There’s a script note I’ve given rather a lot over the years
– to myself and other writers – and yet it doesn’t get talked about all that
much (except for this week, when a post by the mighty James ‘Sitcom Geek’ Cary reminded
me to write this). Since launching my Script Notes service a few months back, I’ve
applied this note to a fair number of the varied and splendid TV and film scripts
I’ve received.
Don’t tell the script
reader things which the viewer won’t see or hear onscreen.
It’s easy to fall into this trap. Why? Because
we’re keen to communicate with the reader and get them on board. We want them to enjoy the script and get the story, without getting
confused. But our eagerness leads us to
forget that readers enjoy scripts most when experiencing them as a viewer would
– when they’re picturing the drama in their heads and gleaning all information solely
from what’s ‘onscreen’.
So if your script’s action lines start sidling up and whispering
privileged information about offscreen
stuff, you run the risk of snapping them out of their own
imaginations. You can remind them they’re
reading a script rather than watching something. Suddenly they’re no longer visualising, but processing
purely written information. You also
make it harder for them to gauge how well the script is actually telling its
story onscreen, where it counts.
Here are some examples of imaginary action lines which
commit this cardinal sin…
INT. LINDA’S BEDROOM - NIGHT
Linda lies on her back, staring at the ceiling. She’s been awake for hours.
How do we, as viewers,
know how long she’s been awake?
INT. BAR – NIGHT
Dan props up the bar, nursing a whiskey. He’s thinking about what Susan told him this
morning.
How do we, as viewers,
know this? Even an Oscar-winning actor would
find themselves hard pressed to convey specific thoughts using only their
facial muscles.
EXT. SPACE
The massive and imposing Stornbecker 8 spaceship glides into
view. This vast behemoth is home to over
200 scientists who specialise in the latest cloning techniques.
How do we, as viewers, know it’s home to over 200 scientists
specialising in the latest cloning techniques?
Sure, we’ll hopefully gather this stuff in subsequent scenes as we
venture inside the ship, but why tell the reader up front? It’s a waste of a line. And more importantly, the reader is no longer
wondering, ‘Hey, I wonder who might live in a spaceship like this’. Let’s look at another example of robbing the
reader of questions…
Pete runs breathless past the 18th hole, towards a pub called The 19th Hole. Something falls from his jacket. He stops to snatch it from the ground, then takes a moment to study it: a photograph of his dead wife HELEN.
How, in the name of
all that’s holy and unholy, do we, as viewers, know that’s his dead wife in the
photo? This, by the way, is the first
time we’ve encountered Helen in this imaginary script and so we have no idea
who she is. And crucially, we shouldn’t
yet. When we read the script we should
have the exact same experience as the viewer, wondering who the woman in the
photo might be. So from this point on,
the script reader and the potential viewer are having two completely different experiences.
And since the Mystery Photo Woman would
have been a good hook, the script reader is actually less engaged.
Sometimes we writers fall into this trap by mistake, in
early drafts. Other times, we try it as a
crafty cheat, to avoid having to find ways to convey information, either
visually (ideal) or by dialogue (the last resort). But it’s very much a false economy and can
cause real problems. If Helen is never
established onscreen as Pete’s dead
wife, she’ll forever remain a mystery for viewers. The writer has told the script reader but
never the viewer. This is an outrage!
So, we need to watch ourselves when it comes to this stuff,
especially when flip-flopping between prose and script (and it’s arguable that ‘show
don’t tell’ still applies just as much to prose as it does to script, even
though the prose writer gets to communicate directly with the ‘end-user’. Depending on the narrator’s POV and story, we
should still ideally be looking to convey things to the reader via characters’
surface lives – through their gestures, spoken words and actions.) As a general rule of thumb, look out for
these three warning signs:
- You find yourself writing about what a character “feels” or “thinks”...
- Or using the word “clearly” or “obviously”, which often tends to be code for “I’m not sure how to convey this visually”, eg ‘Tim is obviously finding this new bar job a struggle’, instead of something like, ‘Tim, caked in sweat, pours two drinks at once. He glances over at a row of frustrated, waiting customers, then knocks a stack of glasses over. Smash!’
- Or naughtily delegating work to the director and/or actors. One example of this might be starting a scene with ‘Lisa, Colin and Tom are chatting on the sofas. Suddenly, the door bursts open’. Guess who has to supply the actual words these people were chatting? That’ll be you, unless this is some kind of crazy arthouse-improv show.
Are there exceptions to the above? Should we never write little asides for the
reader’s sole benefit? Yep, there are
always exceptions. When introducing new
major characters, it’s more of a matter of taste as to whether you tell the
reader their relationships to each other (‘TED holds the door open for his
elderly mother IRENE’) – provided, of course, that you also remember
to establish these onscreen.
Another example might be giving the reader a brief reminder of a smaller character’s identity, eg ‘Rob, the homeless guy from earlier, stares menacingly up at Tara’s window.’ The viewer will have the advantage of instantly recognising Rob from earlier, but the reader will thank you for a prompt.
Another example might be giving the reader a brief reminder of a smaller character’s identity, eg ‘Rob, the homeless guy from earlier, stares menacingly up at Tara’s window.’ The viewer will have the advantage of instantly recognising Rob from earlier, but the reader will thank you for a prompt.
Such small exceptions aside, scriptwriting is all about
visual storytelling. And that’s why we
must treat reader and viewer as one and the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment