Message Board

I'd simply set up the master scenes then note INTERCUTTING: and proceed with dialogue. As the writer, that's all you should be concerned with. Leave the actual editing to the Director and Editor, and just tell your story. When it's simple, even the so-called professional 'readers' can understand it. And without that all-important 'recommend' at the bottom of the coverage, it won't get to anyone who can green-light it. Good luck. Ellum

Having experience as a reader of short fiction, poetry, and a well-known national screenwriting competition, let me note some observations. 1 - Many scripts start too slowly, or too forward of the actual setup/hook, or they begin with too many characters, clustered and confusingly introduced, thus making it difficult to sort out their important relative to the developing circumstances. 2 - Many scripts, though well-written and professional in format, simply do not have a story that is intriguing, or the goal of the protagonist and the risk he/she is willing to take is not enough--the stakes aren't high enough, the payoff mediocre. In short, the story wasn't worth the writer's time and talent. 3 - Many scripts are poorly written or are disturbing hybrids--too much narrative as though a novelist is writing a novelist's idea of a screenplay. 4 - Many scripts contain too many irrelevant details that a viewer cannot know or that cannot be shown on film. 5 - Many scripts, though well-written, are cliches of what we've seen too many times, peopled with characters so familiar as to be b-o-r-i-n-g.

And, what's more important, a reading experience is one hundred percent subjective. One reader might enjoy science fiction, another might feel like upchucking at the thought of reading that genre. I do truly believe that, no matter the sorry state of things in the film business relative to the treatment of writers and their works, good writing will eventually be recognized - and rewarded - even by those who seem to have literary talent recognition as exciting as peeling paint. Keep writing, keep trying, keep it clear, lean and to the point. Move the reader to laughter or tears, but move them from the theatre seat to some new experience in an exotic setting, and they'll love you for it. Afterall, it wasn't the director, the editor, the set designer or the actor; it was your words, your story, your imagination and talent--and your long commitment to the pursuit of excellence, alone with your computer or pencil, forsaking all else. Good luck. Ellum

Having experience as a reader of short fiction, poetry, and a well-known national screenwriting competition, let me note some observations.

1 - Many scripts start too slowly, or too forward of the actual setup/hook, or they begin with too many characters, clustered and confusingly introduced, thus making it difficult to sort out their importance relative to the developing circumstances.

2 - Many scripts, though well-written and professional in format, simply do not have a story that is intriguing, or the goal of the protagonist and the risk he/she is willing to take is not enough--the stakes aren't high enough, the payoff mediocre. In short, the story wasn't worth the writer's time and talent.

3 - Many scripts are poorly written or are disturbing hybrids--too much narrative as though a novelist is writing a novelist's idea of a screenplay. 4 - Many scripts contain too many irrelevant details that a viewer cannot know or that cannot be shown on film. 5 - Many scripts, though well-written, are cliches of what we've seen too many times, peopled with characters so familiar as to be b-o-r-i-n-g.

And, what's more important, a reading experience is one hundred percent subjective. One reader might enjoy science fiction, another might feel like upchucking at the thought of reading that genre.

I do truly believe that, no matter the sorry state of things in the film business relative to the treatment of writers and their works, good writing will eventually be recognized - and rewarded - even by those who seem to have literary talent recognition as exciting as peeling paint. Keep writing, keep trying, keep it clear, lean and to the point. Move the reader to laughter or tears, and move the viewer from the theatre seat to some new experience in an exotic setting, and they'll love you for it. Afterall, it wasn't the director, the editor, the set designer or the actor; it was your words, your story, your imagination and talent--and your long commitment to the pursuit of excellence, alone with your computer or pencil, forsaking all else. Good luck. Ellum

When a character is on the phone, but is not in the scene, the simplest solution is as follows: INT. PHONE BOOTH - DAY

Bill dials, listens.

DALE (FILTERED) Yeah?

INT. DALE'S APT. - CONTINUOUS

Dale is on the phone.

INTERCUTTING:

BILL You get the package?

DALE I got an empty box!

He slams down the phone.

END OF INTERCUTTING:

BACK TO THE PHONE BOOTH:

Bill hangs up the phone.

BILL (V.O.) Someone was playing games.

INT. BILL'S BOAT - LATER

Bill descends from the deck.

BILL Marge, you here?

MARGE (O.S.) Follow your nose to the galley.

BILL (V.O.) (crossing to the galley) At least she hadn't run out on me.

INT. GALLEY - CONTINUOUS

Bill enters. Marge hands him a drink.

Some time ago, can't recall when - a few years, I think - an agent sent a copy of the screenplay CASABLANCA to agencies and production companies, retitled RICK'S PLACE, and out of about 100 responses - most of which were 'pass' only one reader recognized the work.

Just goes to show you what writers are up against. Go figure.

Good writing is immediately obvious, and readers tend to go along with the writer's pace--to a certain extent, if the writing is crisp and interesting. Bad writing--form, dialogue, choice of direction, is also immediately obvious. What will set your screenplay apart from all the others in the reader's pile? I believe it will initially be the hook. Not that you need a hook for the story; but you'd dang sure better hook the reader. If your story is alive from line one and is somehow different or intriguing, the reader might finish the page. If the writing is clean and fast, the reader might read another page. If these things do happen--lucky you!--the reader might give you the courtesy of reading the entire first 10 pages--unless the reader's mandage from his employer is to read all of each screenplay--but that is rarely the case. Never be fooled into believing that you are the exception, that your writing and your story is so darned good you can can ignore the reality that the reader's time is too valuable (to the reader) and hope that somewhere between fade in and fade out you'll impress him/her with your extradordinary talents and original story. True, some stories don't have a hook, but most do, and when they do, the reader is immediately drawn into the story. In one of the hardest industries to break into, you must display from line one an unusually adept way of telling your story, an understanding of industry-accepted formatting, and you must have something to say that separates you from all the thousands of others who have the same aspirations. AMERICAN BEAUTY was written by someone who has been in the business many years and with contacts you and I can only dream of someday having. He truly could afford to tell his story exactly as he chose, knowing that his contacts would read it, if for no other reason than his track-record in tv and stage--same as you'd read anything William Goldman writes, not that it might be great, but because of Goldman's track-record. My advice to you is to rewrite the first ten pages until you honestly believe that you cannot improve upon any part of it. The first ten pages are the most important in getting your story read. They are too important to be anything but your focus, once the story is written and you're satisfied with it. Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite all your works, but especially the first ten pages. Good luck. Ellum

