All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
I was wondering if I'm the only one who has read a critically acclaimed screenplay only to become utterly disappointed afterwards!?
For example: I've just read a couple of pages of "Room" and I don't find the writing that appealing. Of course I can't tell if this is the final version but at least it says so.
I've also experienced the same feeling when I read other scripts, even by some well known writers/directors. That kind of sucks because I'm looking for some really good examples but some of these so called fantastic screenplays don't even have a proper formatting and lots of sentences are really awkwardly written in my opinion. Seems like the people who read these scripts actually focus more on the story itself than the wording and so on.
Did you ever wonder how a certain script could receive critical acclaim and sell for a ridiculous amount of money?
An audience see a movie. A story told in pictures. They couldn't care less about format, grammar, typos and word choice. Except for dialogue, of course. Story is what matters most. However, you can make yourself look like a newbie writer by having a poorly written script, but in the end it's the story and how you weave your tale that matters most. I think it was Robert McKee who said, trust me, everyone is looking for a GREAT story. I for one, believe that.
Of course story matters most but people often pay attention to all these other things so much that I wonder if that's even necessary.
I focus so much on formatting, word choice and punctuation (alongside the story) that it slows down the writing process. I always thought that this is a must-have if I want to submit a script to a contest one day or even sell it but obviously it's not, at least not that much.
I think if you are writing on spec then you need a great story AND a script that stands out for the right reasons - not the wrong ones like formatting issues etc.
However when you read award winning or critically acclaimed scripts, these are well down the line to production scripts, and in 90% of cases were never actually spec scripts... So the readers of those, usually producers, directors and actors, are a lot more tolerant of the script format, typos etc because they understand it's their blueprint to translate it to the screen.
So Room, is a script written by the Author, based on her own novel. It's a film that the director REALLY wanted to make, to the extent that he wrote the Author a long letter explaining why he should be allowed to adapt it. Given those circumstances I'm sure the script was great for translating to a film... But wouldn't win any awards for a well formatted, 'industry standard' script... It didn't need to.
Unfortunately, until you break in and have a number of hit scripts to your name... You'll have to stick to standard and a GREAT story and hope someone spots the talent... Same for the rest of us
I haven't entered a contest in years. I could be wrong, but I think how you write matters in contests, but a little less so when trying to sell it to a production company. I've read thousands of scripts by now, and sadly it's true what they say, you can often tell after reading just the first page of a script, if the writer knows how to tell a story or not. I give that first page a read regardless of grammar, format, writing style and typos, but if the story has done nothing to peak my interest after that first page, I'm out. Sounds unfair? Of course. But, like I said, after having read so many scripts, it's often more true than not.
Even as an amateur writer - basic formatting errors cause hiccups and serve to derail a story as I read. e.g., Okay - interesting, interesting...ERROR IN SLUG LINE.....interesting, interesting - CAMERA DIRECTION.... interesting, interesting...UNFILMABLE, etc. The very knowledge of a "rule" created speed bumps to the story. Not so before I started learning the rules. I read a script just for the entertainment/story value. I was not aware of formatting "rules" so the story always trumped format.
I have not evolved (I think) where I am back to story as the prime catalyst as my view of quality. I'm to the point now where asides ,unfilmables, etc actually enhance the read and many guidelines are completely out the window for me. Inglorious Bastards is a good example. The opening scene is 20 pages, many would say that it starts too late, ends too late, violates structure, etc - but I found it riveting. Yes, it spent 15 minutes introducing the Nazi. But for me it was tension-filled and established that I am dealing with a character that has more interest in the quality of milk than in the sanctity of life - that visualization carried me through the entire film.
The other item is that a producer can screw up a great script and vice versa. I loved the scripts for Gone Girl and the Fault In Our Stars - I did not like the movies. The script for As Good As it Gets was just okay but the film was one of my favorites.
