Not saying it can never work out, Sandra, just that it usually doesn't. For me anyway. I mean, if we're near the end of page 1, and nothing important has happened and no dialogue takes place, that's a long page 1.

"He walked into a dark, empty house, unlived in for months. A mouse scampered across the floor. Curtains blew in a drafty window. Shadows from swaying trees danced along a wall of peeling wallpaper.

He took off his coat, threw it on the chair. A cloud of dust is loosed into the air. He checks the light switch. Nothing. A small table by the plush sofa, a draw partly open. He investigates, opens the draw, searches. A small black address book. He places in his pocket. A noise upstairs. He stops, listens. the mouse again scampers."

It's just too much. A whole bunch of stuff to envision before you are even hooked into the story, before you even know if it's worth the energy to envision.

I'm gonna try really hard to get through all the scripts in the next day or two. So far (ie, about 5 random scripts in), I'm finding them a bit tough to get through because they're fairly overwritten, IMHO. Still, a couple of the stories have stuck with me and will make my list

Good job, everybody! As predicted, I wish I had entered

Quoted from leitskev Not saying it can never work out, Sandra, just that it usually doesn't. For me anyway. I mean, if we're near the end of page 1, and nothing important has happened and no dialogue takes place, that's a long page 1. "He walked into a dark, empty house, unlived in for months. A mouse scampered across the floor. Curtains blew in a drafty window. Shadows from swaying trees danced along a wall of peeling wallpaper. He took off his coat, threw it on the chair. A cloud of dust is loosed into the air. He checks the light switch. Nothing. A small table by the plush sofa, a draw partly open. He investigates, opens the draw, searches. A small black address book. He places in his pocket. A noise upstairs. He stops, listens. the mouse again scampers." It's just too much. A whole bunch of stuff to envision before you are even hooked into the story, before you even know if it's worth the energy to envision.

You should write off the cuff more often, Kevin. I actually enjoyed that!!! But you know me.  

Sandra

I think a big problem with a lot of the scripts is that a lot of the writers do not understand what gothic horror is.  It's not just a location or a time-period thing.  It's mood.  Gothic horror should terrify you without the fear of violence or death.

When Eddie Pagan was the guest of Simplyscripts Radio, he explained Latin Horror as the victims fearing for their souls as opposed to the fear of physical harm.  Gothic horror is very much the same.  When you have one character chasing another character with a knife/gun/chainsaw/whatever, you left the realm of gothic horror.


Phil

You're right to an extent, Phil, but that's the issue: mood. Very hard to establish it. One of the ways is setting. Or at least that was the common effort here. So we ended up with a lot of description.

I think Gothic is open to interpretation. It arose, I think, in the early 19th century as a reaction to rationalism. It came at a time when the world was being scientifically classified and studied, when emphasis was on the future, on progress. Gothic reaction represented a longing for the past, for esoteric knowledge, for mystery and mysterious places. The scientific world did not believe in the soul; the Gothic world is obsessed with it.

The Gothic movement flairs up repeatedly ever since it began. Every time science makes a leap and threatens who we are, we long for the past, the mysterious. The same psychological forces make UFOS so popular.

I think it's natural for us to want to describe a Gothic setting, and frankly that can be fun to do to, but it gets our stories into trouble when we start describing things and actions before we draw people into the story.

I would actually say the way Phil opens his stories is the way you want to open a story, Gothic or other. I was going to use a link to one of yours earlier today in a review, but I couldn't remember where it was. It's the one that starts out with the car accident in the woods, where the girls is saved by the druid. That's how you start a script1

Kevin, and everyone else...

I disagree with what you're saying about "too much desciption" out of the gate.

You have to understand that many of the classic Gothic Horror movies of the 60's and 70's...or any good "moody" movie, all begin with the setting, and keep in mind that 1/2 a page, in theory, equals 30 seconds of film.  That's not too much to "set the scene", or mood, IMO, at least.

Now, obviously, I'm not talking about huge blocks of prose with no action, but setting the scene is always important IMO, and especially when the mood and feel is so important.

Quoted from dogglebe I think a big problem with a lot of the scripts is that a lot of the writers do not understand what gothic horror is.  It's not just a location or a time-period thing.  It's mood.  Gothic horror should terrify you without the fear of violence or death. When Eddie Pagan was the guest of Simplyscripts Radio, he explained Latin Horror as the victims fearing for their souls as opposed to the fear of physical harm.   Phil

Yes, Phil. I have to agree absolutely. To me, and I might be wrong, but it's absolutely about mood. Deep down in the soul cutting fear. Beyond just physical pain fear, but fear of not "completing one's mission" fear of "past regrets", fear of "one's own dark shadowy negative parts in one's own soul"... etc... It's where all these different aspects come together and be they physical things or not, they present themselves as psychological manifestations to some degree and if it's done well, can be passed on to the reader.

Like in Poe's Amontillado:

Fortunato's desire to taste the wine and give his appraisal overrode his common sense. He couldn't even see what was coming. How many of us can relate to that-- with our own unfortunate desires?

To me, desire and passion are two things that are loaded in gothic and what it means to me.

Sandra

I'm gonna make my case against that, Jeff, though I understand your position.

The 1/2 page/thirty second comparison is what's leading you astray, IMO. Looking at films as blueprints is a choice that puts your script at a disadvantage in the competition to get produced. The task as a spec script writer is to grab the reader into the story as quickly as possible. Every second that goes by without that happening is a lost opportunity.

I'm not saying that a half page is too much, I'm not drawing a particular line. But I would guess that a half page is risky. Especially if there are a lot of little objects or actions that the reader has to envision.

