Write a kick ass story. Have a contact that can get you read by someone who matters.

Seriously, how many of us can get read by a studio reader no matter how perfectly the script is formatted?

Quoted from JamminGirl I don't think we should omit...'we see' in absolute terms. If they're not overused, they work.

It has been said in many other threads, but is repeated here for the sake of completeness.

There is a difference between "we" and "we see".

Virtually without exception, "we see" is wasted words that can simply be lopped off the front of your sentence.

The use of "we", as in "we sail through the air" or "we move through the keyhole" are fun to use...sparingly.

If the verb you use after "we" is either "see" or "hear", there is probably a better way to write the sentence.

Quoted from JamminGirl I don't think we should omitt 'ing' or 'we see' in absolute terms. If they're not overused, they work.

I totally agree. There is standard practice, but an effective use of 'we see' can dovetail with an industry standard screenplay.

The idea, story and ability to compellingly tell said story is the most crucial element - we all agree on that. I tend to focus my reading more on produced screenplays, and from that reading, it's clear to see that there is no consensus on what should and what shouldn't be included.

Andrew

Andrew

Quoted from bert It has been said in many other threads, but is repeated here for the sake of completeness. There is a difference between "we" and "we see". Virtually without exception, "we see" is wasted words that can simply be lopped off the front of your sentence. The use of "we", as in "we sail through the air" or "we move through the keyhole" are fun to use...sparingly. If the verb you use after "we" is either "see" or "hear", there is probably a better way to write the sentence.

you make an interesting point. You're against the 'see'.

What annoys me is when someone cuts a script down on the mere basis of someone using 'we'. It's as if there is an absolute rule against it without reason.
Atleast you give your reason, and not an unreasonable one.

This talk about CAPS has gone into one of those annoying "how to write a sentence" discussions.

The use of "we" has boiled down to a personal preference. The argument against is that it can (CAN) pull the reader out of the story and remind them that they are reading a script. Is that a big deal? Depends on who you are and how you like to read. An argument for is that it gives one a distinct way to define what "we" as the reader are actually seeing. The one thing I've always said on this point is that a novel NEVER uses this so why should a screenplay. Yes, they're different, but a spec is meant to tell a story.

On 'ing' words... The point of such a recommendation is to prevent the use of passive sentences, just like recommending against 'we' is to do the same thing along with keeping the story in the story instead of reminding the reader that they're reading a script for a movie. Active sentences. However, you can write an active sentence with a word ending in 'ing', just as you can write one with a 'we' as Bert pointed out.

Drop all the rule talk. It's unnecessary. Rules are guidelines when it comes to screenplays as well as any other kind of literary art. Yes, screenplays are literary until they turn into movies. Specs are basically novels written in a different format. They're not easier or harder; they're just different. In a way, they're a little more difficult because we're taught NOT to direct and track everything in a scene. This allows us to lose track of what's going on pretty easily sometimes.

Screenplays have specific elements in regards to FORMAT that have to be followed, but that's about it. A poorly formatted screenplay with an excellent story, however, is still a pleasure to read, since a poorly formatted feature length script can be fixed in about an hour in Word. A poorly told story takes a lot more time.

The point is to tell a good, active, visual story. If you do that, no one will fault anything you put in there from 'ings' to 'we's' and even CAPS. Please don't obsess over these things.

Quoted from Lakewood In the real world CAPS are for scanning a script you've already read or to save you having to read it at all.   This is the first page of the Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes script: GAS STREET LAMP POOL OF LIGHT TWO-HORSE CARRIAGE SUPERIMPOSE: "London 1891" GLIMPSE OF A FACE DR. JOHN WATSON DOWN RIVER POLICE CARRIAGES SINGLE SET OF FOOTPRINTS And you don't need to read it (either again or at all).  We get the period, main character and that the police are tracking footprints near the river. You don't necessarily do it for the production or the director even though it often does highlight major props or elements and can be helpful if they're searching for a scene.  You basically do it for the people with money who never read a script in the first place. This kind of capping (which I believe is what Bert referred to) acts as a kind of map.  And I'm sure it breaks a lot of new writer's hearts.

Yep. I like it myself. I can skim a script in a matter of minutes and see all the beats and all the changes of tempo and the entire skeleton of the story very easly.