that's an unacceptable way to write a character description, right?  I read the new Tom Lennon and Ben Garant book and they do it that way, although they are famous screenwriters and I'm a nobody, so I'm sure it wouldn't fly.  

Thanks as always.

Extremely unacceptable!  Also, very lazy...

The problem with being this specific is that:

1. The person reading it may not like *Actor Name* or may not even know him/her;

2.  The person reading it may not like that actor.  If you describe the mysterious MISTER KING as 'think Sean Connery,' I would think that King is a lazy, pompous guy with a Scottish accent.

Describe your character as you see him.  Don't compare him to others.


Phil

Unacceptable might be too strong a word -- I mean, people do it -- but I suspect most would frown on it -- and worse they will roll their eyes at your naiveté and might even give up on your script right then and there.

On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with having an actor in mind.  That often helps.

If you are thinking Will Smith or Jack Black, then write to them.  Your character should talk like that and act like that -- and if you do it right, the reader might arrive at the same conclusion without your "help."

Quoted from dogglebe is a lazy, pompous guy with a Scottish accent.Phil

Huh?  Where'd lazy come from?  I can see the pompous and Scottish accent, but lazy?  maybe male chauvinist...

Quoted from dogglebe If you describe the mysterious MISTER KING as 'think Sean Connery,' I would think that King is a lazy, pompous guy with a Scottish accent. Phil

Retired, not lazy.

Quoted from DarrenJamesSeeley Retired, not lazy.

He is lazy.  He's plays himself, no matter what the role calls for.  Russian U-boat commander?  Let's do this smug and with a Scottish accent.  A Spanish highlander?  Let's do this smug and with a Scottish accent.

He doesn't play any other character.  That's why he's lazy.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe He is lazy. Phil

And rich...and well respected as an actor.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Sean Connery was HOT even into his 70s!!! Some people may have a broader range than others as far as acting goes, but few have the appeal that he did for that length of time and to both genders.

Connery has no range.  He played one character like many other actors in H'wood.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe The problem with being this specific is that: 1. The person reading it may not like *Actor Name* or may not even know him/her; 2.  The person reading it may not like that actor.  If you describe the mysterious MISTER KING as 'think Sean Connery,' I would think that King is a lazy, pompous guy with a Scottish accent. Describe your character as you see him.  Don't compare him to others. Phil

I agree here. Why? It's this simple:

I don't think anyone can really be stereotyped. Well, yes, kinduv, but not really. You know what I'm saying?

Yes, we have our type A personalities etc... and yes, I think we all fall into categories, but if we as writers become lazy and say, "think Sandra Elstree" or whatever, then I think we're going to lose a lot of ground. We need to always be asking:

What defines this character in a very distinct and critical way. Are they a shoe fanatic? And why and how? It's not just the shoes is it? What is it? On and on and on it goes...

We need to be asking questions. Hard questions. All of the time. If we simply paint some prototype on the page, I don't think we're working hard enough--

Not that the "think so and so" isn't acceptable in a pitch; I just don't think it's acceptable in our work at a base level and therefore in our scripts.

Sandra

I would say, if it works for you to do this then do it.  There's no law against it.  

However, it better really work because if it doesn't work it's going to fail miserably there's not going to be much of an in between.

Quoted from mcornetto I would say, if it works for you to do this then do it.  There's no law against it.   However, it better really work because if it doesn't work it's going to fail miserably there's not going to be much of an in between.

Kind of the same as writing specific music into your work. It can work, most definitely, but we had better hard thinketh it over and over, through it again and over again some many hundred times before we just hammer something out onto the page and consider it reasonable.

It's a firm belief of mine that everything-- every single god little thing that turns up on the page, if it's substantial, needs to prove itself. Then, it will remain. Like us and every one of our actions: If it's important, meaningful and lasting, it needs to prove its importance. If it scores well on our scales, it will rise to the surface of our consciousness and play out in our drama.

How it weighs out in the scheme of things? That's a weighty question. The variables are many. This is where it's our turn to play...

G-d give us a means.  

(Wish he'd given me more means). ...

But satisfaction is part of happiness and being grateful for what you get is all part and parcel of that same gift that He gives. ... Another life...

Another gift...

And so it goes...

If we can lift up our head and see how he's spryly given us life, with His good and bad included, we might eventually see our mothers and fathers, who winked at us, they hinted at us with half-blind eye. Why? Because they knew...

They knew that if we did our homework and if we paid attention to people who were on the same path as us, two years ago, we'd see the perfection in His guidance.

We'd see His Light.

