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

First Five pages of "Understood" Screenplay..

I read someone saying that a reader should be hooked by the first five pages of a screen-play..

That, the fact that you all seem to be pretty good about offering intelligent commentary on peoples efforts, and the fact that I've never had anyone read anything I've done in screenplay format..
I figured I'd throw my hat in..

Warning: Possible excessive language.. (I don't think so, particularly given the situation, but you might.)

I've never used Googledocs before - so I guess this is how I share

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13nDS1uWTdMObn7-2wSH16w2I05zqyjITuYDoFZkWMqo/edit?hl=en_US


As far as what comes after - I'm thinking of not fully revealing what the argument was about - and I was thinking of possibly doing 45 pages of his story and the next 45 hers.
(honestly, I haven't put much thought into it yet - I just know what the point of it is.)

thoughts, criticism, technical or otherwise?
Thanks for reading! If you read anyway.. if you don't read, than thanks for nothing! :D
 
Last edited:
I read someone saying that a reader should be hooked by the first five pages of a screen-play. Warning: Possible excessive language.. (I don't think so, particularly given the situation, but you might.)

As far as what comes after - I'm thinking of not fully revealing what the argument was about - and I was thinking of possibly doing 45 pages of his story and the next 45 hers.
(honestly, I haven't put much thought into it yet - I just know what the point of it is.)

thoughts, criticism, technical or otherwise?
Frankly, the formatting is too confusing. What is all the Captions? Is this a cartoon like sequence? The first five pages need to be substantive--they need to provide some sort of visual information to the audience about the characters and their problems. Nothing of interest or consequence happens or is said in the first four pages. Gratuitous cursing does nothing to advance the idea of a movie and often will raise the rating. If I were reading this as an agent, I would have rejected it at page one, as harsh as that may sound.

You are trying to sell conflict. Conflict is not the same as a story. As cliche as it is, e-motions are the energy that causes motion in a scene. A screenplay scene is not just two people in the same place. Motion pictures are visual stories--what works in a play or novel doesn't adapt well to the screen. If you're going to start off with a strong emotion, you need make it such that the audience can side with one person or the other. Then follow the character they side with. This is a very intrinsic part of human nature, we like the person we empathize with. We start off despising the man and then you follow him instead of her. She's neither said nor done anything to warrant that treatment. You made her the victim, him the abuser, and you expect the audience to follow him. Doesn't happen. Especially since all he does for the next three pages is whine generically and curse.

He picks up an "object" and hurls it at the wall. So, in your mind's eye, what did he pick up and hurl? I want you to think about.
He's hurling symbols, so you know. If he picks up a knife, a whiskey bottle, an ashtray, whatever, it becomes significant. Strong emotion will "charge" whatever is touched. This is a very deep, subtle fact.

As a screenplay, you're breaking out shots. Your paragraphs have lots of individual actions lumped together. You write feelings when you need to show them. So taking your first paragraph:
Code:
INT. Apartment – DAY.

FADE IN:
A man young man and a young woman. He reaches out and slaps 
her hard across the face. She is stunned and hurt. He remains angry.
She tentatively starts to leave – bewildered by the unexpected violence
 – starts and stops and starts again.
It needs to appear more like:
Code:
                                                       FADE IN

INT.  APARTMENT - DAY

Modern, downtown apartment.  Light but cluttered.  By the door a
small table beside an entertainment center.  In the center of the room,
a dining table covered with papers, a couple glasses, and a bottle of
whiskey.

A young man (late 20s) stands facing a young woman (mid 20s) at the 
dining table.  Each has a heated, intense stare.  The tension between 
them is almost palpable until

He reaches out and slaps her hard across the face.

She steps back, touches her cheek.  Her eyes begin to well with tears.
She pulls herself up straight and her features tighten.

She turns and starts to the door as his eyes follow her.

His face remains fixed, his jaw clenched.

She stops, turns to look at him, then goes to the door.
Rather than just say "he remains angry" or "she's stunned and hurt", I try to give just a bit of visualization. Clearly it falls on the actor/actress to fully realize the character so I'm not going into great detail, but angry and stunned are internal states and visually I need describe the external results. Now we all fall back on saying "He's angry" at times but challenge yourself to express the degree.

