well, you learn something new everyday.  I've been going out of my way NOT to use to them.  

From the point of view of the script itself, the only issue I would have is the line:

"He has no idea where he is!"

Purely because I'm not sure the writer has set up enough clues that this is what's actually happening.

Other than that, I have no issue with any of it....and perhaps the reality is that this is the Director's problem, not the writers.

THERE ARE NO RULES!

These "rules" everyone goes on about are just made up on sites lke this and repeated. There is no rulebook as officially endorsed by the Producers of World Cinema.

Worry about the Story and the Characters.

By all means make the writing lean and effective, but also worry about the tone...the tone of the writing should be consistent with the story. There appears to be a desire on some sides to make out as though there is only one acceptable way of writing a script...and this is patently untrue

It get to a point when these kind of things become a major hindrance...the literary equivalent of not seeing the Woods for the Trees....staring at the make up of one tree, it's branches and the shape of the leaves and not seeing the Forest.

I think the part of where "he has no idea where he is!" is interesting. It's technically an aside. It's difficult to show. But I like it...a lot. In one line he sets up the situation for the director, the actor, most importantly, the reader. I mean, an actor CAN play that. His expression and other physical aspects will convey it. And the rest will be conveyed in the following minutes when he tells the girl across from him he has no idea, but I think it's effective to do that right away in the scene.

And that was really my point. He violated two "rules" with that one sentence, perhaps three. An aside, directing the shot, and underlining. Tssk tssk tssk. Detention time.

I decided recently to use underlining and capitalization...sparingly. Does it interfere with the read? It shouldn't. Does it make things clearer that I am afraid the reader will miss? I hope so. Will it piss people off? The only people it will bother are the people who have had "rules" drilled into them.

Jeff, if your still following, if you can't find a script that does not contain any of things, doesn't that suggest something? Doesn't make you consider...or reconsider? Does that aside really make that script less effective...or more?

Finally, given that there are some things that could be improved in the writing here, what is the more practical approach...spending countless days, months, years trying to polish a script like this...or cranking out scripts and trying to market them? After all, these are scripts, not works of art or pieces of literature. In the end, they will be either filmed and forgotten, or just forgotten.

I've not read the script, but it sounds like the writer makes it clear that he doesn't know where he is through dialogue.

That's fine then....these things are useful embellishments. Like you say it lets everyone know what's going on...CLARITY.

The reason "the rules" exist is because more often than not, writers will have a line like that, then not back it up...and sometimes whole scripts are written in this kind of pseudo literary way and nothing happens that is translatable to video or audio.

Agree hundred percent, Rick. And that really is largely what the rules are for, IMO. A guideline for beginners. Many writers, when they start out, write with quite a few unfilmables. It takes a little practice to learn how to avoid them. But once you pretty much get the hang of it, there may be times you want to knowingly and sparingly include them in your script. That's why we generally find them in the scripts written by those that really understand what they're doing.

No harm in completely writing without them, if you can make the story work!

I was out for a bit, but yes, I am still following.

The term "sparingly" is an interesting one, Kevin...especially when it's referring to underlining words and phrases for "importance".  How often is sparingly?  3-5 times per page?  I don't think so.  If you're only going to underline those words and phrases that are "important", what's that saying about all the other words and phrases?

As to your other question about what does it say if I can't produce a "Produced" script that's written like I preach, my response is exactly what I posted earlier...but I'll take it a few steps further, using my crazy analogies that I know you all love so much.

Up until the late 70's, no one was very concerned about the pollution our automobiles and factories were producing, let alone the pollution we ourselves were responsible for in littering, not recycling, etc.  Does that mean that the way things were were just fine and dandy...or even acceptable?   No, it didn't.  Thank God we finally got a clue, or we may not even be around today.

I'm a perfectionist and I look for and strive for perfection.  It may not be attainable, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying, or accept things which are clearly flawed and inferior products.

Just because the vast majority of horror movie and scripts are God awful, doesn't mean that they have to be...or should be.  Stupid, moronic characters don't have to run up the stairs and hide in a small room, when an entity is chasing them to be "acceptable" or good...cause it's not either.  They can run out the front door, jump out a window, or stand and fight, and chances are the script or movie will be immediately all the better for it.

