SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 29th, 2024, 6:52am
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
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.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Screenwriting Discussion    Screenwriting Class  ›  Long action blocks/Over-descriptive action blocks Moderators: George Willson
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 4 Guests

 Pages: 1, 2 » : All
Recommend Print
  Author    Long action blocks/Over-descriptive action blocks  (currently 3251 views)
Rob Barkan
Posted: January 11th, 2015, 3:12pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
18
Posts Per Day
0.01
Hi all, this one's puzzling me: the screenwriting realm seems to frown upon long, thick action blocks and I'm trying to trim mine down.  But then I have another look at Kasdan's Raiders of the Lost Ark (revised 3rd draft, 1979) and it's full of these:

Indy reaches the alter. The tiny idol looks both fierce and
beautiful. It rests on a pedestal of polished stone. Indy
looks the whole set-up over very carefully. From his jacket
he takes a small, canvas drawstring bag. He begins filling it
with dirt from around the case of the alter. When he has
created a weight that he thinks approximates the weight of
the idol, he bounces it a couple times in his palm
concentrating. It�s clear he wants to replace the idol with
the bag as smoothly as possible. His hand seems ready to do
that once, when he stops, takes a breath and loosens his
shoulder muscles. Now he sets himself again. And makes the
switch! The idol is now in his hand, the bag on the pedestal.
For a long moment it sits there, then the polished stone
beneath the bag drops five inches. This sets off an AURAL
CHAIN REACTION of steadily increasing volume as some huge
mysterious mechanism rumbles into action deep in the temple.

Sixteen lines!  It's a famous, terrific action sequence but everyone on the screenwriting boards would scream to trim it down and break it up.

And:

It shows a Biblical battle. The Israelite Army is vanquishing
an opposition force. At the forefront of the Israelite ranks,
two men carry the Ark of the Covenant, a beautiful gold
chest, crowned by two sculptured gold angels. The men do not
touch the Ark itself; rather they carry it by use of two long
wooden poles which pass through rings in the corners of the
Ark. The painting is very dramatic, full of smoke, tumult and
sinewy dying men. But the most astonishing thing in the
picture is the brilliant jet of white light and flame issuing
from the wings of the angels. It pierces deep into the ranks
of the retreating enemy, wrecking devastation and terror.

Thick as a brick!  Descriptive to the max!  If this script was submitted to the boards many would jump right on it, shred it down.  Yet this script sold and got memorably filmed.  Is it because it was written in 1979?  Or came from an established writer?

My purpose in lusher description in my own work is to immerse the reader in the atmosphere of the story like Lovecraft used to in his prose.  I've been trying to accomplish this as compactly as possible yet not lose vital details about any new world I'm creating.  

Thanks for any feedback,

Rob

Revision History (1 edits)
Rob Barkan  -  January 11th, 2015, 3:27pm
Logged Offline
Private Message
Dreamscale
Posted: January 11th, 2015, 3:37pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Rob Barkan
Is it because it was written in 1979?  Or came from an established writer?[Rob


Yes...exactly, IMO.

Both these "blocks" can and should be broken into several blocks, as each block should contain 1 thought/description or, it can be looked at as each block contains a single shot - you have to move the camera, you write a new passage.

The key here is that "you would have to move the camera" not that you choose to.

I also highly doubt this was written as a Spec script, which is the real key.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 1 - 23
Rob Barkan
Posted: January 11th, 2015, 3:51pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
18
Posts Per Day
0.01
Thanks Dreamscale -- is it that a spec script is supposed to be lean for an easy read --

-- and a script for hire can be far more lushly imbellished and indulgent to help the actors, director, art department and cinematographer in a greenlit production?

For example, Raiders is full of unfilmables describing Indy's thoughts.  To help Harrison Ford's portrayal no doubt.

Rob
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 2 - 23
Leegion
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 3:44am Report to Moderator
New


Location
England
Posts
491
Posts Per Day
0.10

Quoted from Rob Barkan
Thanks Dreamscale -- is it that a spec script is supposed to be lean for an easy read --

-- and a script for hire can be far more lushly imbellished and indulgent to help the actors, director, art department and cinematographer in a greenlit production?

For example, Raiders is full of unfilmables describing Indy's thoughts.  To help Harrison Ford's portrayal no doubt.

Rob


Yes.  Once you sell the script it lands in the director's hands and things start appearing on the pages that wouldn't otherwise be there.  Camera angles for one, transitions from scene to scene, asides to allow the actor some freedom to interpret the scene accordingly.

