I have seen much advice that you should bear in mind your screenplay is "but a blueprint" for the film you envision; a jumping-off point for the many collaborators to come: Avoid directing. Resist prescribing shots to the camera op, and transitions to the editor. All the departments will ply their respective specialties with craftsmanship if not artistry of their own, and must be given the freedom to do so.
Yet at the same time, equally popular is the advice that you should thoroughly refine your dialogue, "so it sizzles" on the page, leaving no room for improvement. The ultimate speakers of your text will strive for absolute fidelity thereto.
That second piece of advice seems at odds with the first. Why? Should it be so? Are actors not as capable to improvise, interpret, authenticate?
Is the expectation of the writer's responsibility unbalanced? How do you reconcile that?
the thing is, for me at least, a spec script is not a “blueprint”
it is, to keep the architectural metaphor going, more like one of those photo-real illustrations that often accompanies the blueprints ... y’know, those lovely renderings of a potential dream home set in a beautifully manicured garden, that are inevitably accompanied by a caveat that reads: “artist’s impression: finishes and fittings may differ”
sure, LATER, when the screenplay has been bought and developed in readiness for production, then it becomes a blueprint ... but until then, it’s a selling tool – an advertisement for your movie (tv show, limited series, whatever)
so, as a selling tool, your screenplay must, to the best of your ability, convey the experience of watching the movie (or whatever) – and it must do this without the talents of amazing actors and all the brilliant artisans who must band together to make your movie (or whatever)
and so, for me at least, it means that yes, i will occasionally “direct on the page” – or suggest a cool transition – or “shape” how i imagine the dialog should be delivered ... i will do anything that will help convey the experience of watching the movie (or whatever)
which means, of course, also making the dialog as “sizzlely” as possible
this does not mean that, in the unlikely event of one of my spec screenplays being produced, i expect it to be translated verbatim to the screen – far from it – but i would hope that the final product does deliver the experience i tried to convey in my spec
in short, everyone, from the director down, will interpret a screenplay in their own unique way, and use it to deliver an experience to the audience – but first the writer has to create that experience, using nothing more than 12pt Courier on a page
Dialogue should be bouncy, but descriptions should not be overly ornate. I don't want to wade through a page of intricate stage directions before I getr to some interaction of the characters in dialogue. You also don't want the audience to feel that a scene has been cut short, to save on diallogue.
Yeah, the blueprint analogy, while commonly shared, is pretty misleading. It's hard to find a close comparison to a script out there in other industries. They are a strange beast.
For me, it's all about creative exploration. With a script, I'm doing as much exploration as I can get away with while working within a lean text based format. Given that production is a collaborative effort, there is always going to be a degree of further exploration but you cannot predict what that's going to be.
A producer is going to want to see as much exploration done on the page as possible in terms of story, theme, character development, dialogue, action, etc because that's a fail safe. You're giving people the best tools you can to work with.
While stuff does change between what's written and what's shot, we have to appreciate the inspiration is an organic result of what was originally propositioned in the screenplay. It owes it's creation to it.
There's also this; a script has to win friends long after it's found a producer. People have to want to attach. People have to want to fund. Sizzling dialogue along with captivating prose really helps with that.
The custom in TV format is to begin each new act at the top of a new page. That means the end of an act might have a half a blank page at the bottom, or less, or more.
When I see my pages with conspicuous white on them I feel it's a detriment. So if there's less than 3/8, I take pains to write the closing scene(s) more compactly. I don't want a dangling paragraph or two.
Sometimes that means dialogue gets truncated. Move the story where it needs to go and get out. I find myself thinking, "This talky bit could be airier, but it gets the idea across within the page." There is hope and trust that they in production will have the wisdom to be less concise, where prudent.
While it's frowned upon, I like to write act titles into my specs. As a result, I often have to do the same to end at the bottom of a page. It's proven to be great practice in both condensing and developing scenes.
I agree it's great practice in condensing—as well as the flip side: On occasion when seeing half a page empty at the act break I've thought, "I have 30 seconds here. How can I make it richer?" Fresh discoveries result.
Making it a richer is a far better way of describing it. That's it. I like things to be as lean as possible but also like things to be neat.
Quietly opens literally all of my television specs...
Or are you referring to act breaks being frowned upon in features only?
I am indeed talking about features.
I'm late to this conversation, but I want to add it's relieving to see I'm not the only one who trips over common terms, such as blueprint.
While I accept that as a writer, not anything else, I'm only a cog in the machine, and I'm fine with that. Blueprint, however, is not a useful term for me. I prefer to see scripts as seeds. Making a seed grow into a full garden, is up to everyone else involved. Not so great scripts are dead seeds that don't have the potential to grow.
However, all the various elements of a script, such as dialogue, action, location, characters, etc, I approach all of them as a well-formed seed, and that is completely my responsibility.
So, not so much a blueprint. More like a fertile ground with well-planted seeds. That's the metaphor that works for me, as just a writer.
I like the seed analogy but don't let anyone demean your position and make you feel like a cog in a machine. The break-in writer community is terrible for making screenwriters feel like they are there to be seen and not heard. We are the geese that lay the golden eggs. The studios may have become corporations but indie film doesn't have to be that way. Artists must treat other artists with respect if we are to create great things together.
CJ, fair point, and I am talking theoretically, or figuratively, if you will. Cog today, blockbuster tomorrow. You never know. I aim for the best.
i can't remember which writer told this story, but it was their first day on set and they were hugely intimidated and spent all their time "keeping out of the way" – aka: hiding – when the producer (one of the good ones) finally found him (or her), the producer gently chastised them saying something like: "what are you hiding for? if it weren't for you, none of these people would be here!"
That's a sweet story!