Notice some formatting issues too. Transitions precede (not follow) sluglines. After the slugline, it's best to provide a brief description of the location if it's new. Only mention things that are relevant to the scene. In this case, I mentioned the dining room table and the stand where she picks up her keys in a moment. I gave a general sense of the room so the person scouting locations has a sense of what to look for.

Next, actions that are independent should be on their own line. If the action of two characters are necessarily joined, that's fine to keep them together. That is the situation of "while..." or "as ...". They are also hints that the shot will frame the two people in the shot.

As it is, the set up scene now needs to provide the audience some explanation. Why is he so upset that he would strike her? If you're not prepared to tell the audience, you need to find a way make them sympathize with him, or switch your focus to her. You built up energy and it needs to discharge at him or her. Choose the target then go with the other. Her walking out IS NOT a discharge. The anger is still heavy in the room. And the longer it "sits" there the more polarized the audience becomes against him. You keep the energy high with no release. The audience/reader finally ceases for their own release.

Drama is about building emotional tension and then providing a guided release. You have a potentially powerful scene but like a dammed river, the water will overflow if you don't give it a direction to flow. Think through the re-write. Good luck.
 
Firstly - thanks for taking the time. I appreciate it.

Gratuitous cursing does nothing to advance the idea of a movie and often will raise the rating.

I understand where you're coming from.. If this were something I was writing for a ratings board or an agent than that would be very sound advice.
Being that it's not, I feel I can get away with pushing aside politics in favor of something that represents real human behavior a bit better.


If you're going to start off with a strong emotion, you need make it such that the audience can side with one person or the other. Then follow the character they side with. This is a very intrinsic part of human nature, we like the person we empathize with. We start off despising the man and then you follow him instead of her. She's neither said nor done anything to warrant that treatment. You made her the victim, him the abuser, and you expect the audience to follow him.

This very sentiment is what the story is about. Throughout the course of the story he seeks empathy but doesn't get it. The captions (I don't get the cartoon reference) are a device used to separate the characters actions from his intentions and feelings.. and in a disconnected, slightly removed, way connect the audience with the main character.

angry and stunned are internal states and visually I need describe the external results

I kind of thought that the screen play was for production.. It's the actors jobs to express internal states visually.. The casting director and director's jobs to find actors who express those states best for the story.. and for that matter it's the art director and set designers jobs to decide what the apartment looks like, isn't it?

I mean, that's kind of what I thought.. I always thought a good screen play does it's job and no one elses.

As it is, the set up scene now needs to provide the audience some explanation.

So it's a good set up, than?
 
it feels real, and it's something that a lot of people have experienced. (exept for hitting a woman, god knows I never did that in my life)

I think if you take it somewhere, this script could connect with some people

Good Luck!
 
It's such a strange thing getting advise for something you're writing or creating..

There's a weird ambiguity..

does this person actually GET what I'm trying to do?
Does he get it and is offering good advice that I'm not getting?
Does he not get it and offering good advice for his perception of it - which isn't conducive at all to what I'm trying to do?
Does he get it and is offering advice that he thinks is good but it's not really very good?
Is he offering good advice and I'm just being stubborn?

::edit:: I don't mean to discredit your advice FantasySciFi - I was just thinking of other threads where advise is given and completely rejected.. and thinking to myself "I'm not so tunnel visioned as that, am I? I'm taking it into honest consideration, aren't I?" which lead to the above statement. ::edit::

I just noticed how odd it is.
Sorry OP, didn't mean to steal your thread.

- It's okay, just keep on topic, would you?

Right. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
The captions (I don't get the cartoon reference) are a device used to separate the characters actions from his intentions and feelings.. and in a disconnected, slightly removed, way connect the audience with the main character.
The formatting doesn't clearly present your intention. The action line reflects actions. Dialogue is just that. Your formatting is wrong and doesn't adequately express what you are trying to accomplish. You had a character, some dialogue, then "CAPTION (character)" and more dialogue. It looked to me as if you wanted a caption to appear under the person showing what they were thinking, a visual word bubble. That suggested a kind of cartoonish appearance like a pop-up. It was not intended as an insult. If you want it to look like a script, scrap the captions and just have the dialogue and actions play out cleanly.