Gil - Seems each of your readers may have valid observations to be considered. Reread those last three words. Bear in mind that it is your story and your choices. When they write their stories they can make their own choices, which might not be what you or I would choose. Seems that every other person has a change which they think will improve your story. Not to take anyone's side, but the suggestion to take the opening lines of direction and expland it into the first page might be the most valid. You may have hit upon a gem that with some polish might shine brighter. I might be tempted to experiment with the opening a bit, just to see if there's a stronger intro. Doesn't entail much time, and the friend might be onto something. You'd know better than anyone, though. Whatever you do, don't be deterred from writing your way. If there are four persons in a room, they'll each think their way is the best way, but the one who sits alone with pencil or computer is the one expending the time and effort and actualizing a portion of their potential. Doing it only gets easier and, hopefully, better. Cheers. Ellum

I believe that one of the most important ways a writer in today's Hollywood can advance his/her career is to network, and many of us--I, for one--do not work at that nearly enough. We can sit around until we're shriveled mummified creatures, forehead resting against the computer screen, lamenting our lot, but the best way--rather than trying to second-guess what buyers are looking for--is to help others, and ourselves, by passing on what we experience and with whom we experience it. How do we get our material read? One way is screenwriting competitions. Even if the readers aren't going to pass along our script to a potential buyer, we do get read...by someone. Productions companies won't accept a script unless it comes A - recommended by someone they know and trust or B - is submitted by an agent, manager, lawyer. How many new writers have an agent? Few. How many have a manager or entertainment lawyer on retainer? Fewer. Who do we know in production development? I know no-one in that category. What's the solution? Most productions companies will not even acknowledge receipt of a query letter; they're paranoid about litigation. Writers need to help writers. If we find a responsive agent, producter, screenwriting contest, pass it on. Without us the boob-tube would be blank except for news, though much of that's scripted, too. Without us theatres would close and become churches or community meeting halls, or be torn down. Movie theatres would be razed to make way for Starbucks, K-Marts and Comp USA stores. Actors would shoe salesmen and waitresses again, and perhaps they'd try writing their memoirs--and hire a ghost-writer to 'polish' their masterpiece. What would Directors do, producers, makeup artists, et al. Without us, there would be no entertainment industry, no opera, nor rock stars. Writers are the low parts of the Hollywood totem pole. Agents don't want us unless/until we're selling; then they keep the phone ringing, hoping to cash in on the product of our endeavors. Producers don't want to hear from us, not from new voices; they don't have the time, and besides, their gardener is a screenwriter, their aunt in Peoria used to write poetry and still reads many of the 'recommends' from the unpaid intern with the title Development Vice-president,' with no prior experience in film-making beyond his last High School date's insistence upon seeing American Pie XVIII. And besides, the Development Vice-president has strict orders to wade through the boxes of agent-submitted scripts and find a 'romantic comedy, cheap-shoot drama/action/thriller, with 'Blair Witch' undertones, character-driven by a Sandra Bullock type only late 40ish who's seeking closure to unremembered childhood trauma, has pyschic tendencies and was a true angel in another life. And 'Don't waste time reading anything else. Skim the opening page or two, then toss it. There's plenty more in boxes in the trunk of my Rolls. You've got the key.' That's how I see today's film business. Our only hope is to keep writing, keep trying, network, and hope we someday bump into an old school/job/fellow writer who agrees to read something we've written, and, if he/she likes it, just might mention it to Tom Cruise or Mel, or Juilia next time they're invited to a 'private' bash in Malibu. Ellum

Money from any source for our writing is always nice, but when it comes to optioning a work, I'd place more value on the possibility that the producer can put the project together and see it to fruition than the amount of up-front money they have to secure your permission to join forces with them in getting your script from page to the big screen. What is the track-record, if any, of the producer--bearing in mind at all times that anyone, simply by saying so, is an instant 'producer'--and that an agent trying to sell your work isn't offering a penny up-front. Whatever your ultimate decision, sign nothing but autographed photographs without an attorney/manager/agent--the latter two being of less importance than the attorney. Good luck in all your pursuits. Ellum

Seems to me that you need a manager or agent-- not a co-writer. Good luck.

Adaptation can be really simple. Externalize everything. Distill the essence of your novel, then rewrite it from scratch. Not only will you eliminate much of the extraneous 'filler', you'll end up with a much leaner, tighter story. Try it, you might find that, although restrictive as to form and length, once you get the hang of the new format, and realize that dialogue is not conversation but film-speak, the second necessary component (the first is the picture) to revealing character and advaning the plot. It's a challenge, but much easier than 350-400 pages that you must keep on-track and moving towards the conclusion. Best, Ellum

A montage is a series of shots involving the same (usually Primary) character. A series of shots can be disparate and not all involve the same character. The form is simple:

MONTAGE:

- Shirley runs out of the warehouse and jumpts into a front loader.

- Frontloader barrels across the freeway.

- Shirley leaps out of the frontloader onto the convertible and the bad guy.

- The frontloader flips off the bridge.

- Frontloader and Shirley fall through the air.

- Frontloader sinks in the bay.

END OF MONTAGE.

A series of shots would be shown the same way.

Whether you number each shot in a series of shots or in a montage, or designate each with a dash or elipsis, the idea is to be clean and clear and easy to read.

Both are shortcuts that permit the writer to incorporate a rapid series of different action without the need of setting up master scenes for each shot. Perhaps the ultimate short cut would be to INTERCUTTING: and then END OF INTERCUTTING.

Just make it clear what you are seeing with your creative eye; it'll get changed by the director and editor anyway, so don't sweat it all that much.

I never think of trailers. I never think of distribution, costume design, set design, camera angles other than INSERT:, and I never think of the type of film or jells that might be used.

I do sometimes think of music, if a particular piece is something needed for a specific scene - though that's a waste of energy too for a writer.

I do think of casting, but only when I'm initially fleshing out a character, then the character becomes its own.

I do think of writing, incessantly--in fact, I have thought of a story as long as three years before putting a single word to paper. I try to confine my creative efforts to the only thing a writer has any control of, choice of words, arrangement of words, choice of scenes, and things I don't often see on film. 'A body of an old woman sprawled atop a low boulder near a slow-trickling creek, her near-transparent skin asprinkle with blushing petals of a wild rose bush, beneath which she is partially concealed.' (The shocking opening scene to MAN-EATERS, a screenplay about man-eating tigers and leopards.)

But, trailers, previews, teasers - I never think about.

