Question about scenes...

[Kastman]

Hello again.

I have started writing my new teen script (ps thanks maestro for that avice on watching another 80's teen comedy and outlining that, it reallyh elped me out) and am just wondeirng about having to write new scenes for small things.

example... in this the main character catches his parents having sex... now the scene is:


INT. LYNCH PARENT'S BEDROOM - DAY

Rob and Nicki are both in bed having sex. The sheets are flailing
all over the place, and Nicki is trying not to scream. She hears
the front door slam and immediately stops.

NICKI
What was that?

ROB
What was what?

NICKI
I heard a noise.

ROB
There was no noise. Come on.

They start up again.



Now I'm about to have Eddie (main character) be walking throughthe hallway unaware, and tlkaing to himself, and then start talking to his mother... do i need to do this
_____________________________________________
ROB
There was no noise. Come on.

They start up again.

INT. HALLWAY - DAY

Eddie walks down the hallway talking to himself... etc.

or do i just write in in a new paragraph under the paretns having sex scene for example...
_____________________________________________
ROB
There was no noise. Come on.

They start up again.

Eddie walks down the hallway tlaking to himself... etc.




I'm sorry if it is hard to understand, any help is appreciated.

[Beeblebrox]

ROB
There was no noise. Come on.

They start up again.

INT. HALLWAY - DAY

Eddie walks down the hallway talking to himself...

You would do it this way.

[Kastman]

Ok thanks for that Beeble, you never cease to amaze me...




Thread closed...:( damn lack of authority

[Kastman]

ok theres no point making a new thead about this so i have one more question....


When having a scene at a fast food place... is it necessary to name the place...

is it allowed to put:

INT. McDONALDS - NIGHT

or would i have to make up a naeme like

INT. BARRY'S BURGER SHACK - NIGHT

OOORRR could I just go with...

INT. FAST FOOD PLACE - NIGHT



any help, again, is apreciated.

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by Kastman
is it allowed to put:

INT. McDONALDS - NIGHT

or would i have to make up a naeme like

INT. BARRY'S BURGER SHACK - NIGHT

OOORRR could I just go with...

INT. FAST FOOD PLACE - NIGHT

It doesn't matter.

[Ronaldinho]

Rob and Nicki are both in bed having sex. The sheets are flailing
all over the place, and Nicki is trying not to scream. She hears
the front door slam and immediately stops.

Just as an aside, since Beeble answered the question, I want to point out how much passive voice is in this paragaph.

(are having sex, are flailling, is trying). Don't know if this is your actual text or not but if it is, make it active, and if it isn't, be aware of this habit in your writing.

re: your second question, it doesn't matter becaue it's just a script, and if later they can't get the location they'll change it.

[przybyla]

When having a scene at a fast food place... is it necessary to name the place...

You have to remember that when it goes into production it's gonna gt shot where ever they decide to.

EXT. BURGER JOINT - DAY is fine.


As for your formatting question. You could also use a slugline, which sometimes may come in handy, but in this case it would just take up space.

[inglourious basterd]

Originally posted by Kastman

Thread closed...:( damn lack of authority

Which thread are you talking about?

[Ronaldinho]

Originally posted by przybyla
You have to remember that when it goes into production it's gonna gt shot where ever they decide to.

EXT. BURGER JOINT - DAY is fine.


I'm going to slightly disagree here. The fact is that a McDonalds is a McDonalds. While they may not end up shooting in a McDonalds for a variety of practical reasons, calling it a McDonalds (if a McDonalds is what you want) draws a very clear picture INSTANTLY.

So while none of the options are wrong, they're not equivalent, either. A "Burger Joint" is different from a "fast food restaurant"-- the words convey different things (and McDonalds is far more precise than any of them.)

You should always write in the most clear, concise language possible-- and that means calling a McDonalds a McDonalds.

[Beeblebrox]

I agree with Ron. What you call it depends on what you're going for. I personally opt for believability, so I'll use a real place instead of inventing a fictitious place.

