okay so I just read an article about polishing one's script - the number two items was windows and orphans (basically the same just one refers to dialogue and the other action.) It basically said besides passive writing (of which I have been guilty and working on changing it) it's the top turnoff to a professional reader.

I try to read scripts everyday - currently reading chinatown - many consider the best script ever. Windows and orphans all over the place. (yes it's the original "spec" script - not shooting or transposed.) i.e on two consecutive pages 16 orphans and 8 windows. (May be reversed I always forget which is which.)

So, what do you guys think of widows and orphans.

Also I've been given the advice many times to 1) never use adhjcetives in a script 2) expresses emotions through actions - I.e. head down instead of sad. and 3) no exposition in action lines or dialogue - Chinatown and about every other good script I've read is full or these.

So what do you guys think?

Figured we needed a goos topic to get this place rolling again - been kinda dead.

John

Orphans are an issue, simply because they are a line waster, assuming the cause of the orphan is overwriting in some form.

Orphans in dialogue are a different beast, really, as what peeps say (in dialogue) is simply what you want them to say - as in there aren't any "mistakes" in dialogue, so you may end up with some dialogue orphans.

I remember reading the script for Black Swan, and I was just appalled at the number of orphans, and if I recall correctly, the version of the script that I read (it was actually a group read here on SS) had an extra 20 pages due to wasted lines with an orphan that didn't need to be there.

For me, it's simply an editing function, as in eveyr time I see an orphan, it draws me to reread the line/passage and 99% of the time, it is very simple to do away with the orphan, without taking a single thing away from the read.

With 50 give or take lines to work with on each page, just think what happens to your feature script of 100 pages when you have 2 orphans on every page.  You have an extra 4 pages in your script.  Do the simple math with 3, 4, 5 orphans per page - your script gets bloated and runs longer than it needs to.

My opinion,

There is nothing inherently wrong with an orphan.

There is always something wrong if you didn't write a line as efficiently and clearly as possible.

On my second run-through of a script, I always examine each orphan to see if there was a crisper/shorter way to write that line and therefore avoid it. I would guess about 90% of the time I am able to get rid of the orphan by writing the line better.

So, I think I am sync with Jeff here for the most part.

I would side with Jeff and Dave, as well. The thing about orphans, they don't bother me but if you can get rid of them and shorten your script that little, extra bit, why not do it?

That said, if you have a line worded perfectly and it ends in an orphan, don't make it clunky to remove the orphan.

Ease of comprehension trumps page length any day.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Ease of comprehension trumps page length any day.

yep

Had scripts, short and feature length, read and reviewed by a variety of producers, directors, readers etc... orphans have never come up... life's short, so are orphans, crack on.

I eliminate them totally as it looks better on the page

Basically the way I felt about them. Then I kept reading more and more "the rules" - Then when you read great scripts they don't follow them.

Of corse as you guys pointed out - orphans do serve a purpose - they force you to look at your work and be more concise if possible;e. Seems in the action line it's a lot more possible to remove them then loosing a character's "voice" in dialogue.

I went back in the script I just finished last week and was able to remove all but one orphan and I actually think it read better.

Interesting thing is that Chinatown is 128 pages in original form - probably because of all the orphans - If we try to even get 128 pages read - well - you know that story.

Thanks

And steve - you are right - it does make the script look neater without them - just not at the sake of a character's voice.

Going back to the original OP, I think it’s probably best to go with what you see the pros doing whilst taking into account how established they already are and if they have any other roles with that particular project, like being the director for example which can mean they have more power to bend the rules for example.

However I think the main thing is readability, and how well you’re able to tell a good story.

For example people get their nickers in a twist about unfilmables, but that’s just silly. Yes you don’t want to go overboard, but if it helps the reader, who could be the actor playing that role for example, better understand what is going on, then I see no harm in that, and neither do many of the pros from what I can tell.

Max - many of those in famous scripts also.

Forgive my ignorance but can someone explain "orphans" to me. I'm guilty of over writing, is this the same thing?

Thanks

O

Quoted from Geezis Forgive my ignorance but can someone explain "orphans" to me. I'm guilty of over writing, is this the same thing? Thanks O

Usually, yeah, it's related to overwriting. When you write a line of prose (or dialogue, to some people) and it goes onto the next line by one word, that's an orphan.

