SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 29th, 2024, 6:14am
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Screenwriting Discussion    Screenwriting Class  ›  Out By Page 1?? Moderators: George Willson
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 8 Guests

 Pages: « 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 » : All
Recommend Print
  Author    Out By Page 1??  (currently 8768 views)
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 11:14am Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95
It'a all in the attitude. I appreciate when folks point out things that they perceive to violate the rules. A reviewer really has no idea whether I intended to or not so I always welcome the comment. I have learned a TON from this site in that regard. That may be rooted in the fact that I have never had a writing class or read a screen writing book - nonetheless - SS has been my college in that regard.

That being said, negative comments don't have too be nasty. However,  I have no right to demand that they are not since I am getting a review for free. However, other than stuff like typos, then should be framed in a manner that the receiver of those comments are not misdirected.

A good example is unfilmables. I used to avoid them thinking that it was a rock solid rule. Now, I enjoy them. To my eye:

"TOM (40) athletic build"

is far less interesting than:

'TOM (40), once the Captain of the high school football team and still looking the part.

To me, the ideal exchange would be:  Reviewer - "hey, there is an unfilmable there" Me - thanks, I know - did it on purpose to get a better sense of Tom. - Cheers - Cheers. The bad exchange is: Reviewer - There is an unfilmable there - this script must suck. Me - you must suck.

"The We" violation that started this post is another great example of this. While I generally don't use it since there is a better way to write it - there are cases where - at least IMO - it fits perfectly. To my eye:

We see Dave's computer screen as he types a post.

is better than

Dave sits at his computer - taps the keys

INSERT COMPUTER SCREEN

Blah, blah, blah.

Many other examples - the point being - that sometimes coloring outside the lines is better. And in other times - the lines are just stupid. e.g., I am certain we will see a day where the new standard is to put the time in the slug: E.G.,

INT. DAVE'S HOUSE/DEN - 2:00 PM

With some caveat - always include the time - let the Director figure out the best way to show it. Otherwise you always have to put that stupid clock on the wall or add that extraneous - "what time is it" piece of dialogue.

I enjoy and appreciate when peeps point out the rules - even when I intended to violate them (um - the rules - not the peeps) since they don't know what my thinking was in the first place and the comments have been incredibly helpful. I just don't enjoy it when the entirety of my script is assessed on them.



  




My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 45 - 72
Dreamscale
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 11:59am Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from eldave1
It'a all in the attitude. I appreciate when folks point out things that they perceive to violate the rules. A reviewer really has no idea whether I intended to or not so I always welcome the comment. I have learned a TON from this site in that regard. That may be rooted in the fact that I have never had a writing class or read a screen writing book - nonetheless - SS has been my college in that regard.

"The We" violation that started this post is another great example of this. While I generally don't use it since there is a better way to write it - there are cases where - at least IMO - it fits perfectly. To my eye:

We see Dave's computer screen as he types a post.

is better than

Dave sits at his computer - taps the keys

INSERT COMPUTER SCREEN


I totally understand what you're saying, Dave, as well as what others are saying.  The problem being the constant use of the word "rules".  I for one never use this word, whether it's in discussions or in reviewing.

Screw the rules, do what's right...do what makes sense...do what is most clear...but be very careful, because most writers screw themselves and their scripts in this regard.

Dave, I agree with the first part of what I quoted here completely.  I do not agree with the 2nd part, about the we see example.

I know you're writing this example on the fly, without much thought, so no big deal, BUT, understand that using an insert, you are showing only what is being "inserted".

We may well see Dave's screen as he types, but it's unlikely we'll actually see exactly what's on that screen, as the shot will not be close enough...thus...the insert here is the correct way to go, if you intend on showing what's on the screen.

I'd do it like this (without any "we see's", of course...

Dave furiously types away on his keyboard.

ON SCREEN

blah, blah, blah.

Make sense?  Agree?  Disagree?  CJ?  Here's your chance to attack!  Go for it, you writer of gritty female leads.

Logged
e-mail Reply: 46 - 72
Athenian
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:05pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
203
Posts Per Day
0.06

Quoted from eldave1
To my eye:

We see Dave's computer screen as he types a post.

is better than

Dave sits at his computer - taps the keys

INSERT COMPUTER SCREEN

Blah, blah, blah.


I still use INSERT, but don't like it either. So, do you suggest that it could be avoided entirely?
Logged
Private Message Reply: 47 - 72
Grandma Bear
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:06pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
From Kevin...