I say "it doesn't matter" because what I choose to put down as the writer won't matter when it comes to shooting.

[Kastman]

Originally posted by psudoazn
Which thread are you talking about?

Nevermind, my firstquestion was answered then i said that, but lucky for me i had another question....




Ok thanks for the advice peoples...

Can you please explain the whole active voice/passive voice thing?

Is it just the difference between putting say "Fred is walking down the street" and "Fred walks down the street" or am I missing oh so much more?

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by Kastman
Can you please explain the whole active voice/passive voice thing?

Is it just the difference between putting say "Fred is walking down the street" and "Fred walks down the street" or am I missing oh so much more? [/B]

TECHNICALLY, passive voice is a noun/verb relationship in which the noun is acted upon (passive) rather than acting (active voice).

"The bell has been rung by Steve" is passive voice because the bell is being acted upon.

"Steve rang the bell" is active voice.

THAT SAID, in this case "passive voice" is short hand for too many "is" verbs.

"He is walking to the store" would be written "He walks to the store."

[adamjohnson]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
TECHNICALLY, passive voice is a noun/verb relationship in which the noun is acted upon (passive) rather than acting (active voice).

"The bell has been rung by Steve" is passive voice because the bell is being acted upon.

"Steve rang the bell" is active voice.

THAT SAID, in this case "passive voice" is short hand for too many "is" verbs.

"He is walking to the store" would be written "He walks to the store."

I had a question about this as well. What if the scene opens with him already walking? Then isnt "He is walking ..." correct in that way? B/c saying "He walks" implies (to me at least) that he has not yet started his walk.

[Maestro]

First, you're welcome, Kastman. Glad I could help. And thanks, Beeble, for the compliment in that thread. That said, I'd like to add a few things here:

a) This could be another instance where mini-slugs might come in handy:

INT. EDDIE'S HOUSE -- DAY

Eddie pushes through the front door and lets it slam shut behind him.

IN THE BEDROOM

{Nicki and Rob's dialog}

IN THE HALLWAY

Eddie walks...

2) While I agree with Ron about McDonalds being clear and concise, be careful about including things that would identify it as a McDonalds. (i.e. trademarks like "the golden arches", a Big Mac, etc.) For example, if you write a joke--this is a comedy, right?--with the punchline "I deserved a break today", that could end up being an expensive joke.

So McDonalds in a slug is fine, but making it a story point could cause problems.

Maestro

[Maestro]

What if the scene opens with him already walking?

If I may answer your question with a question: how important is it to the story that the scene starts with the person already in motion?

Maestro

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by adamjohnson
I had a question about this as well. What if the scene opens with him already walking? Then isnt "He is walking ..." correct in that way? B/c saying "He walks" implies (to me at least) that he has not yet started his walk.

When you're talking about "is" verbs and NOT the technical definition of passive voice, it really just depends.

To me, "He is sitting on the bench" and "he sits on the bench" mean two different things. There's nothing inherently wrong with "is" verbs, although some people don't like to read it.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with it. Out of all the people I've worked with, my managers, my agent, producers, other directors, I've never heard anyone complain about overuse of "is" verbs.

Genuine passive voice is another story. It's grammatically weaker than active voice and can be awkward, especially in screenwriting.

[NobodySpecial]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with it. Out of all the people I've worked with, my managers, my agent, producers, other directors, I've never heard anyone complain about overuse of "is" verbs.
But that's partly because of self-selection: agents, producers, and directors read scripts after they've been filtered for quality. People who know what they're doing don't write excessively passive scripts, so the better scripts tend to not have these kind of problems. Its the same thing with voice overs. Off the top of my head, outside of the internet I don't think I've read a single script in the last six months that had more than 6 lines of VO dialogue, unless it was an adaptation of a first person novel.

The problem is, some people <cough, cough, here, cough> tend to use passive sentences all the time, and it makes the reading more bland. "He is standing under a lightpost" vs "He stands under a lightpost". Multiply that by 1000 and you start to lose interest.