I'm reminded of when I was joking around with an editor friend, who helped proof some of my writing, that I'll name her in my acceptance speech. She said, nah man, be like Taika Waititi, "Why should I thank anyone? I did all the typing." A paraphrase, but still the best speech.
Truth me told, sweet stories and joking aside, I don't mind either way. I love being a part of an art community and talking to other artists, but I'm working my way up here. I expect to start small, so I can finish big.
A screenwriter has to hang around to supervise any changes in the script the actors want, if they find the original words don't feel right. They have to reach an acceptable compromise. Not good for actors to junk the script and improvise too much. Actors act, writers write. Some people do both, of course.
Humility goes a long way, especially with more established industry members. Being a writer on set is a fascinating experience as some people will treat with a lot of respect and others with complete disdain. There's a lot of creeps out there who play hierarchy games all the time. Getting shoved out of the background of a group selfie because your not "influential" enough stings but karma has a habbit of coming full circle.
To quote C.J: We are the geese that lay the golden eggs. It all starts with us the screenwriter. We the brain child that conceptualized the premise, plot and story that lead to the movie.
I use the golden goose metaphor mainly for one reason; the only thing a goose needs to lay eggs is food and shelter. That's the amazing thing about writers in the business world, we don't require any raw materials to generate massive quantities of highly valuable output. Industries or industry members who choose to neglect or underpay writers are effectively starving the goose which is crazy and completely against their own interests.
I'd argue, to expand on CJ's golden egg analogy, I can lay all the eggs I want, but if no one's there to keep the eggs warm, they'll never hatch. It takes a village and all that.
Side note, if a director/filmmaker, production crew, actors, want my input during filming, I better get paid for that. I think that's fair.
Just set your own boundaries of what you feel is fair. I'm a "sweep the floors for free and make yourself indispensable" kind of career builder. I'll happily pay to work if there's going to be a bigger pay off in the end.
I think my comments have not only thrown this thread completely off topic, and for that I apologize, but also caused a big misunderstanding. Before I say more, please understand that I don't do pity party.
If this was eighteen years ago, when I was able-bodied, I would agree 100%. Yes, sweep the floor! Do all the legwork! Build your career. Hell, that's exactly what I used to do to build my graphic design career, and it paid off. So yes, I have seen firsthand that method of career building does in fact work and works well. Mentally, I still do that method of career building, all the time.
But, eighteen years later, I've developed several disabilities including chronic illness. Now I'm dependent on two government agencies to help me with housework, including sweeping the floor.
Using an imaginary scenario, if anyone wants me to hop on a plane, be on site during filming in order to provide input as the screenwriter, I have to paid so I can pay a nurse to travel with me, pay a driver with an accessible vehicle, a hotel room with an adjustable bed and a hearing aid compatible phone. All of that would cost thousands of dollars. I would have to be paid, not for profit, for my life. What you see as demeaning, I see as realistic.
But, let's be honest, for an unknown screenwriter, regardless of disability, that scenario is not going to happen.
As an attempt to bring this thread back on topic, I still maintain that everything and everyone is important. From dialogue to a makeup artist, all equally important. Blueprint, cog, seed, egg, hey, whatever works best.
You don't need to appologise for anything. This forum is here to have the conversations that need to be had... or discovered.
What's important is we know our own boundaries and maintain them. It's all about wether we're led by others or by ourselves. I don't want anybody to learn that I do a lot of work on spec and feel that's what they have to do or that my way is better. My willingness to work ungodly amount hours for nothing has been a big problem throughout my life and I've hard to learn to restrict it only to those who reciprocate compensation in some form. I often find myself in a position where I envy those who set the terms clearly but have come to accept my nature. And, for what it's worth, 99.999% of that floor sweeping has been done sitting at a desk in front of a computer.
When I was last on set, a big part of my role (I was technically a guest), was to help someone around who can't feel their legs below the knee due to an operation. I gave them a helping hand here and there and they helped me process a lot of personal issues I was going through (depression and anxiety). Everybody needs support of some kind just like this brit needs a bed to sleep in if he's going to fly his butt across the pond. The great thing is, there are plenty of kind-hearted people out there who put the person first. I want people to know that. I feel that things are projected as too ruthless sometimes. This can be a loving business where artists support artists and everyone is seen as equal.
I hope what I'm saying makes some sense and gives some hope.
Thank you, CJ. You make perfect sense and it does give me hope.
I'm stubborn. I freely admit that. That's my cross to bear. But my stubbornness is also a huge source of inspiration for me. That's how I keep going.
My main hope, as selfish as this may sound, is that the world keeps the understanding that there's still plenty we can do, while staying safe, keeping a distance of two meters, and wearing masks. Of course it's tragic, this global pandemic. But at the same, for first time since a became disabled, everything is accessible to me. Online, zoom, emails, etc. In public, while ables complain about the two meters, I'm happily doing all my grocery shopping without a problem, because everyone is staying out my way. Two meters is a respectful distance for me, not a problem.
Real help is about helping people to help themselves. With all the current restrictions, I can freely help myself. Even if this pandemic resolves by tomorrow, I sincerely hope the learned behavior, respectful distance, being nice to each other, not caring how anyone looks, successful remote business, never changes, so that if I have to tell anyone, sorry, I physically can't, they'll already know that there is, in fact, another way.
I'm with you. I'm hoping the good thing that comes out of this pandemic is a huge cultural reset in thinking. It's amazing how fast the unions/guilds moved when it was the majority of their members who suddenly became vulnerable.
I spent most of 2018/2019 at a community cafe dedicated to helping the most vulnerable in society. Even here in the UK where we have a remarkable level of social support compared to other countries, it's simply not fair how many people can be effectively left behind.
In that case, let's get this revolution started. ;)