• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Cold Opens - How much Exposition is enough?

I

idenitycrisis27

So hey guys, this is my first post on the forums but I had a question. I'm currently working with a group of people on making a TV show that will be crossing large desks in nice offices in less than two weeks. I've been given the opportunity to take the pilot and fix the terrible cold open it had, before it's given to a certain well-known comic book writer/television writer. So, in the rough draft, the opener is supposed to establish how the world works in this fictional universe, but the way it is in the rough draft, the first chunk of dialogue is a monster of a paragraph.
Nine bland, uninteresting, sentences that go something like 'You just don't understand...back in my day, things were a whole lot different...These people are such a huge threat to civil society and our government is barely doing anything about it.' It always makes the writer in me die a little when I read it. I want to change the opener to be something much more subtle, showing through action, rather than through dialogue. Even though the characters in the scene are just throwaway characters, I don't want them to feel as absolutely useless as they do as it is.
So, my question is this: How much exposition in a cold open should be told through Dialogue alone? I know how it should feel in my head, but I'm just looking for an outside opinion, because the other two writers on the project are hard to work with when it comes to changes.

Thanks!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
It opens with throwaway characters to illustrate a racism between two groups of people in the world. The prejudiced character is killed in the opening scene after he attacks two police officers who purposely provoked him into a violent response. The scene was supposed to invoke a sense of the racism during the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Unless the "provoking" is in the boring dialogue, I'm not sure why you need much more than that visual in the opening scene: cops provoke character, who responds physically (I presume?), and cops (or bystanders?) kill character. Seems like that action speaks for itself. But maybe I'm missing something...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The provoking is not anywhere in the dialogue. The scene as it sits is two cops talking. They receive a call on the radio, report to the scene of the crime, and ask to check the offender's blood to determine if he is part of the fictional minority, and he attacks because he knows they'll take him to prison just because he's part of the minority. They shoot him and then it goes straight to the theme. It's terrible.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I personally feel that the entire scene is unnecessary because the scene right after it establishes the main characters, and then shows them going through the exact same situation, only they don't fight back and are sent to the prison.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
In Serenity, the school history lesson doesn't feel too heavy-handed, it comes close, but it ultimately works because it is more about River, a character that we _do_ care about, and the history lesson is secondary.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@mlesemann Do you have any suggestions for an alternative scene, or an alternative purpose it could be used for instead? I've been looking at this project and nothing else for about a week straight and I feel like my brain is burned out on this particular subject.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If it's intended to evoke the racism that was protested by the Civil Rights movement, could you write a scene that shows the "good ol' days" that the cops liked? When the minority "knew its place" and wasn't a "threat to civil society"?

The negative is that it could seem offensive, belittling to the minority. But if done well, it could help to get the viewer to sympathize with/side with the oppressed minority, which I'm assuming is the eventual goal.

It would also provide much more contrast to the next scene, I think?

Of course, I could be completely misunderstanding what you're going for here.
But I just think that you want a contrast, as much as possible, in the 2 scenes.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
idenitycrisis27 said:
So hey guys, this is my first post on the forums but I had a question. I'm currently working with a group of people on making a TV show ... So, in the rough draft, the opener is supposed to establish how the world works in this fictional universe, but the way it is in the rough draft, the first chunk of dialogue is a monster of a paragraph.
Nine bland, uninteresting, sentences that go something like 'You just don't understand...back in my day, things were a whole lot different...These people are such a huge threat to civil society and our government is barely doing anything about it.' It always makes the writer in me die a little when I read it. I want to change the opener to be something much more subtle, showing through action, rather than through dialogue. Even though the characters in the scene are just throwaway characters, I don't want them to feel as absolutely useless as they do as it is.
So, my question is this: How much exposition in a cold open should be told through Dialogue alone? I know how it should feel in my head, but I'm just looking for an outside opinion, because the other two writers on the project are hard to work with when it comes to changes.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Voiceover is fine if there is action going on. But I would advise against it in the pilot. For instance, "Dexter" will often start with a short voiceover which preps for the episode. For me, I like to drop the audience into action immediately. The short dialogue you included really says nothing. It's not really expository as it doesn't tell the audience anything unless as suggested by others, there are images of these "others" begin dangerous.

idenitycrisis27 said:
It opens with throwaway characters to illustrate a racism between two groups of people in the world. The prejudiced character is killed in the opening scene after he attacks two police officers who purposely provoked him into a violent response. The scene was supposed to invoke a sense of the racism during the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s.
Click to expand...

idenitycrisis27 said:
The provoking is not anywhere in the dialogue. The scene as it sits is two cops talking. They receive a call on the radio, report to the scene of the crime, and ask to check the offender's blood to determine if he is part of the fictional minority, and he attacks because he knows they'll take him to prison just because he's part of the minority. They shoot him and then it goes straight to the theme. It's terrible.
Click to expand...

idenitycrisis27 said:
I personally feel that the entire scene is unnecessary because the scene right after it establishes the main characters, and then shows them going through the exact same situation, only they don't fight back and are sent to the prison.
Click to expand...

Still I'd condense down the dialogue to one line and merge the scenes.

Code: 
Overview of "others" involved in some activity.

Squad car pulls up, lights flashing and beeps its warning call.

They glance up surprised as the COPs look out at "them".

One REBEL stands and looks defiant.

INT.  SQUAD CAR - DAY

                            COP #1
                 (to partner)
        They never change, only how politicians tie our hands.
        At least, publicly ... Not everything changes.

The partners exchange glances, adjust themselves and advance 
towards the group.

                             REBEL
         Well, well.  If it ain't the Guardians of the People here
         to keep us all safe.

Nervous laughter from behind.

[i][b]... go on to develop the dialogue & altercation that kills the 'rebel' 
and leads to the others being arrested and imprisoned.  Someone key 
escapes or is injured in the process as the hook.[/b][/i]
That's enough to let the audience dislike COP #1, realize this is a civil problem, and highlights the "others". Then you zip into an action scene. In a TV episode, you need to get into the action in the first 6-8 pages. I'd merge the two scenes. Also "it goes straight to the theme" SHOULD NOT be part of the script. It's a director/editorial call about placing credits, intro's, etc. Unless you are part of the team writing the SHOOTING script, it shouldn't be a consideration in your PILOT script which focuses on story. Having said that, a television writer needs to be more structured than a feature writer.

In television, the end of your act should have a cliffhanger or ‘hook’ so the audience comes back after the commercial break. This may sound confusing and contradictory but after you’ve written your screenplay, you’ll want to go back and divide it up into “commercial acts”. A one hour TV show may have a format like:

Code: 
[color="red"]   Action                          Break[/color]
TEASER: 2-3 pages 	         title sequence & commercial break
ACT I: 10-12 pages          commercial break
ACT II: 10-12 pages        commercial break
ACT III: 10-12 pages       commercial break
ACT IV: 10-12 pages         commercial break
TAG:  2-3 pages	        credits
A more modern trend is to more evenly distribute these sequences.
Code: 
[color="red"]   Action                          Break[/color]
TEASER: 4-6 pages       title sequence & commercial break
ACT I: 8-10 pages        commercial break
ACT II: 8-10 pages       commercial break
ACT III: 8-10 pages      commercial break
ACT IV: 8-10 pages      commercial break
TAG:  6-8 pages	     credits

Sounds like an awesome opportunity for you. Good luck!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top