Like all things relating to writing, talented writers no how to use language to their advantage, including switching to and from passive voice (I know a person who does it on purpose, very effectively, too).

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial
But that's partly because of self-selection: agents, producers, and directors read scripts after they've been filtered for quality. People who know what they're doing don't write excessively passive scripts, so the better scripts tend to not have these kind of problems.

Actually, I read "is" verbs in stuff they're producing all the time (which again is not technically passive voice). It just doesn't matter to anyone reading the script. They're looking for story and characters for the most part. That's what gets the comments and the notes. Not the grammar.

Now, it IS true that those stories are well written, concise, and visual. But it's more of a "I know good writing when I see it" than it is "this guy followed all the 'rules'" situation.

[NobodySpecial]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
Actually, I read "is" verbs in stuff they're producing all the time (which again is not technically passive voice). It just doesn't matter to anyone reading the script. They're looking for story and characters for the most part. That's what gets the comments and the notes. Not the grammar.
Of course, but if you're actually mindful of them, you'll see "is" and "-ing" verbs show up very infrequently, and when they do show up they tend to have a purposeful presence.

In general, the actual technical quality of the writing is lost on most non-writers. Producers or directors who would characterize themselves as writers, or former writers, tend to appreciate these sort of things.

[Kastman]

I'm beginning to think i should re title this thread to "Kastman's questions about screenwriting" because NobodySpecial's couple of entences about voice overs got me thinking.

In my script I have written voice overs, but it's not like those ones where the person is telling the story, as the scene hapens it's the guys mind telling him something, and then him doing something, like on the simpsons for example...

in one episode:
_______________________
Carl: Don't yell at Homer.. just 'cos he's a little slow

Homer's Brain: Wait a minute, something was said, not good... slow! They called you slow!

Homer stands up: How dare you call me slow!

_______________________
See thats what my voice overs are, I just didn't know whther I should write (vo) or should i do it another way?

Sorry for all the questions, but hey, this IS the screenwriting forum i should milk it for all it's worth.

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial
In general, the actual technical quality of the writing is lost on most non-writers.

Yes, but that's who is going to be reading your script. Agents. Executives. Managers. Producers. Non-writers who don't really care about that stuff. Again, that's just my experience. I've gotten plenty of story notes, never any technical notes.

By the time it gets to a director, someone has already been sold on the story and the characters and the grammar matter even less.

The only time I'd ever be really concerned about the nitpicky stuff is if I was sending it to another writer or posting it on an internet message board.

[NobodySpecial]

Depends on how funny you are. If it's funny, then it works. If it's not, then it looks stupid.

It's a tough call without seeing exactly what you've written.

Personally I would advise against trying to write gimmicky comedy, though. On paper visual or aural tricks don't play. The humor is best left to the content of the scene, rather than how that scene is intended to be filmed.

[NobodySpecial]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
Yes, but that's who is going to be reading your script. Agents. Executives. Managers. Producers. Non-writers who don't really care about that stuff.
Hmmm... are you sure there aren't any producers with writing in their backgrounds....?

But in any event, I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. Honestly, if I was handed a script with the line "John is standing by the pool", I would throw it in the trash instantly and put the writer on a shit-list. But the truth is, a person who writes the above line probably doesn't have a strong background in writing (be it academic or experience based), and so is more likely to have committed other problems in the script. Subsequently, those types of scripts, the ones with lots of "is standing"s, tend to be the one's readers put a pass on, and those aren't the ones producers, agents, managers, directors, or actors are reading.

You can go a step further and say that, you know, "John is standing by the pool" isn't very good writing, and a script full of that sort of thing is invariably going to be weaker than a script with lots of active sentences. Now a reader my be completely oblivious to why they're bored, but nevertheless they will be.

Again, that's just my experience. I've gotten plenty of story notes, never any technical notes.
Yeah, me neither. I've never seen or heard about them given either. But let's take this to the next level: have you ever seen a script that's been sold and has gone into production by a studio, but had terrible grammar, and an overall lack of quality to the technical writing itself?

