.
The best piece of advice I can give you right now is that there's no one way to write a script.
There's an accepted overall format that you should learn and follow, but a good story will trump format any day. If you were to use the wrong font and format but you started your script with:
"I see you, Jeff, sitting there naked with that bottle of Jagermeister, listening to Unforgettable by Nat King Cole.", and the reader's name was "Jeff" and he was sitting there naked with a bottle of Jagermeister while listening to Nat King Cole, he's going to keep reading.
Sure that's an extreme example, I mean, who would sit naked with a bottle of Jagermeister while listening to Nat King Cole? That's just strange, but you get my point.
If you were to use the wrong font and format but you started your script with:
"I see you, Jeff, sitting there naked with that bottle of Jagermeister, listening to Unforgettable by Nat King Cole.", and the reader's name was "Jeff" and he was sitting there naked with a bottle of Jagermeister while listening to Nat King Cole, he's going to keep reading.
Sure that's an extreme example, I mean, who would sit naked with a bottle of Jagermeister while listening to Nat King Cole? That's just strange, but you get my point.
Yes...exactly. But, if you changed the song to...oh, I don't know...anything by...like...uh...Edguy, Avantasia, Delain...I CAn actually see that visually. Yeah...it's not a great visual, but I can see it. Maybe change the "bottle" to a pewter Jagermeister shotglass, hrons down and a cheesy bucket with ice and a bottle a Jagie? Yeah...I've seen that picture.
But, you are right, Jordan, if you're going to use an exact song and run a montage over it, I'd recommend "Unforgettable", and I'd do the Natalie & Nat version.
Montages or a "series of shots" are lame. They're all numbered
1) ...
2) ...
3) ...
4) ...
Or done with letters
A) ...
B) ...
C) ...
D) ...
Most of the time you can easily write that montage without the numbered/alphabetical ordering and it looks way better...that's my opinion, of course.
As for whether or not you should put songs into your script, that's your choice. I remember that was one of the first things I read about when I was like 10 years old and getting into screenwriting. All I did was just look up stuff and read stuff. A big no-no at the time was never put a song in your script. I did it anyway, just for the hell of it, because most of the time back then when I was a little kid and didn't know shit from shinola I always envisioned myself as the one directing the crap that I wrote, ya know? So who would care if I put all my favorite songs in the script? Anyway, I rarely do it anymore. I'll just mention the genre instead. But I'm not going to sit here and tell you to not do it, it's a huge no-no, and all that jazz. If you want to do it, do it, but don't go overboard with it. The only thing I recommend is NOT to make the song a strong part of the story to the point where the script can't be filmed unless the rights are attained.
Wrylies/parentheticals have never bothered me. I think a lot of people get annoyed over some weird things.
If you were to use the wrong font and format but you started your script with:
"I see you, Jeff, sitting there naked with that bottle of Jagermeister, listening to Unforgettable by Nat King Cole.", and the reader's name was "Jeff" and he was sitting there naked with a bottle of Jagermeister while listening to Nat King Cole, he's going to keep reading.
Sure that's an extreme example, I mean, who would sit naked with a bottle of Jagermeister while listening to Nat King Cole? That's just strange, but you get my point.
Yes...exactly. But, if you changed the song to...oh, I don't know...anything by...like...uh...Edguy, Avantasia, Delain...I Can actually see that visually. Yeah...it's not a great visual, but I can see it. Maybe change the "bottle" to a pewter Jagermeister shotglass, horns down and a cheesy bucket with ice and a bottle a Jagie? Yeah...I've seen that picture.
But, you are right, Jordan, if you're going to use an exact song and run a montage over it, I'd recommend "Unforgettable", and I'd do the Natalie & Nat King Cole version.
As far as music goes, you cannot mention a specific song you want unless you own the copyrights yourself.
That's actually incorrect. You can mention whatever you want in a spec script. You see, as a result of a federal lawsuit involving Hustler magazine, the Supreme Court determined that you can make reference to anything or anyone in your script as long as it's not for personal gain. Being that it's a spec script, until you get paid, you can have whatever you want in there. Once they pay you, it's not your problem anymore, it's whoever bought it's problem.
I mean, I use music all the time in my scripts, when I think the moment works for it. Nobody's going to sue me for it because they can't and nobody's going to stop reading just because they see a song in there when there "shouldn't be one"...
That's actually incorrect. You can mention whatever you want in a spec script. You see, as a result of a federal lawsuit involving Hustler magazine, the Supreme Court determined that you can make reference to anything or anyone in your script as long as it's not for personal gain. Being that it's a spec script, until you get paid, you can have whatever you want in there. Once they pay you, it's not your problem anymore, it's whoever bought it's problem.
I mean, I use music all the time in my scripts, when I think the moment works for it. Nobody's going to sue me for it because they can't and nobody's going to stop reading just because they see a song in there when there "shouldn't be one"...
I stand corrected.
That's quite a relief, actually. Now I can go ahead and use Minnie Ripperton's "Loving You" in that slasher script I'm working on.
Thanks! You guys are all awesome I'll definitely take the montage bit.
I wonder if there are any songs that can be used freely? Kind of like how we don't need to get the copyrights to do a story in the Bible?
But thanks for the help on the specifics of a song. I guess it might be more helpful to write the genre of the song as opposed to a specific song. Everyone wants money for their ideas right?
Thanks again!
--C
"The unexamined life is not worth living." --Socrates
That's actually incorrect. You can mention whatever you want in a spec script. You see, as a result of a federal lawsuit involving Hustler magazine, the Supreme Court determined that you can make reference to anything or anyone in your script as long as it's not for personal gain. Being that it's a spec script, until you get paid, you can have whatever you want in there. Once they pay you, it's not your problem anymore, it's whoever bought it's problem.
I mean, I use music all the time in my scripts, when I think the moment works for it. Nobody's going to sue me for it because they can't and nobody's going to stop reading just because they see a song in there when there "shouldn't be one"...
Haha I replied too soon. Okay! Well I guess that works well for me too
"The unexamined life is not worth living." --Socrates
Just write what they are listening to: A popular song plays on the radio; A classic; An upbeat rap song; a 90s gangsta rap hit; Christmas music plays...; A god-awful tune from 2014 - you get the point.
Montages and series of shits...SHOTS... agree with the above. I would just write them in scene. But everyone is different. Depends on what you want to project and how. All up to you
If you really wanted a particular song, scene should suggest a fitting tune. If not, put it in! Why not? It's your script. But you could always disguise it, mention the artist or title in dialogue. But to be honest, I don't think it matters that much unless it's absolutely necessary. If you really need it in, put it in. If in doubt, take it out.
