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.
Films can start over black or why captions/supers, in which case the fade wouldn't come until after that.
It can also be a creative decision to not open on a fade and instead hard-open from black, either to accentuate the tone of the story or to achieve some other creative purpose.
In any of these cases, starting with FADE IN is a creatively stifling element that's only still in people's minds because of tradition. In reality, it's kind of a dinosaur, since the only logic that dictates its use are scene transitions, which have been all but abandoned in spec writing for over a decade.
I do start most of my work with FADE IN unless in the event of the above-mentioned cases, but I mostly do so out of habit.
Films can start over black or why captions/supers, in which case the fade wouldn't come until after that.
It can also be a creative decision to not open on a fade and instead hard-open from black, either to accentuate the tone of the story or to achieve some other creative purpose.
In any of these cases, starting with FADE IN is a creatively stifling element that's only still in people's minds because of tradition. In reality, it's kind of a dinosaur, since the only logic that dictates its use are scene transitions, which have been all but abandoned in spec writing for over a decade.
I do start most of my work with FADE IN unless in the event of the above-mentioned cases, but I mostly do so out of habit.
The FADE OUT at the end doesn't serve much more of a purpose than to signify the script is over. The transition to the closing credits could be an iris or something else entirely. I might be misremembering, but I think the original Star Wars trilogy pre-lapped the theme and cut to the credits?
At the opposite end of the spectrum was Return of the King which just... wouldn't... stop... fading... out. I think the Collector's Edition box set had a whole extra DVD of additional endings
The left-justified FADE IN is basically a salutation letting you know you're on the first page of the script. The FADE OUT actually gets in my way because I like to have the denouement leak into the closing credits (because I wouldn't want them squished into an unreadable mess if the movie ever gets made and makes its way to TV).
I still put FADE OUT on the last line, but nothing is really fading there.
This is a great example, not for being silly, but for showing the importance of certain things...like using FADE IN to start your action. Yeah, there are lots of ways to do this without using FADE IN, but skipping it completely shows that you're simply bucking the system, IMO.
Here's a quick analogy (I love analogies!).
I hope we all understand that when driving, a stop sign and/or a red light both signify the need to stop (momentarily for a stop sign and until the red light turns green).
Well, what about if it's really late at night/early morning, and no one is on the road? Or, how about if you're out in the country and again, no one is within miles of you? Do you stop because you've been trained to stop, or simply blow through it, because common sense tells you that the rules don't have to apply here, as there's simply no reason to stop with no one around you?
If you routinely blow through read lights and stop signs, chances are good you're going to get a ticket, as video cams are popping up everywhere, or maybe it's simply a trap and a cop is waiting out of sight.
But, what also happens is that you're now telling yourself it's OK to break the rules (the law) when you deem it to be OK, and that's where the problems begin.
Again, you are missing the main point of my argument so I'll paraphrase what I said in response to Libby...
I don't use FADE IN: if I don’t envision a particular opening scene fading in. A lot of films start like that and many don’t. Some start in the middle of the action, "in medias res" (Its a Latin term so its gotta be legit, right?) I only use FADE IN: if I want the opening scene to fade in. Simple as that.
Anyway, goddammit, I'm now mired in a conversation about FADE IN: on a thread called "Rules - Formatting Fatigue". I'm obviously part of a problem I flagged
The FADE OUT at the end doesn't serve much more of a purpose than to signify the script is over. The transition to the closing credits could be an iris or something else entirely. I might be misremembering, but I think the original Star Wars trilogy pre-lapped the theme and cut to the credits?
At the opposite end of the spectrum was Return of the King which just... wouldn't... stop... fading... out. I think the Collector's Edition box set had a whole extra DVD of additional endings
The left-justified FADE IN is basically a salutation letting you know you're on the first page of the script. The FADE OUT actually gets in my way because I like to have the denouement leak into the closing credits (because I wouldn't want them squished into an unreadable mess if the movie ever gets made and makes its way to TV).
I still put FADE OUT on the last line, but nothing is really fading there.
