In the script that I'm writing now, 'A Home in Suburbia' the horror and key scenes and 'punchy moments' occur after the hour mark. I feel that my approach to horror is definately influenced by the Asian Horror of the Millenium. As a result the 50-60 pages of the script are very much soley character with the odd off-hand scare moment without getting the story to kick off fully.

Is it an acceptable practice to make a film where the first hour is purely character driven and laying up the future scares?

I have attempted to give some form of disequilibrium in the shape of a infidelity sub-plot between the couple but even this doesnt boil over until the 60th minute.

In all honesty the 60 pages written could be generalised as almost 'stylised naturalism'

I did the same thing on my latest script called "Lakeshore Manor", another horror. When I had people read it over, a lot of comments referred to the action being backlogged (or backended..can't remember the exact term). Basically meaning that it's dangerous to fill the 3rd Act with countless action and no development.

I've re-developed my script with a co-writer and we have moved away from revealing everything through the last act and instead building up the tension but while staggering the action throughout the script. It seems to work a little better for us.

Now, that's just our opinion on what we have written. I can't say for sure how it'll work for you until someone reads your script. I would just make sure that it's not a bore before you hit the pacing on the 3rd act.

Remoran:  You now have multiple threads regarding your story where you ask if something is "acceptable" -- as if the script police will show up at your door should you ignore some common convention of structure.

Tell your story.  Tell it any way you like.  And it will work or it won't.  Readers will let you know.

You would be much better served to pose these questions on your "Work In Progress" thread -- perhaps generating more interest in the script you have underway -- and so people might compare your questions to the actual story you have in mind as opposed to vague speculation.

Quoted from Romeran Is it an acceptable practice to make a film where the first hour is purely character driven and laying up the future scares?

Wolf Creek is an horror film which follows that exact structure.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416315/

Is this acceptable? It depends on what do you want to do with your script. Are you planning to go the indie route? Produce this yourself? Show it in some film festivals? That kind of audience will love your slow, scareless, character-driven build up.

Are you writing this on spec? Are you expecting to hook professional readers from prodcos right from the bat? Do you expect them to pass your script up the food chain till it reaches someone willing to invest millions in producing it? After reading 20-30 pages of an horror script with hardly any horror in it, and where the story didn't kick in yet, it will likely be put on the rejection pile.

There isn't a correct answer for your question, IMO. It all depends on what you expect to do with your script when finished.

If you want an idea of typical, that is an answer I can give. Something big SHOULD happen to the main character about 20 pages in for a normal length script. In addition, your first scene should draw the audience in and set them up with the genre.

I wrote a horror script where nothing happened for the first 20 pages. Nothing but character development. I was told it was ok, but it took awhile to get into. Once it got going, it was interesting and ok. My solution? Cut the first twenty pages and put all that character stuff after this event and make a new event for page 20. Now it is praised.

People can tell you that you can write what you want, but subconscously, there is a way that we're used to movies flowing and a way they keep our interest. As long as the plot keeps moving during your developmental period of 60 pages, then there's no problem at all. If your plot is completely stagnant for 60 pages, then there's a problem.

In the end, if it is interesting, it doesn't matter.

Hope I'm not veering off the topic by asking this, but...what exactly is "disequilibrium"?

Most feature films consist of the narrative:
                       equilibrium / disequilibrium / new equilibrium

Basically, it's all dandy (equilibrium), then it goes pear-shaped (disequilibrium) and then it is resolved and is all dandy again (new equilibrium).

Sh*t...I am right yeah? I suddenly thought i might be waffling! lol

I've actually never head of that one before. I don't think equilibrium is necessarily the right term for the first part of a film since although the character's life does have a measure of equilibrium, it's a flawed equilibrium. There's a problem, and the character doesn't know about it. I think it would be better described: perceived equilibrium/disequilibrium/true equilibrium. At the beginning of Star Wars, Luke's life is in balance, but he has unrest within him. I'd hardly call that equilibrium. Most characters are like this at the beginning of the story.

You may notice a lot of the Asian-style films you say your script is influenced by are mostly foreshadowing in their first hour.  Yes, they're introducing us to their characters and setting up their relationships with one another, but as they do so they're leaving little clues for things to come.

Actually, a really good example of first-hour set-up is M. Night Shyamalan's film, Signs.  A couple odd occurrences aside, most of the first hour of this film is pure set-up.  The characters, their relationships to one another, a couple back stories (which in themelves serve as foreshadowing).  For all intents and purposes, nothing really extraordinary happens aside from the odd noises in the corn field and the crop circles. Other than that -- strictly character and foreshadowing.

When this kind of story is done well -- that is, everything foreshadowed is given a conclusion, no loose ends are left, all the clues have a pay-off -- it's a great thing.  But if you don't keep it interesting during that first hour with realistic characters with realistic problems and if you don't drop little hints of things to come, then all you're writing is a flat and empty drama with an ending out of left field that makes no sense.

My opinion, anyway.  Good luck.  Keep writing.

Quoted from Romeran . As a result the 50-60 pages of the script are very much soley character with the odd off-hand scare moment without getting the story to kick off fully.

To paraphrase the advice of various screenwriting gurus and script readers, "If your story doesn't kick off in the first ten pages, your script will end up in the trash."

It sounds harsh, but it's true. Be careful not to confuse 'character driven' with a bunch of characters chatting away and going about their everyday lives.

I haven't read your script, or any of your work, so I'm generalizing here, not accusing you of anything. I have noticed that some new writers fail to make that distinction.

Your story should be in motion from page one. Your characters should develop through the story, not develop through 60 pages of 'equilibrium' before something happens to disrupt them into action. That's not how movies work. They are structured, and dramatic things happen and continue to happen to keep us interested.

Action defines character. I cannot stress this enough. Your characters should be active participants in your story from the get go. How they act and react to situations your story throws at them defines them as living, breathing people.

Try removing all the dialogue from your first sixty pages, then read your script again. What's happening in those sixty pages? Can you follow the story to some extent with no dialogue at all? Is it still interesting, exciting, dramatic? If not, you need to reevaluate your story.

Dialogue is necessary, of course, but it should be a last resort. Don't feel that dialogue is your only tool to develop character. Action is far more powerful. Good dialogue is action through words. Conflict. Verbal sparring that defines your characters. Use it wisely, and work your exposition into the story through conflict.