Kudos to Johnny. I'd add another thought: you write because you are a writer. You don't pogo or unicycle or fly kites. You write, and you want to share your creativity with the world; you want someone else to agree with your observation; you want to be copied; you want to say one thing in a new way; you want to say what's been said before but never with your slant; you want to create a different world, a different reality; you want the momentary control of God - to give birth, nurture, see your 'little darlings' dreams come to fruition; you want to be all the things you aren't; to defeat your demons; you want love as you need it; to express frustration with hatred and bigotry; an ideal removed from the ugly real; you want to start wars in the name of good, and prevent wars that accomplish nothing but death and heartache. You're a writer, which means you'll wait a long time, probably, for recognition. You have monsters and butterflies in your head; your dreams are beautiful beyond description and too frightening too think too much about. You are a concert pianist, the equal to Michelangelo; you discover cures for mankinds worst diseases, powder the butts of babies, explore worlds so far away and so different from Earth that no other human will ever see. You are stronger than Superman, more gentle than Angel's breath.

You write because you cannot avoid it. And I suspect you'll produce a masterpiece someday.

I'd like to see a general award given to every writer, called Award of Achievement in screenplay, novel, poem, etc.

Writers get so little recognition outside their immediate families and strangers on writers' chat rooms.

Everyone who has ever completed any writing effort should be acknowledged for their courage to try and their fortitude to stick to it. Hooray for us!

Casablanca, The Treasure of Sierra Madre, A Streetcar Named Desire, On The Waterfront, Laurence of Arabia, Dr. Zivago, The Prey, Glory, The Shawshank Redemption, Sunset Boulevard, Notorious, Braveheart.

Max Adams (seeMaxrun.com) is a very funny lady. She won Nichols and Heart of Austin, sold 'Excess Baggage' which starred Alicia Silverstone, and Max said that her script was rewritten by everyone including the 7-11 clerk (just kidding on that one) and everyone else connected with the film, including 'an unnamed actress.'

We create and hope we sell, and if we aren't kept on for rewrites, that's the last of our 'little darlings.'

I have a friend, reasonably talented, former attorney--so he has a vocabulary, of sorts, especially 'I object! It might be justice and it might be right, but it's hurting my client!' He has never sold anything, though I do know of three option offers he turned down. Why? Aside from being out of touch with reality, stupid and greedy, he said he would only sell his work if he could be attached as director. Well, wake up--he has no directing experience. Point is, like the artist who sells a painting, if the buyer turns it to face the wall and has a grandchild finger-paint the back of the canvas, the artist has forever surrendered the work to the hands of others.

Just a thought...

Chrysalis (sp) I had nearly the full set of Steve's nekkid pics, with the exception of the series with Madonna and Paltrow, but had to sell them to Nat'l Inquirer because no-one made an offer on my First Place award-winning screenplay; I had to pay the rent, feed the cats, replace printer ink cartridge and pay some contest entry fees.

So, I don't have images of Steve to kick around anymore, but welcome anyway.

Another sad reality is that much of the writing is, excuse me, doggie-doo. But that isn't the saddest part; writers of doggie-doo are not even aware of the substandard doggie-doo they're submitting. And, with all that stuff flooding agents and producers and performers, it clogs the input channels.

I like the concept of requiring (who's to do that?) readers to have some demonstrable skills, but with added talents would come higher salaries, and that extra money comes out of the pockets of the fat-cats; so I don't think we'll see any improvement on that front.

Again, it comes down to improving our craft and networking. I have decided to stop calling myself a writer; I'm more than that...I'm a word-artist. I create worlds from a blank page. Being a word-artist isn't going to get my work read and more than when I was merely a writer, but I feel better now that I've advanced from the ranks of doggie-doo purveyors.

A final thought on that: no matter where I turn--TV, movie theatre, video rack, there is so much el junko that someone financed. True, foreign distributors like action because an explosion is univerally understood and needs no subtitle. But action films are always plot-driven, which makes for the least introspection and shallowest characters. Another problem is that the writers of el junko who, for some unknown and perhaps unknowable reason, actually sold the stuff, are then gifted with a credit. Credits get you read--and the cycle continues, feeding upon itself.

After. I would not have wanted Bruce to know how successful Steve has been in show business.

True.

Ellum Word Artist

One and a half inches left and right magins; one inch top and bottom. Pagination at 1/4 inch.

If you're using a screenwriting softward, Final Draft for instance, try to not cheat on spacing; use 'normal' - but if your script runs anything over 117 pages, you can use 'tight' and it'll reduce the length about 3pages, but I wouldn't use 'very tight.'

Omit the 'more' and bottom of page and 'continued' at top of page; they take up valuable space, and even an idiot reader need only turn a page to see if there's more to the script.

You can reconfigure width of dialogue, but it isn't a good idea--unless it is absolutely necessary.

The main thing is to keep lots of space on the page, free of lengthy direction, and if dialogue runs more than four lines, I'd break it at that.

Keep it clean, clear, easy to read and fast, bearing in mind that not everyone who reads your work will glean what you've woven into it.

Good luck.

Ellum Word Artist

With Final Draft, go into 'elements' then into 'options' and you can reset to 'default' by tabbing 'ok' or 'apply.'

Ellum Word Artist

Because Mr. Beal is somewhat shy, and for those of you who are unaware of his bona fides - Mr. Greg Beal is coordinator of the Motion Picture Academy of Arts and Sciences Nicholl Fellowship program--an annual search for excellence in the craft of screenwriting.

For more about this screenwriter's treasure, see the Academy website. He was interviewed by Max Adams, who was a Nicholl Fellow a few years ago, and winner of Heart of Austin screenplay competition. Max has her own website--SeemaxRun.com. I'm unsure if Greg has a website, probably not because he'd be deluged with e-mails.

Thank you, Greg, for your insight. Many of us can only guess at how things are in the business, and it's refreshing to hear from someone in the know.

Cheers,

Ellum

Word Artist

For some wisdom, see Greg's comments under the topic, 'Reasons for Script rejections.'

Ellum

Word Artist

Greg -

I swear I'm usually so busy writing I can't spare even a minute for forums such as this. That's the truth, Greg. I can't vouch for the other Word Artists posted here, but I've been told that their postings are, for the most part, done by someone else, not a writer, because they too are busy with their writing. A typical writer's day begins at 4:00 a.m. when the cows are milked and the cat tossed out--sometimes the cat gets milked and the cow tossed out; then after a quick cup of non-Starbucks, it's a solid four hours at the computer, a ten minute break to check notes, then another four hour stretch, into the car and off to whatever job supplies the money for the bills; then home by 8 or 9, back on the computer for the closing 4 hour session, a winddown libation, to bed, perhaps to dream.