I'm toast tonight, but I will return tom my script in progress tomorrow.

In the meantime, I'm thankful for the souls here at Simplyscripts. Such excellent souls. I don't know what to say.

Sandra

It is 100% lazy writing for someone who's not already in the business. Writers don't cast films and a professional reader or director or producer will think you're trying to cast the role. What else could they think - that you're saying "hey, let's get a third-rate actor who only looks like this famous person I just described"? No, they're going to think that you want that actor to play the role.

Second, casting directors who read the project do not want an image in their head of a particular actor or actress, otherwise it ruins the read and does their job for them...

Oh, and Conz?  A lot of regulars have given you honest answers and apparently have forgotten that you entered the last OWC and didn't do any reads. So please keep that in mind for the upcoming one?  (0:

AJR

Anthony, couldn't agree more with your words.  I also was thinking that Conz had recently said that he was sorry for not reading any OWC scripts yet and was going to get caught up...apparently he chose not to do that, and still has a big fat ZERO reads, which there just isn't any excuse for.

Time to pay the piper!

I do want to make 1 more comment on this actual thread.  I was thinking about it last night for some reason, and I couldn't stop laughing at what I was thinking.

It's funny enough to think that an unproduced writer would seriously try and cast his own Spec script by using actual known actor's names as descriptions of characters.

But, even funnier is to look at this way...

If you think about it, character description is obviously what the character looks like - so, if you see an actor's name in a character's description, I would think that's what the character is supposed to look like, meaning, maybe the other characters mistake him for the actor named in the description.

So, if your character is described as looking like Brad Pitt, he probably gets alot of trim.  If your character is described as looking like a young Sean Connery, again, he's most likely having his way with the ladies.  But, if you describe him as looking like F Murray Abraham?  Well...haha...luckily, most of your readers won't have a clue what the Hell he looks like.

Wish I read this thread last week.

I have a script submitted already that should be popping up soon.  If anybody reads it, just disregard the description of SKIER #3 as 'think Jeff Bush'.  I'll fix it up in the rewrite.

Quoted from rc1107 SKIER #3

#3?

#3???????

#1!!!!!!!!!

C'mon now!!!

Quoted from Dreamscale Anthony, couldn't agree more with your words.  I also was thinking that Conz had recently said that he was sorry for not reading any OWC scripts yet and was going to get caught up...apparently he chose not to do that, and still has a big fat ZERO reads, which there just isn't any excuse for. Time to pay the piper!

No, you're wrong, Jeff.  He read and commented on one: his own.

Coulda been worse Jeff - the character could have been named DRUNK SKI POSER #3...

(0:

Yep, it can always be worse.  Sad thing for me is that it continues to get worse...

Quoted from ajr It is 100% lazy writing for someone who's not already in the business. Writers don't cast films and a professional reader or director or producer will think you're trying to cast the role. What else could they think - that you're saying "hey, let's get a third-rate actor who only looks like this famous person I just described"? No, they're going to think that you want that actor to play the role. Second, casting directors who read the project do not want an image in their head of a particular actor or actress, otherwise it ruins the read and does their job for them...

I don't think we're talking about casting instructions here.  I think we're saying our character shares aspects with a celebrity and that's quite different.

Gem (45), think Cher before the surgery.  

We aren't saying the character should be cast as Cher but we are using Cher as a visual reference of our character.

If done correctly using celebs in your script can really enhance the reading experience.  And I don't see it as lazy at all - just a different style.  

Michael,

What you're doing and the question posed by the original poster, which is "think George Clooney" are two different things.

Anthony,

Where does the original poster say "think George Clooney"?


EDIT:  And even if it was just "think George Clooney" without any qualification, if it was there to present visual information and it was done in a way that works for the story then there shouldn't be any issue with it.  I  don't think the use of a celebrity's name automatically indicates you are trying to cast the role.  Nor do I think that's the intention of the statement made by the writers of the book mentioned (though of course it could be).

ive never done it, nor do i have any intention in doing it, just wanted feedback... and damn, got a lot.  thanks

That's great, Conz...now go read and comment on this past OWC scripts that you said you were going to read and comment on.

If you have time to post such questions, what's the hold up on your OWC reads?  How many posts did you receive with feedback?  How many did you provide?

What are we missing here?

Michael, per my earlier post, are you saying that when referencing an actor in your description, you're saying that that the character resembles that person?  As in, people would actually stop and wonder whether or not that is actually that actor?

If so, as I said earlier, that's downright laughable 99% of the time. I'm shocked you would encourage...or better yet, not discourage such descriptions.