My point is simply that those scripts that are going into production are not the ones that need the technical notes in the first place.

But that's just my observation.

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial
Honestly, if I was handed a script with the line "John is standing by the pool", I would throw it in the trash instantly and put the writer on a shit-list.

I could read you off a list of scripts that you would have thrown in the garbage that went on to become big hit movies.

Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with what you're saying about bad writing, but bad writing is about more than grammar. It's about use of the language. And you can usually tell by the end of the page whether or not the writer can use the language to tell a story.

Yeah, me neither. I've never seen or heard about them given either. But let's take this to the next level: have you ever seen a script that's been sold and has gone into production by a studio, but had terrible grammar, and an overall lack of quality to the technical writing itself?

No, but I've seen plenty of "is" verbs.

I think we're on the same page, basically, and I definitely agree with you in theory. I'm just not nearly as anal as you are about specifics. If a writer can engage me with his story, his characters, and his use of language, then I most likely won't notice even a frequent use of "is" verbs. I certainly wouldn't throw it away if I happen to come across one.

[NobodySpecial]

Ah I see....

Honestly, if I was handed a script with the line "John is standing by the pool", I would throw it in the trash instantly and put the writer on a shit-list.
That was a typo. It should read "I wouldn't throw it in the trash". Damn internet.

I think every reads right after that. :rolleyes:

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial
That was a typo. It should read "I wouldn't throw it in the trash". Damn internet.

Or maybe you were trying to demonstrate the power of correct spelling through a real world example of how simple mistakes can make big differences.

;)

[Ronaldinho]

I want to agree with NS here.

While non-writers may well not notice that the problem with the writing is the passive voice, your writing will read better if you write more actively.

This is not just a screenwriting thing. Pick up any style manual published in the last 100 years and it'll probably say the same thing.

As for passive voice implying that somebody is in the middle of the action, I half agree-- although the solution is not the passive voice, but rather better writing.

Let's look at some examples.

I think "sits" is one of those verbs where it can be ambiguous is you write it actively (while "walks" is not). So let's take an example:

John sits on a bench.

That reads to me like, well, he starts standing up and he ends up sitting down. But we can be more descriptive:

John relaxes on a bench.

Already it's a clearer picture. (One thing I see a lot on this board is people using very generic verbs. Sits. Walks. Stands. Don't have your characters behave generically! Use descriptive verbs: sprawls, saunters, leaps up.)

Or you can make the choice clear by context:

John folds his newspaper and tosses it on the bench next to him.

(This is another problem I see on these boards. People seem to be waiting around for scenes to start, not doing anything before hand. But a person's state at the start of the scene should reveal something about what he was just doing.)

[adamjohnson]

Originally posted by Ronaldinho
I want to agree with NS here.

While non-writers may well not notice that the problem with the writing is the passive voice, your writing will read better if you write more actively.

This is not just a screenwriting thing. Pick up any style manual published in the last 100 years and it'll probably say the same thing.

As for passive voice implying that somebody is in the middle of the action, I half agree-- although the solution is not the passive voice, but rather better writing.

Let's look at some examples.

I think "sits" is one of those verbs where it can be ambiguous is you write it actively (while "walks" is not). So let's take an example:

John sits on a bench.

That reads to me like, well, he starts standing up and he ends up sitting down. But we can be more descriptive:

John relaxes on a bench.

Already it's a clearer picture. (One thing I see a lot on this board is people using very generic verbs. Sits. Walks. Stands. Don't have your characters behave generically! Use descriptive verbs: sprawls, saunters, leaps up.)



Ahhhhh, very good indeed.

Like you just said, I dont like the scene to start with nothing really happening, so thats why i often have a lot of "John is sitting" or "John is walking", ie ALREADY in the action of doing things. If you said "John walks down the street" its almost the same, but it seems more like hes at the beginning of the street (which might take forever onscreen) and walk to the end, when in reality hes already walking.

But if I were to say "John steps onto the curn from the street" or "John leans back in his La-Z-Boy" are THOSe better than the aformentioned?

