QUICK INTRODUCTION ?

[razormoney]

Do any of you have a problem with introducing a character like this:

INT. LOTT HOUSE - KITCHEN - DAY

ALEX LOTT, mid-thirties, whips up a pancake breakfast.

First, is it a big deal to have the surname mentioned twice so close together (to me it's clear, just want to know if it seems repetitive or distracting).

Second, does anybody have a problem with using a name that can be either gender? Doesn't seem to be a big deal to me, just thought I'd solicit some other opinions. I assume I'll get the "as long as it's clear to the reader" response, which is just fine by me.

R

[-XL-]

Do any of you have a problem with introducing a character like this:

INT. LOTT HOUSE - KITCHEN - DAY

ALEX LOTT, mid-thirties, whips up a pancake breakfast.

First, is it a big deal to have the surname mentioned twice so close together (to me it's clear, just want to know if it seems repetitive or distracting).

Nope. Seems fine.

Second, does anybody have a problem with using a name that can be either gender? Doesn't seem to be a big deal to me, just thought I'd solicit some other opinions. I assume I'll get the "as long as it's clear to the reader" response, which is just fine by me.

That depends. Though there are many girls named Alex it's still predominantly a guy's name. If you're going against the norm then it's going to trip me up every time unless you clarify.

R

As for the character introduction in general, it's hardly illuminating. That's fine if it's an unimportant character but if it's someone we're going to be spending a lot of time with then something more substantial may be in order.

[razormoney]

I'll leave the name -- if worse comes to worse, I can always do a find/replace when I'm done with the script. One of the beauties of screenwriting software.

The character intro was just an example. The real introduction will be more substantial.

R

[dpaterso]

Yeah what XL said.

I presume there are other houses in the script so you have to narrow this one down to the Lott house. Repeating the name doesn't seem wrong.

I'd expect some mention of "he" or "she" in the character's trivial actions if their name is sexually ambiguous and sex isn't detailed in the char intro. I consciously try to use names that aren't ambiguous but that's just me.

-Derek

[scripter1]

I agree with the above posters.

[Goodwriterguy]

Do any of you have a problem with introducing a character like this:

INT. LOTT HOUSE - KITCHEN - DAY

ALEX LOTT, mid-thirties, whips up a pancake breakfast.

First, is it a big deal to have the surname mentioned twice so close together (to me it's clear, just want to know if it seems repetitive or distracting).

Second, does anybody have a problem with using a name that can be either gender? Doesn't seem to be a big deal to me, just thought I'd solicit some other opinions. I assume I'll get the "as long as it's clear to the reader" response, which is just fine by me.
It's generally not cool to use a character's name before they have been introduced. Hence, your use of "LOTT HOUSE" would be inappropriate ... unless we have met some other member of the Lott family already.

This often becomes a dicey deal in situations where we learn almost instantly who "Lott" is and so what's the big deal of using the name a beat before the character is introduced? Well, it's really a matter of being consistent to the practice, and while most understand there will be situations in which it appears to make less than a load of sense, they prefer one to stick to the practice: don't use a character's name before they are introduced.

In this case, because your reader has not read the word or name "Lott" when they encounter this caption, it will pose an immediate question, "Lott house?" What does that mean? This is a bump in the reading road.

A good alternative would be something like this:

INT MIDDLE CLASS HOME - KITCHEN - DAY

Once you establish that this is indeed Alex Lott's place of residence, then you can refer to it as "LOTT HOUSE." Afterall, we're not absolutely certain Alex actually lives here when we meet him, he may be a guest in someone else's home for all we know. And using "LOTT HOUSE" doesn't really solve this, becuase it could be his parent's home and not his.

Is there no preceding scene in which this home is established? If Alex Lott is a principle character and this home a principle location, it seems to me you'd want to do this. Let us see the street Alex lives on, let us see his home, afterall, we're going to spend some time here, probably both inside and out. Why not establish it first?

EXT SYCAMORE STREET, ARLINGTON HEIGHTS - DAY

Pleasant middle-class ranchers with cars in driveways, bicycles on lawns, a guy mowing his lawn, a sprinkler running on another, and one home in particular that has a bright red front door.

At the street in front of this home a mailbox, the name "LOTT."

INT LOTT HOME - KITCHEN - DAY

[end]

Here we have used the character's name before they've been introduced but I think in an acceptable manner. It's for the audience's edification (as opposed for the reader's only) and it is imbedded in an establishing visual. You really have't "used it" so much as you have included it.

You audience will also feel a bit more comfortable with the kitchen scene if you establish where they are first, otherwise, they really don't know if they're in a suburban home, a city condo or apartment, a rural home, or what. In short, they have no idea where they are. This isn't important in a cognitive sense but it is important in a subliminal sense; an audience feels better when it knows where it is (something we may deny them at times, but this isn't one of those times).

Never overlook the value of an establishing shot, they're common as apple pie in movies and television and they serve an important purpose.

Names which may be interpreted as male or female should be avoided. They just create a situation you're ging to have to address, one way or anoher. Why do it if you don't have to? Why indeed.

Keep running! ;)

[razormoney]

Good stuff.