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 found this to be an interesting article on different styles of screenwriting, which the author categorizes as "epic," "moderate" and "lean." He uses the screenplays of Walter Hill to demonstrate his points.
Per the article, I think the LEAN approach is effective in some situations - especially when dealing with action - but I find whole scripts written like that annoying to read.
That isn't to say other people don't like it, but personally I would put a script down if it was written as a list of single words. It's cool and novel that someone did but I wouldn't want to see it become a trend.
What do you mean that Walter Hill write Alien with David Giler? Alien was written by Dan O'Bannon, story by Ronald Shusett. Am I misreading something here?
I think I'm LEAN. I've had complaints about my incomplete sentences. The example scripts rarely break their lines of prose. I don't like that. Especially Alien. I think you should use the full width of the page. And rarely go over three lines IMO. But, try to break action where it makes sense. Like mini pragraphs.
I came to SS not understanding certain things, so my action lines were way, way too long(and we're not even talking dialogue!). Over a period of learning, I got things pretty close to a bare minimum. But I've also decided it's time to start adding some description back, even the dreaded unfilmable, selectively chosen. But I do this with a purpose, and the coverage experience influenced that.
People, whether Pros or amateurs, read scripts fast. Very few if any will come anywhere near Jeff when it comes to absorbing stuff. That's just a fact, and we need to address it when writing.
In the coverage I had, there a few instances where the reader got things wrong. I went back to the script to see if it was unclearly written, and it was not. When someone is reading a script fast, you have to accept there will be mistakes. But if you know this when writing, you sometimes might want to take that extra step to make sure the reader got it right. You pick and choose your moments, of course, but what's worse: having the reader think "that half a line is unfilmable" or having the reader get it wrong?
I also found the car chase scene in that article interesting. Man, imagine what that scene looks like with all the Int.s and EXt.s? What flows better? What captures the feel of the scene better? And that's what we want in our scripts, to give the reader our story, get them to see what we see. All those slugs cluttering that scene would be a crime against story telling.
Slugs should be your bestest friends...Period! Embrace them, hang out with them...party with them. They will make your script sing if you nail it and get it down.
What do you mean that Walter Hill write Alien with David Giler? Alien was written by Dan O'Bannon, story by Ronald Shusett. Am I misreading something here?
Jeff, please tell me you've seen Anchorman. Hence the new avatar. I just like changing it every once in a while.
Walter Hill and David Giler were brought on as script doctors, and by all indications, their contributions to the final film were huge. Their version is pretty much the one Ridley Scott filmed. Hill and Giler were credited as producers, not writers, and I'm not sure of why exactly that was. But I know its fairly typical that big budget films can go through small armies of writers, many of which never get mentioned in the credits. Here is their script for Alien:
But for a funny look at O'Bannon's original script, check out this article that Sniper posted earlier in the week that looks at early versions of well-known movies. Alien(or Starbeast, as it was called) is one of the subjects.
O'Bannon died last year so he ain't got shit to say anymore. When Alien first came out Giler and Hill were the credited writers but O'Bannon took the thing to arbetration and eventually got the writing credits (which is not entirely unfair - Hill and Giler made the script a much better read but the overall story didn't change all that much).
Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
Oh, fu*k off! No-one comes close to Jeff's level of absorption? Kevin and Jeff the same person? Let me say this clearly: being incredibly anal (and largely truculent) does not a good reviewer make. Heretic, bert, Col (off the top of my head) ABSORB a script. Seriously, someone has to shout down this comment. No offence, Jeff, but it's this type of nonsensical view that's given you free rein to wreak havoc with your 'heightened' understanding.
In case anyone is curious: my remark on Jeff's absorption was not about his giving a better or more qualified review than anyone else. Or even that he understands a script better than anyone else. What I was alluding to was the fact that he reads a script very, very closely for details. Few do that.
Why did I single him out? Because I also know that Jeff takes a purist approach when it comes to things like unfilmables, and I think that's something that's well known here among regulars. I included 3 unfilmables in my last script, fully knowing that Jeff would have a problem with them. But I out them there so that the reader who is reading quickly, such as a coverage reader, would have no con fusion on those important scenes.
So the post above was just to explain that. Really fairly obvious.
I'll expand a little on my writing point with an example.
In a feature I recently wrote, I had a scene where a bomb was attached to a car cigarette lighter. There was a little subtlety in the dialogue, deliberately there, and I didn't want the audience to get confused as to which car had the bomb in it. In a film, there would be some closeups on the lighter, maybe some dramatic music. But I didn't want to include that kind of stuff in the script. What I did was add about a half a line making sure people reading understood the bomb was in this car.
I knew the half line was unfilmable. I knew Jeff would object to it, and he did. But I put the line in there so the reader working quickly would not be confused. I would rather risk the reader be annoyed by a tiny unfilmable than he be confused about what's going on. That was my point.
I'm not suggesting do it all over the place. But having them here and there in your script could be helpful. I had 3 in a 112 pages script.
Pages: 1, 
Author
Styles of writing
Logged
Locked Board