Write whatever you want. If you want to write that LED ZEPPELIN's Whole Lotta Love is playing, that's fine. It will give the reader/filmmaker an idea of the tone/mood you're going for. If the script is made into a film, they will go with whatever music their budget allows. Seriously. Write what you feel is important for your story.
Pia (Bear) and Sean (Blonde) have it right on the money. The reader has to be one terrible reader if they dismiss a script for stating which song is playing over the scene or montage. And in the end, it's your script -- and you can do whatever you want with it. There shouldn't be a stigma against writing specific song titles -- if the reader doesn't recognize the song, they'll just glaze over the detail instead of having a seizure.
You can use whatever music or songs you like in a spec script.
Whether the producer, or whoever, wants to use that song or not is a different matter entirely... but if it makes your story better to use it, then use it. Doesn't have to be important to the plot, it just has to fit the story.
Nobody is going to put your script down because you've mentioned a popular song in your script, well... maybe some from here would.
It will give the reader/filmmaker an idea of the tone/mood you're going for.
I'd be cautious on that one - it's fine with songs that everybody knows, if you over-use it and the poor reader's got no idea of what the song it, then it looses its purpose.
I'd be cautious on that one - it's fine with songs that everybody knows, if you over-use it and the poor reader's got no idea of what the song it, then it looses its purpose.
They're not going to Google it. That's the whole reason why I said that I do it when the scene warrants it. It's probably a bad idea to put a full soundtrack into your script, but you are free to do whatever you want with it. But, never assume that the reader is going to put the script down, look the song up THEN pick your script back up.
Depending on how many instances I'm being bombarded with songs I don't know, don't want to know, and don't give a shit about, at some point, I may put the script down...but, it's highly unlikely I'd google them.
I used to use songs in my own scripts but veered away from them. I always have a specific song in mind for a script or moment, so I'd likely say this to a producer/director if/when I sell the script.
There was one a while back called Maverick where I thought of Evanescence's "My Immortal" to play during the ending scene, but I didn't write it in because spec scripts don't often use copyrighted music. Though I'd mention this to producers.
-------
Parenthicals:
I don't use them much, commonly used as "beats" (breaks) between dialogue (if you didn't know what that meant, which you probably did anyway). Or if there's a certain emotion to the words a character says or how they're feeling when they say it.
As for what Dreamscale said on languages, not really a fan of using parenthicals for different lingos. I just put a "NOTE - This chick/dude speaks in Spanish all the time" or something, saves lines.
-------
Montages:
Either use letters (A, B, C) or numbers (1, 2, 3) and you don't need to explain where it takes place, for example, INT/EXT. is not required. Just mention where it is in the action line. Inside or outside, somewhere new, the same place, if it's the same place as the last scene then no need to describe where it is.
As an example:
LAST SCENE - INT. DUNGEON, TRAINING ROOM - NIGHT
Orion duels Brisburn in ferocious combat.
BEGIN MONTAGE:
A) Brisburn swings his sword. Orion parries, knocks him on his butt. B) DEMONS march across a barren wasteland. C) Orion sweeps out Brisburn's legs. Plunges the sword. Brisburn deflects. D) Prometheus leads the demons on dragon-back across the expanse.
You're not looking to produce a film. If I were reading a script with a mind to production and I didn't know the song the writer had used, I would Google it to help better understand the tone the writer is going for.
If I didn't give a shit about it, then I wouldn't bother to Google either...
If you write well, then you can use whatever music or song you like. If you don't write well, Jeff, then you might as well give up now.
If you write well, then you can use whatever music or song you like. If you don't write well, Jeff, then you might as well give up now.
Agreed on the "if you write well, then you can use whatever music or song you like" part, but completely disagree with the giving up now part.
Many writers on SS and anywhere are new writers. They're writers who don't know what they're doing. They're here to learn, ask questions, see examples of good and bad writing, and finally, they're able to take everything they get and make decisions for themselves.
If all the writers who didn't write well gave up now, there wouldn't be too many writers left, Dustin. You for one should know that.
BEGIN MONTAGE: A) Brisburn swings his sword. Orion parries, knocks him on his butt. B) DEMONS march across a barren wasteland. C) Orion sweeps out Brisburn's legs. Plunges the sword. Brisburn deflects. D) Prometheus leads the demons on dragon-back across the expanse.
This is a Series of Shots, not a montage.
Dustin: Google a song in a script? Okay, just don't complain about interrupting a read anymore (and I've been sidelined by hours of dodgy YT vids following a 'quick check'). There's possible and there's probable, and this falls into the latter - in that it's probably not what the reader's going to do. What you're talking about is a likely later stage and I think it's important to know your audience - if this is a complete spec, then veer away -- if you're writing for a limited audience (you know the people who's likely to read it) then you've a little more leeway.
Agreed on the "if you write well, then you can use whatever music or song you like" part, but completely disagree with the giving up now part.
Many writers on SS and anywhere are new writers. They're writers who don't know what they're doing. They're here to learn, ask questions, see examples of good and bad writing, and finally, they're able to take everything they get and make decisions for themselves.
If all the writers who didn't write well gave up now, there wouldn't be too many writers left, Dustin. You for one should know that.
99% of writers will never get anywhere, so they should give up. It would certainly help the more mediocre writers get noticed, eh Jeff.
Writers are born that way. They're good from the moment they can write, relatively speaking. Just as Mozart wrote his first symphony aged eight.
Sure one can improve but if one doesn't write well to begin with, then one will never be able to do so. Unfortunately mate, writing well is a natural talent.
Dustin: Google a song in a script? Okay, just don't complain about interrupting a read anymore (and I've been sidelined by hours of dodgy YT vids following a 'quick check').
Hours of youtube vid's? OK, let's change the subject for a while. If a script prompted me into watching hours of youtube vid's, I'd celebrate it. I enjoy learning new things, and none moreso than learning them through easy-to-digest fiction. I would never complain for being led away from a script for education purposes.
If Googling (takes around 30 seconds in total) an unknown song will give me a better feel for what the writer is trying to achieve then I'll do it. Again, it's an education.
These things have to be done right though, only a good writer can get away with it... the reason for that is because it will simply add to a bad writer's litany of mistakes. In that sense, it's bad... I suppose.
There's possible and there's probable, and this falls into the latter - in that it's probably not what the reader's going to do. What you're talking about is a likely later stage and I think it's important to know your audience - if this is a complete spec, then veer away -- if you're writing for a limited audience (you know the people who's likely to read it) then you've a little more leeway
We're always writing for a limited audience... that being, producers that make our type of script. On an initial read-through they may simply skip over the songs. On the second they will look into obscure songs. Obscure means cheap or even free.
If you write well, then you can do whatever you want. It's always about that.
OK, how about this? You know damn well that writers who don't necessarily write well, do get produced and sometimes even "make it" in the industry, right? I mean, you've been spouting off about some script of yours that's being filmed, right? See, my point?