Quoted from Dreamscale Michael, per my earlier post, are you saying that when referencing an actor in your description, you're saying that that the character resembles that person?  As in, people would actually stop and wonder whether or not that is actually that actor?

We are talking about a visual read here and if it works to use think *actor* for you to describe and it works for those that read your script - then I don't see any problem with using it at all (even if it is for pure physical resemblance).

For some people in some circumstances it's going to work.  And I don't think you can make an argument that it never does - because you'd be wrong.

Well, I have been wrong before and I have absolutely no problem admitting when that happens, but it's not now.

There are very few who will appreciate this kind of description...and many who will despise it and literally stop reading right there.  It's amateur hour 101, and if you honestly don't know or realize that, then I'm not sure what else to say.

It's poor advice to doll out. Period.

Quoted from Dreamscale That's great, Conz...now go read and comment on this past OWC scripts that you said you were going to read and comment on. If you have time to post such questions, what's the hold up on your OWC reads?  How many posts did you receive with feedback?  How many did you provide? What are we missing here? Michael, per my earlier post, are you saying that when referencing an actor in your description, you're saying that that the character resembles that person?  As in, people would actually stop and wonder whether or not that is actually that actor? If so, as I said earlier, that's downright laughable 99% of the time. I'm shocked you would encourage...or better yet, not discourage such descriptions.

dude, i never even know that contest existed before i posted an old throwaway script i had.  it took me 2 minutes to submit.  i didnt realize i had to read every submission, no one had a gun to your head to read mine.  I know i have to read if i submit now, b/c you've so kindly reminded me, and i will.  I didnt say i was gonna go back and read submissions for a contest that is over.  Jesus Christ.  I'm not looking to get banned, or get into flame wars, but back off.

what is this a witch hunt?  relax.

I had a script that i thought applied (it didnt) so i submit it.  when i wrote it, it sure as hell didnt take 7 days.  i submit it the day before teh contest was over, literally the first time i ever saw that forum.  what do you guys want me to do?  I apologize i broke a couple of rules, is that good enough?

Quoted from Conz dude, i never even know that contest existed before i posted an old throwaway script i had.  it took me 2 minutes to submit.  i didnt realize i had to read every submission, no one had a gun to your head to read mine.  I know i have to read if i submit now, b/c you've so kindly reminded me, and i will.  I didnt say i was gonna go back and read submissions for a contest that is over.  Jesus Christ.  I'm not looking to get banned, or get into flame wars, but back off.

Hello Conz! Send me a PM if you get in a fright with a "crazy" that passes your path. (But that might be me after all. Big smiles). ...

Just so you know, the OWC is meant to be a challenge. No gun to your head. It's just you against you. Mono eh Mono. (Is that correct?" Well, sortov. ...

How much time you spend on it is entirely up to you. Two minutes, two days, or two weeks compressed into one week-- however you might want to spell it: the point is that the challenge always is meant to challenge. There's no winner because:

You are a winner already if you participate.

I understand how you feel. People here can get really passionate about their work and they sometimes forget where they've been. We're all and very often like that; so please accept their apologies. No harm intended-- just frustrated hard boiled writers trying to do their job. We're all the same.

Sandra

Conz, this is very confusing.  You're supposedly a board member, right?  Assuming that's true, how could you not read a single line of what the OWC is?  How is that even possible?  It's not, obviously.

But after the fact, numerous members called you out on the fact that you reviewed your own fucking script, but not a single other one.  Right?  At that point, you said you were sorry and would read some of the entries ASAP.  That never happened.  People read old OWC scripts all the time. This one isn't even that old.

And during the reading phase, you had to see all the people reading and reviewing all the scripts, including yours, right?  What the Hell did you think was going on?  Are you seriously claiming complete ignorance?

You know, you're actually very lucky, because if this was indeed a witch hunt, you'd either be burned at the stake or drowned at the bottom of a lake.

Bless your lucky stars...

Quoted from Dreamscale Well, I have been wrong before and I have absolutely no problem admitting when that happens, but it's not now. There are very few who will appreciate this kind of description...and many who will despise it and literally stop reading right there.  It's amateur hour 101, and if you honestly don't know or realize that, then I'm not sure what else to say. It's poor advice to doll out. Period.

Since Tom Lennon who sold some twenty odd scripts wants to give that advice to other people wanting to sell a script then he should give it.   Basing his advice on his experience in the field is not giving poor advice.  It's giving experienced advice.