Ill have to look for those, although they arent VERy prevalent in my scripts (recent ones anyway) I do find one from time to time, read it, change it, and decide it just sounds better the other way. But the new lines I just posted do seem better in every way. Do you agree?

[NobodySpecial]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
Or maybe you were trying to demonstrate the power of correct spelling through a real world example of how simple mistakes can make big differences.

;)
Yes, yes, of course. :rolleyes:

:p

[Captain Planet]

I have a question regarding passive voice. I try to eliminate 'ing' words as much as possible, but sometimes the sentence flows more naturally with an 'ing' word.

EG:

"She silences him with a kiss, clinging to his clothes, luring him closer."

Sure, I can write this as:

"She silences him with a kiss as she clings to his clothes, and lures him closer"

But sounds awkard to me, and somewhat stilted. More like a sequence of three action that happen, as apposed to three actions that are happening at the same time (the kiss, the clinging, the luring).

What are your thoughts?

[NobodySpecial]

Why can't it just be, "She silences him with a kiss, clings to his clothes, lures him closer."?

Take it one step farther and remember the rules of screenwriting format -- ie, use whitespace -- and you can have:

She silences him with a kiss...

Clings to his clothes...

Lures him closer...

Or some crap like that.

If you want to get technical, I believe your original sentence had verb tense inconsistency, or something equally bad.

I'd also say that the luring in part doesn't make much sense, because I'm not sure where she's luring him to. I mean, she can't really lure him closer to herself, because kissing is already close quarters. It's also a little strange that she's kissing and clinging at the same time. It's an odd choice of language, I'd say. But that's just me, and this is just an example.

[Captain Planet]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial

Why can't it just be, "She silences him with a kiss, clings to his clothes, lures him closer."?

I thought about the above method, but it just seemed a little too "listy" to me.

Originally posted by NobodySpecial

If you want to get technical, I believe your original sentence had verb tense inconsistency, or something equally bad.

Hm... so these types of sentences below are technically incorrect?

"A SHOCK-TRAUMA TEAM swarms over her, inserting a vacutainer into an artery to draw blood, wrapping a blood pressure cuff around her arm"

"Disregarding the question, Holden continues, picking up the pace."

"Carrying a bag and umbrella, Deckard disembarks ahead of the other passengers and into the sweltering night."

I see these kinds of sentences all the time: present tense verbs and progressive verbs in the same sentence separated by a comma. The above examples are from "Blade" and "Blade Runner". Is this some archaic rule that is no longer followed? Or is this something only Goyer, Fancher, and the likes can get away with?

[XvoorheesX]

I see these kinds of sentences all the time: present tense verbs and progressive verbs in the same sentence separated by a comma. The above examples are from "Blade" and "Blade Runner". Is this some archaic rule that is no longer followed? Or is this something only Goyer, Fancher, and the likes can get away with?

I find myself writing that way a lot.

These examples are from my newest:

"Sliding his gun out of the holster, Eddy slowly rises to his feet, a look of confusion in his eyes."

"A tear rolling down his cheek, he turns to leave, his head buried in his chest."

"Blowing out a smoothe ribbon of smoke, she takes her cigarette and doubts it in the ash-tray."

Is this a big no-no? I can see where it could be punched up a bit and made clearer, or should I just avoid this all together?

[NobodySpecial]

I thought about the above method, but it just seemed a little too "listy" to me.
And what you originally had wasn't?

I see these kinds of sentences all the time: present tense verbs and progressive verbs in the same sentence separated by a comma. The above examples are from "Blade" and "Blade Runner". Is this some archaic rule that is no longer followed? Or is this something only Goyer, Fancher, and the likes can get away with?
About Goyer, he's a very talented writer who writes extremely good stories. He's a nice guy to boot.

But re-read all those sentences you posted and see how easily they could be re-written to have greater dramatic impact. I don't really need to do that for you, just change some of those -ing verbs to the present tense and see how the sentences read differently. While you're at it you can start recutting the sentences too, and you'll see how a few periods can add impact and strength to what's written.