Quoted from Geezis Forgive my ignorance but can someone explain "orphans" to me. I'm guilty of over writing, is this the same thing? Thanks O

Not over-writing per se. Just means when you a single word leak over to the next
line.

Quoted from eldave1 Not over-writing per se. Just means when you a single word leak over to the next line.

Crazy thing is that I've had people tell me this on dialogue. If you have an orphan in your dialogue, don't mess with it, unless you have a better line of dialogue to replace it.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Crazy thing is that I've had people tell me this on dialogue. If you have an orphan in your dialogue, don't mess with it, unless you have a better line of dialogue to replace it.

IMO - it doesn't apply to dialogue

Some people out there think it does. I don't know how nor why.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Some people out there think it does. I don't know how nor why.

Yeah - I know. I have seen the critiques. Always thought what a moron.

I avoid them in dialogue too lol

Quoted from stevie I avoid them in dialogue too lol

DAVE
I take it back. Not everyone that has
a problem with them in dialogue is a
moron.

See that orphan there :)

As noted above, they're an inefficient use of space, and you can usually tighten up the action block to get that line back. Sometimes the correct fix is to add a short sentence and just make better use of that line.

The term "orphan" technically applies to dialog blocks as well, but given the narrow margins of a dialog block, it's much less of a "sin" and trying to fix it will usually do more harm than good.

Note that screenwriting software like Final Draft prefers to put page breaks between whole sentences, so it can create or avoid orphans differently than Word.

Here's a link to some examples :)

Lol Dave it’s more my OCD. I just can’t leave that lonely word there  ;D

Quoted from stevie Lol Dave it’s more my OCD. I just can’t leave that lonely word there  ;D

Totally understood

Thanks everyone, that’s been made clearer for me.

One thing I’d like to add is that if you’re worrying about this stuff you’re probably more concerned about what other writers think than the people who actually count. And if that is the case then you’re writing for the wrong audience. After all writers don’t make films.

I honestly think nobody cares (except some other writers).

So with that in mind I think it’s always better to write for producers, directors and actors.

Quoted from Pleb One thing I’d like to add is that if you’re worrying about this stuff you’re probably more concerned about what other writers think than the people who actually count. And if that is the case then you’re writing for the wrong audience. After all writers don’t make films. I honestly think nobody cares (except some other writers). So with that in mind I think it’s always better to write for producers, directors and actors.

Well, let's throw out an example again and see if no one would care about this.

If you have 5 orphans on every page, in a 100 page feature, you have 500 orphans in your script.  Divide that by 50, and you have 10 extra pages of complete waste, meaning, actually you have a 90 page script that's been artificially bloated to 100 pages.

It matters.  Orphans matter.  Get rid of them and send them home to hang out with all the other orphans.

I think 5 orphans per page throughout an entire script is incredibly unlikely.

And again, I don’t think orphans matter unless the people who actually make films think they matter, and judging from the amount I’ve seen in screenplays by professional writers, I don’t see any evidence for them being an issue.

Quoted from Pleb I think 5 orphans per page throughout an entire script is incredibly unlikely. And again, I don’t think orphans matter unless the people who actually make films think they matter, and judging from the amount I’ve seen in screenplays by professional writers, I don’t see any evidence for them being an issue.

What Jeff is saying is simply that page lengths set expectations. Readers and executives would prefer to see shorter page lengths. Artificial inflation, in that case, is bad. In practice, it actually means nothing.

You're both right, but discussing different elements.

Quoted from Dreamscale Well, let's throw out an example again and see if no one would care about this. If you have 5 orphans on every page, in a 100 page feature, you have 500 orphans in your script.  Divide that by 50, and you have 10 extra pages of complete waste, meaning, actually you have a 90 page script that's been artificially bloated to 100 pages. It matters.  Orphans matter.  Get rid of them and send them home to hang out with all the other orphans.

I read the script for "Annie". There were at least five orphans on every page.

Quoted from eldave1 I read the script for "Annie". There were at least five orphans on every page.

Oh, Dave... Dave, Dave, Dave... Lol.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Oh, Dave... Dave, Dave, Dave... Lol.

:)