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.
We get a couple new guys every once in a while that remind me of #50....
50.You think you can break all of these aforementioned rules and mistakes and people will still want to read your script and you'll still be able to break in because Tarantino did it.
You think when you finish your 3rd draft, you're done and it's ready to be submitted to agents, producers, actors or contests. It's not.
2 drafts of 'A Slave's Tale' written in a month... Finalist, BBC Writer's Room... Semi-Finalist, Shore Scripts.
Quoted Text
Using music � specific songs and artists � in your scenes or writing a scene to a specific song. What do Beatles, Bowie, Beach Boys, Bon Jovi and Bon Iver all have in common? Their songs will add MILLIONS to your budget.
It is not the writer's budget. It's just in the script. A producer is not beholden to obey every word.
Quoted Text
All conversations start with �hello� or �how are you� and scenes end with �goodbye, goodnight or talk to you later.� Or if dialogue is full of conversational niceties � thank you, please, your welcome, etc.
What about bad grammar? Knowing the difference between you're and your, for example?
Interesting read. The hate towards Celtx is strange, it's a fine program and it's free, which is only positive. Made me wonder if Mr. Manus had .doc/.txt/.celtx files in mind? Doubtful based on the wording, but once they're in .pdf, who can tell? Odd one. And +1 to the Trelby supporters, it's much more comfortable to use than Celtx, despite lacking a few features that it has.
Quoted Text
There's nothing on the line - no STAKES - in the first scene.
This point was the one I was most surprised to see on the list. This certainly can't be a golden rule. You can't just say that the first scene of all screenplays instantly needs to have something on the line. These situations take time to establish, a lot longer than one scene for most. If done right, it'll work, but even if you're a really good screenwriter, it just can't work in all screenplays. Stories are different and establishing the world and characters peacefully and gradually is often a necessity.
I disagreed with a few other points and I thought some of them could have been worded better. "You think when you finish your 3rd draft, you're done and it's ready to be submitted to agents, producers, actors or contests. It's not." could rather work as "You think when you finish your 3rd draft you think there's nothing more that can be improved." Plenty of third drafts could be ready enough.
But this was definitely an interesting read with good points, cheers for the link.
This one I was curious about too:
Quoted Text
Not giving us your main characters last names when introducing them.
I wouldn't consider this to be more than a personal choice. It's often easier to remember the character with just one name, especially if many are introduced in a short span of time. I don't know, though. What does everyone think about this one?
Yeah that was another I disagreed with. Shorts or even scripts where it just isn't necessary to know the character's last name do crop up. As the writer, we know when to use a surname and when not to.
I disagreed with the camera directions too. Even if the DP doesn't end up using them, you could still write them in if you feel they are effective.
In regards to conflict. There should be some in every scene... no matter how minor. Not being able to find car keys is conflict... it's something that keeps the viewer's eyes moving and mind thinking. As we are learning from a character's reaction to losing the car keys what sort of person they are. Keep things as dynamic as you can.
I think keeping things dynamic can also be done with dialogue alone though. Two heads talking. One would have to be good at dialogue, but even if poor then it would be good practise. I think making an interesting talking heads script would be just as much, if not more, of a challenge than zero-dialogue.
Yeah, agreed with minor conflict. I saw stakes as a bigger term though, at least in the concept brought out above. Showing someone react to losing their car keys, minor conflict, can show their character, good. But you can't always force a "big meeting" stake that will cost them their job if they can't find their keys and drive to work into every first scene.
And yeah, the camera directions along with some other points were very definitive. The first one has "between every scene", after that there are a few where it looks like you can never go against it, that aren't a problem sparingly.
The article is worth the read imo. It brings out things that are often mistaken against and should be useful, especially to very new writers, maybe it just sounds a little too cocky along with some items/points in the list that could do with a polish on their wording.
Somewhere along the line professional writers went from needing a typewriter to needing every bell and whistle Final Draft can charge $100+ for. And if I think that makes no sense what-so-ever, I'm the one who's suspect.
Scripts should be judged on a script by script basis, not by a catch-all set of rules.
The thing with Celtx is to get writers to buy into the whole bullshit market. Only real writers use FINAL DRAFT. So then they pay for that believing it will magically transform them into a screenwriter and, when it inevitably doesn't, they turn to bullshit failed screenwriters that have remodelled themselves as gurus, giving them money to turn them into the great writer they just know they are.