Think of spec scripts as a blueprint for a casino or something.  You can draw it all out to be this lavish and lush place, but then the builders start designing it and certain things will either be removed and/or beefed up in order for it to function correctly, so it doesn't fall down when gamblers are on the roulette wheel.

A lot of professional scripts are TERRIBLE for anyone just breaking into the show.  All of them are filled with things we don't actually need, the action blocks are terrible and overlong (The Dark Knight for example) and half of it is unnecessary page filler.

All we really get in terms of professional scripts are shooting scripts or final drafts.  I don't think, in my 3-4 years of doing this, I've ever seen a professional SPEC script.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 3 - 23
Dreamscale
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 9:44am Report to Moderator
Guest User



I've said this many times before and peeps can either agree or disagree...

Just because a Pro does something, it doesn't mean it's right.

You can pull up all sorts of scripts over the years from classic movies and see "we see/we hear", camera angles, horribly grating asides, swearing like a sailor in the prose, unfilmables, big blocks of awkward description, crazy overwriting, terrible grammar, typos, etc.  You name it, you'll see it.

But again, don't think that makes it right, just because a Pro did it.

Any and every production with any kind of "real" budget", will have things fleshed out in production notes and the writer and/or a script supervisor will be on set during pre-production and filming.

The idea that actors are handed a script and then filming begins and they base their performance on that script, is rather ludicrous.

But, on the flip side of that, write the best script you can right off the bat, including solid dialogue and action that makes sense, as we've seen so many times where big budget films miss on such simple things, as if they trusted the writer out of the gate and no one mentioned the mistakes or the weaker aspects.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 4 - 23
Demento
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 11:13am Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
946
Posts Per Day
0.25

Quoted from Dreamscale
Just because a Pro does something, it doesn't mean it's right.


If he's a Pro, he's getting paid for his work, so he's doing something right. At the end of the day that's the goal, get produced, get paid.

Maybe the things you disagree with aren't that important because people still get work, make money despite making what you perceive to be mistakes.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 5 - 23
Dreamscale
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 12:17pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Demento
If he's a Pro, he's getting paid for his work, so he's doing something right.


That's not what we're discussing here.

We're discussing examples of things that are obviously incorrect, and my point is that Pro or Amateur, mistakes are made and common, and one should not point to Pro mistakes and say if so and so did it, why shouldn't I?

[/quote]Maybe the things you disagree with aren't that important because people still get work, make money despite making what you perceive to be mistakes.[/quote]

A mistake is a mistake, and again, the point of this post was asking about such mistakes and how Pros can get away with them.

Many Pro writers write very long winded, overwritten action blocks that are not properly broken up, but that doesn't mean that new writers should do the same thing with their Spec scripts.

Logged
e-mail Reply: 6 - 23
Rob Barkan
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 12:29pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
18
Posts Per Day
0.01
Thanks Dreamscale, you've cleared that up quite nicely...

Now, on to yet another re-write.  Somehow I'm looking forward to it.  The labor's never a drudgery, if you love what you do.  And I do.  We all do.  

Best,

Rob
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 7 - 23
DustinBowcot
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 1:10pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



The reason spec writers should stick to the rules is because you want people to be able to read through quickly.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 8 - 23
Scar Tissue Films
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 1:16pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3382
Posts Per Day
0.63
The writer of that got the gig from Lucas after they had a chat in a bar somewhere.

Lucas liked him and hired him to write a script he was working on.

He sat round a table with Lucas and Spielberg. Lucas threw out the story, they all had their say. Then he went away and wrote it.

The writer even said to Lucas "How do you know I'm any good, you haven't read any of my work?"

He said " I just have a feeling"..."And if you're not any good I'll just fire you and get someone else".

You can make your own moral of the story.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 9 - 23
CameronD
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 1:42pm Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
542
Posts Per Day
0.14
Moral of the story is that when you're a "pro" you can write over descriptive and bloated scripts like Cloud Atlas.


http://www.TheFilmBox.org Movie reviews, news, and fun!
http://www.screenplaywritenow.com Write a screenplay. Write. Now.
http://www.SchismSEO.com Separate from your competition. Affordable SEO services
http://www.MyEasyGifter.com Because nobody likes receiving gift cards
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 10 - 23
Grandma Bear
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 1:59pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
I just finished The Babysitter. One of the highest rated scripts on The Blacklist. It was definitely written in a very unconventional way.

The action writing is stretched to a single sentence per line making the script longer than what it would normally be. The script is only 85 pages if you don't count the one page near the middle that has only the words WHAT THE FUCK in ridiculously huge fonts on it. It that script was filmed, I doubt it would even make a 60 minute film.