And coversely, many, many very good writers who do write well, don't get their scripts into the right hands and don't end up making it. I mean...uh...look at...uh...Bert, for example. Damn good writer who writes damn good...or well, I guess, right.
See what I'm saying? Bert shouldn't quit writing, should he?
Dude, in all seriousness, it's about good advice and poor advice and as usual, you're giving out poor advice.
Beginning/young/whatever you want to call it writers should not use exact songs in their scripts. Period.
Anyone expecting the majority of readers to google songs, bands, or whatever, while reading their script, is an idiot, point blank. And you've proven that to be true - you do expect this, you say you'd happily do it, and you're an idiot, so case closed.
This reads a lot like you've orgasmed after shouting my name.
Quoted from Dreamscale
OK, how about this? You know damn well that writers who don't necessarily write well, do get produced and sometimes even "make it" in the industry, right? I mean, you've been spouting off about some script of yours that's being filmed, right? See, my point?
Those writers go out and produce their own films. Or, sometimes, it's just the best the producer can afford. Give me an example of a bad writer that has made it in the industry.
Two scripts of mine are being made by other people and I'm making two or three myself. I've also been commissioned to write a feature with a Ł4 million pound budget. My first short film (that I'm making) will be shown at the BAFTA ceremony in November. I've also just got through to the final of the BBC writer's room, out of 1300 scripts. Proof is in the pudding. Where's yours?
Quoted from Dreamscale
And coversely, many, many very good writers who do write well, don't get their scripts into the right hands and don't end up making it. I mean...uh...look at...uh...Bert, for example. Damn good writer who writes damn good...or well, I guess, right.
Unfortunately, Bert is not prolific enough and doesn't make the right moves. I'm sure that if he did, he'd get somewhere.
Quoted from Dreamscale
See what I'm saying?
No.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Bert shouldn't quit writing, should he?
Bert is a good writer. I have never said that good writers should quit. Only the bad ones... which happens to be around 99%.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Dude, in all seriousness, it's about good advice and poor advice and as usual, you're giving out poor advice.
I share the benefit of my experience. I'm not giving advice.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Beginning/young/whatever you want to call it writers should not use exact songs in their scripts. Period.
Why not?
Quoted from Dreamscale
Anyone expecting the majority of readers to google songs, bands, or whatever, while reading their script, is an idiot, point blank. And you've proven that to be true - you do expect this, you say you'd happily do it, and you're an idiot, so case closed.
If I've paid a reader they better do their job. Writing songs in a script is neither here nor there... if a reader wants to skip it, that is their prerogative and a missed opportunity to educate themselves. It is not idiotic to want to expand one's knowledge... it is however, to do the opposite.
This reads a lot like you've orgasmed after shouting my name.
Well, if that turns you on or gets you off, more power to you, bro.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Those writers go out and produce their own films. Or, sometimes, it's just the best the producer can afford. Give me an example of a bad writer that has made it in the industry.
Really? Dude, c'mon now. That list is WAY TOO LONG to even begin to think about. Either you don't watch many movies, or you just don't have a clue.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Two scripts of mine are being made by other people and I'm making two or three myself. I've also been commissioned to write a feature with a Ł4 million pound budget. My first short film (that I'm making) will be shown at the BAFTA ceremony in November. I've also just got through to the final of the BBC writer's room, out of 1300 scripts. Proof is in the pudding. Where's yours?
Exactly my point about writers who don't and/or can't write well that get produced. You get me? That pudding has to be edible for any proof to come out of it.
Where're mine? Mine are with Bert - I guess I'm not "prolific enough". When mine hit, they'll hit big.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Bert is a good writer. I have never said that good writers should quit. Only the bad ones... which happens to be around 99%.
And there you go again. By "bad writers", is that based on your opinion? You seem to defend lots of bad writers here on SS and give them all sorts of sugarcoated BS, as well as advice...no?
Quoted from DustinBowcot
If I've paid a reader they better do their job. Writing songs in a script is neither here nor there... if a reader wants to skip it, that is their prerogative and a missed opportunity to educate themselves. It is not idiotic to want to expand one's knowledge... it is however, to do the opposite.
If you've paid a reader? What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Chances are good that you should be paying peeps to read your drivel, otherwise, you're not going to get too many takers on those snoozefests.
Point being, SS is not a paid reader scenario. My comments about reading and not reading based on obvious mistakes and things that shouldn't be in Spec scripts are based on what the average non paid reader will put up with.
OK, my weekend is about to begin, so I'm going to try and stay away from things that irritate me, and 1 of those things is you, fucknut. You get me?
Dude, in all seriousness, it's about good advice and poor advice and as usual, you're giving out poor advice.
Beginning/young/whatever you want to call it writers should not use exact songs in their scripts. Period.
Anyone expecting the majority of readers to google songs, bands, or whatever, while reading their script, is an idiot, point blank. And you've proven that to be true - you do expect this, you say you'd happily do it, and you're an idiot, so case closed.
I'm on the fence about your first point. I often disagree with Dustin. Whatever he says usually has me shaking my head, like his famed catchphrase "do whatever you want." But lately, I have been coming around to that catchphrase - to an extent.
Second point - agreed.
Third point - agreed - but let's not get into name calling. I, personally, have never had to Google anything I read in a script, spec wise or pro. Would I want anyone to Google anything about my script? Fuck no! Not while they're in the process of reading it. Do that shit after you have finished my script. I know for a fact if I went on Youtube to see about a song some writer insisted on using, I'd be lost to that script. I'd see some recommended videos on the side, and start watching them. Maybe I'll want to check my e-mail next, or go on Facebook. This could go on and on, and, maybe I would do the same with a good writer and a good script, but for not as long, but the problem is - I still lost my attention - I still lost focused of what I was supposed to be reading. Whether it's a half an hour, 15 minutes or 5 minutes, it's 5 minutes too long. Now I'm not saying everyone is like this, but I would never, ever, want anyone to Google anything while reading my shit. Hell, I already surf the net enough while reading scripts on here or else where, why the hell would a writer want to give me another reason to keep on doing it?
Quoted from Dreamscale
OK, my weekend is about to begin, so I'm going to try and stay away from things that irritate me, and 1 of those things is you, fucknut. You get me?
Relax, dude, you don't agree with him, that's it, leave it be. You don't have to resort to the name calling. It's only going to fuel the fire. There are people I disagree with and have no interest in talking to or even associating with because their advice or way of thinking irritates the fuck out of me, but I just let it slide. If you know you're going to clash constantly with someone who you so strongly dislike, walk the other way. I'm only saying that because it doesn't seem like anything good ever comes out of it when you 2 interact.
"do whatever you want." But lately, I have been coming around to that catchphrase - to an extent.