If you need those people... these failed screenwriter gurus that set up websites for $5 a month, IMO, you'll never make it as a writer. What they have to say doesn't count... if it did, they'd be selling their own screenplays. Yet we have to listen to them drone on and on about what makes a screenplay great? Please.
Dustin: I understand your overall point but am unsure what you mean about Celtx. I just paid the one-time 4.99 fee (no subscription, etc.) because it's easier to use than what I had.
$4.99? Celtx is free.. unless I've missed something. The one I downloaded was and the excerpt from the Celtx website FAQ tells me the same: "Yes. Classic Celtx desktop software is distributed under an open source license, so you can download it, use it, and distribute it for free."
Imo there's more than enough adequate information & software for screenwriting out there that any writer won't necessarily have to spend a dime on writing and learning about screenwriting, minus the electricity bill. The only thing I'm currently considering spending money on is a screenwriting competition once I'm good enough to throw a script down that path.
You all have gotten me interested about the fuzz around Final Draft now. Might give the free trial a go and take a look what's so special about it.
Oh, guess the mobile version isn't free. Should have figured out that was what you meant from the previous mention of an iPad, my bad! Yeah, that's definitely not hefty and is easily worth it for a mobile device.
I use Celtx. It's free. I also like how I can go from scene to scene just by clicking. I also like how if I forget a character's name I can check that too. But I have a small white board anyway that I used to use when I wrote in Open Office. I make notes on it so I don't lose track of where I am.
I think the competitions are worth entering. I didn't believe so at first, but after nearly winning a couple and having my script sent around lots of production companies it has been worth it. No bites yet, but it's early days. Plus it's with a script that is fairly controversial so I'm not expecting much, but you never know.
I didn't know anything about writing when I started. I wasn't even very good at English (I'm Swedish). Grammar and spelling is something I have got a lot better at thanks to SS members feedback.
In the early going, -06, I was told not to use ing words. Try to avoid the word "and". And so on. Things have changed a lot since then, but I'm still stuck in that way of writing. People usually tell me my scripts are fast reads though, so maybe there was something to those "rules"? Now I just need to work on writing better stories. A completely different animal...
Honestly? I really like Final Draft. Not fond of the price, but we already owned it when I started writing. So - for me - it was free.
I dabbled with Celtx, but didn't feel like dealing with the learning curve (which is probably pretty small) since I already knew FD.
But I would assume what's already been stated is right. As long as the formatting's fine, why would FD be any better or worse? It *is* useful for generating certain cast reports that I've been asked for from time to time. Don't know if Celtx has comparable ones.
And... I HAVE once or twice been asked for an FDX file. (Spec work for a producer). Don't know if Celtx can export that...?
But I really have never seen a use for most of FD's bells and whistles. It's just that I'm familiar with the program, so it's my personal go-to....
Ditto to what Johnny and Wonka said. There's a difference between passive verbs and progressive verbs and it's all about the construction of the sentence - sometimes an 'ing' is indeed necessary - you learn how it works.
Also, that point about a full separate paragraph preferably for each character description - sometimes that ain't necessary and depending on the script neither is the inclusion of a last name.
Some of the points are right on the money - problem is when someone dictates hard and fast rules.
As always story is key . You can get away with a lot if it's a brilliant tale and a lot can be fixed according to industry standard later.
Seems a bit ridiculous to me that a script would automatically be labeled amateur with the implication being it wouldn't be worth reading further if any of these points haven't been adhered to.
I have no clue what you guys are even talking about. I don't think I could tell a passive verb from a progressive one if someone held a gun to my head. This is why I have to stick to my simple way.
I don't want to get confused. I'm just going to continue what I'm doing. I usually get a 9 or 10 on spelling and grammar when I send my scripts out for coverage. Don't jinx me!
Always used Final Draft, never had any issues with it. Seems producers like it too, and they do occasionally ask for drafts so they or their "team" can work with drafts you give them. It just seems to be the program most producers use, and most compatible. Compatible being main word. If you can send someone something they can use it's a lot more useful than sending someone something they have to convert. Basically, if you can use FD, I'd recommend using it.
It's also served me well, so I'm a Final Draft fan.
I don't agree with this guy on some of his "rules". Clearly some work -- most Hollywood films are so predictable because they use the same damn template over and over, and they're unlikely to change. So there is proof in the pudding. There is a "formula". But I don't agree with everything this guy says. I think you just need to use common sense when you read over your script. And Hollywood isn't the be all and end all, it's great to attract bigwig pro co's, but don't sell your soul. Unless it’s worth it.