I've read thousands of scripts by now, and sadly it's true what they say, you can often tell after reading just the first page of a script, if the writer knows how to tell a story or not. I give that first page a read regardless of grammar, format, writing style and typos, but if the story has done nothing to peak my interest after that first page, I'm out. Sounds unfair? Of course. But, like I said, after having read so many scripts, it's often more true than not.
It not only sounds unfair, it sounds ridiculous to be honest. I know we've had this argument before, but I just can't accept your claim that you or anyone else has this ability and find it absurd. I don't mean to be harsh in any way but no one has the ability to predict where a story is going to go or how good it is by reading the first 1% of it. It's impossible. Unless you're related to Nostradamus. Doesn't matter if you read ten or a million screenplays. You're making a judgement based on your opinion on 1% of something that could have a ton of layers, twists, subplots etc.
By your admission you read the first page and if you like it you read on, if not, you stop. So, you never really read the scripts you have given up on in their entirety. In reality you don't know if you would have liked them or what you would have thought if you would have read on. Because you never did. You're going on your own assumption on what you think will happen. Or maybe by the opinion of someone else that did read the scripts in their entirety. But that's not your opinion, that's someone else's. Writing is subjective and a matter of taste. So you don't know how you would have felt if you would have read on and read the whole thing. You don't really know where it would go.
I wrote a script where the first page was a man eating dinner in front of a TV. That was it. Descriptions of a man sitting down and eating, turning on the TV, eating some more. On page two it was revealed that a man was watching him from outside his house. On page 108 you found out what the actual point of the script you were reading was and why the one man was watching the other. On page 110 the script ended. Going by page 1, you couldn't have guessed anything in terms of story. There was no story on that page. That story came together as you read on.
If you had read only the first page, you would have not known anything about what the point of the first page was or what the story of the script was. Doesn't mean it didn't have any. It just required patience. This is the way I wanted to tell that story.
Instance. Read the following page below.
Code
THE HOSPITAL. DAY. MAY,
PANORAMIC VIEW of The Hospital -- a vast medical complex, a
sprawling pastiche of architecture extending ten blocks north
and south on First Avenue and east to the river.
The Hospital was founded in the late 19th century, and there
are still a few begrimed Victorian Bedlams and Bastilles
among the buildings. Mostly though, it is Medical Modern
1971, white and chrome and lots of glass and concrete shafts
and rotundas. A spanking new Community Mental Health Clinic
towers among the tenements at the northern end of the complex.
On the far side of First Avenue, a twenty-story apartment
house with recessed balconies and picture windows to house
the resident staff has just recently been completed, and
next to it, eight ghetto buildings are being demolished to
make way -- according to the construction company's sign --
for a new Drug Rehabilitation Center, to be completed in
1973, we should all live so long. This is where the shattering
SOUNDS OF CONSTRUCTION are coming from. A block length of
generators and cement and demolition machines are POUNDING,
CRASHING, SCREAMING. Traffic HONKS and BRAYS up First Avenue.
It is a cold spring morning -- 10:00 A.M.
A 1966 station wagon pulls up to the Holly Pavilion.
A tiny, fragile, white-bearded OLD MAN, almost lost in his
overcoat, is helped from the rear of a station wagon and
slowly led to the entrance doors by a middle-aged nurse.
NARRATOR
On Monday morning, a patient named
Guernsey, male, middle-seventies was
admitted to the hospital complaining
of chest pains.
HOLLY PAVILION. EIGHTH FLOOR CORRIDOR
The old man is now in a wheelchair pushed by a hospital
orderly down the corridor.
NARRATOR
He had been referred by a nursing
home where the doctor had diagnosed
his condition as angina pectoris.
Now it is axiomatic that nursing
home doctors are always wrong.
This is just a random example I pulled from my head.
This is the first page of the script for the movie - The Hospital. It was written by Paddy Chayefsky. Who also wrote Network. The man won three Oscars for best screenplay.
What's exciting about this page 1? What can you tell about the story from this page? If you've seen the movie (which I don't like) you know that this page tells you nothing about what's going to happen in the movie. There is a shift in tone half-way through the movie.