- I have the same approach to FADE OUT: Some endings fade out, others don't. It depends. It should be a creative choice, not mandatory.
No one is really arguing to run the stop sign. They are debating two things:
- What is a Stop Sign? - What does running that Stop Sign mean?
For me, asides, unfilmables, wrylies, bold headers and a whole host of other things are not Stop Signs. When I read reviews that contain stuff like - you used a wrylie, there's an orphan, there's an aside, I generally learn nothing as it carries the same weight as if someone had said you used a verb or a noun. Worse, when I read comment that concludes the writing is bad because of the existence of these elements, I think the commenter is simply inaccurate and hope the writer ignores them.
Same for things like V.O. and O.S. e.g., When someone points out their existence - like they're inherently a bad thing, (or a Stop Sign in this analogy) it's useless - because they're not stop signs. Conversely, if someone is making an argument that - hey. I think the scene would work better if the character actually said the line versus just thinking it because (insert reason)- then I'm listening. I may end up disagreeing - but I'm listening.
And then there is the weight given to the things that are reasonably construed as Stop Signs. As an example, I think scripts should generally start with FADE IN. That being said I can remember a single instance where I noticed if it was there or not. It's a nit and should be given the weight of one in terms of the overall writing.
Damn, you guys are killing me! This stuff is so simple, it's just shocking how it keeps coming up...over and over again.
Why would anyone debate what a stop sign or red stop light is...or for? It's universally recognized as 1 of the most important "rules" of the road, and they are 1 of the main reasons why we can all drive in relative safety.
Why would anyone debate what running the stop sign or red stop light would mean? It's pretty obvious that if you run stop signs and stop lights, while traffic is around you, you'll cause/be in accidents and you'll get tickets for the infractions.
What I tried to bring up is how this universal driving rule really doesn't matter at all when others aren't on the streets (and cops aren't watching to give you a ticket).
Stop signs and stop lights aren't bad things. Actually, they're great things and without them, driving would be a true nightmare.
Rules aren't bad things, either. They're there for a reason.
Somehow you and others have this strange thing in your heads that screenwriting "rules" and formatting are bad things and inhibitors.
Orphans, asides, wrylies, and the like do not fall into any rules that I'm aware of, so I'm confused how/why they keep popping up on threads like these.
Orphans, asides, wrylies, and the like do not fall into any rules that I'm aware of, so I'm confused how/why they keep popping up on threads like these.
Because you continue to treat them as stop signs (rules). See your comments on any OWC ever.
On other such threads, you've admitted several times that things I have said on your scripts have helped you and many things I've brought up, you still do to this very day, although you wouldn't say exactly what those things are.
Give The Kid some credit.
I was waiting for that Yes that one thing is breaking up my action into shots. I still definitely do that. I said largely, not entirely.
Like your review of my last script that included a lot of comments about my use of (O.S.), (V.O.), and wrylies. I’m happy with the way I use them, and it isn’t incorrect so I don’t worry about that criticism.
Because you continue to treat them as stop signs (rules). See your comments on any OWC ever.
Dave, c'mon now. In your above quote, you're insinuating that "stop signs" and "rules" are bad.
In my analogy, I said the opposite. I said they are 1 of the most important reasons that driving isn't utter chaos and life threatening.
I also said when other cars aren't on the road, these things don't do anything to prevent chaos and death, as in they don't really matter unless a cop sees you and gives you a ticket.
When you throw your work out to the world to see and read, any good reader "sees" when things are overlooked, done poorly, incorrectly, or just shouldn't be there.
An orphan by itself is not a problem at all...unless it's the result of poor writing or editing.
A wrylie here and there can be important to the script, but when used in excess, it's a deterrent to the read.
A smart, witty, unique aside can add to a script. Asides popping up all over the place is again a deterrent to the read.
I don't understand where the confusion is coming from.
Dave, c'mon now. In your above quote, you're insinuating that "stop signs" and "rules" are bad.
In my analogy, I said the opposite. I said they are 1 of the most important reasons that driving isn't utter chaos and life threatening.
