What I'm saying is that if the "rules" are in place to guarantee the greatest potential for success, and you break the rules and STILL end up being totally successful ....then why were the rules ever there in the first place?
"The rules" developed over time from what plays well on the screen. Just like the hemline of skirts, the interpretation of the "rules" reflects the community. The previous post about ratings and use of swearing is an example. But more importantly you are mixing up two different concepts--the script and the movie.
The script--by the writer--is not the part that makes money. The movie--by the director--is what makes the money. In the past the writer and the director were often different. The trend today is they are one and the same.
"The rules" don't dictate whether a script is "good" or not. Just as speed limit signs don't dictate whether you're a good driver or not. We all know some areas are speed traps and drive carefully. Other times, we can go a little faster because the stretch of road is long and vacant.
A movie is a realization of a script that uses the talents of the director, actors, and many behind the scenes talents. Poor scripts can sometimes be saved by good directing, acting and editing. Equally, an awesome script can be ruined by poor performances.
There are a different set of "rules" for visual media--camera angles, depth of focus, shot composition, audio and visual effects planning, etc. These are the MONEY MAKERS. And if I'm the writer/director I get to put all that into my script. If I'm not, I can suggest it. The closer my vision is to the director's, the more likely my script will be realized as I wrote it. However, all those elements cost money. Often the director and the producer need to do what is financially possible.
The rules for writing reflect what has worked well in finished films over the years, just as the rules for filming have evolved. They aren't static which is why they are "best practice guidelines". Anyone driving the highway in the city knows that that 55 mph is just a recommended speed given everyone else rushing past you. But driving through smaller towns, you might want to be a bit more conservative. It's about experience. These guidelines help new writers and are not intended as fetters. Nor do they make a mediocre script great. Highways riddled with potholes are still bad driving.
... I could easily see someone who loves to find faults in other people's scripts because it makes them feel like they are operating at a much higher level. ....Like a self-initiated 'ego stroke".
I agree and that unfortunately happens. It's true everywhere though. I'm sure you've received "helpful" advice from other artists regarding your oil paintings. To be a screenwriter requires a thick hide and belief in your own ability to push forward.
... I also don't want to "get away" with writing a sloppy script. All I want is there to be an agreed-upon philosophy (and format guide) that is universally accepted within the industry so I CAN supply a quality script. All I want to do is KNOW what I'm supposed to do so that I can DELIVER exactly what is required of me!
Writing a script "by the rules" doesn't make it quality. It produces a well formatted script.
Writing a script "using the formula" doesn't make it quality. It produces a predictable script.
It's like creating a scene with Bob Ross. Following his techniques produces works that resemble realistic natural scenes that makes amateurs feel like accomplished artists. Artists can take some of those techniques and create their own works. "Real artists" say Ross just sold techniques and the paintings are just cliche. Yet many people like cliche. It makes them feel talented. These "formulas" and "rules" do the same thing. They help give new writers confidence and organize their efforts so they do resemble "real screenplays".
I can only offer my five observations:
FSF #1: Have a solid story concept that is well laid out so that there are no plot holes.
FSF #2: Use screenwriting software to format your script and consult Trotter's Screenwriter's Bible on questions of advanced formatting.
FSF #3: Have others read your script outloud to hear the flow of dialogue.
FSF #4: Expect you will need to re-read and revise your script several times before you're ready to submit.
FSF #5: Be active in filmmaking locally to get a feel for what works well on the camera.
Half the experts say "No address on the title sheet." The other half says, "put your address on the title sheet." A part of my $99 script review was wasted because the analyst was part of the 50% who says, "No address on the title page." It was just "luck of the draw" that it turned out that way for me.
Honestly, it doesn't matter unless it's for a contest in which they explictly do not want information that would bias a reader. NO PRODUCER/READER will pass on a script because of an address on the first page. Let's be sensible. There are producers who will only accept from Canadian writers or similar. That's the writer's bad for not checking that out before submitting.
