I have watched a ton of movies/TV and one thing really made an impression on me. That is that almost everything is out of the usual in films. Every scene in order to stay interesting to the viewer is made to be unusual in some fashion. That is what I do when I try to write. I think to my self what can I do that is unusual that would be interesting. What is your thoughts.
-
Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.
Writing Tip
- Thread starter rockerrockstar
- Start date
Every time I log in here I want to preface my posts with: "You've got to be fucking kidding me," (YGTBFKM).
I never met creative people who had a problem with the unusual. The "usual" is the first thing you CUT and toss out in favor of something the audience has not seen before.
This does not mean flying radioactive sheep are in. This means that scenes we've seen before need work. Period. You will be fired and replaced with another writer (if you ever get to that stage -- debatable) if you fail to understand this.
The audience has seen quite a lot. It is the screenwriter's job to come up with a new take on just about everything.
Crap no budget, non-serious works do not live up to this standard, obviously.
Movies that people pay a lot of money to produce strive to do this. For a reason. Obvious, trite, predictable scenes do not impress many.
Again: (YGTBFKM)
Or not. You can point your camcorder anywhere you like.
I never met creative people who had a problem with the unusual. The "usual" is the first thing you CUT and toss out in favor of something the audience has not seen before.
This does not mean flying radioactive sheep are in. This means that scenes we've seen before need work. Period. You will be fired and replaced with another writer (if you ever get to that stage -- debatable) if you fail to understand this.
The audience has seen quite a lot. It is the screenwriter's job to come up with a new take on just about everything.
Crap no budget, non-serious works do not live up to this standard, obviously.
Movies that people pay a lot of money to produce strive to do this. For a reason. Obvious, trite, predictable scenes do not impress many.
Again: (YGTBFKM)
Or not. You can point your camcorder anywhere you like.
I'm quite sure you've misinterpreted the entire discussion.
You've yet to answer either counterpoint anybody has made, but simply continued to stress your own, again, and again.
Nobody has mentioned putting predictable scenes in their movies, again, you've conjured this situation of your own accord. What we did say, is that a movie cannot run on "Unpredictable" moments alone, but to say these are not of importance, is exponentionaly naive to the aged method of storytelling.
I do understand your point, i do. But you're missing the bigger picture. It's clear when a gesture like this is presented.
"Crap no budget, non-serious works do not live up to this standard, obviously"
I am in no way suggesting, do not be creative, that a screenwriter should continue to surcome to the norm.
Opinions differ.
I do hope you stick around IT, and that this mutual disagreement hasn't deterred you from any of the folk.
Yet, this discussion no longer has any grounds. Thread's dead baby, thread's dead.
You've yet to answer either counterpoint anybody has made, but simply continued to stress your own, again, and again.
Nobody has mentioned putting predictable scenes in their movies, again, you've conjured this situation of your own accord. What we did say, is that a movie cannot run on "Unpredictable" moments alone, but to say these are not of importance, is exponentionaly naive to the aged method of storytelling.
I do understand your point, i do. But you're missing the bigger picture. It's clear when a gesture like this is presented.
"Crap no budget, non-serious works do not live up to this standard, obviously"
I am in no way suggesting, do not be creative, that a screenwriter should continue to surcome to the norm.
Opinions differ.
I do hope you stick around IT, and that this mutual disagreement hasn't deterred you from any of the folk.
Yet, this discussion no longer has any grounds. Thread's dead baby, thread's dead.
Last edited:
I'm with Paper. It seems to be a case of people talking past people. It would make an unusual scene.
Nobody in their right mind writes in order to see how banal and cliché they can be.
It's absolutely true that one must strive to present your material in fresh ways.
On the other hand, some things are "clichés" because they work. That is to say, they are dramatic tools and techniques that have been used since Aristophanes thru Shakespeare and G. B. Shaw and Eugene O'Neil to Tom Stoppard. They are basic building blocks of the architecture of good drama.
The problem is a red herring, though, since it's all a matter of how you arrange the blocks, and paint them, and order them, and...well, you get what I mean.
