I've run into a problem introducing multiple characters for a scene. Actually, I've run into it a couple times now, so would like help. Suggestions or links to scripts where it is done well would be appreciated.

The issue is introducing multiple characters in a scene. Let me give 2 examples: a poker game, and a combat unit on patrol.

Let's start with the poker game. Suppose there are 6 players. And then say there is another person watching the game. Maybe a guy whose wife's playing, or he is a dealer. Each of these players has a personality that will come into play in the scene. I was able to describe them in a line or two. The problem was when to provide the description.

I didn't want to overwhelm the reader with a string of descriptions. Kind of ruins the flow. So I simply said how many were in the game, and then described them first chance I got, in other words when they did something. As it is a card game, this mostly went in order of the game.

The person who read this for me had a problem with all these people being introduced throughout the scene. It confused him a little. He suggested using less players.

That would make things easier, but it is very limiting. There generally are 6 players in this kind of card game, and they each had a role to play in the scene.

The next time I encountered the problem was a scene that begins with 5 soldiers and 2 guides on patrol. They are all necessary to the story. The way I have it written now has an action block introducing the guides, names no description except age. Then I have the soldiers introduced in one action block, no description except age.

But I proceed to describe the characters over the next pages as they each say or do something. Does that make sense?

I guess I would sum up the problem as this: trying to present the information so that it is clear and formatted right, without interrupting the flow of the story.

Any help appreciated!

Kevin

Kevin, my advice is never to remove characters because something about having them is difficult.

Pretend you're watching an actual movie.  When characters first appear onscreen, they are rarely immediately named...that all comes when there is an opportunity to let the audience in on who they are exactly, or at least what their name is.

In a written script, we get teh opportunity to "help" our readers along by naming each and every character immediately.  Some find it difficult to remember everyone, especially when numerous characters are intro'd togetehr, but who cares, really...you know?  Assuming these characters have pivitol roles in the script, there will be plenty of time for your readers to get to know them.

So, my advice is always to intro them immediately as they are first shown onscreen.  IMo, you don't need alot of detail when describing characters, because whatever you're going to throw out there, should become clear based on their actions throughout the script.  If you need to tell us what they're wearing or a physical description, just do it and don't worry about yuor readers having issues associating with everyone.

Here's one example from Predator:

INT. HELICOPTER - NIGHT                                5

         Illuminated by the eerie red glow of NIGHT LIGHTS, are
         SEVEN MEN, dressed in jungle camouflage, soft hats and
         camouflage face-makeup.  They wear no identity badges
         or insignias.  The man are checking their WEAPONS,
         making last minute adjustments to their GEAR.

         The compartment reverberates with the NOISE of the
         THUMPING ROTORS and the ROAR of air from the open
         doors.

         BLAIN, weapons and ordinance specialist, a frightening
         bull of a man, a 240 pound killer, removes from his
         shirtpocket a think PLUG OF TOBACCO.  He looks across
         at:

         MAC, a huge bear of a man, black, holding am M-60
         MACHINE GUN.  Blain holds out the tobacco to Mac who
         refuses with a gentle shake of the head, a knowing
         smile, he knows what's coming.

         Holding the plug between his teeth Blain yanks free
         from his shoulder scabbard a wicked, ten inch COMBAT
         KNIFE.  Placing the razor sharp blade next to his lips
         he slices through the plug as if it were butter.  He
         chews throughtfully.

         Seated by the open doorway is RAMIREZ, a slight,
         angular man, an East L.A. streetwise Chicano.

         Adding a final piece of camouflage TAPE to his pack
         HARNESS, he looks up and smiles, faking a throw and
         the bulleting the tape to:

         HAWKINS, the radioman and medic, Irish, street-tough,
         reading a rolled-up magazine, as if he were a rush hour
         commuter.  He snags the tape with an instinctual snap

                                                      (CONTINUED)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         REVISED - "HUNTER" - 4/17/86                           9

                                                                *

   5     CONTINUED:                                             5

         of the wrist, continuing to read for a moment before
         looking up, grinning at Ramirez, his boyish, eager
         face belying the rugged professional beneath.  He
         turns his gaze to the man next to him:

         BILLY, the Kit Carson Scout, an American Indian, proud,
         stoic, a man of quiet strength and simplicity,
         carefully replacing the FIRING MECHANISM of his M-203,
         working its action several times.  He looks up with a
         smile at Hawkins.

                                 HAWKINS
                         (shouting)
                  Hey, Billy, how many marines
                  does it take to eat a squirrel?

         Billy looks back, shaking his head, uncomprehending.

                                 HAWKINS
                  Two.  One to eat it and one
                  to watch for cars.

         Hawkins laughs heartily at his joke.