Yeah - you can always do whatever you want, but you might be harming your script somewhat. Take a look at this link to a five minute film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jjeS334a_I Yeah - it's not great, but it's okay. The guy wanted to use Earth Wind & Fire's “That’s the Way of the World”.
Really? Dude, c'mon now. That list is WAY TOO LONG to even begin to think about. Either you don't watch many movies, or you just don't have a clue.
You can't name one bad writer that has made it in the industry. Bad writers don't make it, ever... bad writers don't get any interest in their work, ever.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Where're mine? Mine are with Bert - I guess I'm not "prolific enough". When mine hit, they'll hit big.
You and Bert are nowhere near the same level. Yours isn't anything to do with prolificness, indeed, were you to increase your productivity it would be tantamount to torture.
Quoted from Dreamscale
And there you go again. By "bad writers", is that based on your opinion? You seem to defend lots of bad writers here on SS and give them all sorts of sugarcoated BS, as well as advice...no?
Bad writers are bad writers... based on everyone's opinion. They're usually the writers that don't get anywhere no matter how hard they try... they then end up at places like this belittling newbs.
Quoted from Dreamscale
If you've paid a reader? What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Chances are good that you should be paying peeps to read your drivel, otherwise, you're not going to get too many takers on those snoozefests.
Analysts are readers too, and the only readers one actually needs. The good ones need paying.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Point being, SS is not a paid reader scenario. My comments about reading and not reading based on obvious mistakes and things that shouldn't be in Spec scripts are based on what the average non paid reader will put up with.
Ah, so your comments are based on what the readers here at SS might put up with... LOL. Yeah, we're on completely different pages.
Yeah - you can always do whatever you want, but you might be harming your script somewhat. Take a look at this link to a five minute film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jjeS334a_I Yeah - it's not great, but it's okay. The guy wanted to use Earth Wind & Fire's “That’s the Way of the World”.
Now, you can write just whatever you want, but I'd still say... a little caution.
Haha I know, I meant story wise. I'm so busy worrying about this or that - and I've been doing it for far too long - that I'm just going to write whatever the heck I want this next go around. If it works, it works, if it doesn't, it doesn't - but I won't be hammering myself over the head with all of these "you gotta hit this point at this beat" or "save the cat this and save the cat that" or any of that screenwriting guru bullshit. I'm just going to try something different for a change.
Yeah - you can always do whatever you want, but you might be harming your script somewhat. Take a look at this link to a five minute film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jjeS334a_I Yeah - it's not great, but it's okay. The guy wanted to use Earth Wind & Fire's “That’s the Way of the World”.
Now, you can write just whatever you want, but I'd still say... a little caution.
The writer there hasn't harmed the script... The script has not been harmed at all. The producer has simply had to use something else in the film. It was his own fault that he put the songs into the film first without seeking permission.
Chances are what we write does not get used... that doesn't mean we shouldn't write it anyway. I write action scenes even though there will be choreographers whose job it is to figure fight scenes out. All I really need to write is FIGHT SCENE... but I don't. I write a fight scene because 'FIGHT SCENE' on its own is not storytelling. It ruins the aesthetics of the script.
I agree with some points in this discussion, disagree with other points.
An example of my disagreement would be the "bad writers don't get any interest" segment of your post, Dustin.
Now, I've been at this for 2 - 3 years, really only got "mediocre" in 2014, kinda getting better now according to some folks' responses on my latest upload, which is "amazing" and "expertly written" according to some, which is great and all. Anyway, going off point here. The point of my response to the "bad writers don't get interest" portion of your post brings me to this: Am I a bad writer?
The answer: no. I'm not a "good" writer, but I'm certainly not a "bad" writer.
I'm somewhere in the middle caught in an endless cycle of eternal purgatory, scratching and clawing my way up some torturous hell-wall lined with the mangled remains of twisted souls (fallen screenwriters) attempting to reach the portal while demons (Hollywood producers) voraciously battle to drag me down into obscurity.
That above section is rather vivid and...disturbing, but my point is simple.
Just because we haven't had interest in our stuff YET, doesn't mean we're bad writers. Just haven't caught that break.
We're all desperately scrambling up that hillside trying to reach the doorknob but falling just short. Given the time, a bad writer can become a good writer, and somewhere down the line they will become a GREAT writer.
-------------------------
J.K. Rowling for example, not a screenwriter (yet), did in fact have to wait several YEARS before anything happened with Harry Potter. If I recall, some agent threw her manuscript in the trashcan, yeah, the highest grossing book/film franchise ever, thrown in the garbage like some recycled Syfy script.
Then it went on to break both box office and book sales records over its lifespan.
-------------------------
My point here, is you can't say a new writer is "bad". Every writer starts somewhere on the food chain. Some are gifted with the natural ability to storyboard concisely. Others (like me and most) have to start at the bottom, read a dictionary, read up on "how to's" and such, then we gradually make our way to the elusive door.
So yeah, no one here is bad, heck, I'd bet the "bad" writers are just starting. And let's be honest here, how many of us were good at this when we started? I know I wasn't.
You seem to be confusing screenwriting with writing. Writers will have a voice and know how to turn a sentence, how to hold people to the page. A bad writer can't do that.
There are plenty of bad writers, not just bad writers but terrible writers.
Quoted Text
Just because we haven't had interest in our stuff YET, doesn't mean we're bad writers
I have never said any such thing... nor implied it. I can read a bad writer, I don't need to base it off how popular they are.
#2 - Parentheticals, also known as wrylies. Use them as little as possible, as they are a space waster and they also irritate readers. For the most part, they aren't going to be necessary unless you have a character speaking in a foreign language or it's important to note how someone says something. You could easily write a feature and have zero wrylies.
I saw a recent interview with Billy Ray (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0712753/). He said a mistake young writers do is not use parentheticals. In his opinion you can use parentheticals to set the tone of your scene or story. They can be hugely effective to get across what you are trying to do with the scene and can help the writer/actor/director to unify in their visions of what the movie is. He was very much for them.
I agree with him, but you should use them wisely and watch out for overuse.
Like with everything, there are different philosophies on what you should do.
The only time I use them is when it isn't clear which character is being spoken to. Anything else is cheating. I believe it takes more skill to do everything else in the action lines. Always good to show off your skill.
I see nothing wrong with parentheticals, if they are used to bring some greater understanding to a scene. I wrote a scene where two former lovers where sharing some light back-and-forth banter. The female character made some joke about the male character who responded with "bitch". By placing "Playful" in a parenthetical before this, it made sure that the reader knew that the character was continuing on with the banter and wasn't mortally offended by the joke thrown his way.
What I hate is when they are used incorrectly or unnecessarily. My personal favourite is when "Angry" is used as a parenthetical during an argument... I mean, how many heated arguments have we seen when the participants aren't angry?