And any advice can work or not work for the person receiving it.   Because you can't actually speak for anyone in the field, only for yourself,  when you say it's poor advice - you really mean it's poor advice for you.  And that's fine.  It probably is poor advice for you.

But other people deserve and should insist on the chance to try things and see if it works for them before they go all value judgmenty on it.   I don't think it's poor advice to encourage people to be creative and try to set their work apart from others.  This is definitely the time for them to do it.        

Sean, Sean, Sean...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbGVIdA3dx0



He'll never live this role down.

Quoted from Conz I know i have to read if i submit now, b/c you've so kindly reminded me, and i will.

He says he gets it, so benefit of the doubt.  Time to let this one go, guys.

The few feature producers I've been working with addressed this with me.
I've never been asked to write with an actor in mind simply cuz they were hot.

However...
They WILL ASK you to write their ideas with a certain "voice" in mind.
This is due to specific relationships they have and want to take advantage of them.
But I've never been asked to to write that down in the character description.

E.D.

Gilliam and Palin famously wrote in the Script for Time Bandits that a character takes his helmet off, and is revealed as looking like Sean Connery.

Guess who got the part.

I once wrote a script in which a character name checks an actor - one I had in mind when writing the part. It was an indirect way to put the thought in the readers head...

You guys are amazing...simply amazing.

So, Time Bandits was released 30 years ago, and written by 2 Hollywood insider Pros.  Whether or not the script was written on spec, isn't even the issue here.  These guys had clout and success, and basically could write anything they wanted to, anyway they wanted to.  Whatever they were writing, was being read by other Pros and Hollywood A Listers.  When you get tot hat level, go ahead and write Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie into your script.

The issue at hand, and question originally asked, was whether or not it was acceptable (or a goods idea) to to describe a character by using an actual actor's name in a Spec script, written by an unproduced, unknown writer.

And the clear answer is, "No, it is not a good idea to do that."  Period.

Haven't we all read scripts that attempt this?  I know I sure have and I know I didn't get more than a few pages into it, because of this.  It's just foolish.

Do yourselves all a favor and don't write like this.  Please...

Quoted from Dreamscale Conz, this is very confusing.  You're supposedly a board member, right?  Assuming that's true, how could you not read a single line of what the OWC is?  How is that even possible?  It's not, obviously. But after the fact, numerous members called you out on the fact that you reviewed your own fucking script, but not a single other one.  Right?  .

i was being self deprecating.  i didnt even know it would be revealed to be mine to be honest.

but seriously dude... relax... you'll be ok.  I feel like I've done something terrible to you by the way you're talking to me.

Conz, you haven't done anything terrible to me personally as far as I know, but again, this isn't the point.

It would be so simple of you to not have this attitude you're portraying and apologize to each and everyone and go back and read some OWC scripts...like you said you had planned on doing.  If nothing else, you should read the scripts by writers that read and provided feedback to you.

So simple and the problem is long forgotten.  Why can't you do that?

Quoted from Dreamscale Conz, you haven't done anything terrible to me personally as far as I know, but again, this isn't the point. It would be so simple of you to not have this attitude you're portraying and apologize to each and everyone and go back and read some OWC scripts...like you said you had planned on doing.  If nothing else, you should read the scripts by writers that read and provided feedback to you. So simple and the problem is long forgotten.  Why can't you do that?

Because the only person pestering him about it is you.  Both bert and I said let it go.  Conz knows the OWC expectations now and if he enters the next OWC he will abide by them or not.   Let it go until then.

Quoted from Conz that's an unacceptable way to write a character description, right?

There's ways around everything.  I'm quoting here... "Once you know the rules and start breaking them...then you're really not breaking them."    If that makes sense.

Ghostie

MARTY, 78, Think Ernest Borgnine in Captiva Island, sits in a chair with a corn cob pipe in his mouth.

HARRY, 51, think F. Murray Abraham in Largo Desolato, lies on the ground, examining the carcass of a skunk.

                                     MARTY
                                         (in an Ernest Borgnine-like voice)
                            Harry, are you sure the fucking thing
                            is dead?

Harry looks up to Marty, a sly grin on his face.
                                  
                                      HARRY
                                           (in an F. Murray Abraham-like voice)
                             You think I'd be on the ground examining
                              it, if it was still alive?

He goes back to work on the dried-up carcass.

                                       HARRY (CONT.)
                              Of course, it's fucking dead, you old goat!