The script is not bad though. It kept me reading, but I'm not a big fan of some of these ridiculous lengths some writers go to in order to try to create their own voice.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 11 - 23
Dreamscale
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 2:18pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Grandma Bear
I just finished The Babysitter. One of the highest rated scripts on The Blacklist. It was definitely written in a very unconventional way.

The action writing is stretched to a single sentence per line making the script longer than what it would normally be. The script is only 85 pages if you don't count the one page near the middle that has only the words WHAT THE FUCK in ridiculously huge fonts on it. It that script was filmed, I doubt it would even make a 60 minute film.

The script is not bad though. It kept me reading, but I'm not a big fan of some of these ridiculous lengths some writers go to in order to try to create their own voice.


And this is a great point and example.

For some reason I'll never understand it.  The peeps who are in power either don't know what's good and not good, or they're so easily tricked by smartass writing and dumbass asides into thinking that because it worked on paper (for them) it will translate to film and work for the masses.

But maybe that's what I'm missing in general, because the vast majority of all movies made, IMO, downright SUCK in both execution and premise.  And so many critics agree, yet these movies go on to make huge profits and mega millions over and over again.

Package and market it "the right way" and the vast majority of this garbage will sell.

I watched a shitty little horror flick the other day on one of the movie channels - The Devil's Due, from last year.  Complete piece of shit in every way imaginable.  Nothing remotely new or unique...complete waste of time. made for $7 Million, it went on to suck in over $36 Million at the WWBO and probably made another $20 Million in DVD sales/rentals, including movie channel income and the like.

Just goes to show - peeps are idiots and you don't need a great premise/story/script, to make a boatload of dough.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 12 - 23
Demento
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 3:10pm Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
946
Posts Per Day
0.25

Quoted from Dreamscale

That's not what we're discussing here.

We're discussing examples of things that are obviously incorrect, and my point is that Pro or Amateur, mistakes are made and common, and one should not point to Pro mistakes and say if so and so did it, why shouldn't I?


I get where you're going. Pros are already "in", so people in the industry will read their work regardless if they make "mistakes", but I have to ask...

What is obviously incorrect? Where do these rules of screenwriting exist? They are mostly trends or what people are told their writing should look like by people that haven't sold anything. In reality, the people for whom these scripts are written for, mostly don't give a damn. Given the scripts that have been sold.

Trends change all the time. Bold slugs are in now. I see these "rules" get broken all the time and these scripts still get produced. So obviously there are no obviously incorrect ways of writing. Since all these things are accepted by the people who matter. They should be the ones that set the standard of what is acceptable and what isn't.

This is a quote from the script Angry Bear mentions.


Quoted Text
His fingers reaching for his back pocket...

POCKET KNIFE, BITCHES!

               BEE
      I don’t believe you.

               COLE
Well... I don’t believe this. So.

               BEE
      Touché.

              COLE
      Thanks.

HE OPENS THE KNIFE, BITCHES!


This is in the actual script, bold and everything. A spec script that was sold.


Quoted Text
A mistake is a mistake, and again, the point of this post was asking about such mistakes and how Pros can get away with them.


How is it a mistake if it has no repercussions? If no one cares? Spec scripts like the one I quotes above still get sold.


Quoted from Dreamscale

Many Pro writers write very long winded, overwritten action blocks that are not properly broken up, but that doesn't mean that new writers should do the same thing with their Spec scripts.


If you look at this years Blacklist scripts and all kind of scripts that have gotten sold over the years on spec, most of them break rules, are riddled with "mistakes". Maybe people pay more attention to the actual story than the way it's written.


Quoted from Dreamscale
I watched a s****y little horror flick the other day on one of the movie channels - The Devil's Due, from last year.  Complete piece of s*** in every way imaginable.  Nothing remotely new or unique...complete waste of time. made for $7 Million, it went on to suck in over $36 Million at the WWBO and probably made another $20 Million in DVD sales/rentals, including movie channel income and the like.

Just goes to show - peeps are idiots and you don't need a great premise/story/script, to make a boatload of dough.


I don't get you. I see you often say "different strokes for different folks". You call people idiots if they liked (or made) a movie like "The Devil's Due". Yet you profess your love for movies such as "Wolf Creek 2" and "I Spit On Your Grave 2". I would think, you of all people should be more opened minded to what people like.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 13 - 23
Dreamscale
Posted: January 12th, 2015, 4:08pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Demento
What is obviously incorrect? Where do these rules of screenwriting exist? They are mostly trends or what people are told their writing should look like by people that haven't sold anything. In reality, the people for whom these scripts are written for, mostly don't give a damn. Given the scripts that have been sold.