1) No more than three words, even when using a comma (to Cathy, whispered) 2) No more than one line. So no (furiously, to Featherstonehaugh) 3) Don’t be redundant.
After that all bets are off. That includes actions (as long as the actions can be performed during the dialogue). For example, in a poker game:
Code
Dean:
(throws in coins)
Raise.
Keith:
(checks his cards)
Son of a bitch.
Compared to:
Code
Dean throws his coins in the pot.
Dean:
Raise.
Keith checks his cards.
Keith:
Son of a bitch.
For me, the first flows a heck of a lot quicker. It also saves two lines during a simple back and forth exchange. Now if I can work an action into a previous line, I’ll do it because that would save more space. But why would I create two entire lines (one for description and one for the white space that follows) for an action that I could condense into three words and shove into a parenthetical? Far from a space waster, smartly used parentheticals can be tremendous space savers. In my opinion, any dialogue heavy script that doesn’t do this is unnecessarily bloated by at least one to two pages. And isn’t that the dream when we’re editing? To cut a couple pages from our script while changing essentially nothing?
Of course, we all have our own styles. And I would never argue that someone should change their style simply because I prefer it that way. But as long as I can read and do math, no one’s gonna convince me that the first example above is somehow objectively “wrong”.
And isn’t that the dream when we’re editing? To cut a couple pages from our script while changing essentially nothing?
Why would that be a dream?
I don't edit to cut pages. I edit to make my story read better.
Your example is unnecessarily directing the actors, therefore adding lines. During a card game, a line of action or parenthetical suggesting an actor looks at their cards is a little silly. Provide a better example and you might convince me.
I don't edit to cut pages. I edit to make my story read better.
Obviously. But more often than not, writers write too much, and improve by editing out and condensing rather than adding and expanding. Not everyone has the same concerns, but I’d venture to guess that a majority of screenwriters who come up with 135 page first draft go on to thinking, “I’ve got to cut fifteen pages.” I also believe most seek to take little nips out of their screenplay (through shortening and combining line description) before continuing on to the much harder task of eliminating or combining whole scenes.
Quoted from Dustin
Your example is unnecessarily directing the actors, therefore adding lines. During a card game, a line of action or parenthetical suggesting an actor looks at their cards is a little silly.
I’m not sure I get this. You would prefer me to have Dean raising without throwing coins into the pot? How is the physical act of actually putting the money in the pot an unnecessary direction. In the same vein, why would I have Keith assume he’s beat without looking at his cards? Are you saying these actions should be assumed without the writer indicating them? That the writer should only indicate when these actions aren't happening? I think it’s a dangerous game for a writer to start assuming what a reader will assume from words not on the page. One could easily change the scene to this:
Code
DEAN:
Raise.
KEITH:
Son of a bitch.
Keith folds. Dean collects.
KEITH:
Wait, you were out of chips, asshole.
DEAN:
Too late. You folded.
Dean doesn’t really have to say “raise” either. He could just toss the coins in. In addition, tossing your bet in is different than pushing it in, is different than placing it in. And checking your cards in mid-play indicates a different skill set than remembering your hand. Sure actors can object to anything. But to put it simply, Dean is bluffing and Keith is too inexperienced to call him out. That’s character on the page. I don’t think it’s necessary to delete subtle character moments just because some as yet undetermined actor may have a problem with some minutiae.
Everyone has something different that ticks their annoyance meter. For the most part it’s impossible to account for (unless you know in advance who your specific reader will be). But one of the things that seems to annoy most readers is a bloated, repetitive read. Both of which are more apparent (however slightly) in the second example. At least, in my opinion.
Both of your examples are action lines. Simply switched to parenthesis. They don't actually belong in parenthesis. The second one, doesn't even deserve an action line.
This is how I'd write the same thing:
Code
Dean confidently throws in his stake.
Dean:
Raise.
Keith:
Son of a b****.
They're called action wrylies, and they are "acceptable", but I have to say I'm with Dustin in that they really shouldn't be used, other than very, VERY rarely.
The thing is there are 1,000's of ways to save a line or a space. Using action wrylies isn't really a very good one to look for, IMO.
Wrylies are irritating for the most part. Thye disrupt the flow of a read and because they're centered and only contain a few words at most, you'll find that in more cases than not, you'll have to really think about how to fit them on 1 line (action wrylies, that is).
Everyone can do as they please, obviously, but I'll say it again, using wrylies is not recommended on a regular basis.
I don't find moderate use of wrylies irritating at all. I think they sometimes really help a scene. Five - six (sad), (curious) pre script are fine in my opinion. Just don't go overboard. Action wrylies save space, so I like them as well sparsely used.
Everyone has different preferences, find what works for you.
OK, cool...so you understand we're talking about 1 per 11 - 15 pages, right?
So, my point again, is...seriously...sparing...sparingly...not alot...very little...only when it's necesary, or when you think it is when you're writing your masterpiece.
Bottom line again...don't use them as a way fo saving lines, don't use them more than a few times per feature length script. Love life and your fellow human Beeings. Believe in love at first sight. And most importantly, believe in what you write and write that way because you believe in it.
Word out...to all the Fathers and to all the sons and to all the daughters.
The second one, doesn't even deserve an action line.
I feel like I already addressed that...
Quoted from Me
…why would I have Keith assume he’s beat without looking at his cards?...checking your cards in mid-play indicates a different skill set than remembering your hand.
But I’ll add, what if Keith bet blind the first round, meaning he didn’t look at his cards? To have him fold on Dean’s raise, without ever indicating he looked at his cards, is to take a brazen character and change him into a moron. There are reasons for that line to be there. To cut it out of context is to defeat the objective, which is to save lines without deleting information. I’ll admit though, that there is this:
Code
DEAN:
Raise.
Dean tosses his coins in the pot. Keith checks his cards.
KEITH:
Son of a bitch.
Now this doesn’t quite beat out the way I prefer for the example I choose. But it works well and it saves the space. So I’ll move on to something more egregious:
Code
MARK:
What do you want me to do?
VERNE:
What else can we do?
(sighs)
Run the damn Bieber story.
VS:
Code
MARK:
What do you want me to do?
VERNE:
What else can we do?
Verne sighs.
VERNE:
Run the damn Bieber story.
The count there is 7 to 10. That’s three lines saved from one parenthetical. Does taking up three lines for Verne's sigh really “flow better”? I just don’t see how forcing my eyes to travel three wasted spaces leads to a better flow than quickly glancing over a single word on the way to the next line.
And yes, I think the ‘sigh’ is needed. It’s basically a punch line and punches require beats. In that beat Verne also gets to express how he feels about “running the damn Bieber story”. So in my mind it does two things, not zero. In fact, I think Verne’s “What else can we do?” line is more disposable than the sigh.