Quoted from Dreamscale MARTY, 78, Think Ernest Borgnine in Captiva Island, sits in a chair with a corn cob pipe in his mouth. HARRY, 51, think F. Murray Abraham in Largo Desolato, lies on the ground, examining the carcass of a skunk.                                      MARTY                                          (in an Ernest Borgnine-like voice)                             Harry, are you sure the fucking thing                             is dead? Harry looks up to Marty, a sly grin on his face.                                                                          HARRY                                            (in an F. Murray Abraham-like voice)                              You think I'd be on the ground examining                               it, if it was still alive? He goes back to work on the dried-up carcass.                                        HARRY (CONT.)                               Of course, it's fucking dead, you old goat!

I actually got a  clear picture of your characters in my head, even if you went out of your way to pick obscure films.  And if it wasn't for the the silly wrylies -- I would say it was ok  not half as bad as I expected but not something for you to over-use.

But actually when I said some times it could be the right approach, I was thinking of movies about Hollywood, coming of age/fame movies. Using think *actor* to describe your characters would fit right in with the mood of the story.  Your introductions would not only be appropriate, they would be essential to the story, belong there.

And some people, talk exactly like that, think this actor - think that actor, and so their voice when writing a screenplay would naturally phrase intros like that.  And because it was their voice it would feel natural - so even if you did want to complain about it you wouldn't because a true voice is soothing...        

KEV(40), stumbles along a street, as drunk as Jeff Bush at a Super Bowl party.

He bumps into BILL(35), who's as happy as Steve McDonell at a Beatles convention.

The atmosphere grows tense and vicious, like a Pia Cook horror script.

But the peace is soon settled, like a Sandra Elsteree happy thought of the day...

OK, then.  There we go.

I hope to see lots of this utilized in the upcoming OWC.  I for one will definitely be using it every chance I get...minus the silly wrylies, of course.

Did you also get a feel for the horrid acting from Marty, since Ernest Borgnine gave a horrendous performance in Captiva Island?  Hope so, as that was a major point in his character in my example.

I'd love to see someone else throw up another example of this...who's in?

Love it, Stevie!  Well done.  I'd also like to see this utilized in the upcoming OWC.  Very, very visual descriptions there.  That's the kind of writing that should make us all rich, famous, fat, and lazy...like Sean Connery.

I think we should have a think *actor* contest.   Who can make the best use of it.  5 pages due   Oct 14th.   Send them to Don with think *actor* in the comment.  That is unless he does the OWC, in which case we'd need to reschedule.

I thought the OWC is already scheduled for tomorrow?

Quoted from Dreamscale I thought the OWC is already scheduled for tomorrow?

And so it is.  So we'll have to reschedule the think *actor* contest.  Say 5 page due September 1st.  Best use of think *actor* gets bragging rights.

What time is the OWC being released tomorrow?

I wasn't able to do the last one but so love the ALL HALLOWS EVE version.

Shawn.....><

Quoted from Ledbetter What time is the OWC being released tomorrow? I wasn't able to do the last one but so love the ALL HALLOWS EVE version. Shawn.....><

The October OWC is coming October 7th, 10:00 pm edt

Sweet!  I'll have to jump on this immediately, as I'm moving out, once again on Tuesday, so I'll have the weekend to write, and that will be it.

Hopefully that old goat LedHead will grace us with his presence in this OWC.  He's been MIA as of late, and that's always too bad to see.

The Palin/Gilliam story was intended as an anecdote, nothing more, linking as it did both the themes of naming an actor and the preceding discussion of Sean Connery.

It was not intended as a recommendation to use this method of writing - naming an actor as a way of describing a character.

I have read lots of scripts, some very famous, some largely unknown or forgotten, and I cannot recall ever seeing this done. I am sure it is, but it is not a common practice.

But it's gonna be now on SS, at least!  

Hopefully, 46%-71.4% of this October's OWC entries will utilize this remarkable character description for as many characters as humanly possible.  My personal hope is that we will be allowed to have characters like Ernie Borgine when he was at personal high in Captiva Island, or even good old F. Murray.  If I can, I'll even throw in Neal Patrick Harris from his classic Doogie Howser M.D. days.

Damn...you guys are gonna be lovin' my script!  Please don't hate on it because of my character descriptions, as they will provide the ultimate in a visual que.

I feel like I've learned so much on this thread...I mean even more than what the wily comedian Conz is all about...  

WORDS THAT MUST
A modern horror story for a cultured world.


Oh, the horror...

Quoted from RayW WORDS THAT MUST A modern horror story for a cultured world. Oh, the horror...

James is the voice of reason:

James
It's all about the money.
You should follow the money.

**

I can't top that one. No matter how much perfume
we want to pile atop the shit to make it pleasant.

That's the whole truth.

Sandra