You can write like that, but do you really want to? Shouldn't your goal be to write better, instead of just "eh"?

[Ronaldinho]

"She silences him with a kiss, clinging to his clothes, luring him closer."

Sure, I can write this as:

"She silences him with a kiss as she clings to his clothes, and lures him closer"

I agree this sounds listy, but I think the reason is that it IS listy and vague.

This gets back to the point that beneath a lot of these grammar problems are content problems-- as NS pointed out, this doesn't really make sense.

In general (although I'm not going to look it up right now) I have no problem with sentences of the structure:

He does something, [while] doing something related.

The problem with this:


"A SHOCK-TRAUMA TEAM swarms over her, inserting a vacutainer into an artery to draw blood, wrapping a blood pressure cuff around her arm"

is, im my opinion, that the subject is a shock-trauma team, and then you list a bunch of indidivual actions. A shock trauma team doesn't insert a vautainer-- a single member of the team does.

Your other two examples from that post didn't bother me at all.

[Maestro]

Can I ask a question in "Kastman's questions about screenwriting"?

switching to and from passive voice (I know a person who does it on purpose, very effectively, too).

I've done that to enhance the tone of a scene. Is that what you had in mind? What other reasons are there? To emphasize the passivity of a character, perhaps?

Thanks - Maestro

[Kastman]

bump, in case people didnt see maestro had a question.. also!


IN my script there are a lot of the scenes in school, and I feel way too repetitive trying to describe what the peole are doing, like at the start of a scene the students are all messing about, but if i write too much of the same stuff it sounds/looks and is stupid. any help with this please?

if you need examples say so and il find them for you, thanks again.

[Maestro]

Remember that you're supposed to be describing things that are important to the story. Another way to look at this: what are we learning (about your characters or story)--that we didn't already know--by seeing these characters do whatever they're doing? Describe what we need to see to learn that.

Also note that people behave differently in different situations. i.e. in class vs at lunch vs during extra-curricular activities vs at the counselor's office, etc.

Thanks for the bump - Maestro

[NobodySpecial]

Originally posted by Maestro
I've done that to enhance the tone of a scene. Is that what you had in mind? What other reasons are there? To emphasize the passivity of a character, perhaps?
Depends on what you mean by "mood". Clearly, there are times when the a passive like language may be preferable such as...

John stalks through the bushes. He stops at the edge of the brush, pushes it aside.

Margot's still standing where he left her.

You could try writing that as: "Margot stands where he left her", but does that sound right? To me it's not as natural as the "is -ing" way. It's less formal, which would help if this scene was intended to be funny (it would also help if I wasn't a lousy writer :rolleyes: ).

Part of the real trick to writing is to manipulate the audience without them realizing they've been manipulated. Language and style go a long way to doing just that. It's why writers are recommended to use short, kurt sentences for action -- they quicken the pace of the reader. It's a subtle trick that's used quite effectively, and frequently.

Hope that answers your question.

IN my script there are a lot of the scenes in school, and I feel way too repetitive trying to describe what the peole are doing, like at the start of a scene the students are all messing about, but if i write too much of the same stuff it sounds/looks and is stupid. any help with this please?
Maestro hit the nail on the head -- focus on what's important to the story. So, is the fact that the kids are messing around important to the story? It might be, which means you have to let us know, whether you want to or not, though there's not a lot you'd need to say to clue us in as to what's happening.

"The teacher exuberantly writes out the answers to the math quiz. None of the students are paying attention."
(yes, I realize it's passive... ;))

"Michael struggles to finish the reading assignment while the other students holler back and forth."

You can see in both that it's important that the kids aren't paying attention, or are otherwise engaged in their activities. In the first example, you're clued into the fact that the teacher is more excited by this material than her kids are. In the second, you're setting up that there's a lot of distraction that might be giving Michael a bit of problem with his task.

That sort of thing. Does that make sense?

