Filming with a Treatment but no Script?

Raditude

Raditude

I have an idea for an independent film, and have written a "Presentation Treatment." The treatment includes some of the dialog and gives a general idea on the direction the film should go. I find myself lacking the attention span to sit down and write a whole script for a feature length film. Since I'll be directing and know what I want, I have been thinking of just shooting with the Treatment, and coming up with dialog on the fly and having characters improv some of their lines.

Does anyone see a problem with going this route? Has anyone done it before, and had success or failure? Does anyone have any recommendations on how to achieve this?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Does anyone see a problem with going this route
Click to expand...

I'll give you a similar dilemma..

I want to build a house, but don't really have a blueprint with room layout, dimensions, sizes etc..

but i DO have a sketch of the house...


Appleseed%20House%20Sketch.jpg



Now, do you think I could build my house just by going off of my sketch?


I probably could.. but it will have sooooo many problems, and i will have to tear it down many many times, because the beams wont go together, there will be gaps in the window and door frames, etc...




Your script is your blueprint to your movie.
Of course, if its 30 second long - you PROBABLY could get away with it, but with anything longer - write a screenplay.
Get Celtx too, if you don't have it.. its a free screenplay software
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
dlevanchuk said:
Your script is your blueprint to your movie.
Of course, if its 30 second long - you PROBABLY could get away with it, but with anything longer - write a screenplay.
Get Celtx too, if you don't have it.. its a free screenplay software
Click to expand...
I agree.

http://celtx.com/
Also:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/12721428/Professional-Screenplay-Formatting-Guide

If your attention span finds significant resistance to pounding out a 110pg screenplay then organizing all the moving to pieces to directing a feature is going to be considerably more difficult.

Changing words around on a word processing program is like building an oragami paper boat compared to organizing video & audio materials, auditioning people for cast & crew, scouting and securing locations, costumes, props, schedules, budgets, release forms, permissions, editing, scoring, distribution, and setting up the project's LLC all of which is like putting together your own wooden sailing yacht.
You know your starboard from port, right?
When your AD gets into a heated argument with your DP, who stomps off with his disk out of your camera halfway through the shoot and doesn't come back from lunchbreak who owns the material on the disk? :)

Before begining with a feature length project you may find it fantastically beneficial to first create, shoot, edit, and elicit feedback on three or four five to ten minute shorts.
Each will be wildly different educational experiences.

With a good understanding of the actual experience on those short projects you'll be able to bring considerably more to your feature length project which will exponentially task everyone's emotional resources considerably more.
Sprinting vs. marathon.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I did it once, with a 10-minute short. Horrible failure. Hated every minute of it. Would never even think of doing it again.

Screenwriting is arguably THE most important step of the entire process.

dlevanchuk makes a great analogy, but I'd say that building a house, based only on a sketch, is similar to shooting a short film without a script. Shooting a feature, without a script, would be a little more like this:

Build me this airplane-

airplane.jpg
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm no expert, but if you got a cast that is good at improv, it might work.
There was a film made here called 'The nativity' that was all improvisation and it worked pretty well. So try it and see how it goes? :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The movie Monsters was filmed this way.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1470827/

They explain in the extras how they drove around South America, and Central America, with just a treatment, and would see locations that fit different scenes. Since there wasn't any dialog written, he couldn't even A/B shots, and they only had 1 camera. So he would film them improvising the dialog, and cut A/B shots to make it look like there was conversation.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As soon as you mention no script people are always going to look down upon the idea, because you're breaking convention. These are the people that want to make the perfect film, they want to make money.

Film is about pushing the boundaries, if you think you're good enough then give it a shot. Approach filmmaking like a work of art, not like an airfix kit.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raditude said:
Does anyone see a problem with going this route?
Click to expand...
I see many problems.

But no more than making any feature length movie. There are
problems going the route of three crew. There are problems going
the route of using only natural lighting. Their are problems shooting
on film. There are problems going the rout of shooting a feature
in five days. There are problems going the route of shooting a feature
with only $5,000.