Quoted from Demento
Everything over seven is too much.
No offense intended, but I wasn’t sure if that was a joke. 700 lines of dialogue is not an unreasonable estimate for a feature. That basically translates to anything over 1% of your dialogue being too much. If your gonna pare it down to 1%, it would be more consistent to eliminate all of them. So just do that.
40 parentheticals would still be only about 6%. I’d say over 10% and you might want to double check yourself. But don’t forget, (filtered, radio) is a parenthetical as well. If you write a story with a lot of foreign languages on walkie-talkies you could easily crack 10% on what many would consider to be required parentheticals.
It bears repeating, I'm merely explaining the logic by which I use parentheticals. I don't 'knock points off' a read for seeing something different.
All you wrote was that he looks at his cards, you didn't mention where the cards were. I didn't know what game they were playing. I now take it that you are imagining them playing poker... the type where cards are laid out face down on the table? I don't gamble. At all. I don't even play the lottery. I imagined the cards being in his hands, so it would have been natural for an actor to intermittently look at their cards anyway.
The count there is 7 to 10. That’s three lines saved from one parenthetical. Does taking up three lines for Verne's sigh really “flow better”?
That depends upon how you want it to flow. In your first example the sigh happens quickly. In the second, it happens much slower. That's flow. You may want the sigh to come in fast, use a parenthetical, if there's a longer beat between pause and dialogue then use an action line. It is all about flow.
I just don’t see how forcing my eyes to travel three wasted spaces leads to a better flow than quickly glancing over a single word on the way to the next line.
Forcing your eyes? Most words and even sentences are read instantaneously by our brains, it doesn't take any effort. It's not how the words are positioned that makes a story flow, it is the way the writer writes it.
Personally, I only add the parenthicals for the reader's needs. I already know how they speak, more visual readers will also know after witnessing the scene unfold. In truth, I'd not use them at all if I was absolutely, 100% certain that anyone who reads my story can fully understand the emotive state of the characters during a scene.
I never used to use them at all. I use them sometimes now to help people grasp the concept of a scene.
I do it with action lines sometimes, if the character is speaking, for example, and is doing something at the same time, I add a little parenthical to show what he/she does in that exact moment to save me doing this:
Quoted Text
Shane I want a cookie.
Shane takes a cookie
Shane I love me cookies.
Now it's more like this:
Quoted Text
Shane I want a cookie (takes cookie) I love me cookies.
Saves what... a line, two lines? Big deal in truth.
Someone else gave an example of what their scene was, during a poker game, when it comes to poker/card games, I often avoid using action lines. I just say whatever they're doing in their dialogue section to save even more space.
Don't have to do it this way, but it helps bring the page count down. I remember years ago I'd convey emotion with action lines, probably the reason most of my scripts came in at OVER 120 pages. Now, most of them barely hit 90 and the only ones that go over 90 are epics, but only by 10 - 15 pages due to plot threads.
I guess, my point here, is only use parenthicals when absolutely needed or use them to bring your page count down by conveying action and emotion within dialogue sections to avoid overcrowding your script with unneeded action lines.
Shaving pages while still keeping the exact same substance of the story does nothing to shorten the actual story itself. Merely the page count changes. Why are people so hung up on page count?
I remember years ago I'd convey emotion with action lines, probably the reason most of my scripts came in at OVER 120 pages. Now, most of them barely hit 90 and the only ones that go over 90 are epics, but only by 10 - 15 pages due to plot threads.
Right... so you're actually suggesting here that you can save 30 pages by using this technique. I've read one or two of your scripts and don't remember you using parentheses equal to 30 pages worth of savings.
Shaving pages while still keeping the exact same substance of the story does nothing to shorten the actual story itself. Merely the page count changes. Why are people so hung up on page count?
Because in my opinion, the less pages you use in your story the better. I've been able to get a lot of my stuff down to the mid 90s, 110 in my eyes, is pushing the limit, 105 is enough to tell a complex narrative while 95 - 100 pages is more than enough to convey a story, development and a message to a target audience.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Right... so you're actually suggesting here that you can save 30 pages by using this technique. I've read one or two of your scripts and don't remember you using parentheses equal to 30 pages worth of savings.
Not suggesting anything. Merely stating that it saves lines. Not 30 pages worth, not 10 pages worth, if we're lucky, maybe 2 or 3 pages worth.
I believe you can fit roughly 30 lines on a standard Celtx page. By using parenthicals to convey emotion and action, you can save roughly 2 lines each time you do it because you're not hitting "action" then "character" again.
As for my own stuff, I pretty much remove a helluva lot of content before I upload. Sometimes these scripts go for 100+ pages, then I edit, use parentheses (not in the raw, finished pdf) to cut down a lot of stuff, then I end up with a 90 pager.
Not that it's all parenthicals/wrylies though. I remove a lot of the fat too.
30 lines per page - 2-3 parenthicals per page saving 2 lines (6 lines saved) meaning if you do this a few times over the course of your story, say, 15-30, you're cutting 2 meaningless pages away while delivering the exact same idea.
Not that it's what everyone does. Like I said, I only really do it to help the readers understand the emotive state and/or what the character is doing while talking.
Shaving pages while still keeping the exact same substance of the story does nothing to shorten the actual story itself. Merely the page count changes. Why are people so hung up on page count?
Because you have to have a standard. Page cost for a full feature at average cost runs into the region of $300,000 to $500,000 per page. They have to be properly budgetted, but people make rough estimates based on their budget -- $4m=$44,444 @ 90pp, but at the same cost per page amount = $1.3m extra at 120pp. Many, many people are paid per day - cameras are hired at a cost per day, as are location etc.
Also, stuff gets added - credits, extra action - any changes you (producer/director) want - so there's a need to see the story told in its basic form, and not with a whole bunch of unnecessary stuff thrown in for the fun of it.
I'll put my hand in here and hope I don't get bit. I have a relevant question since we're talking about Celtx, pages numbers and page lines now. When I type in Celtx my current screenplay is at 117 pages. But when I create a PDF for it the page count jumps to 120. I took out options like having CONT at the bottom of pages and such but I still cant get the two to match up I know the title page eats up one of these but its very frustrating to shave pages off only to have them bloat on back due to PDF conversion. How can I make this one to one?
Not too sure you can actually - it refomats it when it converts it to pdf, which I've always taken to mean 'does it properly'. And I don't think anyone needs to get obsessive about cutting pages here and there - your story has to be lean too. BTW, have you got your settings down as US Letter (Script->Format Option->) and not A4?