I also said when other cars aren't on the road, these things don't do anything to prevent chaos and death, as in they don't really matter unless a cop sees you and gives you a ticket.
When you throw your work out to the world to see and read, any good reader "sees" when things are overlooked, done poorly, incorrectly, or just shouldn't be there.
An orphan by itself is not a problem at all...unless it's the result of poor writing or editing.
A wrylie here and there can be important to the script, but when used in excess, it's a deterrent to the read.
A smart, witty, unique aside can add to a script. Asides popping up all over the place is again a deterrent to the read.
I don't understand where the confusion is coming from.
Quite the contrary. I didn't say stop signs are bad. I said calling something a stop sign that is not one is bad. Please re-read my post.
You view certain things as stop signs that simply are not. Like wrylies as an example. Hope that is clearer.
I've never called anything a stop sign, other than an actual red stop sign, as in my analogy.
I don't know where you are coming from on me viewing certain things as stop signs, or what that even means.
I am now even more confused.
Hmm.
Try looking at your comments on the top 5 in the last OWC as an example. You treat VO, wrylies, etc. Like they are rule violations . By that, you merely note their existence in a script as if by their use the writer is doing something wrong.
I was waiting for that Yes that one thing is breaking up my action into shots. I still definitely do that. I said largely, not entirely.
Like your review of my last script that included a lot of comments about my use of (O.S.), (V.O.), and wrylies. I’m happy with the way I use them, and it isn’t incorrect so I don’t worry about that criticism.
Warren, I just looked back at my feedback for your "Crazy in Love" script. Then, I opened up the script, and did some quick counts, just to see if I was wrong in what I wrote.
Here's the quick tally (and it may be off, as I did this quickly)...9 page script with 10 VO's, 4 OS's, and 10 wrylies.
I don't know how anyone could argue that there aren't an awful alot of these 3 things for a short, and IMO, WAY TOO MANY!
Peeps liked your script. That is obvious, as it "won". I liked it too, and gave it 3 out of 5 stars. If you lost the vast majority of the wrylies and OS's, nothing in the story would change, you'd save half a page, and I would have given you 4 stars. The VO's are a personal choice and each one is necessary, if that's the route you wanted to go. For me, it was confusing at first, because of them, and secondly and maybe even more importantly, I don't think they'll work in a filmed version as you envision, but what do I know?
Warren, I just looked back at my feedback for your "Crazy in Love" script. Then, I opened up the script, and did some quick counts, just to see if I was wrong in what I wrote.
Here's the quick tally (and it may be off, as I did this quickly)...9 page script with 10 VO's, 4 OS's, and 10 wrylies.
I don't know how anyone could argue that there aren't an awful alot of these 3 things for a short, and IMO, WAY TOO MANY!
Peeps liked your script. That is obvious, as it "won". I liked it too, and gave it 3 out of 5 stars. If you lost the vast majority of the wrylies and OS's, nothing in the story would change, you'd save half a page, and I would have given you 4 stars. The VO's are a personal choice and each one is necessary, if that's the route you wanted to go. For me, it was confusing at first, because of them, and secondly and maybe even more importantly, I don't think they'll work in a filmed version as you envision, but what do I know?
See, mate - you just created a stop sign - number of wrylies. VO, etc 10 is not too many.
Try looking at your comments on the top 5 in the last OWC as an example. You treat VO, wrylies, etc. Like they are rule violations . By that, you merely note their existence in a script as if by their use the writer is doing something wrong.
Dave, maybe we both have too much time on our hands today, but I think you know I enjoy a good friendly debate, so i have to continue.
A VO is a personal choice a writer can make, and it's not often used. If that's the route the writer chooses, then that's all fine and dandy with me, and every single time a character gives us a VO, it needs to be shown, obviously. There's nothing wrong with using VO's, and it rarely even comes up, as most characters speak out loud.
Wrylies are another beast altogether, and IMO most peeps do not really know how to uee them correctly and/or effectively. A wrylie here and a wrylie there is not a problem, if used correctly, if used in a way that enhances the read, and/or if it helps the reader understand/see something clearer.