Trends change all the time. Bold slugs are in now. I see these "rules" get broken all the time and these scripts still get produced. So obviously there are no obviously incorrect ways of writing. Since all these things are accepted by the people who matter. They should be the ones that set the standard of what is acceptable and what isn't.


Demento, not sure what your name is, or I'd address you here, but in terms of your questions, I'll say this...

First of all, we're not discussing "screenwriting trends" here.  That could/should be a whole different thread.  This thread is discussing "long action blocks and over description in action blocks" and what's incorrect about them.

Let me give you a quick and easy example that may hit home...

What is a script?  It's the plans or "recipe" for making a movie. It gives all the "necessary" elements and directions that will be required - it sets scenes, describes actions, introduces characters, gives those characters a voice and a personality, and most importantly, tells a story in a cohesive, "understood" way.

The level of detail will vary greatly from script to script and writer to writer, but a professionally written script will follow an age old strucuture that everyone in the business, and now adays anyone who cares to learn, can follow.

Easy, right?

But at their core, scripts are literary in nature and for the most part, follow along literary guidelines that simply are what they are.

Now, obviously, scripts are not novels and are not held to a novel's strict rules of writing, but grammar and puncuation rules do exist and should not be ignored or overlooked.  Just because someone or most don't understand why something's incorrect, doesn't mean it's not incorrect.

This is just simple, plain logic.

But let's get back to the subject at hand - what constitutes an overly long action block, why is it incorrect, and why should we give a fuck?

A script is meant to be "easy" to read.  Anything over 4 lines of prose is not easy to read and the more lines it is, the harder it is to read and follow exactly where you are on the page, within that block (passage).

A passage is meant to be about a single thought/idea/description/action and by "correctly" writing this way, it's easy for the reader to follow along.  It's all about communicating to your readers in a way that makes it easiest for any level to understand clearly.

There are others who could explain this better than I could or am, but it goes back to actual writing - sentence structure, paragraph formation, etc.  It allows the reader to make assumptions that should be correct, so that they can read along at a good clip and not have to stop and question things...or go back and reread lines or passages for clarity.

It also helps the reader visually "see" the movei play out in their head as they read along.  Every time you have a new passage, you have a new shot.  If you don't or can't break up your passages properly, you're not going to be able to write visually, because your readers won't be able to follow along.

The quotes from Pia on that script obviously show a style choice - a style that I would not read, because it's condescending to me.  It takes me out of the read completely.  It breaks the visual picture I'm forming in my head.  It's smartass and smug and the bottom line id that it's a waste of space every time it's done.  It does not translate to film, so why include it?  But that's another topic completely, as obviously, many of those who make decisions on what or what not to produce, don't understand this - they're tricked into thinking that the writer's voice will translate to film, but it won't and what they're left with when it comes time to shoot is simply a script that has numerous "extra" lines that have nothing to do with anything.


Quoted from Demento
If you look at this years Blacklist scripts and all kind of scripts that have gotten sold over the years on spec, most of them break rules, are riddled with "mistakes". Maybe people pay more attention to the actual story than the way it's written.


Or maybe, as I've said numerous times, these people don't realize they're riddled with mistakes.  They don't realize why these are mistakes.  Or they don't realize what i just said above about the throwaway unfilmable lines that don't transfer to film.

If you really think that these scripts that get purchased and produced into movies all have such amazing stories, you're lucky, cuz I sure don't.  Very, very few have anything unique to say or show and even fewer are entertaining.


Quoted from Demento
I don't get you. I see you often say "different strokes for different folks". You call people idiots if they liked (or made) a movie like "The Devil's Due". Yet you profess your love for movies such as "Wolf Creek 2" and "I Spit On Your Grave 2". I would think, you of all people should be more opened minded to what people like.


Peeps can like anything they choose to, but the reality is that most peeps are more like sheep - they follow...they like what they're supposed to like...they like what's supposedly cool and hip, or popular.

I personally don't care what's popular.  I don't like something because I'm supposed to.  We all have different tastes and I'm not afraid to like what most will not.

And, yes, I loved Wolf Creek 2 and I was very impressed with I Spit on your Grave 2.  Teh subject matter alone on both will turn off 9 out of 10 people before they even give them a chance, but both are very well done.  Both pull no punches and take no prisoners, and that's really, in a nutshell what I like.  They push the envelope and aren't afraid to go places few movies do.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 14 - 23
 Pages: 1, 2 » : All
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Screenwriting Class  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006