"Libby, my account is inactive, so I had to post through Pia. I still come to the forum from time to time to check on friends, but I don't want to use up precious writing or reading time in volleys. I even read some OWC's! There are a lot of exceptional writers here, good to chart their success.

CJ's original comment in this thread was so well-stated that it drew me into the discussion. Sadly, he was later subjected to juvenile personal attack, which has since been amended, but was a reminder of how quickly things can degenerate here.

Dave's example in his last post was perfect! His examples really should be the stake in the heart of the rules people...but it won't be. They seem to have eternal lives. They are impenetrable to reason or evidence."


Logged
Private Message Reply: 48 - 72
cloroxmartini
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:11pm Report to Moderator
Been Around



Location
You know what a saguaro is?
Posts
803
Posts Per Day
0.14

Quoted from eldave1

It was whether or not a perceived transgression - the use of we - is grounds for evaluating the entire content of a script. To me it clearly is not and is more of an indication of a bad reviewer than it is of a bad writer.


The use of "we," (is that comma in the right correct spot location?) generally, would not deter me, however I have no problem bailing on a script at page one purely because of how it's written (done it a million zillion bajillion dozines dozens of times). Like Jeff said, you can generally tell what you're in for on from page one. If the story is there, then I, for the most part, can skip right over the format Nazi stuff. If you're committed to read (by money or word) then read, and review (maybe that's the real point here?), otherwise, who cares. I think it's the writers job to tell a story compelling enough to for me to want to read it (of course one person's reading junk is another's reading treasure).
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 49 - 72
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:22pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95

Quoted from CJ Walley


And all the power to you, buddy. But referring to a lot of the good practice out there as rules is part of the problem. We have to stop doing so.



Don't agree - I'm not going to object to some one posting:

As a rule - you should include day or night at the end of the slug.

vs.

As good practice - - you should include day or night at the end of the slug.

I personally have just learned too much from that type of feedback to not want to see it. Again, I started here as a novice so my value from it may be different then others.

I just want to avoid - your script sucks because you (pick your rule). I don't care what it is labeled.


My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 50 - 72
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:34pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95

Quoted Text
Dave, I agree with the first part of what I quoted here completely.  I do not agree with the 2nd part, about the we see example.

I know you're writing this example on the fly, without much thought, so no big deal, BUT, understand that using an insert, you are showing only what is being "inserted".

We may well see Dave's screen as he types, but it's unlikely we'll actually see exactly what's on that screen, as the shot will not be close enough...thus...the insert here is the correct way to go, if you intend on showing what's on the screen.

I'd do it like this (without any "we see's", of course...

Dave furiously types away on his keyboard.

ON SCREEN

blah, blah, blah.

Make sense?  Agree?  Disagree?  CJ?  Here's your chance to attack!  Go for it, you writer of gritty female leads.


Hey, Jeff.

No - I don't really agree. You make an assumption that is a bit of leap - that being we are looking at a blurry screen that we can't make out merely because it wasn't inserted. If I wrote this instead:

We see the words on Dave's computer screen as he types a post.

You still probably wouldn't like it. To me - all that is needed is the knowledge that something Dave types on a screen is visible. Why not let the Director decide if the shot it over Dave's shoulder, if it is a shot of the entire screen or any other scenario. It always seemed to be that the preciseness of the INSERT standard contradicts another axiom - don't so the Director's job.

All that being said - I think the way you suggested works fine as well. I just don't think there is a right of wrong here. But I do know my own preference.

Cheers


My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 51 - 72
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:38pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95

Quoted from Athenian


I still use INSERT, but don't like it either. So, do you suggest that it could be avoided entirely?


No. If I think that in my readers mind it is more compelling to see the Computer, TV, or whatever take up the entire screen - then I use the standard insert. If I don't think it matters I have taken to using the We see approach because I think it is more efficient.

I don't think there is a wrong way here. Or better said - I prefer to write what is in my mind's eye.


My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 52 - 72
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 12:40pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95

Quoted Text
You make a good argument here, Dave. I should have worded my point better. I don't feel good practice should be touted as a strict ruleset. The phrasing you use here does not do as such and I have no issue with it.


We be on the same page


My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 53 - 72
Dreamscale
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 1:18pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



OK guys and gals.  I'm not trying to argue here.  I'm honestly not and I'm going to choose my words very carefully and not take any potshots at anyone.  I'm also not going to say anything is right, wrong, or a rule that must be adhered to.  And again, I definitely understand that when someone throws out an example, chances are good they didn't spend alot of time on it.

Let's take an example of "Dave" and a screen.  It doesn't matter if it's a computer screen, a phone screen, or a TV screen.