The way you make a movie is the way you make a movie. I think
it would be foolish to NOT try this. Regardless of what others have
done or what others think, YOU should make the movie you want
using the method you want.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I wouldn't do this with a feature length. Up to about a 10 minute short maybe. What are your goals? If you want to be very good at what you do I don't think so. Or, maybe you want to be the best at filming features without a script, then maybe.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
There are
problems going the route of three crew. There are problems going
the route of using only natural lighting. Their are problems shooting
on film. There are problems going the rout of shooting a feature
in five days. There are problems going the route of shooting a feature
with only $5,000.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth! :yes:

directorik said:
The way you make a movie is the way you make a movie. I think
it would be foolish to NOT try this. Regardless of what others have
done or what others think, YOU should make the movie you want
using the method you want.
Click to expand...

That's a really good point. Shoot, for all we know, the OP might be the next Christopher Guest. The only thing I might add, though, is that I think we should at least acknowledge that what the OP wants to do is incredibly daring. It's a bold move, and it sounds to me like they'd be taking a giant leap on blind faith.

My advice would be to take that giant leap, but not on blind faith. I'm a risk-taker, but I believe in taking educated risks. So, if this is the method the OP wants to employ, perhaps, instead of jumping completely into the deep-end, with a feature as their first venture, how about a couple practice-shorts?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
if you are going improv, try to have 2-3 cameras to make sure you get good coverage. If possible get camera ops who are quick on their feet and know the camera well. Make sure to have plenty of batteries for the cameras and extra memory cards. organize as best you can ahead of time on what you want from each person involved.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The thought of shooting anything narrative (especially a feature) without a schedule so detailed I know what time I'm taking a crap on day 4 makes me break out in a cold sweat, so you can imagine how I'd feel about no script. I'd run screaming into the night.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I acted in one such project. As a performer, it was very rewarding to follow ones muse and let the scene carry me from moment to moment. There was some gold in there that no one expected. Unfortunately, the Director's treatment was not very well thought out. So, he never knew if he got what he needed, in a take. So, we would spend LOTS of time doing alternative takes to cover his narrative bases. This became a nightmare in terms of coverage, and matching performances for editorial, because he felt compelled do the same alternatives for all the other angles we shot. The process slowed way down, and it felt like no one had any idea what we were doing. There just wasn't a plan. As a result, the two-day shoot expanded to weeks, and the 5 minute short was at 45 (recent cut). They are struggling in editorial to figure out what to use.

My $0.02 is that you have a very detailed treatment (80+ pages for a feature). You don't need to share it with the actors, just use it as a personal guide so you know what you need to shoot, and when to move on. Things get weird in the heat of the moment, and having a detailed treatment as a personal reference may help keep you on track.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The French film Irreversible http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290673/ was filmed with only a treatment.
HOWEVER, that being said the director Gaspar Noé is brilliant at doing that type of thing. So he's proved you can film with a treatment, but it does help to have actors like Vincent Cassel (from Black Swan)) who are incredibly talented.

So I believe it's possible, but probably extremely difficult.

Best of luck.
FK

Raditude said:
I have an idea for an independent film, and have written a "Presentation Treatment." The treatment includes some of the dialog and gives a general idea on the direction the film should go. I find myself lacking the attention span to sit down and write a whole script for a feature length film. Since I'll be directing and know what I want, I have been thinking of just shooting with the Treatment, and coming up with dialog on the fly and having characters improv some of their lines.

Does anyone see a problem with going this route? Has anyone done it before, and had success or failure? Does anyone have any recommendations on how to achieve this?
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Think of it as a learning experience and don't be disappointed if it doesn't turn out as well as you hoped. I would get experienced people on the cameras and for audio though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Timecode by Mike Figgis was shot like this, and in continuous takes, and I thought it was pretty good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timecode_(film)

Had the added interest of having four different viewpoints on-screen simultaneously with the audio switching between each viewpoint as it got interesting - of course this also allowed him to gloss over the bits that weren't so good in the other viewpoints :)

EDIT: Having said that, I'm doing pretty much the exact opposite for my first short and planning like you wouldn't believe. Strikes me that there are going to be enough unknowns without me not really knowing what I'm doing too.

But if it's throwaway and isn't going to cost you anything, or you have tons of cash and don't care whether it works, then why the hell not! ;)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree with what others have said here.

A feature film is a LONG time to improv.

Maybe do the first scene, or a scene or two to test results?

A lot depends on how good your actors are. And how good you are as a director/editor.

Editing will be key. Most improv bits go way too long and aren't funny after a certain point.

Of course, you could be brilliant and make the most amazing movie ever......
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top