I suspect Nicholl will set a new record in 2003, thanks in no small part to your appearance on Moviebytes.

Ellum

Word Artist

Practical Paradox (formerly Bad Kitty Films) closes January 31st. You might want to give them a try. They provide (aside from prizes) coverage notes from at least three readers, and some of those readers have great credentials. Matter of little fact, I won their first annual contest (it is now semi-annual) in 2001, feature length, and I'd recommend it to anyone who wants honest feedback. They also, separately, offer various services. Worth checking out.

Ellum

Word Artist

I'm with Jill - forgot about African Queen and To Kill A Mockingbird. Thanks for reminding me.

Ellum

Word Artist

Chrystal -

It's been said before, but take a look at TV Guide and you'll get some really good examples of loglines. Essentially, in a short sentence, what is it about? The synopsis is an expansion of the logline, but is still only a skeleton of the whole, and is a teaser meant to entice someone to read the script--not to be confused with an outline--and never, never give away the ending, otherwise the potential reader will think he/she already knows enough about the project.

Good luck.

Ellum

Word Artist

Remember, there are no rules in stone, except that what you are presenting must be clear, so that the viewer (were it to get to that point) and the reader 'gets it' right away.

You are the judge, but I would set up each master scene, and then use

INTERCUTTING:

THE RIG: Jim holds fast to the cable.

THE BOAT: Bob yells into the radio.

IN THE WATER: Lou makes the final cut and the cable whips back, beheading him.

END OF INTERCUTTING

I think that is a neater way, as opposed to a montage. It's especially effective if you have dialogue in some of the quick shots, which you want to avoid in a SERIES OF SHOTS or MONTAGE.

But, experiment, see what you like, see how it flows. That's all that's important. :)

Ellum

Word Artist

Greg -

Forgive me; I'm new to Moviebytes' forums, and when I saw your name, I couldn't contain myself. Sort of like a star-struck fan, I do suppose.

Imagine how Max Adams or Andrew Marlowe must feel today, going against 6000plus entries. One wonders if their winning scripts would have won in 2002. I've read Max's 'Excess Baggage' and Marlowe's 'Air Force One.' But Max won for 'My Back Yard,' and it hasn't been released yet.

Anyway, it is refreshing to know that professionals of your calibre actually take the time to participate in these discussions, and to give guidance and insight, and I'm sure others are as appreciative as I. So, thanks again.

Ellum

Word Artist

A final thought on this subject--and I do mean, for me, a final thought:

Writers should never forget that the business of entertainment business is business. Producers want, among other things, a project that can attract an audience to be entertained. Producers want a project that can be reasonably financed, that can be reasonably projected to recoup production and distribution costs and a profit.

If we submit a sci-fi with jillions of special effects and sets, it's going to cost so much to film that only .0001% of film-makers would be in the running.

We writers sometimes lose sight of what we are attempting to do in this business. We're trying to get someone else to finance our art--and it's been observed many times over that movies are the costliest art form (though I suggest a hundred mile freeway system might give it a run for the money.)

Audiences want to be entertained, swept away on an adventure unlike they experienced last time in the theatre. They want some new information, a peek at a new culture, some worthy goal, some worthy character to become for two hours, and to be the hero they wish they could be. New, fresh, unusual, exciting.

We speak of quality in our writing, but what does that mean? We have 110-120 pages to tell a story. CASABLANCA had just about everything going for it, including charismatic actors, beautiful and memorable music, some witty dialogue--all elements of great films. It entertained as well showed us that love does not always out, that loyalty is worth aspiring to, and that the two hours we experienced was a satisfying get-away-from-it-all--and we didn't resent the price of the ticket.

Like Rick, we all come to this desert 'for the waters.' And none of us was 'misinformed' when told that the business of writing is frustrating and often unrewarded. As a word artist I do not measure my success by what someone buys or rewards in a writing competition. I'm in competition only with myself and feel that I've succeeded when I'm satisfied that I've told my story the best I'm able, and in a way that I'd chooses again.

Ellum

Word Artist

Make that - in a way I'd choose again. (Ad I'm discovering that I'm relying entirely too much on spell-check.)

Another possibility:

Siren, smoke, fire.

Adding its own danger to the activity around the burning rig, the wind screams across the deck, sweeping men and equipment into the boiling sea -

A boat slices the waves; someone on board pointing, gesticulating.

A helicopter swoops dangerously close to the swinging cable with the tipped and empty lifeboat dangling -

A man on the rig climbs higher, now within feet of the limp body of the old woman roped to tower -

And news-chopper converge as -

The Director yells -

Cut! Cut! Goddammit! This isn't 'Titanic' and the budget's coming out of my pocket! Wave those numbnut reporters away from the set! We've got a goddammed movie to make.

- and the wind-machine is turned off, the stunt men helped from the water, and the crew readies for the next shot.

I noticed the cameraderie and figured it out all by myself that the comments are made in good spirit--and didn't even need to be told it was an 'unwritten law.' But, thanks. I guess. It's an honor to be considered a peer of Greg's--though I admit the honor would be less-felt were Joe Esterhous a Byte-buddie. (that should elicit some good-natured debating.)

Rather call it cheating, I'd refer to it as adjustments, which can be easily made with most softward programs. Should you do it? Up to you. I've done it, and will probably do it again if need be. Shoot for 115-117 for anything but a comedy, which can be shorter and usually is. Anything beyond 120, unless you were hired to write something and know it'll go through many rewrites to please the employer, should be avoided. A-list writers can pretty much do as they please, and often do. Dances With Wolves was about 180 minutes, Braveheart about the same, but they are exceptions.

How sweet of you, and I mean that, sincerely. I'm glad to have found a group of writers who not only have fun, but have something to say.

A good lap dancer makes no distinction, but does the wriggle for the wriggle's sake, and hopes to constantly improve.

I was unaware that the Old Man beat his wives. But he remains a primary source of inspiration.

Thanks. I've heard them mentioned before. Think I'll give them a try.

Ideas are meaningless and worthless unless you make the commitment to develop one of them--then it could become a gem. Bearing in mind that there are no new ideas-unless a butterfly swallowing a Steinway in two seconds qualifies--select one of your many ideas that really, truly appeals to you, and have at it. If it's in your head it must have some interest to you; perhaps others will find it equally fascinating if you develop it.