There's no 'one solution fit's all' answer to your question. It all depends, on how important the characters are, in how many scenes they appear in, if they have speaking parts etc.

This topic of conversation comes up atleast once a yeaer; a bunch of us argue the best way to introduce a crowded room.  I just want to start out by saying that those who disagree with me are a-holes!

If you introduce six people, seated around a poker table in one sentence (a list), no one will remember them.  It's too much information to throw at the readers at once.  Instead, list one or two of the characters at a time, doing something.

Quoted Text INT.  SMALL ROOM - NIGHT DAVID (55) shuffles cards.  His short pudgy fingers (like the rest of him) fight the cards.  PAUL (45), watches him from the adjacent seat.  The two are dressed in beefeater T-shirts.  Sweat pours from their faces.              PAUL You having problems with those cards--?              DAVID I'm fine. A few of the cards fall on the green cloth table where chips are piled up neatly.  David quickly scoops them up and continues shuffling.              PAUL Really?  From here, it's looks like a battle--              DAVID I'm fine! STEVIE (55) stands at a nearby card table.  Sandwiches sit on paper plates.  He looks over the buffet, annoyed.  He tucks his tie into his shirt pocket.              STEVE Why is everything here on white?              DAVID Because Muriel bought white bread.  That's why? Steve places a sandwich on a plate and turns back to the table.              STEVE It's not healthy for you.  They bleach all the nutrients out. CARL (50) finishes a bottle of beer.  He places the empty next to him on the table, next to its four brothers.  He's very unkept              CARL That's true.  I read that in Reader's Digest.              DAVID You want whole wheat, you bring the sandwiches next time.  Tonight, they're on white bread. More cards slip out from the deck.              PAUL I hear whole grains gives you a better grip on the cards when you shuffle--              DAVID Shut the hell up!  Who's in?

If you introduce them separately, people remember them.  If you wrote that PAUL (55), DAVID (65), STEVE (55) and CARL (50) sit around the table, the reader can't identify with them.


Phil

Although that is definitely a good example from a pro script that basically everyone knows, it also shows how things have changed over time...at least they've hopefully changed.

There is so much detail given there in that example...too much detail, IMO.  It's almost comical to me the way everyone is described...but maybe that's just me.  "A bull of a man"...and..."a bear of a man"...HaHa...which one is bigger and tougher?

  But the general principal is what i was referring to in a roundabout way.

Intro the "group" first gernerically. Then, go through the line of characters, if that's what yuo want to do.  Or, just intro each as they have something to do or say.

Quoted from Dreamscale Although that is definitely a good example from a pro script that basically everyone knows, it also shows how things have changed over time...at least they've hopefully changed. There is so much detail given there in that example...too much detail, IMO.  It's almost comical to me the way everyone is described...but maybe that's just me.  "A bull of a man"...and..."a bear of a man"...HaHa...which one is bigger and tougher?   But the general principal is what i was referring to in a roundabout way. Intro the "group" first gernerically. Then, go through the line of characters, if that's what yuo want to do.  Or, just intro each as they have something to do or say.

Was just thinking the very same thing when I pasted it - but like you said it's there just to illustrate a point.

Quoted from Dreamscale So, my advice is always to intro them immediately as they are first shown onscreen.

Jeff's a good writer. Though, we seldom agree. Machine gunning character intro's to start your script is not a good idea IMO. You haven't been here as long as some of us, I'll take it you never read AJR's GRAND AVENUE? He got slaughtered for character intro's in the beginning, yet, it is one of the more promissing scripts I've ever read here. Its been yanked, because he is working hard to get it to film.

I think you can intro characters. For lack of a better word, in a sexy way. Only describe what we have to know. If it soesn't pertain to the story, who gives a fuck if he's fat or has a beard.

I'm tooting my own horn now. You've read So Pretty. I intro the two main characters off the bat. The other three after the challenge is offered. I think it flowed well that way. Too many intros out of the gate is a sloppy read IMO.

hope this helps.

James

It's nice if you happen to be the director AND the writer. I just thought of a script to look at that has a scene similar to what I was thinking of: Reservoir Dogs. And I found it online.

Unfortunately, QT provides no description.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/25164568/Reservoir-Dogs-Screenplay

Mr Black, Mr White and so forth. Then right to the dialogue.

Thanks Jeff.

Edit: thanks JW

I think I will try to avoid machine gun introductions, but make sure things are clear. I don't generally have problems with character descriptions. I can usually come up with something that paints a picture in a sentence. The main issue for me is lining these all up at once, or spacing them a little.

A secondary issue is this: sometimes I don't think much description is needed. That topic is addressed elsewhere here. But for me, for example, if I have a "gang of youths led by a big bully", that should be close to enough for the director. Let him fill in the blanks based on what cast is available.