Yeah, its US letter. Currently on my 4th or 5th rewrite, (they are starting to blur together) and focusing on tightening up the story, cutting unneeded scenes and dialogue. But for everything I cut I'll add something else so my pages are a yo-yo right now. I don't want to say how many pages I've cut since the first draft but its been substantial, lol. Was just hoping to gain a page or two back through formatting if I could. Guess, I'll have to do it the old fashioned way.
I guess it felt beside the point, is all. Without the context of the scene, no one can say with any authority what information is or isn’t necessary.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
It's not about saving space, it's about telling a story well. If that means you use more words to help with flow then so be it.
I agree. Likewise, I would say it’s not about avoiding parentheticals.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
That depends upon how you want it to flow. In your first example the sigh happens quickly. In the second, it happens much slower. That's flow. You may want the sigh to come in fast, use a parenthetical, if there's a longer beat between pause and dialogue then use an action line. It is all about flow.
Yes! It is all about flow. When writing a scene we should be considering all options equally, not thinking, “I will do everything in my power to avoid parentheticals.”
Quoted from Dustin
It's not how the words are positioned that makes a story flow, it is the way the writer writes it.
Not sure its that simple. You could attack any standard of formatting with that sentence. But I suppose this means we agree that the parenthetical doesn’t necessarily inhibit the flow? (I know you weren’t the one who said that originally).
I agree whole-heartedly that the story and the scene comes first, but I still can’t tell whether we’re reaching a consensus or pulling away from it.
Quoted from Dustin
It's not about saving space… It's not how the words are positioned that makes a story flow… It isn't about consistency either
All that just makes me think to myself… So why should I be avoiding parentheticals like they’re gonna give me the clap?
---To further elaborate on how or why I use action parenthesis. My first thought is, do I want this action to be occurring during or in close relation with the dialogue? If so, I question whether that action serves the dialogue.
A parenthetical's use is to modify dialogue. It can add tone (sullen), give direction (to Cathy), alter language (in French) and so on. An action parenthetical is no different. People communicate through body language. Body language modifies and supports verbal language, so any action I put into parenthesis needs to have a close relationship to the dialogue.
Code
DEAN:
(waves)
Bye.
---------------------
KEITH:
(pounding)
Open the door!
------------------------
JAYNE
(winks)
Wouldn’t you like to know?
As I said before, if there’s a previous action line that can contain Jayne’s wink, I may put it there instead. But if there isn’t, it doesn’t make sense, to me, to leave the wink suspended to the side in white space instead of nuzzled right up next to the communication it supports.
Lastly I think, “can I condense this into three words”? If the action serves the first two purposes well, the third one usually isn’t hard to figure out.
I agree that ‘space saving’ isn’t the point, and it’s my fault for over emphasizing that in my original post. I see parentheticals constantly referred to as space wasters and wonder how many people are aware of the numerous occasions when they could actually save a space instead.
I'll put my hand in here and hope I don't get bit. I have a relevant question since we're talking about Celtx, pages numbers and page lines now. When I type in Celtx my current screenplay is at 117 pages. But when I create a PDF for it the page count jumps to 120. I took out options like having CONT at the bottom of pages and such but I still cant get the two to match up I know the title page eats up one of these but its very frustrating to shave pages off only to have them bloat on back due to PDF conversion. How can I make this one to one?
No hand biting here. I think I found this answer on a forum somewhere. Unfortunately, I think the answer was, your script is really 120 pages long. It may be worth it to find a second opinion, though. I leave off the function that yields the first number. No use getting my hopes up
Because you have to have a standard. Page cost for a full feature at average cost runs into the region of $300,000 to $500,000 per page. They have to be properly budgetted, but people make rough estimates based on their budget -- $4m=$44,444 @ 90pp, but at the same cost per page amount = $1.3m extra at 120pp. Many, many people are paid per day - cameras are hired at a cost per day, as are location etc.
Also, stuff gets added - credits, extra action - any changes you (producer/director) want - so there's a need to see the story told in its basic form, and not with a whole bunch of unnecessary stuff thrown in for the fun of it.
What does that have to do with what I said? Page count does not matter if the substance of the story is exactly the same. I wasn't even talking about adding extra stuff.
Because in my opinion, the less pages you use in your story the better. I've been able to get a lot of my stuff down to the mid 90s, 110 in my eyes, is pushing the limit, 105 is enough to tell a complex narrative while 95 - 100 pages is more than enough to convey a story, development and a message to a target audience.
You shouldn't define how long a story should be and constrain yourself to that. Saving lines but keeping the same substance is still the same script just in one or two less pages. Still the same amount of words, still the same length... it is only the pages that are shorter, the story is still the same length. Therefore still the same amount of film time. You do get that logic? I've repeated it several times now and it just goes over people's heads.
Your earlier statement was that you went from writing 120 pages down to 90... that's 30 pages. So, that comment wasn't relevant to this conversation... had no point. The way you said it suggested that it was down to using parentheses more. So let's take 2-3 pages... you honestly think that a 99 page script makes any difference to a 102 page script?
Don't listen to the idiots on here that tell you anything over 100 is bad. They're not professional readers, they are lazy readers that couldn't give a flying about your script. They want it easy, because it isn't their job and they have no vested interest in your interests.
Have a pro reader read your 120 page script and they will not mention page count as a factor unless you have used unnecessary scenes or lengthy descriptions... and even then they won't mention page count, just the lengthy descriptions and extra scenes. The actual page count is fine so long as it tells an entertaining story.
Ewall... I'll condense my point for you... it doesn't take any longer to read an action within action than it does to read it within parenthesis.
The use of parenthesis should be used sparingly. I hate seeing huge blocks of dialogue on the page and will seek to break it up with action. Not just because this is a visual medium but also due to aesthetics. I doubt that in a single one of my scripts you will find a single page containing just dialogue. I find the use of parenthesis to describe action extremely unappealing to my tastes. Maybe it works for you. I doubt it would for me.
Oh man, you guys are killing me...absolutely kiling me!
First of all, I don't know what this 30 lines per page crap is because that's horseshit. Depending on your software, your settings, and whether or not you're double spacing before Slugs, you'll find that 99% of professional scripts, including professionaly formatted non professional scripts, will have 52-56 lines per page.
I have 54 lines per page.
Does page length matter? Of course it does. Are you frickin' kidding me? How anyone can say it doesn't matter, is beyond clueless.
So, what about this talk of "cutting pages" and savings lines by using wrylies? Really?
Well, using 54 lines per page as a good average, how many action wrylies will you have to include in your 100 page script to save 3 pages?
The use of parenthesis should be used sparingly. I hate seeing huge blocks of dialogue on the page and will seek to break it up with action. Not just because this is a visual medium but also due to aesthetics.
That's fair, of course. It's worth it to note that no one's use of parentheticals exists in a vacuum. There are other elements of style that writers use uniquely. Writers don't just balance one element, they balance all elements in combination. That's why what works for one won't work for another. But it's also fair to note...
