Scripts studios are posting for award consideration.

We are now at sixteen...

- Don

I opened up The Lost City of Z. The second-third sentence was - WE HEAR WIND. Dude used - We.

Clearly this James Gray doesn't know what he's doing. I immediately closed the script.

OMG I opened, THE BIG SICK. Second sentence uses WE HEAR.

Then I opened, THE MAN WHO INVENTED CHRISTMAS. The second sentence in the script uses WE HEAR.

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST has a six line action paragraph. LOL.

Don't these pros know anything?

I suppose that once you are working in the business and you get a specific job, especially for a big film, you have some leeway, and I'm sure the film-makers would have given the screenwriter specifics that they want to see and that would be the writer's primary focus.

I was just joking. It's been shown time and time again that no one cares about most of these things, sans amateur writers online. I mean 3 out of the 6 scripts posted open with WE HEAR...

You will likely get criticized here for doing that.

Quoted from Demento I was just joking. It's been shown time and time again that no one cares about most of these things, sans amateur writers online. I mean 3 out of the 6 scripts posted open with WE HEAR... You will likely get criticized here for doing that.

Obviously, none of these scripts are going to win any awards...

To the point, tho it is used very sparingly.  And these are shooting drafts, rather than screenplays, so you are going to get camera angles and such in there.  I'm at the point now if I read, "Camera over to..." in a well written script it makes perfect sense and keeps me in the story.  

Where folks go wrong is that EVERY action slug has "We see..."  

I was very surprised that The Big Sick was so light on action slugs.  The dialogue, I thought, was snappy, but that is what one would expect from Kumail.  

- Don

I think if you understand filmmaking to a higher degree, like understand editing and shooting principles, camera angles, using camera moves can actually enhance the script because they can be used to better visually convey the story.

Now, someone is gonna say - but that's the director's job. That doesn't mean you as the writer can't convey how you see your story on screen. He may not use your idea, but sometimes the visual set-up, progression, aesthetic of the scene could be the point of the scene itself. I don't see why a writer can't express visual ideas on paper he thinks might enhance a scene or explain why he wrote it.

Later on a DP, director, VFX person and storyboard artist could hash out if it makes sense or if they should approach it another way.

Why be boring if you have an interesting idea on how a scene should play out on screen?

Of course you shouldn't go overboard with this like with anything but I don't think anyone would put your script down if you do.

Quoted from Don Obviously, none of these scripts are going to win any awards... To the point, tho it is used very sparingly.  And these are shooting drafts, rather than screenplays, so you are going to get camera angles and such in there.  I'm at the point now if I read, "Camera over to..." in a well written script it makes perfect sense and keeps me in the story.   Where folks go wrong is that EVERY action slug has "We see..."   I was very surprised that The Big Sick was so light on action slugs.  The dialogue, I thought, was snappy, but that is what one would expect from Kumail.   - Don

I quite liked the Big Sick.  

It is obvious (at least to me) from the script it was written from a perspective of a story already sold, characters already known, etc - and therefore format and other nitty things ignored: Just from page 1.

No FADE IN

Unneeded page numbers in left

The "We Hear" - which ain't needed btw. Could just have easily wrote  - Audience LAUGHTER.

No proper character intro for Andy Dodd - or age or description.

Same issue for KUMAIL

Same issue for CHRIS

A SLUG wasted on Credits

etc.

Basically stuff that you are only getting a way with if concept, characters etc have already been pitched and sold and now you're just writing a script and taking advantage of the short cuts now available.  I would never recommend someone write a spec script like this.

I don't crap my pants when I see a "We see". Only issue to me is when a better way of doing is available and not used.

Quoted from eldave1 Only issue to me is when a better way of doing is available and not used.

But isn't that subjective and most of these things can be debated to death.

Instance, why use FADE IN, when most movies don't really fade in? Why waste a line on something that isn't practical and doesn't serve any purpose? To mark the start of the story? We're at page one, we know it's starting. Technically a fade in is a transition. Why use a transition at the end and start and not in-between? Why use something archaic when most archaic things have been left behind? Fades and dissolves as transitions in feature films went out of style in the 60s.

Most working writers don't care about these things and philosophies differ. Billy Ray (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0712753/) says - use more parenthesis. The tone of your story could live in the parenthesis. Most screenplay gurus say - don't use parenthesis, it's a sign of an amateur.

People say, the script is the blueprint of the film. Tarantino says - the script is NOT a blueprint to your film.

There are really no right answers here, most of the time. Are we really gonna lose sleep over these things? If we do, then so will others and people will focus on pointing out technicalities and not what's wrong with the story.

Quoted from Demento But isn't that subjective and most of these things can be debated to death. Instance, why use FADE IN, when most movies don't really fade in? Why waste a line on something that isn't practical and doesn't serve any purpose? To mark the start of the story? We're at page one, we know it's starting. Technically a fade in is a transition. Why use a transition at the end and start and not in-between? Why use something archaic when most archaic things have been left behind? Fades and dissolves as transitions in feature films went out of style in the 60s. Most working writers don't care about these things and philosophies differ. Billy Ray (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0712753/) says - use more parenthesis. The tone of your story could live in the parenthesis. Most screenplay gurus say - don't use parenthesis, it's a sign of an amateur. People say, the script is the blueprint of the film. Tarantino says - the script is NOT a blueprint to your film. There are really no right answers here, most of the time. Are we really gonna lose sleep over these things? If we do, then so will others and people will focus on pointing out technicalities and not what's wrong with the story.

We are not that far apart.

On the We

As I said, it doesn't violate my senses when I spot a We See or We Hear. However, I often feel that the writer didn't take the best approach. I think it is far more exciting to read : BANG -  a Gunshot echoes in the air. Then it is to read We hear a Gunshot. Again - not a huge deal.

On Fade In

Think you have a point.

Parentheses

Agree with you here - as I would on asides and unfilmables. If any of them are used to improve the pace or tone of the story - go for it. If they don't - nuke them.

I think my problem was the script you selected was such a bad example - it is obviously a short cut script - just look at the character intros. A spec writer would never get away with that and shouldn't.

But philosophically, we are not that far apart.

Pretty sure the FADE IN is left over from very early film making days, back when film makers played with the aperture position as a method of transition, probably their only method back then in the silent-film days or a handful of limited ones.

People carried it over all this time to legitimatize their writings. Tradition, I suppose.

As far as WE SEE, I ask: who's we, anyways? It's kinda like when someone is proving a point and says: THEY SAY...  

Why not say, THEY SEE in the action blocks of the script? I maintain, I'd rather not read WE SEE.

Funny thing is, the WE SEE term seems to be used mostly in the opening of a script, and kinda vanishes as the script continues. Fine with me.

I personally don't like WE SEE. It doesn't read well to me and comes off a bit lazy.

However, a lot of "pro" writers seem to use it.

Will check some of these out as I've just started a new feature based on my recent trek to Nepal. Its gonna be a horror/comedy with zombies at Base Camp as the theme lol.

And I had planned to go full on on this with unfilmables, asides, WE SEE etc to keep in the wacky comedic vein of it. Sort of like the Beatles film 'Help'. The main chars will all be based on me and the 4 other people I trekked with to the letter, as we had a fine time with jokes and snappy banter during the trip as we all become lifelong friends. Hopefully i can nail it - looking to get it done by Xmas

Sounds cool

mother! and I, Tonya are up on the scripts studios are posting for award consideration page.

- Don