If what's on that screen is important and you want to "show" what's on that screen, you need to make it known.  The only way you can do this is by "telling/showing" exactly what is on the screen.  If it's not important, you won't say anything about what's on the screen.

"Dave watches TV."  This simple action/description line says all we need to know, while not giving any exact details.  In this example, "we see" Dave watching a TV, which implies "we see" Dave, "we see" a TV, and "we see" him watching that TV.  It doesn't matter what's on the TV or where Dave is situated (sitting in a recliner, lying on a sofa, lying in bed.  Very possibly, this would be shown in the prior line or passage, but also very possibly, it's not, because it doesn't matter.

If Dave is doing Tae Bo, as he watches, we're going to need to know, and "see" that a Tae Bo workout is taking place on the screen (and maybe that Billy Blanks is on the screen, leading the workout - LOL!).

"Dave types away furiously on his computer keypad."  This simple action/description line again says all we need know, assuming we don't need to "see" what exactly he's typing.  If we do need to see what is on the screen or what he is typing, it's going to have to be written out, and IMO, an insert or "ON SCREEN" will need to be used, so we can "see it".  You're not going to say something like, "Dave types a love letter", or "Dave replies to a post on Simply Scripts".

"Dave texts on his new Smart Phone."  Again, this is a very simple action/description line that shows all we need to "see" - unless we need to "see" what's on the screen, and again, without an insert or the like, we will not be able to "see" what he's texting, because the screen is too small.

Just trying to be clear and make it clear where I'm coming from and why I say what I say.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 54 - 72
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 1:31pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95
Just to clarify: Dave is an old fat ass who would never work out as he watches TV. He would drink beer, eat snacks or doze off.

Jeff, I used the term post as a placeholder - it would work as:

We see Dave's computer screen as he types: "JEFF THINKS DAVE WORKS OUT."
i.e., you can use the We see to show exactly what is being seen. You prefer:

Dave types at his computer.

ON SCREEN

JEFF THINKS DAVE WORKS OUT

I prefer my way - achieves same objective, uses one line rather than three, lets the director decide how the viewer sees this. Sure, it would be scoffed at by some - but I like it better.


My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 55 - 72
Dreamscale
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 1:44pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from eldave1
Just to clarify: Dave is an old fat ass who would never work out as he watches TV. He would drink beer, eat snacks or doze off.

Jeff, I used the term post as a placeholder - it would work as:

We see Dave's computer screen as he types: "JEFF THINKS DAVE WORKS OUT."
i.e., you can use the We see to show exactly what is being seen. You prefer:

Dave types at his computer.

ON SCREEN

JEFF THINKS DAVE WORKS OUT

I prefer my way - achieves same objective, uses one line rather than three, lets the director decide how the viewer sees this. Sure, it would be scoffed at by some - but I like it better.


LOL!!!  

1 clarification - when using "ON SCREEN" - you can simply "follow" that on the same line with what is onscreen, so it's 1 extra line and 1 empty line.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 56 - 72
eldave1
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 2:01pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Southern California
Posts
6874
Posts Per Day
1.95

Quoted from Dreamscale


LOL!!!  

1 clarification - when using "ON SCREEN" - you can simply "follow" that on the same line with what is onscreen, so it's 1 extra line and 1 empty line.


So - it is 3 lines rather than 1. Better I think.

I would add this: the "guideline" will change. Somewhere down the road a guru will figure out that there is no need for the "We see" (my way) or the Insert (your way) because computers, TVs and cell phones are so ubiquitous. They will say just simply cap it like one does for sounds. e.g.,

Dave types on his computer: "DAVE IS FAT"

or

Dave pulls out his cell phone and texts: "DAVE IS FAT"

The argument will be since you added the line, of course it is scene - why waste the space telling us that it is.  My bet anyway.


My Scripts can all be seen here:

http://dlambertson.wix.com/scripts
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 57 - 72
Grandma Bear
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 2:04pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
I would just write -

Jeff stabs the keys on the keyboard. His jaw knotted tight.

On the screen: I need a fucking Jägermeister!



Logged
Private Message Reply: 58 - 72
Dreamscale
Posted: March 16th, 2016, 2:13pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Grandma Bear
I would just write -

Jeff stabs the keys on the keyboard. His jaw knotted tight.

On the screen: I need a fucking Jägermeister!




Or...

The great and all powerful Jeff stabs the keys on his keyboard, his jaw knotted tight.

ON SCREEN:  I need a fucking Jagie!

Logged
e-mail Reply: 59 - 72
 Pages: « 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 » : All
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Screenwriting Class  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006