Edit 2: thanks Eoin; good example. I think Jeff is right that it might be a little too descriptive, but still a great example.

Phil, the method you suggest is actually close to what I did, though my descriptions were slightly more and the action involved required things to be a little more spread out.

Quoted from leitskev It's nice if you happen to be the director AND the writer. I just thought of a script to look at that has a scene similar to what I was thinking of: Reservoir Dogs. And I found it online. Unfortunately, QT provides no description. http://www.scribd.com/doc/25164568/Reservoir-Dogs-Screenplay Mr Black, Mr White and so forth. Then right to the dialogue. Thanks Jeff.

To his credit, those are some pretty damn easy names to remember.

James, I wasn't recommending using a "machine gun" intro, and yes, I did read and review AJR's script.

But, as I said, words on a page and images on a screen are 2 completely different beasts, and that's not even taking into consideration that many times, characters in a filmed version are never actually named, to the point where the audience actually knows what their names are.  You know?

And giving physical descriptions to characters when they don't come into play or matter is usually a waste, otehr than to give readers a visual picture, so that they can play they script out in their heads.

Can you do it this way.

MR WHITE(35), MR BLACK(40), MR YELLOW(29), MR GREEN(30), NICE GUY(30), AND BOSSMAN(50) are seated at the table drinking coffee.

ALICE(45) the foul mouthed, life hardened waitress refills the cup of Mr White.

Mr White, his dark hair greased and his attire gangster, is as slick as the smile he flashes the waitress.

Bossman, broad shouldered and square jawed, bald head shaved to a shine, glares at White with cold, blue eyes.

    "Pay attention to business, White!"

Mr Black is a wiry figure of constant kinetic energy.

    "I'll take some coffee, Alice."

Mr Green is fat enough to put his chair to test. He lights a cigarette with meaty hands and admonishes Black.

     "Last thing you need is coffee."

You can definitely do it that way, but your example is definitely in the realm of a machine gun intro, IMO.

Quoted from Dreamscale So, my advice is always to intro them immediately as they are first shown onscreen.

That's what you're supposed to do.  BUT that doesn't mean you have to introduce all the characters within three seconds of a scene.

Quoted from leitskev Phil, the method you suggest is actually close to what I did, though my descriptions were slightly more and the action involved required things to be a little more spread out.

I just cranked out that poker scene.  If I was actually writing this scene, as part of a script, it would've gone on a lot longer.

A few years back, I wrote a script where many of the characters had platinum-colored hair.  I introduced a bunch of them early on and then brought a busload of them together in a conference.  I mentioned/introduced them as I needed them.


Phil

Yep, agreed, Phil.  As I tried to say, you can intro the "group" generically, kind of like the Predator example, then go from there into more detail as you actually intro each of the characters, based on what they're doing...assuming they're doing something that warrents an intro.

Just making sure what I did above is acceptable. The difference between that and Phil's example is that I gave a quick listing of the characters, before fleshing out their introduction. The difference is that in this way, when I open the scene, right away I say "six guys are playing cards," or "five guys on patrol," and list them. This lets you get the overall picture before you begin to describe.

You guys may suggest that I just say "six guys play cards" then introduce them when they do something. Actually, that is what I originally did, and it caused the confusion with the reader because the last of the players was not introduced til 2 pages later, so it seemed like a new guy popped in to him. Granted, this was not a very experienced script reader, but I think his problem could still be an indicator, since a reader who is experienced but is reading tons of scripts could have the same problem.

So in my next scene where it was a factor, with the soldiers, I used the technique above. a) list the characters in caps; b) describe their character as soon as possible in the next page or two.

Ouch, I hate that intro. I would forget them all in a matter of two lines. Give them something to do. One continually stirs their coffee, obviously nervous. Another fogs up the glass on the window and draws a smiley face in it. Like a child.

To me, its not how they look, but what they do. I wouldn't roll with that opener the way it's written.

We can meet two, then the waitress, give her some smart dialogue, then meet the others at the table.

James

That was not a real story JW, just something I whipped up here to illustrate. My point was to make sure I can list the characters formally first, then describe them over the next couple pages when they do stuff. That post was just to sample the format, like Phil's further up.  In a real scene there would be a lot more going on.

this makes me want to read Predator...actually, I'm going to read it tonite.  Great movie.
i also had an issue about introducing multiple characters..now i can see clearly.
you guys rock!!

I guess I should weigh in on this...

Leitskev - read Fast Times At Ridgemont High - I think it's posted here on the site. That's what I tried to emulate in my re-write of Grand Avenue. The first draft had a POV passing the characters as they were introduced and that was roundly panned, and rightly so. The version we have now settles on a couple of characters at a time and describes them doing something, like Phil said. And the main character introduces them in V.O., because as Jeff said, you have to distinguish between when the reader meets the character and when the audience does.