Quoted from DustinBowcot
I doubt that in a single one of my scripts you will find a single page containing just dialogue.
...you wouldn't find it in mine either.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Well, using 54 lines per page as a good average, how many action wrylies will you have to include in your 100 page script to save 3 pages?
Between 54 and 80. I believe I indicated a "10% of dialogue worry-limit" above. Depending on how many lines of dialogue there are, this straddles that limit.
EDIT: Scratch that. Between 54 and 162. The low end is still achievable, and even 1 page is nothing to frown at.
Between 54 and 80. I believe I indicated a "10% of dialogue worry-limit" above. Depending on how many lines of dialogue there are, this straddles that limit.
About 81, give or take, depending on where the pages break.
And, yeah, IMO, it more than straddles the limit...it breaks it badly, as I can't imagine someone using anywhere near that many action wrylies in a Spec script, and then saying, "Well, I saved 3 pages".
There were a few good examples of how one can successfully use them, but they are few and far between.
The 30-lines thing was my fault. I was using it as an example for my thesis... is that the word? As is the wrylies stuff. You'd likely need roughly 65-80 action wrylies per script to get 3 pages off the total. But one or two, maybe 10 or 15 per script won't do much, but still, it saves lines, and maybe pages if you use enough.
@Dustin
It's more of a personal choice for me, mate. I like it when my scripts come in at less than 100 pages. In my opinion, whenever ANY of my scripts go over that line I see them as a potential problem.
-----------
Anyway, guess this turned into more of a debate than anything. Suppose we all have our own ways of doing things, otherwise it'd be boring, lol.
What does that have to do with what I said? Page count does not matter if the substance of the story is exactly the same. I wasn't even talking about adding extra stuff.
-- you weren't talking about adding extra stuff, I was. That's the reality of the fact.
I don't get your logic totally, so you might have to explain further: Substance of the story is contained in 30pp. Subtance is exactly the same for 60pp. What are the extra pages for then?
Substance of the story is contained in 30pp. Subtance is exactly the same for 60pp. What are the extra pages for then?
They're all wasted space, filled with unfilmables, orphans, repitition out the ass, over writing, unnecessary detail, unnecessary wrylies, and basically, writing like a beginner.
This is funny, you have to be a piss poor reader if you put a script down for its use of parentheticals -- considering the writer knows what they're doing.
I just want to chime in here and say that the average lines per page for a script isn't capped at 56. I'd argue around 50/60% or so scripts are written in Final Draft, and FD uses 58 lines -- so that's probably a better estimate. Even if the percentage is less than that, most of the newer programs follow the same protocol and go with 58. Heck, Trelby has 60 if you're counting.
From that logic, if you have 58 parentheticals in your script and you take them all out, then you'll lose a page. Not three.
This wasn't Dustin, guys, it was me. I gave the pp thing. Blame goes to me for being a "noob" at this. Never listen to anything I say in regards to "answers" 'cause I'm awful at giving advice, hell, I barely understood what "PP" meant until I realized it meant "per page" about two seconds ago after I typed "the heck is PP?"
-- you weren't talking about adding extra stuff, I was. That's the reality of the fact.
I don't get your logic totally, so you might have to explain further: Substance of the story is contained in 30pp. Subtance is exactly the same for 60pp. What are the extra pages for then?
Now you're needlessly bringing specific figures into it. If you can't understand the explanation so far then I'm at a loss to simplify it further. You'll just have to remain in ignorance.
This is funny, you have to be a piss poor reader if you put a script down for its use of parentheticals -- considering the writer knows what they're doing.
I just want to chime in here and say that the average lines per page for a script isn't capped at 56. I'd argue around 50/60% or so scripts are written in Final Draft, and FD uses 58 lines -- so that's probably a better estimate. Even if the percentage is less than that, most of the newer programs follow the same protocol and go with 58. Heck, Trelby has 60 if you're counting.
From that logic, if you have 58 parentheticals in your script and you take them all out, then you'll lose a page. Not three.
Mo, first of all, you missed the point of where this discussion went - action wrylies - using action wrylies to save lines over using regular action/description lines.
So, at what point, as in how many wrylies assaulting your sense would it take for you to think, "damn, that's way too many and I'm getting irritated"? When would you become a piss poor reader?
Mo, first of all, you missed the point of where this discussion went - action wrylies - using action wrylies to save lines over using regular action/description lines.
So, at what point, as in how many wrylies assaulting your sense would it take for you to think, "damn, that's way too many and I'm getting irritated"? When would you become a piss poor reader?
I kind of skimmed over everything in the thread, but I was implying that if if you're cutting parentheticals to lose pages, you're doing it for the wrong reasons. 5-10 is an abysmally low number, unless of course, there's no need to use any more -- which in the end comes to what kind of writer you are.
Piss poor reader was a bit of an extreme but personally, if the writer is using them right, they can have as many as they want, but if it's the opposite/or it's plain obvious they're doing it to cut down on action, then you could say I'd be irritated. A lot of writers like to treat readers as five year olds waiting to have a hissy fit as they start reading a script. So nobody ever takes a chance and in the end, you're left with a polished turd with the inciting incident on page 12 and six wrylies used in intervals of 20 pages. Again, I'm not sure which side this agrees with since I lost track of who said what.
Jumping again to my previous post. I noticed in Celtx that PDF conversion was adding more pages to my script that there should be. I also noticed that there was an extra space, like a line and a half, above every new scene. I found an option to make it 1 line spaced out between scenes and I cut 3 pages that way. Is it standard to have that extra half line between scenes? Is it cheating to get rid of it? Would anybody notice?
Nobody gives a pHuck. So long as you write well, it really, really, doesn't matter. If people think that the difference between their script getting read and not is a few extra pages then they are sorely deluded.
Nobody gives a pHuck. So long as you write well, it really, really, doesn't matter. If people think that the difference between their script getting read and not is a few extra pages then they are sorely deluded.
This gives me an idea: I'll just number the last 10 pages of my features 81-90, regardless of how many pages are actually in the script.
With a good logline and a well written first 10 pages, I'm sure I can get a reader to stick around until the end. Now I just need to write features.
It could have the opposite effect. I think you're going too much from your experiences with readers from this forum... many of whom have no interest in your script (from a production perspective). In my experience, professional readers and producers are not put off by a page count below 130. I think it is fine to hit 120 and slightly more if you want to. I also believe that certain scripts deserve more than 89 pages, and I also believe producers looking to make those films will feel that way too.
I wouldn't mess around with declaring there are less pages than there really are... but who knows, it might work.
Pages: 
Author
Quick Questions?!
Logged
I'll definitely take the montage bit.
Locked Board