This is a writer with 3 Oscars for writing, something that no one has ever done. Of course all this is subjective, but still proves he was held in high regard by his peers. If you don't like this page 1, does that imply that Chayefsky didn't know how to tell a story? Is this Oscar winning script, one with a bad story?
Note - that first page above is from a script that WON an Oscar, a Golden Globe, a WGA award and a BAFTA for best screenplay. It was universally regarded as the best script that year from most big organizations.
In reality you really can't tell anything from one page. You can tell if the writer is familiar with the general screenwriting format. Is English his first language. Does he have a good grasp on grammar and so on.
I think you missed my point entirely. I didn't say I know from the first page where the story is going. I said, I can usually tell if the writer knows how to tell a story or not. If it is apparent that the writer is new to screenwriting, then I can say I know from my experience that the story will most likely not be told in a way that is engaging or intriguing. I also did not say something exciting has to happen on the first page...
In reality you really can't tell anything from one page. You can tell if the writer is familiar with the general screenwriting format. Is English his first language. Does he have a good grasp on grammar and so on.
You can reveal a lot on the first page. Character. Mystery. Dilemma. Action. Whatever. Lots of things. If there's nothing there, then IMHO, the writer is wasting space.
Well, that first page had me right off the bat. If posted on SS this would have copped a right ribbing for all its 'tells' and 'mistakes'. The difference between the so called formatting errors and 'mistakes' the writer makes here and the mistakes of a lot of amateur writers, or for the sake of argument unpublished newbs, is that this guy knows how to use words. He also knows exactly how to plonk me right into the time and place, and he knows how to evoke imagery. He clearly possesses that xfactor. The better question might be can this be learned, that talent? I believe there are 'naturals', they just have 'it', it's effortless, and then there are others who learn how to do it by reading and emulating and slogging away.
I can see both Pia's and Demento's points of view, but I will say I (sorry, D) I side more with Pia. I've opened a gazillion scripts too - if you don't grab me with your words, first page, make me feel like I'm in the palm of your hand, cause I don't want to let go, then unfortunately I'm onto the next one for my hit (for want of a better word). Just a cold hard fact.
I think you missed my point entirely. I didn't say I know from the first page where the story is going. I said, I can usually tell if the writer knows how to tell a story or not. If it is apparent that the writer is new to screenwriting, then I can say I know from my experience that the story will most likely not be told in a way that is engaging or intriguing. I also did not say something exciting has to happen on the first page...
But you can't know if the writer knows how to tell a story just by reading one page. This is a very arrogant thing to say. Because a story is told over the whole length of the script. You cannot possible tell what the writer is trying to do with the first page, why it's there. You're going into the read with a bunch of assumptions and preconceived notions and not letting things play out, which is what a story should do.
There are different ways to tell stories, different narrative structures, different devices can be used. I for one do not like to read scripts where every 5 or 10 pages are their own mini story, with their own mini plot that connect to a larger one. This is something that doesn't appeal to me, but still, I have to read the whole script to understand what the story is and what each scene meant and was trying to do.
I wrote a script where the first six pages had nothing to do with the 90 that followed. But they reconnected on page 96. They featured a different setting, different time-period, different characters, different tone. They were intentionally corny but you would have never understood why that was if you stopped reading there.
I can write two pages of just describing imagery, let's say flowers, an open field. Open my script with that. Then on page 80 connect those two pages to my story and present them as a dream my main character had. Which I reveal is a major plot point to my character's development. You would find out nothing about the significance of those two pages and no story would be presented in them. Yet they could be a major puzzle piece to my plot.
If you want story, you have to read the whole thing. Good story takes time to develop. For layers to be added, subtext etc. No one ever said for example a movie like Taken featured a good story.
Quoted Text
You can reveal a lot on the first page. Character. Mystery. Dilemma. Action. Whatever. Lots of things. If there's nothing there, then IMHO, the writer is wasting space.
Maybe on it's own the first page doesn't reveal anything. But combined with the rest, it does reveal something. This is my point. That you do not know why it's there. Why it contains what it contains.
