Just curious as to others thoughts on the use of dramatic or artistic license to advance your plot. I've noticed in some of the scripts here certain situations arise that typically don't happen in real life but the writer utilizes them anyway to advance the plot.

I understand the use of such license when recounting historical events because you are trying to get into the head of the figure who might be your protagonist. But when it concerns technical aspects of a job, do you look the other way when it comes to being entirely accurate?  For example, I laugh at some courtroom scenes I see on screen because as an attorney, I know the way some procedures are depicted aren't anywhere close to being realistic.  But I, on the other hand, would have to do more research than I would want if I were trying to write an accurate depiction of how a surgeon would perform a particular procedure.  Any thoughts on what you think is acceptable as to taking dramatic liberties?

Keep in mind that any particular medical procedure will take serious time.  I'm having an endoscopy next week and that will take about a half hour.  Is it worth showing the whole thing in a script?  What about separating conjoined twins?  Twelve to thirty hours for this (and a lot cooler than an endoscopy).

I remember an editor once telling that you can either show the beginning and middle of something, or the middle and ending of something.  Don't show beginning, middle and end.  It tales up too much time.


Phil

Phil, I think that's totally correct about how much you show.  I'm thinking more along the lines of in what you do show, do people care whether it is accurate in its depiction.  For example, would a doctor ask for a certain instrument when doing a heart procedure, and would it matter if you showed it otherwise?  Or if you're doing a cop procedural, if you don't know how the cops procure the evidence, do you just imagine how it would happen or do you try to show it as accurately as possible.  What if the way you imagine it advances your plot much better than the accurate way?

If it looks believable to the avaerage person, then it should be okay.

I remember the only time I ever watched CSI, the detectives were looking for a drill bit that made a very jagged hole in a sheetrock wall.  They found the suspected drill and proceeded to drill a hole with it,  The detective kept moving the drill around and created a very sloopy hole.  From this they declared that it was the drill bit they were looking for.

I stopped watching after that.


Phil

Gary in my honest opinion, screenplays are there to entertain. It always annoys me when I hear people say "Aw that so wouldn't happen in real life!" - GET OVER IT! It's a film, you're watching it to be entertained not sit there and critique it on its realistic aspects. No one jumps off trains onto a moving vehicle, but hey... It's still entertaining and that is all that matters, IMO.

However, you shouldn't go overboard with it. While jumping off a train onto another moving vehicle doesn't actually HAPPEN, it is still POSSIBLE. I would suggest not going into anything that isn't possible at all... Then again, it is dependent on the genre.

I agree with what Phil has already said. The story is what matters. Don't get caught up in keeping something realistic. Tell the story whatever way advances your plot in a more dramatic way.

Hope this helps

Dan

I agree with Dan. It's about entertainment.
And when I watch a movie, I think is there anyway that one of the 7 billion people on the planet could ever possibly do that? If the answer is "yes", then it's the story of that person. I will seem crazy to 6.99999 billion people.

It depends on what you're taking liberties with and what kind of liberties you're taking.

I tend to think bending the laws of physics is slightly more forgivable than bending the rules of a profession. I rarely write what I don't know, so if I were writing medical, cop, or legal, I'd feel more compelled to be accurate about what I was writing. Sometimes, the truth isn't always boring or useless when it comes to moving a story along. Whenever I watch SVU or something, I'm always bummed to think about how they seem to go into so much detail--more than other shows--but it's still probably junk crime-solving and comes nothing close to real life. The writers come so close to telling it like it is, it's disappointing that they don't go all the way and find ways to make reality serve the storytelling.

Another thing I've been considering lately is how reality is portrayed in spy movies. Anymore, I think they've become too real. Instead of thinking James Bond's world is so different and fantastic from our own, I'm paying more attention to the way his world is basically our world, but way more implausible and awkward.