I agree with Dustin. You can't tell someone how to write a story. And from my experience, producers want good stories. T hey don't give a rats about spelling, punctuation, scene headings...(well, some)... but mostly, they think " Can we do something with this." The producer's job is to help formulate a spec into a script, then the director has his/her version. Or both work together, which is great or can be hell. I’ve actually f’d this process up more than anything else. A few years back, I was under the impression once you meet the “magic formula”, everything just slides into place. Well, no. Not quite as simple as that. I wish these screenwriting gurus would comment on that process. Maybe ‘cos they’ve never been there.
As much as we should make our screenplays as great and production quality wise as possible, it's gonna go through several processes anyway... it's best not to linger or be fearful about what the experts suggest. Just write your own way, keep in mind the basic rules of screenplay writing, and go to town.
Having said that -- and just seen Pia’s comment: I used to also take note of never using “AND”, “THE”, “words that end with LY or ING” -- and it was great advice. I changed one script with the above and it got optioned within the month. Bizarre. It’s (one of) the most important thing I learnt from this site. I understand it now, it’s rule of thumb, but at the time I was like “what the fuck? This don’t even make sense?! Why write like I’m retarded?” hahah. Now, I’m like “meh.” This ‘ING word speeds up the sentence, this AND is needed to make the sentence make sense, this “THE” is required so whoever reads this doesn't think I’m from an alien planet.
Forget 50 rules. Here’s my rule. Write a decent story in basic script format and you’ll probably do alright.
Before anybody gets bent out of shape over these "rules" - and I doubt many will, cos' I think most people here are smart enough to tell which nuggets are gold and which are basically shit - know this: Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
There is absolutely nothing new in this article about the so-called rules. Some are solid, some are just downright stupid. Intentions and obstacles create drama/conflict, and there's your story. Give your character a flaw or an inner demon to resolve, and there's your character arc. Add clarity and structure to the mix, and there's your script. Basically.
The point about passive verbs, is and are, words that end on "ly" is valid but only to a certain extent. As LC show in the two examples, passive verbs following an active verb work but - as with everything else - just don't overdo it.
First and last name of the characters? Sure - if it's relevant to the story (which it rarely is).
Whether if something is written in FD or Celtx etc. is irrelevant. Yes, you can tell the difference - even in pdf form - but so what? I use FD myself and - if pressed - I think I can pick out the scripts that aren't written in FD as well based on the tiny - and I do mean tiny - variations in the format. But is this something that will dramatically change the read in any shape or form? Of course not.
It's basically like Coke and Pepsi. Same but different.
Like Dustin rightly said, these "gurus" weren't good enough themselves to make it so now they have to justify there existence by scaring writers who have just started out into buying their "services". Some of them are legit however but it can be impossible to tell in this internet age.
Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
Libby, you're VERY helpful here at SS. Much appreciated. In my case though, I think I'm too old to learn all the grammar rules. I also have a very hard time learning by reading. If someone shows me how to do something, I learn quickly. I read a lot, but it's for pleasure only. Other types of reading just don't stick. Lately, a friend's been trying to make me look at different styles of prose. What is good writing and what is bad, but I never can tell which is good or bad. I only know if the story interests me or not. I tried to write prose once and was told I was bad at it. I never tried again. So, I'm just going to stick to my script writing and my style. It's not because I think that's how it should be done, but rather, that's the only way I know how. It seems to be working. Whenever I send my scripts out for coverage I usually score the highest on my writing. Go figure.
Rob, "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." And those who can't even teach critique. That's what it seems like to me and I'm not just talking about writing. It seems to be true with everything.
Like Dustin rightly said, these "gurus" weren't good enough themselves to make it so now they have to justify there existence by scaring writers who have just started out into buying their "services". Some of them are legit however but it can be impossible to tell in this internet age.
This is what it basically comes down to. I wouldn't get too caught up with what guru's preach. Usually those are people that failed at what they were trying to do so they refocused to find a way and earn money in the same field. Read produced screenplays, see for yourself what is acceptable and what is not, draw your own conclusions and go by that. If it's the right field for you, you'll figure it out.
Here are Frank Darabont's thoughts on the subject:
Quoted Text
The whole industry of - we can make you a screenwriter. I have ambivalent feelings because, ultimately, even though there is some benefit to be gained by those things I stress the word "some" benefit, minimal benefit - ultimately you know what it all boils down to? You're sitting at your desk, all by yourself for years, trying to figure out your craft and applying the effort necessary. And that's what nobody wants to hear. Everybody wants to hear, I can teach you a three-act structure, I can give you a formula, and you'll be selling screenplays within six months. Bullshit. And what's really funny is, these guys in the business of being screenwriting gurus, they don't ever write screenplays. I have never seen one of these guys' names on a screen credit in a movie.