A lot of great movies open with just imagery.
What's the opening to Paris, Texas? A man walking through the desert for five minutes. Just shots of landscapes and then a man walks.
eldave1 mentioned Inglorious Bastards. The opening to that is a man chopping wood. Then a woman brings him a glass of water, then he chops some more wood. If I remember correctly. Then they talk for 15 minutes at a table.
Below is the first page out of David Lynch's movie The Straight Story. Again, just of the top of my head as a highly regarded movie. What can someone tell from this page really in terms of the writer's storytelling ability?
Code
EXT.--NIGHT SKY
Autumn evening FULL of STARS. Music plays over
as credits roll.
DISSOLVE TO:
2 EXT.--DAY LAURENS, IOWA
It is a hot day in early September in Laurens, a small
rural community in north central Iowa. The main
drag, all of four blocks, is bookended by a giant
grain elevator and a John Deere dealership. No cars
on the road.
CUT TO:
3 EXT.--DAY SMALL HOUSE & NEIGHBORING HOUSE
At the neighboring house, DOROTHY, a rather
large woman, 50ish, with bleached blond, cropped
hair is sunbathing in a chaise lounge. She is wearing
bermuda shorts, a tank top and eye protectors over
her eyes. Next to her is a small table with a plate on
it. Out of the other house, which has chipped siding
and faded, peeling window frames, comes ROSE
(late 30s, brown hair in a pixie cut, stocky, in jeans
and a cotton shirt). The door slams and Rose heads
down the walk. Dorothy doesn't move a muscle or
remove her eye protectors.
DOROTHY
Hey Rose.
Rose doesn't break stride but yells over...
ROSE
Hey Dorothy.
Rose exits and we remain on the two houses and
Dorothy sunbathing. After a moment, Dorothy
reaches over and feels the plate next to her. She lifts
the protectors and checks out the table...sees she's
out of treats, gets up, grabs the plate and heads into
her house.
Humans are amazing at pattern recognition. Like I said, after having read thousands of scripts by now. Amateur and pro, I can usually tell early on if a script is going to be good or not. This has more to do with the writer than the story itself. I have no idea after the first page what a story is going to be about. I know however from having read a lot that if the writer appears to be a newbie, the script usually falls apart completely in the second act especially. Again, I'm not pretending to know what the story will be, just that newbies rarely know how to string a satisfactory story together. And, I include myself in that category, btw.
The previous example you posted for example, I agree with Libby. "this guy knows how to use words. He also knows exactly how to plonk me right into the time and place, and he knows how to evoke imagery." That's what is revealed on the first page. It draws us in and want to read on. Are there amazing stories I haven't read because I bailed early? Probably, but why should I waste my time reading on when I have learned from experience that 99.9% of the time I know it won't end good if there's nothing of interest on the first page? I'm not a reader that gets paid, so why should I spend my time on a script like that? Ask any studio reader or coverage or contest reader. I bet you most of them will agree. It's simple pattern recognition.
You seem mad at me for some reason. I'm just an old woman writing and reading as a hobby. If you think I'm being unfair, who does it hurt if I elect to not read someone's script? My time is limited, I'll give a script one page to make me feel anything/something. If I do, I'll read the second page. If I'm still interested, I go on until the script no longer interest me.
I think you can definitely tell by the first page if a script is going to be bad. Good, not so much. You can get a sense of the pace and general cause/effect that is the veritable thread the reader is meant to follow, but I don't think these things necessarily equate to "good" writing (rather, responsible or, to be a tad cynical, "marketable" writing). I can't remember the last time I read the first page of a script and felt like "I'm in the palm of your hand," for instance, even though I've read scripts that have hooked me early on. In that sense, I suppose I'd agree with Pia and Libby from a more negative place, but would also grant Demento some of his points, especially that good stories take time to develop.