And I'm going to say something controversial here - who cares if your reader loses track of the characters? We read each others' work as a way of helping, but none of us are the final arbiter. And professional readers do coverage for actors and directors, who don't give a flying fig how it "reads" - they care how it looks. So if you have a shot of 12 people in a scene, and cinematically the director loves it, then how the writer introduces them (on paper) is secondary, and what's important is how the characters introduce each other (i.e., when and where they address each other with names). And it's a professional reader's job to go back and take notes if they have to.

And thanks Jwent for the kind words...

AJR

Thanks for chipping in AJR.

There were a couple aspects to the problem for me.

The first issue is making sure formatting is acceptable. Formatting rules have generally evolved to be what they are for a reason. But sometimes they are a handicap, and complying with them can force writing to be clunky or awkward.

The problem I have with what you are saying about not caring what the reader experiences is this: as a spec script writer, if you lose the reader, you are done. It never gets to a director, producer, actor. So while we are making a blueprint for a film, and blueprints are not designed for the entertainment of the reader, we really do have to make sure we engage the reader.

Formatting rules are mostly designed with blueprinting in mind. But spec writers really have the burden of telling a story with the written word, not very different from a novelist. These forms are somewhat at odds with each other.

I want someone to be able to read my script and have it be clear, smooth flowing, entertaining. That means I want it to seem as little like a blueprint as I can. Which means I want to know exactly where the format boundaries are, where things can be stretched without causing a professional reader to drop the script due to a format violation. Does that make sense?

So what I have decided on this question is this: 1) avoid introducing multiple chars where you can; 2) when you do, set up the scene generally so the reader gets an image in his/her head. For example, "six players in a card game," or "nine cops in the back of the SWAT truck on the way to the hostage crisis." 3) then introduce them in more detail with some type of action that makes them distinguishable.  Try to get these intros done within a couple pages.

This is what I going to try to go with for now, but I remain open to advice and ideas.

Thanks man! I will check out Grand when I can.

leitskev,

True, you never want to lose the reader, but you do need to make a distinction between the professional reader and us, reading as fellow writers. What I should have said is who cares if we, as peers, lose track of your characters? A professional reader will know the difference between how it reads and how it will look up on the screen.

That said, if you are too haphazard and your formatting is unwieldy, so as to create a mish-mosh of images in the professional reader's mind? Then yes, you've lost them - but that's bad writing, not too many characters.

That is a good point. I wish we could get a professional reader to chime in. My thinking is that if it doesn't work for most readers here, it won't work for a professional reader. Here's why: while the reader might be more of a pro, more experienced(and that's assuming it's not just an intern), that pro might be reading hundreds of scripts a week.  I can only imagine the kind of fatigue they experience. So I think you want to make the read as smooth and easy as possible.

But I recognize your point, and would love to hear from someone who has worked as a reader. Thanks man!

I agree with what Anthonry said here, and I'm glad he went back and reworded what he meant about pro vs average readers...but I want to go a a step further...

First of all, when someone says "Pro Reader", don't think that means they're any different or better than good readers in here...or anywhere.  many times they're far from it.

Same goes with Producers...maybe even more so.  Just cause they're successful and have cash, it doesn't mean they have any special abilities to "know" what works best with a script that's going to be a movie...and many times, they obviuosly don't.

BUT, I think the point Anthony was making was that one can't assume the majority of readers on these or other such boards are astute readers, and just because many don't like/can't follow/don't understand the way something's setup or formatted, don't panic, cause chances are good that you know as much or more than they do, and therefor you probably don't need to worry about what they can or can't follow.

I don't mean to put words into anyone's mouth, but hopefully I am right in what I'm saying for AJR...and I know I'm right in general.   ;D ;D ;D

Just always keep in mind that a filmed version is so different from a written version in what works, what doesn't work, and what you'll actually see, hear, and "get", and as far as I'm concerned, if your script is solidly written with these things in mind, you're golden, come film time.

What I'm saying is that every writer who read Grand Avenue, almost to a person and regardless of whether they liked it overall or not, commented on the amount of the characters - and not one of the professionals who've read it - coverage readers, producers, agents, managers, directors and actors - have said a word about it... (0:

That is very interesting! Now I def want to see it, check out how you handled those intro's. Are there scenes where a bunch are introduced in one scene, which was the problem that prompted this post/

Yes Leit, a bunch of them are introduced in a bar fairly early on and in somewhat rapid succession. Unfortunately it's no longer up on SS, but I sent you a PM regarding it...