Good writing.

Gil

e.e.cummings got away with no capitalization, but I wouldn't try it in screenwriting.

MK

It's spelled porsche. I know because I just looked at the nameplate on the '65 that's covered in the carport that belongs to my daughter and that I promised to restore but haven't gotten around to it--what with writing and spelling lessons, ets.:)

Capitalize Porsche - and make that etc. instead of ets. Now, to write....

A SERIES OF SHOTS:

Mother shoots herself.

Aunt slaps her and smiles.

Father embraces her when she's a child.

Her one true love caresses her cheek.

END OF SERIES OF SHOTS

You could additionally designate that each shot dissolves to the other...

AS I A DREAM...

Last line should have read 'As in a dream.'

We seem to have forgotten HIGH NOON. Just saw the last few minutes on TV and was reminded how good it was.

And for wonderful dialogue, let's not over look 'The Outlaw Josey Wales.'

Most inexpensive way to make the trip would be to enter and win the Heart of Austin screenwriting competition, which would cover all expenses. Don't know about you young-uns of 30, 40 or 50ish, but we truly senior seniors at 60+ still might have a thing or two to say.

If I'm writing a scene of a forest, sometimes I'll use an environmental tape--river water, birds chirping, etc. I've found that it helps me to feel the scene. When I reread for rewrite, I always use earplugs to keep out all sound; helps concentration. But, do whatever works best for you.

In addition to the above, the submission must be the work of the author, not based upon any other work, published or unpublished, except that it can be an adaptation of the author's work and can be based upon a real person's life or real events. Their website gives full particulars, of course. Expect to compete with about 7,000 others. However, as many will not be of your calibre, you're probably actually up against only about 5% of all submissions. Just my opinion.

In addition to the above, the submission must be the work of the author, not based upon any other work, published or unpublished, except that it can be an adaptation of the author's work and can be based upon a real person's life or real events. Their website gives full particulars, of course. Expect to compete with about 7,000 others. However, as many will not be of your calibre, you're probably actually up against only about 5% of all submissions. Just my opinion.

Just wanted to share this from a recent email from The Writer's Store.

5. GATEKEEPER: They Have my Script, But Who's Reading it?

The Gatekeeper column is an occasional feature of the Writers Store eZine where experts answer your questions about writing and The Business. To submit your question, please send an email to News@writersstore.com and we will try to answer in a future issue.

Question: Can you tell me what the process is once I've submitted my screenplay to a production company? Where does it go once it's been delivered? Who reads it first, who next, and what exactly happens to my script next? Leticia R., Toronto, Ont.

Larry Brody Responds: When you send in a screenplay all by your lonesome, without an agent, the odds are it gets tossed out, or you get a letter saying the company can't consider your submission without a release. If this happens to you, request a copy of their release form and sign it.

The release will use language to the effect that you promise not to sue them if they steal your idea, but it's their game and their ball, so if you want to play you need to make that promise -- and then sue 'em anyway if push comes to shove.

Once the technicalities have been taken care of your script goes into the slush pile, where an assistant delegated to do all the 'first reads' will look at it -- after the assistant has looked over material sent in by people known to the head of the company or head of development at the company and by agents. This can take a while, so be patient. The good news is that even though most companies say they use professional readers, they really use interns, who are people just like you -- young men and women who want to be writers. They understand your situation. The bad news is that since they too want to be writers they're rivals and therefore not inclined to recommend anything up the ladder unless it's so great that discovering it will make them stars.

Remember that the definition of a good script in our current corporate showbiz environment is 'one my boss will like.' The boss has told the reader what he or she wants or thinks the company needs, and if the reader refers too much material that doesn't fit that description the reader will soon be out of a job.

So -- the intern reads it, then whoever is the lowest person in the development chain. Then the head of development. Then the Big Boss, whoever that is. Piece of cake, right?

I'm not being cynical here, just realistic. You've got to know what you're up against. Knowledge is power.

* * * * * * *

It is this kind of insider tip that makes we wary about the calibre of the reader who's passing initial judgement on my work, which determines whether the Producer even becomes aware of who I am and the work I've submitted. Would I feel as disheartened whether this person recommends or passes? Absolutely. An opinion is valid only within the parameters of the one forming it, and only as valuable as that person's ability to form the opinion from an informed position. A child might think the best story ever written was how a skunk used perfume to cover its stench...and I might be willing to debate that. Then again, compared to some work I've read, the child might have a point.

I'd rather take the path frequented by tigers than walk in the time-worn footsteps of sheep--more adventure-- and 'though I might end up in the stomach of a tiger, the experience would be infinitely more exciting than the shear-shed and chops shop.

...and that's so easy to do.:)

But MK is right.

Something like...

She gives in to unconsiousness, and as her eyes close...

FLASH BACK:

Blah, blah, blah...

END OF FLASHBACK.

BACK TO SCENE

She opens her eyes and discovers she's in heaven and has been nominated for Best Original Screenplay. And she wonders if there'll be a shelf on her cloud where she can display the Oscar.

Good for you, MK.

I do not write for the 'window with the talking heads.' My work tends to exotic places and open spaces...jungles and cathedrals, forests and mountains...none of which are easily depicted 30 inches on the diagonal.

Actually, a montage is a series of (usually) overlapping shots in which the principal character is depicted, noting a progression of time or related events--as opposed to a series of shots that are (usually) disparate and not necessarily involving the principal character in each shot. The first big battle in BRAVEHEART was primarily a montage depicting Wallace and his buddies.

Neither a montage or series of shots has dialogue (usually)'though I've used both with V.O. I could give an example but it's probably not needed here.

An example where a series of shots would be useful, though it could as easily be INTERCUTTING would be a prison riot.

In the exercise yard, the riot begins, sparked by a white inmate striking a black inmate with a five pound weight.

A SERIES OF SHOTS:

A guard in a tower aim a rifle, fires.

In the weights pit, an inmate is hit in the forehead by the bullet.

Against the wall, half a dozen inmates have overpowered a guard.

Now the Special Ops team spills from the gym, batons swinging.

From the safety of his office, the Warden screams into the microphone, pleading for order.

An inmate smashes the prisoner transport bus into a fence.

Screams, gunfire, sirens, smoke, clouds of pepperspray.

END OF SERIES OF SHOTS.

INT. KAY'S TRAILER - MINUTES LATER.

Kay is furious.

KAY: That was not what I had in mind!