At the same time, I think the whole thing with the first page has more to do with people reading scripts all the time, with professional readers going through dozens, if not hundreds of scripts per day. That's gonna wear you down, for sure, and if you're lucky enough to land a batch of scripts where the first pages aren't loaded with red flags (you won't be), you're still probably gonna prefer the writer get straight to it rather than sink a page essentially painting a picture before doing so. In that sense, I think it's more strategic to grab your reader right off the bat, since you're not necessarily gonna get a fair shake. How can you when you're lumped with hundreds upon hundreds of other scripts?
In response to the original post...
I read Cabin in the Woods several years ago. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone would think the ending doesn't totally sink the script. It renders the story incapable of standing on its own in a non-meta capacity and makes the whole thing feel like a troll. As I understand it, it's supposedly the writers' love letter to horror movies, but to me, that's completely disingenuous since the entire script is focused on the elements that make people write the genre off entirely. I'd have preferred the dudes tried to write an actual good horror movie instead of a snarky parody that basically says, "Here's how not to do it. Let's try something else now."
And speaking of first pages and the like, the script kicks off in a completely mundane office setting, as opposed to a more horror-centric environment, and while the dialogue does feature some foreshadowing, it's cryptic with little to grab onto contextually speaking and thus not enticing.
You seem mad at me for some reason. I'm just an old woman writing and reading as a hobby. If you think I'm being unfair, who does it hurt if I elect to not read someone's script? My time is limited, I'll give a script one page to make me feel anything/something. If I do, I'll read the second page. If I'm still interested, I go on until the script no longer interest me.
I'm not mad at you. Don't get me wrong. I just strongly disagree with your claim and I'm voicing my opinion. It has nothing to do with you as a person and I don't mean to come across harshly. This is not my desire, intent.
I understand that your and everyone else's time is limited and if you choose to stop reading at page 1 that is your business. However what I can't agree with is your claim that you or anyone else can tell if a writer can tell a story just by read 1% of his. This notion I find ridiculous and arrogant. It's an assumption that is presented as fact. I find it very judgmental. And, like you said, unfair. Again, whether you stop reading or not, that's your choice. But saying based on the one page that you know this or that about the writer in terms of his ability to tell a story is what I take exception too.
Let's take me for instance. I have always liked movies. I think I have, in my basement probably over... 5000 movies on VHS, Laser Disks, Video CD's, Bootlegs etc. Some I bought, some were given to me, some were recorded off of TV. Where I live you could buy 2 movies for a dollar, bootleg on the street. A 4 four VHS tape you could buy for 2 dollars.
I've probably seen thousands more movies on TV, the cinema or that I've rented back in the day. I've watched everything from the very first things put to film to hundreds of kung fu movies, samurai movies, Russian dramas etc. The other month I was sick and bed-bound, I watched 11 movies in one day. Just to catch up on some I haven't seen and see if they differed in structure etc. I've read books on film-making. Seen likely most documentaries about the process and the history of cinema. I've been to movie sets. I've worked as a video editor. I've written 8 features scripts. I may have not read thousands of screenplay, but I have probably read over 600-700 at least. If we don't count the ones I didn't read whole and dropped after a few pages.
So, I've invested a lot of time watching movies, figuring out how they are made and how they have evolved. I would say, it's safe to say that I know more about movies than the average moviegoer and that I have accumulated some knowledge of the topic.
However... I would not dare say I can tell how good a movie will be after watching 15 minutes of it in terms of story. Even after seeing thousands of movies and knowing a lot of the tropes, how the usual structures payout and so on.
It's my opinion that human beings should be humble. So it's the show of arrogance that someone can tell how good someone else is and if they can tell a story or not just by reading one page is what irks me. To dismiss someone just on the thought that you can evaluate correctly his storytelling ability and talent by that 1%. Especially when we are talking about a subjective field where there are different approaches, ways to tell a story, there are no guidelines to follow on how to do this and that in terms of story. Where innovation and originality should be praised. People might be great at pattern recognition but if a script is 100 pages and you only read the first one and stop, you don't know what pattern the script follows, you just assume that you do and here is where the arrogance lies.