I still find this kind of stuff useful, even if a simple marketing trick. Which it is.
I have just read a handful of scripts at MP. We are all amateurs over there...and here as well.
But, but...it is very clear when someone is new. Even if they have read up and tried.
The reason that some'pro's' break rules is that they are;
1) Confident enough to say I don't give a shit
2) use it correctly, and effectively
Rules are often wrong, or can be limiting, in certain circumstances.
So, for example, a six line opening scene would be a red flag...until you read the most visual and powerful opening six liner you have ever read. Then it was a rule that had no relevance. Could I pull off a six liner that blew a reader away...probably not. I keep to two or three lines to keep it dynamic. I know my limits.
So, the rules are useful, lists like this are useful, just don't get obsessed over it.
Tell it visually
Tell it fast
Tell it in a compelling way
Tell it so that they want to read on
Tell them something new
Get those right and they will read on, even with an ing word.
(PS - I agree on the ing words being the second verb - thanks Jeff for that - and being used to show a dynamic situation. John August also made the point they are useful for showing the change of movement. Eg John walks in to the shop singing. He goes quiet. Susan stands at the till with her Husband etc)
The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards. Third - Honolulu Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
A professional screenplay writer is somebody that writes professional screenplays. I don't see any difference between many of the writers here and that of many produced scripts. Indeed, many, many produced scripts are written by directors that believe writing is easy and do it themselves. They're not professional screenplay writers. They just know how to get funding for a film.
Decent article. Raises shitty script awareness. I'll agree and disagree with this point:
3. Description is in past tense instead of present tense and does not use the active form of the verb. For example, John drives � not John is driving. Danny stands � not is standing. No -ING verbs.
ING verbs are easy to screw up, but can make the read quicker if you use them properly. When writers aren't aware of the pitfalls ING can lead to, it reads poorly. The writer is then forced to ink robotic sentences to follow the rule of active verbs (not voice), which in turn sacrifices their writing voice.
However, if a writer knows how to use them - they can combine multiple actions leading to a dynamic sentence. Just consider this when using the forbidden ING:
- If you're using 1 verb in a sentence, don't ING that sucker - They sometimes add words; never use "is" to complete a verb - They add syllables causing large words to become even larger - The ING verb is submissive to the active verb - Don't use nominalzations - modifying a verb into a noun
I personally believe it's more of a sin to use an excess of adverbs and adjectives, far more lethal than INGs.
The thing with the ING verbs is that sometimes they are more appropriate than just S or ES verbs. If the scene starts with the character already doing something, ING just sounds better. Let's say the scene begins with someone already in a chair. If you say "John SITS in a chair" it sounds like we actually see him sit down, whereas "John sitting in a chair" is more accuarate because he's already in the chair. I've read a LOT of pro scripts with plenty of ING verbs, too. I've seen a lot of John August stuff where he uses ING, even when it would sound better to use S or ES.
The thing with the ING verbs is that sometimes they are more appropriate than just S or ES verbs. If the scene starts with the character already doing something, ING just sounds better. Let's say the scene begins with someone already in a chair. If you say "John SITS in a chair" it sounds like we actually see him sit down, whereas "John sitting in a chair" is more accuarate because he's already in the chair. I've read a LOT of pro scripts with plenty of ING verbs, too. I've seen a lot of John August stuff where he uses ING, even when it would sound better to use S or ES.
Don't forget the ole "Seated in a chair, John..."
Adjective "clauses" are still dependent on a main clause, although in screenwriting sometimes we can get away with it without it sounding goofy. Also, if using them in between a subject and verb, ensure you write it short and sweet. If too many words separate them, it causes confusion to the reader.
The technique has tons of value. It helps cut down on repetitious sentences!
Pages: 
Author
Good Reading-50 dead giveaways you are an amateur.
Logged
The only thing I'm currently considering spending money on is a screenwriting competition once I'm good enough to throw a script down that path.
I also have a very hard time learning by reading. If someone shows me how to do something, I learn quickly. I read a lot, but it's for pleasure only. Other types of reading just don't stick. Lately, a friend's been trying to make me look at different styles of prose. What is good writing and what is bad, but I never can tell which is good or bad. I only know if the story interests me or not. I tried to write prose once and was told I was bad at it. 
Locked Board