The Director turns to his assistant.

DIRECTOR: Didn't you clear this with MK?

A 'great story' according to whom?

Don't be discouraged, but a 'great story' does not a movie make, unless it's a great story peopled with interesting characters (human or otherwise) told in an interesting way, and in a professional format.

Great stories are like great ideas, and none are worth much until they're developed. Do you want to write, act, or both? As with everything else in life... specialize, specialize, specialize. In writing, that translates to rewrite, rewrite, rewrite.

As writing is, at least in part, experiencial, the more you do it the better you (might) get; at the very least, it might come easier to you.

At age fourteen, I wonder at the depth you are able to delve, with such little actual life experience. Do you really know what romantic love is? Have you ever experienced loss, tragedy, success, failure, humiliation...beyond the frustrations of school life and 'hanging out' with your peers? Do you understand that success is an attitude within you, and nor measured by anything else? Money isn't success, recognition isn't, power isn't.

Do you have an understanding of structure, plotting, timing? Can you distinguish story from plot, active vs passive voice? How important is backstory? What is an inciting incident and need it always be revealed chronologically? Linear or non-linear? What is a plot point? Can an audience be satisfied with a 'great story' wherein the protagonist is unchanged by events?

At fourteen, were I you, I'd be reading the classics--novels, plays, assays, philosophy, the arts. The best writers are those who read, have read, and will continue to read. Do you want to say something significant and quotable, or be famous and make wads of money? Writing is often a lonely pursuit, unrewarded except for the reward of having seen the concept to fruition; then the hard work begins with rewrites.

With the above in mind, welcome to the world of writing. If you're unable to find a teen writing group, you might want to start one. Good luck to you.

MK

:)

Okay MK - you made me do it.

Here are two examples of montage from an actual script.

EXT. SHACK - DAY

TITLE OVER: LATE WINTER OF THAT YEAR

Peter exits the shack, moves to a snow-covered wood pile and picks up two short logs.

Tucked up clos eto the pile of woood is a sheet-covered body, asprinkle with sparkling snow.

Okay MK - you made me do it.

Here are two examples of montage from an actual script.

EXT. SHACK - DAY

TITLE OVER: LATE WINTER OF THAT YEAR

Peter exits the shack, moves to a snow-covered wood pile and picks up two short logs.

Tucked up clos eto the pile of woood is a sheet-covered body, asprinkle with sparkling snow.

PETER: Couple more months, Ma - dirt will be soft enough.

EXT. FOREST - DAY

Peter finishes digging a grave, climbs out, pulls a sheet-covered body to the edge, gently lowers it into the ground.

SAME - LATER

Peter places a flower atop the grave mound. And weeps.

MONTAGE:

- Peter adds salmon to drying racks over a charcoal smoker.

- Peter gathers small animals from traps.

- Light snow as Peter startles a deer in a copse.

- Peter reaise a rife and aims...

- Peter pulls a travois laden with a deer carcass.

- Peter fashions a deerskin jacket.

PETER (V.O.) In solitude I grew, and as far as I knew, this was all life held for me.

- Peter gazes out a window at a raging snowstorm.

- Peter sits in Ma's rocking chair, reading her bible.

END OF MONTAGE.

MK - that's all I have time for right now. I'll do another example later, but in the above, I wanted only to show the learning process a seven-year-old boy went through in surviving alone in a wilderness, and the passing of time, advancing the story. In the next scene, the boy is a twenty-three year old man.

CD's might be the way of the future, but a hard-copy is more immediate, easier to take to a juice bar and get involved. If you have a burner and it's not big deal, accomodate the interested party; otherwise, I wouldn't go out and have it put on a disc.

MKJ

No, that's perfectly normal, but when you have mental flashes of someone else's experiences, worry. Actually, I wrote a novel some years ago about a man who had been a wolf in another life, and for months I had mental flashes in which I was part of a pack, even knew the shewolf who bore me, and could hear her call to me when I was a pup. Go figure.

WSN seems the way to go. I've only posted on Winning Scripts, and I've never had an inquiry. I've had friends say they've seen the logline, otherwise, nada. WSN here I come.

Good night to all...

MK is right. Give the general flavor, but the director and stunt coordinator will end up doing what they want.

You've no doubt heard the famous line from Battle of the Bulge (I think that's the one, might be wrong) where the writer had written simply: 'They charge.' He made no attempt to describe the battle.

Just personal taste, but in a love scene I think a subtle look, movement, implication is stronger than detail, as it leaves all else to the viewers imagination.

Kim -

Exactly right. The imagination is far more detailed than a writer should attempt. In a thriller I just completed, I gave the audience some truly gory images of what's left of a human after a man-eating tiger has eaten and abandoned it. Thereafter, when the hero comes on such a scene, we can imagine what he's seeing, and we need no details. It worked because the opening sequence set the tone for the story and got the viewer immediately into it, having introduced the antagonist (if one can call a tiger such) and what's the hero's up against.

Remember in JAWS, Spielberg deliberately held-off showing the shark, which made the opening scene of the swimmer even more menacing--poor lady.

MK

I looked him up in HCD. He isn't listed as a producer, with a production company, a film or TV executive, agent or manager, publicist or casting director. If he ain't listed there... send him an e-mail and ask what exactly he does. He might be a writer bereft of ideas and takes a peek at other writer's works because....

Gil -

Write anyway you choose; you're the Word Artist, but I'd be embarrassed to so obviously imitate another writer.

And yes, I do have an answer to your question about including songs in your script.

#1 - 'Staying Alive' and 'I will Survive' are cliche to the max.

#2 - Never specify music unless it is absolutely vital to the scene that cannot (excuse me) stay alive without it. Such smacks of amateurism, which is to be avoided at all costs.

#3 - The only other exception to #2 would be if your script is a period piece where inclusion of music adds to the establishment of the period.

#4 - And disputing what I just said in #3, you can add music and lyrics as an integral part of your story, as Horton Foote did in 'Tender Mercies.' The character played by Robert Duvall was a country/western singer on the downslide with booze, and the V.O. of lyric flowing through a couple of otherwise dialogue-less scenes was quite effective.

Freddie -

Thanks. I think I'll take your advice and go to another chat room.

After spending a week or so participating in this forum, it's clear that it is not what the title suggests, but rather a hodge-podge of disjointed b.s. with more ego than substance in many of the postings, and peopled by many who just want to hang out and pass out b.s. On a maturity scale, I'd rank it in the egg stage. I'll check back from time to time to see if there's more than one truly interested in improving their craft. Meanwhile....