Jeff,

The problem is that you seem to put such a vast importance on minutiae that don't really matter.

Any appraisal of this script should really be focussed on things like: Is this an effective opening? Is there a hook to get the audience involved? Does the main character seem interesting? Are there interesting visuals or opportunities for strong sound design? Is it establishing the right tone?

This little excerpt is doing so many things that many pre-pros fail to do in their first twenty pages, let alone paragrpah.

Point of view is established instantly...we meet our main character and are instantly introduced to the world. The writer is thinking both visually and in terms of sound...using the train to disorient and establish tone etc. He's even thinking about lighting and using light to create interesting effects.

There's an interesting strobe effect, the sun is rising suggesting a new beginning.

Then he's using the train tracks to create a feeling of someone being almost dragged along against his will, like a kind of inescapable destiny. (Something similar to something Hitchcock did in Strangers on a Train).

He's already layering up his future theme.

These are the important things...the things that will survive the transition to film.

After that there are commercial concerns..is this feasible in budgetary concerns, does it have a market etc etc?

I'm not having a go here, but you always seem to miss this kind of stuff and then get all upset by underlinings and such, stuff that's of so little consequence that no filmmaker is even going to notice.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Jeff, The problem is that you seem to put such a vast importance on minutiae that don't really matter. Any appraisal of this script should really be focussed on things like: Is this an effective opening? Is there a hook to get the audience involved? Does the main character seem interesting? Are there interesting visuals or opportunities for strong sound design? Is it establishing the right tone? This little excerpt is doing so many things that many pre-pros fail to do in their first twenty pages, let alone paragrpah. Point of view is established instantly...we meet our main character and are instantly introduced to the world. The writer is thinking both visually and in terms of sound...using the train to disorient and establish tone etc. He's even thinking about lighting and using light to create interesting effects. There's an interesting strobe effect, the sun is rising suggesting a new beginning. Then he's using the train tracks to create a feeling of someone being almost dragged along against his will, like a kind of inescapable destiny. (Something similar to something Hitchcock did in Strangers on a Train). He's already layering up his future theme. These are the important things...the things that will survive the transition to film. I'm not having a go here, but you always seem to miss this kind of stuff and then get all upset by underlinings and such, stuff that's of so little consequence that no filmmaker is even going to notice.

This above....and the fact that if you read enough scripts, you can tell -- by page 1 -- if you are reading a competent scriptwriter who is playing fast and loose with their prose.

On the flip-side, you can also tell by page 1 that the writer doesn't have a clue what they are doing.

Sure, there are sometimes shades of gray, but 90% of the time this is a fact.  It is.

And folks who read scripts for a living?  You can bet they spot it even faster than we do.

You have been called on this before, Jeff -- you read alot here, but you need to get OUT of here sometimes and read what is going on out there.

Read those specs and "see" what you are missing.

You guys humor me, you really do.  And I'm sure I humor you as well.

I've watched and continue to watch enough movies to feel confident in what I'm saying, when it comes to movies and the scripts they're born from.  And I have enough writing background and knowledge, in terms of both screenwriting and all other forms of writing to feel confident in what I say.

The funny thing is that anyone can "read" anything they want into something, be it a Pro or amateur script they're trying to defend, or downright praise.  It's easy.  It can even be done with a pisser or a piece of shit script, if you really try.

Rick, you say I continue to miss these certain things you bring up at various times, but I continue to say that "everyone" continues to miss the vast majority of what I bring up all the time.

But there's a big difference, because the majority of what you bring up isn't tangible...it's something you're "seeing" or reading in, that others may not.  It may or may not be something the writer even remotely was after or realized.  What I bring up is black and white and should be obvious and something that can't be argued.

Let's try this again, for the love of all that's Holy and bright.

You want to underline your entire script?  Go for it.  You want to bold the entire thing?  Sure, why the fuck not...go for it.  How about using different colors for different parts of the script, or when different characters speak?  Maybe even a different color for Protags and Antags?  OK...sure...go for it.

Does any of that change literally anything in the script in terms of what it will look like on film?  Nope...not one stinkin' bit.  So why not do it?

Am I "taking it too far" with these examples?  How far is too far?  It comes down to each reader how far is too far or what is annoying and unnecessary.

So my point once again is what, you're asking?