People can believe to have this ability, I on the other hand believe that they don't. Some voice that they do, I voice my opinion that they don't. In the end it will not change anything as both sides will choose to believe what they want. That's how it is with most things when it comes to people. But I felt the need to get my opinion out there
So, I'm not mad at you Pia. I just don't agree with you on this matter. I've found you to be wonderful, polite and helpful on this forum and I wish you a ton of success.
Maybe I can mediate some here, as I can see both sides. From a novel reading perspective, I have read as much as Demento has watched... and every book I would give 100 pages, often 1 third, to tell if I like the story or not.
However, I could tell from the first few pages whether or not the writer's voice was one I could relate to. A good writer communicates on a subconscious level with their readers. This is true for novels and screenplays. Being able to tell/execute a story well is very important. Two writers could tell the exact same story, but one will always tell it better than the other, relatively speaking. It could be that two different readers will favour a different writer.
So, I think that when we say that we can know if they can tell a story or not from the first page, is more that we can tell whether that writer will be able to tell it in a way that we can relate to.
So, I think that when we say that we can know if they can tell a story or not from the first page, is more that we can tell whether that writer will be able to tell it in a way that we can relate to.
That's different. Now we're talking about personal preference and a matter of taste. So, maybe by reading a few pages I could tell if this is written in a style that's up my alley. If I like the tone. If the genre is my thing. If the writer has good grasp of language. If he has an interesting voice.
This is totally different than offering up a claim that someone can tell if a writer can tell a story just by going on the first page of a script. It's presented in such a way that someone has the ability to judge someone else very objectively just based on 1% or less of their story.
This is passing judgment on the talent of a person by your notions of how a story should be told without even having significant evidence, making such an assessment on the basis of only one page. Stories are build, developed.
Like you Dustin with books I usually give a movie at least 45 minutes before I start fast-forwarding to the end. But still, I make a point to finish most things I start in order to give them a fair shake and try not to pass judgement without first trying to get what they were trying to do. If I don't finish it, I make it a point to mention that I didn't finish it. Just so everything is fair. This is how I hope to be treated and this is how I treat others.
It's like me watching a football game and turning it off after the first minute and saying - "These people don't know how to play football. Did you see those two passes they did? They suck."
I'm not talking about movies. I'm talking about screenplays. It's like studying the blueprints to a house by an architect vs checking out the finished building. Did the builder use skilled craftsmen that took pride in their work, use quality materials and so on. Or did he do a shoddy low quality job? None of which has to do with the drawings of the architect.
You can continue to call me arrogant, but I continue to base my opinion on my own experience which comes from having read thousands of scripts. I believe many full time readers, people that read scripts for a living will say the same thing. You can usually tell a lot from the first page of a script. Again, if there's nothing on the first page that tells us anything of interest of any kind, the writer is wasting space and most likely, the story that follows will be more of the same. It's a pattern that I continue to see.
I'm out of this discussion, because you continue to misread/misunderstand what I'm trying to say and I hate arguments in text. I do better in person than typing.
It's like studying the blueprints to a house by an architect vs checking out the finished building. Did the builder use skilled craftsmen that took pride in their work, use quality materials and so on. Or did he do a shoddy low quality job? None of which has to do with the drawings of the architect.
But if we see only 1% of the drawing how can we tell what the architect's vision is?
If I just see a corner of a drawing of a house, can I make an assessment that the plans for the house are lousy? That the design sucks?
I believe many full time readers, people that read scripts for a living will say the same thing
I believe they are all wrong. They have the right to believe what they choose to believe, but I have the right to believe that their approach is wrong.
Again, if there's nothing on the first page that tells us anything of interest of any kind, the writer is wasting space and most likely, the story that follows will be more of the same. It's a pattern that I continue to see.
So you choose to prejudge one person's work in a subjective field based on what you perceived as mistakes in other people's work? I'd say that's unfair and unreasonable. Plus, if you started off seeing these mistakes in writing and start writing off other future writer's going by this, you are limiting yourself and cheating yourself to experiencing new writing approaches and will likely get stuck in a reading pattern yourself.