Code:
        YOUNG MAN (cont.)
        Just fucking fantastic! Is everyone ffhng..

                [color="red"]CAPTION on young man:[/color]
        Probably had the little brats be little
        shits. Stopped them on her way out.. I can
        see her laughing.. that fucking smile.. and
        those big fucking eyes. Bullshit, it's all
        bullshit. It's all

                YOUNG MAN
        BULLSHIT!
:weird:

I kind of thought that the screen play was for production.. It's the actors jobs to express internal states visually.. The casting director and director's jobs to find actors who express those states best for the story.. and for that matter it's the art director and set designers jobs to decide what the apartment looks like, isn't it? I mean, that's kind of what I thought.. I always thought a good screen play does it's job and no one elses.
Yes and no. A good screenplay is a blueprint. It is a balance between description and minimalism. Plays are about dialogue. Novels are about dialogue and internal feelings. Movies are about visualized actions. You need to put in some description to make your script easy to visualize. Dense paragraphs with internalized states along with long unbroken dialogue are red flags for readers to reject your script. I don't know how else to say it gently. My example was to help you see how you can adapt what you wrote. I think you need to read a few more screenplays to see how the successful ones are constructed. You can contrast their style with yours. If you're filming this, you can make up your own formatting rules.

It's such a strange thing getting advise for something you're writing or creating..
There's a weird ambiguity..

does this person actually GET what I'm trying to do?
Does he get it and is offering good advice that I'm not getting?
Does he not get it and offering good advice for his perception of it - which isn't conducive at all to what I'm trying to do?
Does he get it and is offering advice that he thinks is good but it's not really very good?
Is he offering good advice and I'm just being stubborn?
This will be tough to hear but it's true. The MEANING of your work IS the PERCEPTION it PRESENTS to the VIEWER. No one can see inside your head. Doesn't matter how clever or thought provoking you intend. All we can do is read and watch what you present. What has been reflected back is my perception of what you shared--good or bad. Having said that, you are free to examine or ignore it to your heart's content. I am not saying your piece isn't powerful or doesn't have potential. If a reader doesn't "get it", then it's because it wasn't written clearly enough "to be got". Please understand, so many scripts cross a reader's desk, that it's easier to reject than pass. They don't need to get it, you need to provide it.

::edit:: I don't mean to discredit your advice FantasySciFi - I was just thinking of other threads where advise is given and completely rejected.. and thinking to myself "I'm not so tunnel visioned as that, am I? I'm taking it into honest consideration, aren't I?" which lead to the above statement. ::edit:: I just noticed how odd it is.

Heck, I'll discredit me. I have to have my work gone over too. And my critics aren't gentle about telling me how I need to re-rewrite a sequence to film. My advice is freely given and may be freely ignored. I stand categorically by the statement that there is no right way to write a screenplay. However, if it's not strong storywise or format-wise, a script will be rejected. Your formatting is confusing and non-standard. But hey, you're free to ignore that too.

It is odd when what is clear to us is put in a different perspective. I try to be straight with feedback as gently and helpfully as I can. Writers can use it to improve the screenplay as they choose. I could lie and say it's a great script. No changes needed. Is that really fair or helpful to you? Especially if you want it to succeed.
 
I think some people see a bear and say "that doesn't make a very good bunny."

When I say "get it" that's what I mean.

Some of your initial response was "that's awfully big for a bunny.." and some of it was "Does that bunny have four legs or six?"

I'm a little concerned about the six legs - not so much about the size.
As I mentioned - I completely appreciate you looking at my animal at all. :D


::edit::
Just read it back and realized/remembered that I paid absolutely no attention to pacing.
I chose to treat it like a shot list. (no specific reason, I just did.)

I think that's where a lot of your problems with the format come from. (I mean aside from the knee-jerk "that's not how it's done")
You can't watch it in your head as you're reading it. You have to create it as you're reading it.

Hmm.
 
Last edited:
I think that's where a lot of your problems with the format come from. (I mean aside from the knee-jerk "that's not how it's done")
Format is not a knee-jerk reaction. Format is how screenwriters
communicate with the reader.