...Every keystroke I'm typing in on my script is coming from one place... and ONLY one place. That's MY FRICKIN' BRAIN! It is 100% MY STORY! What happens to it after that is a totally different issue. But the truth is that it has to start somewhere... and that starting point is my FRICKIN' HEAD!
I agree. My point is that they are indifferent to your concerns because once it's in their hands, it becomes their story. That indifference is what can feel frustrating to me as the ORIGINATOR of the STORY. The "game" is making the script enticing so it is produced close to my original version. Some screenwriters obsess about "their story" when, after the sale, it no longer is.
...As a nobody script writer who may end up being a "one trick pony" the contest route is probably my only option. I agree about the "genre" issue in these contests. I can clearly see the Nicholl Fellowship is a drama-oriented contest ....but I have to start somewhere.
Just don't take it hard if you don't make it. I've read many excellent scripts that never place. With any contest, there can only be a handful of winners. You might also query local production companies like "Silver Chain Films" in Louisville to see if they'd be willing to read your script. Really, Birdman, volunteer to be on a set and help out. I know their focus is horror but from the description, your script straddles that horror/sci fi line. Also, try writing some other scripts. Pinning all your hopes on one script will only limit your opportunities.
If I were to summarize, I have found WAY too much discrepancy within the ENTIRE script writing industry as compared to other walks of life. There are far too many "conflicting views" as to what is proper format and what is not. If the industry can't come together at the most basic level (proper script format) and have a clear set of scripting guidelines ...then I'm sticking to my evaluation that the entire industry is fucked up.
Thanks for the in-depth replies! I really DO enjoy the opinions expressed by you and several others.
-Birdman
I'd have to say the same is true for art. I mean cubism? pointillism? abstract? pop? WTF? Can't they just settle on a style? I mean Bob Ross taught me how to make realistic landscapes with happy little clouds. That's REAL art. My teacher said that perspective is weenies. Another said that the color wheel is 19th century and should be banned. Both have works in major galleries. When I studied piano and I had to learn scales and modes. I studied counterpoint and harmonic progressions and then later found out those weren't used by "real" musicians who went on gut instinct. Who do I believe?
If I follow all the rules, I end up with happy little clouds reflected over gently bubbling streams that look realistic. I have I-IV-V-I compositions that are harmonious to the ear. These are effin' masterpieces! OK, so I didn't go to Juillard or Pratt but watched the videos. Why aren't I in the gallery or being played in concert halls? The entire art and music industry is effed up!
FSF:
(1) Whenever someone posts their dialogue sequences in these forums, usually 75% of the words gets whacked out of whatever the characters are saying. ... we "noob writers" are scared to fucking death to add even one single additional word to our dialogue for fear that the "On the nose" dialogue gods will spill their wrath upon our scripts.
On-the-nose is when the characters say what is already seen and known. A director will cut it out. If an exchange basically says nothing, yeah, lots of the words will be cut. From research studies, nearly 50% of general conversation is redundant. Back in the days of plastic film, time was major money. Dialogue was kept to what was needed to move the scene. FROM THE DIRECTOR'S PERSPECTIVE, they are encouraged to have the characters do something without saying a word. Film is primarily visual. That's the problem for most new writers is they feel compelled to have dialogue.
(2) I'm currently watching "Saving Mr. Banks". The dialogue in this movie is TOTALLY SATURATED with words words words words words! P.L. Travers (main character) responds in scene after scene with dialogue so complex, witty, and sharp that is difficult for mortal human beings to even keep up with. I doubt seriously that anyone could EVER spew out words so well articulated and strung together with such Shakespearian expertise ...yet there it is right up there on the silver screen! It's not enough that she responds to other people in such unbelievable fashion ...but she even talks to herself this way when nobody is standing around her.
Truth Time: If I wrote a screenplay like this and posted it up in these threads, you guys would be "whacking away" at P.L. Travers' dialogue until she ended up talking like in the example I posted above saying, "Birdman, NOBODY talks that way in real life!"