I disagree with Pia's premise other than as it personally applies to Pia (i.e., what may be true for Pia could not be true for 99% of other readers - who knows). I generally think there is no way to tell if a script contains a good story based on one page. I have read bad page ones that yield good stories and great page ones that yield bad stories. However, I have no argument with a premise that says if I don't like the first page I am not going to bother to find out. It is the writer's obligation to draw in.
Quoted Text
Demento is incorrect as usual.
I believe that, in general, Demento is correct. I do take objection to linking Pia's view as something born from arrogance or any other personality trait - it is just an honest difference of opinion. It's like saying you would have to be an idiot to think - blah, blah - it ends the conversation and is not needed. SO Demento - with you on thesis - not crazy about the manner in which it is delivered.
Quoted Text
It's very, very easy to tell if a writer is any good, based on the first page. SIMPLE!
All due respect but without the words - "sometimes" inserted at the beginning of your sentence - I couldn't disagree more.
Think of storytelling on the most basic level, one person sitting across from another telling a story. What techniques do good storytellers universally employ in that situation? They inflect, they make eye contact, they use their hands and general body language to convey emotion, they speak clearly and fluently.
What do bad storytellers do? They stutter, they mumble, they look down at their feet, they talk in a bored, monotone voice.
These things are true irrespective of what story is being told. One storyteller could be telling a simple revenge tale. The other a brilliant, complex drama spanning eons filled with irony and metaphors and clever messages about the ills of society or whatever. Doesn't matter. The one who mumbles and talks without inflection is a worse storyteller. He may have a better story. But he can't tell it as well.
On page 1 of a script there's usually action descriptions, character descriptions, and dialogue. If the dialogue is flat, on the nose, etc... that is bad storytelling. If the action descriptions are over-written in big blocks of text and entirely passive... that is bad storytelling. It's the equivalent of someone mumbling, talking without inflection, not engaging the listener.
The successful patterns and techniques that give action descriptions their potency apply from page 1 onward. If he's not doing it on page 1, he's not gonna suddenly start writing vivid, efficient action descriptions on page 50. They will be bad throughout. Same with the dialogue and everything else.
He will remain a bad storyteller. May turn out he has a good story. But his telling of that story is greatly flawed.
For many people, the execution of the story is the most important thing. Least for me it is. I'd rather listen to a good storyteller tell an unoriginal, plain story than have someone mumble out a wholly unique yarn while slouched in his chair staring at his feet the whole time.
I assume Pia feels the same way. Even from the first page she can tell if someone is a bad storyteller. Hence she stops reading. That's not arrogance. That's common sense.
What we need as new site functionality is Voting Buttons to 'settle' discussion like this
More seriously... Pia gave her view of what she has learnt through experience, she openly admits that this may mean she has missed some good scripts to read, but the key here is that it is HER opinion and HER approach... and if that works for Pia then that's fine... for Pia.
Stating that you have formulated an opinion based on extensive experience isn't arrogant imho... it's just a personal insight that you've come to and others can agree with it, or not.
....but if the story has done nothing to peak my interest after that first page, I'm out. Sounds unfair? Of course.
So, it wasn't so much about story telling as it was about piquing interest. Nothing really to do with format or errors - I'll make the same decision on log-lines. If a log line doesn't pique my interest - I'm not reading. Because - it didn't pique MY interest. It does not mean it is not interesting. So I viewed Pia's conclusion not as some ultimate script review paradigm - but rather a simple statement of her personal experience. My personal experience does not align with hers, hence I have reached a different conclusion. I think there is virtually nothing you can tell about a "story" from page 1. But that is just me.
Quoted Text
It's entirely reasonable to not be entertained on page one or feel the content at hand could have clearly been written in a more entertaining fashion. It's fair to jump to assumptions based on that in the same way it's fair to question a singer who misses a note in the opening bar of a song.
Slightly different view - I think it is more akin to forecasting the quality of an entire concert based on the first note in the first song. Just don't think the first nite is a good barometer. But again - that's for me.