If you do not want to use the standard screenplay format you risk
this "knee-jerk" reaction from people who are accustom to reading
screenplays. You say you are not writing for the ratings board (no
one is) or agents so that leads to the question: who are you writing
this for?

I understand that many beginning writers resist the standard format
but you did ask for "technical" advice. When you are writing a screenplay
it is to your advantage to present it in the proper format.

I read it. But I don't know how to offer my thoughts because you did
not use the standard screenplay format. Do I comments only on the
story and characters? If so will these things be in a movie, a play or
a novel? Right now, as a screenplay, the first pages do not hook me
mostly because your format is not standard.

Haiku is poem of seventeen syllables, in three lines of five, seven, and
five which doesn’t rhyme. If it doesn’t follow these rules it may be a
great poem, but it isn’t haiku.
 
The captions (I don't get the cartoon reference) are a device used to separate the characters actions from his intentions and feelings.. and in a disconnected, slightly removed, way connect the audience with the main character.

Are the captions supposed to be his inner voice or him speaking to himself? That's what I got when I read it - if so, then you need to reformat it and not use CAPTION. While I didn't picture pop up bubbles as cartoon dialogue like Fantasy, I pictured subtitles. If this is what you are going for, then use (V.O.) and look into reading some movies that use lots of VO as narration.

If this is not what you are going for, then I apologize that I still don't get it.
 
- directorik

A Haiku is to Poetry as a Screen-play is to what?

Anyway - the reaction is knee-jerk, not the thing thats being reacted to.. and I didn't imply that it's unwarranted in any way.

If the formatting doesn't work I suppose the most appropriate thing to do would be to comment on why it doesn't work.
I see why it doesn't work as a marketable product. Why doesn't it work as something a person can read and plan out a movie with?

- arrodiii

You thought the Caption stuff was to be spoken aloud? How did you get that from "Caption"?
When FantasySciFi said "cartoon" I thought of animated cartoons - which has no reliance on word bubbles at all. If he said "comic" I might have made the association. How do you get from "Caption" to out loud?

I was writing it as addendum. Not strictly internal thoughts, dialogue, or anything coming from the characters. Just additional information presented to the audience.

I was under the impression that "(V.O.)" was for.. well voice overs.. spoken. Subtitles seem more for presenting what's being spoken simultaneously as text. Caption made the most sense and I needed to point out that it was only while a given character was on screen.. "CAPTION on" seemed the most direct way to do that.



::edit:: I should have asked this obvious question -

Knowing that the captions are on-screen text dissociated from dialogue but dependent on what characters are on screen - how would you write it?



And on a side note - I'm liking how the beginnings of a story about being understood is generating discussion about the conventions of being understood. :D
 
Last edited:
A Haiku is to Poetry as a Screen-play is to what?
I'm sorry you misunderstood. I was not comparing haiku to a
screenplay - I am comparing the format. The format of haiku
is important to that type of poetry just as the format of a
screenplay is important to that type of writing. It may be a
great story - it is not a screenplay.

If the formatting doesn't work I suppose the most appropriate thing to do would be to comment on why it doesn't work.
Which is why I asked the question you chose not to answer. I would
be glad to comment on why improper screenplay format doesn't work
when presenting a screenplay. Just as others already have.
I see why it doesn't work as a marketable product. Why doesn't it work as something a person can read and plan out a movie with?
Because the screenplay has a specific format that you did not follow.
It may be a great story but you chose not to follow the proper screenplay
format so it does not read like a screenplay. If you choose to present
this work as something other than a screenplay I can comment the
story - but in order to plan out a movie it is standard to present the
story in screenplay format.

By the other comments it seems as if you have not communicated your
story in a way that people can "get" it. This is sometimes the fault of the
writer. And it may be the fault of the reader.
 
You can call it whatever you want - It's a piece of writing that's intended as a plan for a film.

Call it an Algamerrack.

I write Algamerracks. Does the same thing as a screen-play only formatted differently.


I was not comparing haiku to a
screenplay - I am comparing the format.

Gotcha.


By the other comments it seems as if you have not communicated your
story in a way that people can "get" it.