To clarify what was clarified by the very title of the post, to wit: 'Screenwriting Contests Discussion Forum.' But that isn't what it is, as the three of you apparently agree. It is a hang-out chat room; what it isn't is a forum of discussion of the craft of screenwriting. True, there have been posts with intersting questions about how best to solve a screenwriting issue, and without exceptiion the replies have been sincere and professional. Compare the posts of substance with those that are nothing but baloney, being cute, and online flirting, and you'll get the drift.

No-one I know wants to discuss only screenwriting contests. What is there to discuss besides who placed or did not, who felt ripped off and who felt otherwise, who advanced their career by even the smallest measure from which contest.

When a question is thrown out and the answer isn't what the poster liked, the lack of professionalism and ego-polishing comes through loud and clear with responses such as 'thanks for your 2 cents worth.' When someone takes the time and effort to help someone else, it deserves respect equal to the spirit with which it is offered. Such is not the way of some participants of this forum.

If you only want to make a half-hearted stab at a very difficult business, you won't get much in return. It might all come down to where you're comfortable with the bar--keep it low and loose and goofy and everyone has a belly-laugh, or get serious and raise the bar to a height approaching a standard above mediocre.

And since this is a forum for everyone, and everyone's opinion is as valid as the next guy, the above is my opinion. And I find the forum lacking in the inspiration department.

Whether you agree or not, you might react with more passion than I've thus far seen from all but a few of you.

Good for you. Seems your efforts might pay off, and the good part is that no-one at the management company has said anything negative. You might a chance of the actress actually reading it. Good luck...and keep writing.

Very kind of you. Thanks. Besides, who could say no to an attorney? I've not tried Zoetrope's website, though I've been in the building a time or two. Glad to hear that you got some good from this chat room. My dismay is not with the writers here--most seem to have all their dogs pulling in the same direction--but it just might be that I'd hoped for more than a coffee-klatch. Much of the banter ought to be put in a private e-mail--just my opinion--and leave the rest to those who have something to ask or expound upon relative to the purpose of this forum. I, for one, could care less about the weather up north, frozen cow cakes or whether the Bucs ever win another game. I can get all that and more from a newspaper. My time is limited and valuable to me. When I turn to a forum for discussion of my craft, that's what I expect to find, and peopled by others equally serious about their craft. Enough. Thanks again for your courtesy and kindness.

Okay - here goes.

Having considered the kind comments from many of you, including some e-mails, I've concluded that I may have acted somewhat...rash. True, I do not have to read all threads, which I have been doing. So, thank you MK and all the others and, as in A.A. let's just take it one day at a time.

Amit:

An example of a fight scene that does not intrude upon the Director's domain or that of a stunt coordinator.

Hasad is a terrorist. In the preceeding scene he murdered Dardin, a U. S. Airforce Colonel. Now, the scene:

INT. DARDIN'S HOTEL ROOM - NIGHT

Hasad rummages through a closet. A door closes O.S. Hasad turns - SGT. PICKER, in uniform has entered.

PICKER: Who the hell are you?

Hasad moves towards him. Picker places a hand on his service automatic, unsnaps the straps, steps back a pace.

HASAD: Hand away from that sidearm, soldier! I'll ask the questions and you'll answer them. Identification, Mister. (snaps a finer) Now!

Picker takes out a wallet, hands it to him.

HASAD: I'm military intelligence, Sergeant... (reading)...Picker. There's been an accident. Where's the Humvee?

PICKER: Parked down the street. In a garage, near the corner --

HASAD: Keys?

PICKER: I have them. What accident?

HASAD: Oh, I lied...but your Colonel is quite dead. We were having dinner. I killed him during dessert. He rather enjoyed it...the plum pudding I mean.

Picker rushes him. Hasad throws him aside. Picker reaches for his pistol. Hasad kicks it away. Picker assumes a karate stance. Hasad smiles.

HASAD: Not like that--

The clash. Picker is flipped to the floor.

HASAD: --like this. (snaps Picker's neck) Your training leaves something to be desired. Hmm? Like, how to survive.

When I have a moment, I'll give an example of a love scene.

Amit - now a love scene.

So you'll understand the scene, they have just come from dinner. They are in Rome. Hansen is with Israeli defence force, a soldier. Deborah is an agent with Shin Bet, Israel's Military Intelligence. Lou Petrie, the woman they are discussing, is the protagonist, walks with a cane, has an eye-patch--results of a tour bus bombing that killed her husband and son. Simon, mentioned towards the end of the scene, was Deborah's fiancee; he was killed prior to the tour bus bombing. Abu Hasad is a terrorist.

And now, the scene:

INT. HOTEL LOBBBY, AT THE ELEVATOR - LATER

HANSEN: Why'd France think they'd killed him?

INT. ELEVATOR - CONTINUOUS

DEBORAH: Seven terrorists died in the raid. One survived, but with serious injuries. Torture's standard protocol. He held out a few days. Discovered the hard way that he wasn't Superman. In a dying statement he identified a dead comrade as Abu Hasad. Who knows why a person is loyal to another?

INT. HOTEL CORRIDOR - CONTINUOUS

Deborah and Hansen exit the elevator and move down the corridor. Deborah stops at a door, holds out a hand for a key.

HANSEN: This is my room. Your's is --

DEBORAH: I know.

He hands her the key.

INT. HOTEL ROOM - CONTINUOUS

They enter.

HANSEN: Why did she leave Mossad?

He turns on a table lamp near a bed.

DEBORAH: Her injuries. Continuing as a field agent was not possible. She transferred from Mossad to Shin-Bet, took a desk job, specialized in counterterrorism.

He kisses her neck.

DEBORAH: When France announced Hasad's death, intelligence agencies closed their files on him. All except Mossad.

She kisses him lightlyon the lips.

DEBORAH: A year ago Rasso took over as Director, ignored our DNA evidence. Said we were 'chasing a ghost.' Shin-Bet closed their fires on Hasad. Lou quit. I stayed on. Kept their resources available to us.

He caresses an arm, massages her shoulders.

HANSEN: You must have loved Simon very much.

DEBORAH: Too much, perhaps.

They kiss. He unsnaps a button on her bouse.

HANSEN: I admire Petrie, same as you do.

DEBORAH: Admire her? She is more than good at her craft. I would not want her hunting me.

He moves behind her, hands on her stomach, holds her close. She turns to face him, studies his eyes.

DEBORAH: Ever truly loved anyone?