One more example: A young child bangs away at the piano. It's total cacophany and hardly "creative" or something anyone wants to listen to. IT IS, however, totally original and "unusual." When he gets older and learns the "usual" methods of harmony, counter-point, rhythm, etc., he's still free to create, but WITHIN the confines of the rules of the craft.
I think maybe this is the confusion?
best,
-Charles
Nobody in their right mind writes in order to see how banal and cliché they can be.
It's absolutely true that one must strive to present your material in fresh ways.
On the other hand, some things are "clichés" because they work. That is to say, they are dramatic tools and techniques that have been used since Aristophanes thru Shakespeare and G. B. Shaw and Eugene O'Neil to Tom Stoppard. They are basic building blocks of the architecture of good drama.
The problem is a red herring, though, since it's all a matter of how you arrange the blocks, and paint them, and order them, and...well, you get what I mean.
One more example: A young child bangs away at the piano. It's total cacophany and hardly "creative" or something anyone wants to listen to. IT IS, however, totally original and "unusual." When he gets older and learns the "usual" methods of harmony, counter-point, rhythm, etc., he's still free to create, but WITHIN the confines of the rules of the craft.
I think maybe this is the confusion?
best,
-Charles
I do.
"I'd rather make a movie about a guy walking his dog than about the emperor of China." -Jim Jarmusch
Paper nailed it really. Pol is not actually paying attention to what we are saying. He is constantly trying to claim things that simply are not true. I have stated my points and clarified that I have no interest in normal boring life taking up my entire stories, yet he keeps acting as if thats all I've talked about.
My point is the effort involved and potentially falling into the absurd due to over thinking your scenes. Not to mention the extreme of having nothing "normal" in your story. The unusual is good, but only if it flows with the story, sitting around on every scene trying to make it special won't make it any better than someone who achieves the same thing by trusting their storytelling skills to get the same results. It's like if you worry about some event and start thinking of all the worst possible scenarios you get all worked up and it ends up not being nearly as bad as you imagined. The same could happen to a script/story, you over think it and come out with absurd or lame drivel.
Anyways I agree thread is dead, no reason to keep trying to explain the same thing a hundred different ways when the person replying will just ignore what you say and pull a "I reject your reality and substitue my own" in his reply.
My point is the effort involved and potentially falling into the absurd due to over thinking your scenes. Not to mention the extreme of having nothing "normal" in your story. The unusual is good, but only if it flows with the story, sitting around on every scene trying to make it special won't make it any better than someone who achieves the same thing by trusting their storytelling skills to get the same results. It's like if you worry about some event and start thinking of all the worst possible scenarios you get all worked up and it ends up not being nearly as bad as you imagined. The same could happen to a script/story, you over think it and come out with absurd or lame drivel.
Anyways I agree thread is dead, no reason to keep trying to explain the same thing a hundred different ways when the person replying will just ignore what you say and pull a "I reject your reality and substitue my own" in his reply.
In response to the first post
Your subject matter should be unusual, not each individual scene; otherwise it looks like you've tried to make each scene look unusual!! If your story and/or character are unusual then peculiarities will be organic in the scene, especially if you are leading to a climax.
Your subject matter should be unusual, not each individual scene; otherwise it looks like you've tried to make each scene look unusual!! If your story and/or character are unusual then peculiarities will be organic in the scene, especially if you are leading to a climax.
I think a case could definately be made for most writers trying too hard. They try to incorporate too much. They try too hard to make things "unusual". Typically it feels too forced.
The rules are pretty simple:
- Figure out the story you want to tell
- Decide the conflict of the scene
- The character's emotional tone at the begining of the scene has to be reversed by the end of the scene
- Keep things moving with action.
- Dont tell me... show me
- Remove every adverb
- Remove inarticulate adjectives
/scene
Trust me, a unicycle chase may seem unusual and be more of a challenge, but a car chase will work better and flow easier every time.
Writing is like taking a dump: Relax and let it flow, don't force it.