My point is don't write unnecessary things.  Assure yourself of not going too far overboard with any of this nonsense by not doing it at all.  Is that so crazy?

Quoted from Dreamscale My point is don't write unnecessary things.  Assure yourself of not going too far overboard with any of this nonsense by not doing it at all.  Is that so crazy?

It isn't crazy.  It is a valid viewpoint.

BUT, you are removing tools from your toolbox if you dismiss it all out-of-hand.

We are all here for pretty much the same reason, Jeff.  To learn.

That is why I once again inject myself into this tired debate -- to encourage you to get your hands on a few Black List scripts, or something similar.

Your opinion sometimes carries a lot of sway, Jeff -- but the trap is assuming that you, yourself, have nothing left to learn.

Quoted from bert It isn't crazy.  It is a valid viewpoint. BUT, you are removing tools from your toolbox if you dismiss it all out-of-hand. We are all here for pretty much the same reason, Jeff.  To learn. That is why I once again inject myself into this tired debate -- to encourage you to get your hands on a few Black List scripts, or something similar. Your opinion sometimes carries a lot of sway, Jeff -- but the trap is assuming that you, yourself, have nothing left to learn.

Wise words, summing up what I've been saying less effectively.

Jeff, the way I use underlining is not to highlight what is important. It is to highlight things I am afraid the reader will miss. And anything missed, even something relatively minor, can screw up the story. It's happened to me, and I hate when it happens. If I can use the tool of underlining, or capitalizing, or making three dimensional words that jump up and down, it's worth considering.

Those pros that use them? Chances are they use them for a reason.

You guys love to pile on...again and again.

Bert, your last comments here could (once again) be applied to anyone and any opinion.

In no way am I saying or have I ever said that I have nothing to learn and never make mistakes.

But, that doesn't mean that I can't have an opinion and feel strongly about it.  Or have complete faith in my opinions and beliefs, and feel confident that what I saying has merit.

Does it?

We always tend to get off topic when these  discussions take place.

Let's see what Kevin was originally after with this post...

He posted 1 page of a Produced script to "show" that Pro's do what he is currently doing, to show that it's more than just acceptable.

Then, because it's a "popular" and successful movie, others chimed in how amazing the writing was, how perfect in what it got across to the readers, blah, blah, blah.  A few had a minor qualm about this line or that line.

I gave my opinion and stand by it.  Having not seen the script in a PDF form, I don't know exactly what the first page looks like, in terms of bolded or underlined passages, but in no way is anyone ever gong to be able to convince me that the multiple sentence character intro is the way to go, or even semi necessary.

Quoted from Dreamscale You guys love to pile on...again and again.

Heh...yeah, just happens to be a lazy afternoon around here.

I will ask you one last question, Jeff, then leave it at that.  And really think about it for a second.

This opinion that readers will toss a script aside for some of these transgressions...did you actually READ that from a honest source that you trust....or is it just an opinion formed over time from haunting around these boards...and convincing yourself this must be the case?

My opinions were identical to yours, Jeff.  About three years ago.

Come join us on the dark side.......

Well, I can't quote who I've heard it from, but I do know for a fact that I've read it from multiple sources, on multiple screenwriting websites.

And Bert, c'mon, lets' be honest here.  I do not say that I or anyone else will stop reading a script based on a single violation of this or that.  Never the case.  But there is a line where things go overboard...whatever they are, and if the script ain't cuttin' it anyway, good bye read.  Period.  Or, if I'm being paid to read, or doing it as a favor from a friend, when the annoyances start to mount, my feelings on the script go downhill fast.

Lazy afternoon here as well.

Happy New Year, everyone!

Leaving aside the "intangible" thing...the problem is that you've created rules for yourself and then are using them to evaluate the quality of any given script in a purely mechanical way.

But those rules are largely arbitary. They aren't based on anything tangible, as you seem to think. They aren't based on what's selling, what makes good films or anything else.

Like Kev says, all these "rules" are just guidelines intended for neophyte writers to put them in the general area of how to write a script. They aren't written in stone.

4 lines of character description isn't necessarily a bad thing...it might be, it might also be considered necessary in the mind of a writer for his own personal reasons.

You're a victim of sites like these in a way...people have repeated things so often that they've become accepted truths, but when we analyse how things are in the real world, these "truths" are found to be wrong.