[Kastman]

Yes, that makes perfect sense but what i meant was is at the very start o a scene, describing what it is like. say at a high school i write

EXT HIGH SCHOOL - MORNING
-Here i want to show that all the students (this being the first day at school) are running around emssing with each other doing jack all and then later i have some of the bigger characters enter opr do something.



but later on, when i write another scene, do i eed to describe the setting and what the crowd is like in the area beause writing that a lt of times is getting very repetitive. YEah?




Thanks again

[NobodySpecial]

Originally posted by Kastman
EXT HIGH SCHOOL - MORNING
-Here i want to show that all the students (this being the first day at school) are running around emssing with each other doing jack all and then later i have some of the bigger characters enter opr do something.
So there are a couple of really important questions that arise out of this.

1) How are you communicating to the audience that this is the first day of school? Granted, it was quite a while ago, but as I recall we used to dick around every morning, not just the morning of the first day of school. So dicking around isn't doesn't elucidate the time frame of this scene.

Given that we have the next question.

2) If you're communicating to use that this is the first day of school some other way, then why do we need to know what the kids are doing?

This is the real important point here. Why are their specific actions important to me? Can't you just write, "Dick strolls into the busy school."? Or even, "Dick strolls into school."?

Do the actions of the kids impact the story?

Watch:
Dick walks into the packed cafeteria. The students sit talking and eating.
or
Dick walks into the packed cafeteria. The students sit silently eating their food

The first describes a generic cafeteria. The second describes a very unique situation.

So, you can omit what the students are doing in the first example (because it's a given), but not in the second (because it's unique). That's the way to approach these sort of things. I only need to hear things that aren't expected or that are absolutely important to note.

[Kastman]

Originally posted by NobodySpecial

1) How are you communicating to the audience that this is the first day of school? Granted, it was quite a while ago, but as I recall we used to dick around every morning, not just the morning of the first day of school. So dicking around isn't doesn't elucidate the time frame of this scene.


Yeah thats my point, if thats what they do everyday, do I need to write a description for them messing about for eveyr scene i write that takes place there? because thats why it is getting so repetitive


Or does does just brigning in the main characters straight away with it being a busy school work fine?

[Kastman]

Ok, I'm back, and have yet another question about screenwriting. SOme may debate after so many questions that i know what a screenplay is, I say "yes" to those people... anyways.


With this whole passive voice business.. i have a scene where i use it, but it looks ok to me... here it be...



Josh walks past the group with his lunch, looking for a place to
sit. He finally sees a bench with two other kids on it, they both
keep to themselves. He makes sure it's ok with them if he sits
with them, they don't care. Phoebe has her eyes locked on him.
Eddie notices this and is a little bit jealous.

EDDIE
So then, Friday at my house?

PHOEBE
Hey Denise, did you see that guy?

DENISE
Yeah.

PHOEBE
I haven't seen him before. Is he new?

DENISE
Yeah his name is Josh I think. He's in my
science class.

Jason notices Eddie as he tries not to care that Phoebe is
looking at another guy. He tries to help.

JASON
Well look who he's hanging around with? He
must be weird or something.



The "jason notices Eddie as he tries not to care that Phoebe is looking at another guy. He tries to help out."

Is that ok? I have gone through my script and eliminated most words ending with "ing" but does this one count?

[Beeblebrox]

He makes sure it's ok with them if he sits
with them, they don't care.

I have bigger problem with your action and it's this sentence here.

Do NOT skip over dialogue scenes like this if we see them on screen. If he makes sure it's okay and they don't care, then we need to see them say it.

[HorrorIsMyGod]

I thought this would be better to post my question here instead of opening a new topic. I hope knowbody is offended by this.

my question is, Should Screenwriters incorporated music in their Scripts? ie. Alice Cooper's Teenage Frankenstein CRANKS out from the car stereo.

Also, How would you incorporate a close up shot of a moving car's wheel?

CUT TO:

EXT. A Baron Road - MidDay

Close up on the front wheel of SPEEDING Automobile.