Mostly seem to get it, but second guess.


Knowing that the captions are on-screen text dissociated from dialogue but dependent on what characters are on screen - how would you write it? What's the standard?
 
You can call it whatever you want - It's a piece of writing that's intended as a plan for a film.

Call it an Algamerrack.

I write Algamerracks. Does the same thing as a screen-play only formatted differently.
Fair enough.

I've never heard of an Algamerrack. Until today I have never read an
Algamerrack. In my understanding a piece of writing that's intended
as a plan for a film is called a "screenplay" and a screenplay has a very
specific format that allows others to understand what the writer has in
mind.

Good luck with your Algamerrack. I found my reading my first one confusing.
 
Fair enough.


Good luck with your Algamerrack. I found my reading my first one confusing.

:lol:

EDIT: Maybe I can be more helpful thab just putting a smiley face.:) Here's the nuts and bolts of it:

If you want to sell the screenplay(and that's what it is) you should write in Industry Standard format. Just the way any other professional communicates in the standard format of their chosen profession. Attorneys don't get in front of a judge and say,"but hey big guy, my client is innocent because. Here, look at this piece of paper that I just found. check it out." It doesn't work that way. The same with spec screen plays. There has to be a common format so that communication is streamlined and more productive.

If you want to invent your own format, your free to. Also, if you plan to film the movie yourself, by all means, write the thing in heiroglyphs, if that's what you want to do.

Do not try and change the whole industry to suite your needs. It just will not work.
 
Last edited:
Of course you haven't heard of an Algamerrack. I just invented it. (patent pending) :D



If you want to sell the screenplay(and that's what it is) you should write in Industry Standard format. Just the way any other professional communicates in the standard format of their chosen profession. Attorneys don't get in front of a judge and say,"but hey big guy, my client is innocent because. Here, look at this piece of paper that I just found. check it out." It doesn't work that way. The same with spec screen plays. There has to be a common format so that communication is streamlined and more productive.

If you want to invent your own format, your free to. Also, if you plan to film the movie yourself, by all means, write the thing in heiroglyphs, if that's what you want to do.

Do not try and change the whole industry to suite your needs. It just will not work.


I agree one hundred percent. If I wanted to sell a screenplay than that's exactly what I would do.

Some points you may have missed:

* I hardly think posting five pages written in an evening to an Internet forum qualifies as trying to change the whole industry.

* If I were trying to sell it, I probably wouldn't try to sell it on indietalk.com.

* If I were going to sell it on indietalk.com - I'd probably put "For Sale:" in the subject line, and post it in the services offered forum.

:D


You dress up in your nicest suit. Comb your hair. Get your resume together. Put on the expensive cologne. Practice your standard interview answers. Show up fifteen minutes early and you interview for the big job. Firm handshake. Friendly. Show your teeth.

That's a screen-play.

You offer your buddy a beer and a barbecue to help you paint the porch.

That's an Algamerrack.


Now that we've got that cleared up - outside of the fact that I'm not showing up to the barbecue in a thousand dollar suit - what is preventing me from getting the job? heheh.

In other words.. (or in the first words, actually) outside of the fact that it's not industry standard - what prevents it from being understandable? why is it confusing?
I get the impression that you're exaggerating a bit because you think I'm not getting what you're saying. Is that the case?

Your views/know how on the last question would be greatly appreciated..

Knowing that the captions are on-screen text dissociated from dialogue but dependent on what characters are on screen - how would you write it?



Also, Post Script, In addition to, and - I hope the levity with which I'm posting is coming through. I totally get that some of you take it all very seriously - personally I like to create things, I like to tell stories, I like to talk with people who are interested in creating things and telling stories. I like to geek out about special effects and writers and actors and etc. There are lots of people here looking for advice about there projects in earnest - and while I certainly appreciate good advice and thoughtful critique and life saving know-how when you really need it.. I'm kind of approaching this forum as a bar setting more than an office or school setting.. (the office and the school really is on set after all isn't it?)

In other words - your intentions and advise is not lost on me. I hear yah.
Just, like I mentioned before - your calling my bear a bunny. :P

-@
 
Back
Top