Visuals

[fountain923]

I was wondering about something re:writing screenplays. I was reading a site that gave some "tips" about mistakes to avoid and one of them was giving directions and such that directors and camera people would make the decisions about.

When the writer is working with ideas for a screenplay, though, doesn't that writer often get inspired in terms of how she sees a scene opening, e.g, what the camera would focus upon, what this or that would look like? After all, she is imagining it all. Even without the actual technical skills, it seems someone can "create" aspects of a film or video in her head and visualize something on a basic level that could work well.

Is there a taboo against adding any of these things in addition to the actions and dialog? I'm at the novice stage with actual screenwriting.

 

[Helix]

It might be worth having a look at scripts available online to see how much detail they include.

Here are Craig Mazin's scripts for Chernobyl.

https://johnaugust.com/library#chernobyl

 

[fountain923]

It might be worth having a look at scripts available online to see how much detail they include.

Here are Craig Mazin's scripts for Chernobyl.

https://johnaugust.com/library#chernobyl

Thank you, Helix. That's a good idea.

 

[Helix]

There are a few sites where you can download a range of scripts or read them online. I know the BBC has a wide range including television and radio: https://www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts

 

[Maryn]

Drew's Script-o-Rama has thousands of scripts. Just make sure you're getting the actual shooting script, not an earlier draft or a fan's transcription.

To answer your question, yes, it is taboo to include any description that it not necessary for the script. If there needs to be a wall-mounted sword because later someone will take it down and use it, then you'd put that in. But if the castle has a sword on its wall, because that's how you envision it, you don't include it. (You can still envision it--who's to know?)

Including details that are someone else's purview--costuming, set decoration, directing, camera work--is a very common mark of a beginner.

Worth noting: highly successful screenwriters often get a pass on including these details. So do scripts written by the filmmaker.

Maryn, who didn't hang out at a screenwriting board for years without picking up a thing or two

 

[fountain923]

There are a few sites where you can download a range of scripts or read them online. I know the BBC has a wide range including television and radio: https://www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts

Thanks again, Helix. Tell me, are these scripts that one can get usually what the writer submitted or final copies (and do the latter generally contain visuals and directions put in by someone else?)?

 

[fountain923]

Drew's Script-o-Rama has thousands of scripts. Just make sure you're getting the actual shooting script, not an earlier draft or a fan's transcription.

To answer your question, yes, it is taboo to include any description that it not necessary for the script. If there needs to be a wall-mounted sword because later someone will take it down and use it, then you'd put that in. But if the castle has a sword on its wall, because that's how you envision it, you don't include it. (You can still envision it--who's to know?)

Including details that are someone else's purview--costuming, set decoration, directing, camera work--is a very common mark of a beginner.

Worth noting: highly successful screenwriters often get a pass on including these details. So do scripts written by the filmmaker.

Maryn, who didn't hang out at a screenwriting board for years without picking up a thing or two

Thanks, Maryn...especially for the benefit of your experience. I get your point about the important prop sword. What happens, though, if the writer has a really inspired idea for the opening shot, e.g.? Of course, the powers that be could always nix it. Would the writer automatically be thrown into the fire for including it? (My practical question).

My bit of confusion about is that the act of creating a "screenplay" specifically, as opposed to a play, would be motivated by some thinking about the medium while creating. And, of course, even if not experts, we've all watched films and some of us are aficionados. For some films (like a "modern version" of something, e.g.) the "writing" of the creation may involve including a lot of non-verbal elements.

 

[Helix]

Thanks again, Helix. Tell me, are these scripts that one can get usually what the writer submitted or final copies (and do the latter generally contain visuals and directions put in by someone else?)?

Have a look through them. I would imagine they are the final versions.

 

[Maryn]

<snip>What happens, though, if the writer has a really inspired idea for the opening shot, e.g.? Of course, the powers that be could always nix it. Would the writer automatically be thrown into the fire for including it? (My practical question).<snip>

I'm pretty sure they just reject such screenplays rather than burn the writer, but it's not a chance to take! Why is there piled wood and an upright stake in that back lot?

The inspired opening shot (or the split screen, quick cuts between characters, appearance of the monster, actor's facial expression or line delivery, etc.) is not the writer's job but the director's, so writing it into the script marks the writer as someone okay with stepping on the toes of people far more important that the one who thought up the whole thing. (That's the way of the film industry; writers are mostly nobodies.)

When a writer wants that level of control so their inspirations make it to the screen, they probably need to produce and direct their own film--which some do, to varying levels of success. The fundraising is the hard part.

Maryn, not interested in directing--or fundraising