Would that be somewhat accurate?

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by HorrorIsMyGod
my question is, Should Screenwriters incorporated music in their Scripts? ie. Alice Cooper's Teenage Frankenstein CRANKS out from the car stereo.

No.

Also, How would you incorporate a close up shot of a moving car's wheel?

Unless there's some pressing reason why you NEED this shot, I'd leave it out. It's a VERY tired cliche.

[HorrorIsMyGod]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
No.



Unless there's some pressing reason why you NEED this shot, I'd leave it out. It's a VERY tired cliche.

I was thinking the same! It would probably be best to have...

CUT TO:

Ext. A Baron Road - MidDay

An OLD Panel Truck BARREL'S past.

Better?

[Ronaldinho]

Also, How would you incorporate a close up shot of a moving car's wheel?

CUT TO:

EXT. A Baron Road - MidDay

Close up on the front wheel of SPEEDING Automobile.


You're going ot have to explain why you need the closeup of the wheel. It's a turnign wheel. That's what wheels do. Why show a closeup of a wheel if it's just turning?

You're writing the story, not directing it, so don't worry about calling shots that don't have story content.

If you want to direct the audience's attention to a part of the car, there should be a story reason. Take a look at the opening of Kristof Kielslowski's "Blue" for a reason to cut to the underside of a car.

But avoid writing the shot, anyway. I'd probably write something like, "Under the car, fluid drips from the brake line."

[Kastman]

Originally posted by Beeblebrox
I have bigger problem with your action and it's this sentence here.

Do NOT skip over dialogue scenes like this if we see them on screen. If he makes sure it's okay and they don't care, then we need to see them say it.

Yeah I see what you mean, but I wasn't intending for there to be dialogue, he kind of is supposed to go to sit down, they look up and see him so he hesitates, but they just go back to doing what they were doing.... or should i write that whole thing out.



Now..... back onto my other questiopn lol:D scroll up a few posts for that one

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by Kastman
they look up and see him so he hesitates, but they just go back to doing what they were doing.

That is more along the lines of how you should write it actually.

And it brings me to the point about overthinking this stuff. You're a storyteller. Tell your story. Being clear and concise is almost always more important than getting all that other stuff (camera direction, passive voice, etc) right.

[Ares2907]

I'm not sure that your question on passive writing has been answered yet. I'll leave aside the stuff that the others covered because, well, they already covered it. What you need to understand is that writing a spec script is writing actions, not still images. Look for sentences or phrases that conjure still images in your mind's eye. They're bad and most likely it's because they're written passively.


Phoebe has her eyes locked on him.
Eddie notices this and is a little bit jealous.


Okay so, Phoebe is openly gawking at Josh? Can't look away? Isn't concerned by what her friends might think about her checking out the new kid? You will want to make that more clear.

Now, I don't know if Eddie is her boyfriend or just has wood for her. Secondly what exactly is he doing to show the audience that he's trying not to be jealous? Jealousy is an internal state.

Consider:
AT A NEARBY TABLE
Phoebe stares intently at Josh. Eddie's eyes narrow as he follows her line of sight.

Compared with:
Phoebe steals surreptitious glances at Josh. Eddie catches her and scowls.


The 'Friday, at my house' is good. It's good down to where you start writing action again.

Originally posted by Kastman

The "jason notices Eddie as he tries not to care that Phoebe is looking at another guy. He tries to help out."

Is that ok? I have gone through my script and eliminated most words ending with "ing" but does this one count?

No, it's not okay. Yes it counts. There are several things wrong with it. The whole 'A sees B being jealous of C looking at D and wants to help' Okay - remember the cave troll in FotR? That's your sentence. It lumbers about and confuses itself.

Okay, you've just done a nice little setup, with Eddie being ignored - pointedly. Then you fuck it up by labouring the point. We get it. We can surmise that Jason gets it too.

Consider:
Eddie's scowl deepens. Jason punches him lightly on the arm.

JASON
Check out who he's sitting with. He's probably a computer nerd


hth