-Birdman
John Lee Hancock, who directed "Saving Mr. Banks", served as a production assistant on "My Demon Lover". He was writer/director of "Hard Time Romance". He was involved with a couple other projects, one a television series he helped to write, direct and produce. Mr. Hancock is a successful writer, director and writer/director following the career progression I mentioned earlier.
Ms. Marcel has several credits having worked as an actress as well as being writer & producer of the TV show "Terra Nova". Her co-writer, Ms. Smith has a well established history working in Australian TV.
Truth Time: Dialogue needs to be appropriate to the character. If you had over twenty years of writing experience under your belt as they do, especially having to write for television which is a much more structured medium, you would know the proper tone, length, and content.. Working as an actor, as Ms. Marcel has done, informs your writing. Experienced writers use dialogue with a purpose.
On any Internet forum you will find people with limited experience willing to chime in what they've read or think without any experience to back it up. When you hear from people who have written and directed, like Directorik and others, you're getting feedback based on experience. Directors and writers who've worked on sets read scripts differently than screenwriters who've never set foot on a production.
One More Point:
My wife couldn't find her "FitBit" this morning and was running around looking for it. I found it down in the basement. When I found it I told her, "I found your FitBit. You left it in the basement on top of the washing machine." Now, this was a REAL LIFE happening. That's what I said to her.
.... There is no doubt in my mind that numerous follow-up post would have whacked my response down to mere nothingness with the end result being:
...even though that's not what happened in "real life". People would have suggested I reduce it down to a more "believable" phrase.
-Birdman
"I found your FitBit. You left it in the basement on top of the washing machine." It's obvious that you found it since you're holding it. Is it relevant that the washing machine is in the basement? If so, did the audience see the washer in the basement in a previous scene? I mean, obviously Mrs. Birdman knows where the washer is so I don't need to tell her it's in the basement. Since I'm handing it to her, it's obvious to her that I found it. So the root essence I need to convey is "It was on top of the washer."
Code:
Mrs. Birdman rushes about and
Birdman reaches up and touches her arm.
She pauses as he smiles and holds up the fitbit.
BIRDMAN
It was on top of the washer.
She brightens, takes it, goes to leave ...
she returns, kisses his cheek and dashes off.
He smiles to himself before sipping his coffee.
If important, I could say "Your fitbit was on top of the washer." or even "Happen to leave this on the washer, dear?" Here the tone of the character is important. But that tone would have to carry through the entire script. Dialogue is difficult. It needs to be purposeful in setting the context of character, location, and period. And it is the most problematic. When there is only a small piece to evaluate, it can seem the recommendations to cut dialogue feel arbitrary.
When I'm acting, the director often gives us discretion to change the dialogue to make it feel natural for the scene. The director will give me the script, I will learn the lines. When actually in the shoot, if the dialogue feels wrong or is awkward, the director may give some suggestions or I may put out my own ideas. As the actor, I'm interpreting dialogue. I'm telling you this because if you keep worrying about getting the dialogue right, you're misspending your efforts. Dialogue helps me to get a sense of my character. My role as an actor is to take the words and actions and make them believable.
Before you go off, "Fine! A fellow screenwriter doesn't even respect the script when he's acting!" you need to understand. When acting, I'm focused on MY ROLE--to breath life to your script. I believe screenwriters should take acting lessons if they want to improve their dialogue skills. The more industry savvy you become, the more you maximize your opportunities.
. I think it would be safe to agree with Rik. You probably ain't seen nothing yet
) would ABSOLUTELY LOVE to see someone actually pull it off just to energize that feeling of creativity that seems to get lost within the cold, hard reality of life. There is still a small, tiny grain of "hope" that a nobody can pull off a miracle in the spec script industry, but reality (and Rayw's many anti-hope links) are always there to remind us all that miracles seldom happen in real life.