Get the reader into the story as quick as possible. Turning words into images is work for the reader. Asking him to make that investment before he even knows if he;s at all interested in the story is risky. Set the mood and the location as quick as possible, and get to the story. The goal is vertical reading: the readers eye should move down the page as quickly as possible.

There were a few well written scripts here that I felt exhausted already before we even met the first character, certainly before the character did anything significant or said anything. It's very similar to when writers introduce too many characters(that was not a problem in this OWC). It's a lot of work to remember them all and visualize them each time they come on.

Quoted from leitskev You're right to an extent, Phil, but that's the issue: mood. Very hard to establish it. One of the ways is setting. Or at least that was the common effort here. So we ended up with a lot of description.

I disagree.  You can set up mood anywhere.  If you can't do it in a modern day setting, then you can't do it in a cemetery at night.  At the risk of whoring myself (I hate whoring myself), I recommend that you read Linus.  That was gothic horror set in a modern day park.  The characters made it gothic horror, not the setting.

Quoted from leitskev I think it's natural for us to want to describe a Gothic setting, and frankly that can be fun to do to, but it gets our stories into trouble when we start describing things and actions before we draw people into the story.

I think it's lazy to pick the gothiest setting we can find for a gothic horror story.  Cemetery.  Haunted house.  It's been done to death because it's easy.  Try writing a gothic horror piece that takes place in a Chuckie Cheese.  That takes work, but could be done.

Quoted from leitskev I would actually say the way Phil opens his stories is the way you want to open a story, Gothic or other. I was going to use a link to one of yours earlier today in a review, but I couldn't remember where it was. It's the one that starts out with the car accident in the woods, where the girls is saved by the druid. That's how you start a script1

Well, since you brought it up (you know how much I hate whoring myself), the script is A Druid's Guide to the Northeast and it's a sequel, of sorts, to Linus.


Phil

Kev, I hear what you're saying...I seriously do, but I definitely disagree with the point you're trying to make.

Bascially, you're saying that you're against visual, STRONG writing.  You're also saying that the "average" reader doesn't have the capacity to "see" visuals, based on visual writing.

You're saying that it's more important to skip strong visuals and go right into strong story...or any story, for that matter, because we all know the vast majority of any story, be it Pro, amateur, or actual filmed movie, is reltively weak and most likely downright lame.

IMo, the difference between a bad, decent, and god script, is the quality of writing...and more importantly, the successful attempt at strong, real visuals, that ANY reader can relate to.

Obvioulsy, the better the story, the better the script, but a strong, unique story is very hard to come  by.  Why not set everything up with strong visuals that jumpstart the read?

I purposely did not use a haunted house or, God forbid, a castle in my script. No cemetery either. To me, Gothic is connection to the past, though. I do have some stuff in the setting of my story that does that, or tries to.

I did want to make sure my script was not only Gothic, but that most would understand it as Gothic. I mean, we could have Gothic Horror on a starship in the future, but few will call it Gothic, so it would fail on that ground.

Druid's Guide, yes, that's the one! The opening scene, that's how you bring someone into the story. A good comparison. Had you done it the wrong way, you could have spent half a page describing the dark woods where the dear and the antelope roam, the owl's eyes reflect in the night, the badger tests the idea of crossing the road, a star shoots across the sky, and wind whisper their secret songs. But you didn't. You brought us into the story. That's what a lot of folks didn't do here. The put a lot of energy into establishing a "Gothic" setting. Understandable, I just think they're better off getting to the story. Don't give the reader the chance to drift off. Grab and don't let go.

Quoted from Dreamscale Why not set everything up with strong visuals that jumpstart the read?

Because the public at large have been public schooled and schooled by media. They grew/grow up on Brady Bunch and Glee. They cannot think, they cannot question, they cannot understand what eight on its side means if you write it into a script.

IOW: You need to dumb everything down and give them a hamburger and a coke and make them happy.

Sandra

Jeff, an interviewer once asked Keith Richards why he does not do more lead vocals with the Rolling Stones, since he has a great voice(supposedly). His answer: what would Mick do?

You want us to establish strong visuals. I say leave it for the director. You have your job, he has his, and Mick has his.

Do I think you should describe strong visuals that will succeed in film? Yes, Yes, Yes!

What I'm saying is that it should not take a half page to do that, and I'm saying you don't need to describe everything and the kitchen sink in a scene.

Let's say the scene takes place in Jeff's bedroom. There's no reason to describe everything in the room. Only something that really tells us something critical about Jeff. Like that big naked poster of Rosie O'Donnel on the ceiling.

And I'll take in a step further. Maybe the writer can think of 7 things in that room that could really tell us something about Jeff(like the shoes in Black Swan). Maybe all 7 of things are superbly revealing and give us wonderful insights. But don't do it. It's too much. Get us to the story as soon as you can.

A good opening or establishing shot is important. But then get to the story.

And I don't the problem is that readers cannot visualize. The problem is that they can, and if you ask them to visualize a dozen things before there is anything going on, you'll lose them. Because they are not yet in the story, their mind will drift off. Game over. Tough to get 'em back now.

I'm not saying I am good at doing this. But the pro scripts get you into the story within a half page.

Sandra, this is not about dumming down a script. This is about making the reader want to keep going. Jeff should agree with that, I think, as he stopped most reads on page 1. A good script won't let you quit.

Ok, I have to get some work done! I'll check back in an hour. Love you guys, later.

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. Because the public at large have been public schooled and schooled by media. They grew/grow up on Brady Bunch and Glee. They cannot think, they cannot question, they cannot understand what eight on its side means if you write it into a script. IOW: You need to dumb everything down and give them a hamburger and a coke and make them happy. Sandra

Sandra so true, and sad. People have no idea how important learning (or the ability to study) is.
On top of that inability is a tremendous amount of false data swirling around as well in so many different subjects.