Quoted Text
This is something that's entirely different than aborting because of bold slug lines, an adverb, five lines of dialogue, or whatever shit people are freaking out over these days. It's also something that stems deeper than it seems many writers and readers are prepared to tread.
Could not agree and disagree more (what??. I have reached the point where I believe that commenting on someone's overall writing ability or the potential quality of a script based on rules or guidelines (many of which I no longer even deem valid) to be just plain silly. That being said - I would add the one page test to that list. But again - that's just me.
Plenty of people are going to chuck a script after one page. I've seen it discussed here many a time. No one's ever changed their mind on the subject. In that sense, the onus is on the writer to put their best foot forward or not. The reader's gonna do what they're gonna do.
Personally, I prefer to give every script what I believe to be a fair shake. I'm not a professional reader, so I don't feel the need to act like one. I've generally got some time to dig in and not so defiantly precious with my time that I can't read at least a few pages (not that I don't bail on scripts early on myself). I wouldn't say bailing after one page is inherently unhelpful in the case of writers doing it, but given that we're not professional readers (or at least not reading in a professional capacity here), I think it defeats the purpose of having a forum like this. The only real differentiator is that writers probably aren't riding on as many hopes and can afford to sink a read without losing a significant opportunity.
On the subject of arrogance, specifically Pia's arrogance, I'd propose she is nothing from the sort. This I know from personal experience (as is currently a forefront of this conversation). One of the least arrogant people I've met here. Writers can be as fucked up as anyone else, especially where arrogance is concerned, so I think that's saying something.
Plenty of people are going to chuck a script after one page. I've seen it discussed here many a time. No one's ever changed their mind on the subject. In that sense, the onus is on the writer to put their best foot forward or not. The reader's gonna do what they're gonna do.
Personally, I prefer to give every script what I believe to be a fair shake. I'm not a professional reader, so I don't feel the need to act like one. I've generally got some time to dig in and not so defiantly precious with my time that I can't read at least a few pages (not that I don't bail on scripts early on myself). I wouldn't say bailing after one page is inherently unhelpful in the case of writers doing it, but given that we're not professional readers (or at least not reading in a professional capacity here), I think it defeats the purpose of having a forum like this. The only real differentiator is that writers probably aren't riding on as many hopes and can afford to sink a read without losing a significant opportunity.
On the subject of arrogance, specifically Pia's arrogance, I'd propose she is nothing from the sort. This I know from personal experience (as is currently a forefront of this conversation). One of the least arrogant people I've met here. Writers can be as fucked up as anyone else, especially where arrogance is concerned, so I think that's saying something.
I think Pia meant she could tell if the writer was up to scratch from page one, which is a fair shout. If page one is written poorly, you would imagine the rest is gonna follow suit. Poorly means the obvious, but includes tone, atmosphere and world building. Page one has to have something, if not all three, to keep reader interest.
I just read through all of the posts in this thread and I wanted to say the following, as an aspiring screenwriter:
While I agree that you can determine CERTAIN things from page one, there is no way to come to a conclusion on anything. What if the entire first page is as establishing shot, followed by a series of slug lines, setting up something? You'd be able to determine the writer's ability to describe a scene, but that's all, what if they're dialogue is crap but their "showing" is awesome? The same could be said if the first page is sharp dialogue but little else.
I went back and looked at two of my screenplays that I've been focusing on recently, trying to decide if the first page is interesting, or at least is something that paints a picture worth looking at. But interest is subjective. What if the reader doesn't like the picture that is being painted, but the process of painting it is done very well?
It's just not a great realization when I read things like this. I want my stuff to get out there and read, but knowing there are people who will throw it away after the first page is quite discouraging.
I'd say the first 3-5 pages would give a more complete indication on what's to come.
Pages: 
Author
Critically acclaimed scripts
Logged
. I have reached the point where I believe that commenting on someone's overall writing ability or the potential quality of a script based on rules or guidelines (many of which I no longer even deem valid) to be just plain silly. That being said - I would add the one page test to that list. But again - that's just me. 
Locked Board