She turns out the light.

One of the reasons for staging it this way was to provide needed expostion. This scene was halfway into the story and Petrie's physical injuries and backstory needed explanation.

Hope this helps you--but always do it your way.

No -- but when my father died, at age 53, his organs were destroyed by a lifetime of alcohol consumption, and I had to try to understand why it happens to some and not to others. One of my brothers is an alcoholic, as is an older sister; yet I cannot handle more than a beer once or twice a year. But I admire the A.A. programs, and all who have the courage to attend and adhere to their guidelines. So, that's why the 'one day at a time' comment.

I think, as Freddie alluded to, and secretly within each of us we know that our greatest success was discovering that we could write, and then completing something that, good or bad by anyone else's standard, we were proud of. For me, that will always be the moment I most treasure. To wonder about something, begin to fit a few pieces of an imaginary puzzle into place, adjust some things, envisage the end, and then to put it into written word. The pride of knowing that, at any time you choose, you can sit down and create something from nothing. Maybe it's like Michelangelo said -- that the piece was always there within the stone, and he simply chipped away until he'd freed it, and then everyone else could see what he'd seen buried within the marble. As there was only one Michelangelo, there is only one of each of us, and whatever we create will be unique -- perhaps familiar, but nevertheless unique.

Even a cursory anatomical examination would leave little doubt that the name Ellum, which is masculine, is appropriate.

Vincent -

Forget about Underexposed. According to their website there will be no contest this year.

Also, check carefully that the contests you enter do not take an option if they select you a winner; such would render you ineligible for some, such as Nicholl's. Good luck. And thanks for defending some of my thoughts.

Vincent -

Forget about Underexposed. According to their website there will be no contest this year.

Also, check carefully that the contests you enter do not take an option if they select you a winner; such would render you ineligible for some, such as Nicholl's. Good luck. And thanks for defending some of my thoughts.

As each author of a post is identified, why would you think my name is anything other than shown?

Danny -

Thanks. I also tried to e-mail Screen Arts for information on 2003 contest, but it was returned as undeliverable. The site on Moviebytes gave an October 2002 deadline; nothing about the next one. Congratulations on your win.

D.Jay --

Guess you weren't paying attention.

Paula -

How can I contact the Ladies Literary Guild?

Okay, D.Jay - you stand corrected then. See the post BY Vincent, 1/22/03 @6:46 p.m.

Not to worry; others have reading comprehension difficulties from time-to-time--my daughter has attention deficit, since she was a child, and she's now 34. Hasn't affected her much though. She's bright and successful. Just have to repeat things now and again. As for me, I've discovered the last few years that my hearing isn't all it once was, but it makes for a more interesting conversation, from my point of view, as I hear things that weren't said--or think I do--and respond to them, much to the confusion of others. "It's hot to day, I'll bet." And I reply, "Yeah, probably low 90's." And my wife then corrects me: "I said I forgot to pay...a bill, and I'll get...."

To Bryan Walsh:

Your comments above, implying that I might enjoy Scriptsales.com more than I enjoy this site becaue "...most of the posters there have the attitude that in order to make it in this business, if you criticize, belittle and trample on others, you will have a better shot at it..." is critical, belittling and trampling on me--in the most personal way; it is a personal attack, and I find it out of line, unnecessary, unkind and untrue; It disputes the assessment of MK, to wit: '... this site is comprised of a bunch of nice people who get along and help others.' Though I tend to agree with her, unfortunately you have proved the exception.

May I make the same suggestion to you, as you seem to be a truly unhappy individual.

Quite the contrary to the slurs you've hurled at me, I have never criticized, belittled or trampled on any individual; not on this site, not ever. My general comments, critical of the misuse of this forum to b.s. about irrelevant issues was an attempt to drag some of you from the much you're stuck in and challenge you to excel. Some will readily see that, others will not, and Paul Simon said it better than I ever could: "All lies and jest, yet a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest."

Look in the mirror, and if that doesn't help, reread every word I've contributed to this forum and try to find a single instance where I criticized, belittled or trampled upon anyone. Meanwhile, get off my back!

'...from the much...' should have been '...from the muck...'

Joe -

I checked on them with Preditors and Editors, and they got a NOT RECOMMENDED, as they charge upfront reading fees. As you know, they're in Ohio, which might limit their ability to represent you in Hollywood.

In any event, you might, in the future, want to check on literary agents and others at the following website:

www.anotherrealm.com/prededitors

Best of luck.

Ellum

I thought Walla Walla was an onion region in a dry part of Washington state. What did the 'poor bastard' do? Hope it wasn't writing a script that the judge didn't like.

MK -

Good to see you've resurfaced. Missed your wit and wisdom the past couple of days.

Vincent -

At my age it means absolutely nothing. When I was young I used to wonder how it would be, being old, being invisible to the other gender, whether one would ever lose interest, etc. And now I know. I remember, still, and I wonder why, when young, some things seemed so often on one's mind. Makes me also wonder if Alzeimers is a curse or blessing.

Then I'll take your word for it and retract the 'get off my back' part of my posting. I'm not likely to get to step 8 of the A.A. prayer, as I am not an attending member, but thanks anyway.

MK

I posted on WSN. (and not to get into any more trouble (Go Bucs!) I lived in S.F for a while, and when the Raiders returned to Oakland, posters that read 'Welcome home, Raiders' got altered by addition of a 'T' in front of Raiders, which pretty much summed up my feelings about them.)

Jill -

Not that I'm religious, but God bless you! You learned the secret rather quickly. Money aside, acceptance aside, whether you ever sell or sell so much you eventually get millions, (as Joe Esterhous does) and win the Oscar seventeen times in a row...you now know that your writing is primarily for YOU. I began with the philosphy of small expectations will only give rise to small disappointments, and each time someone says, 'Hey, I like that,' is just dressing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.

Keep writing. I cannot help but get more enjoyable each new page.

Paula -

I thought since you referred me to them in a rather knowing way, intimating that they were not as 'light' as this forum, you must know from experience. Apparently not. But, thanks for the thought. I think.

Last sentence...I cannot help but... should have read ...it cannot help but...

Randy --

Thank you. I feel honored. On a day when I don't learn something more about life, I feel I've failed to be as receptive as I could have been.

Just yesterday, for example, I learned that I had been in error since memore; I always hyphenated bi- or semi- (whatever), when, according to Mirriam/Webster they are not to be hyphenated and mean, essentially the same. Thus: semiannual and biannual both mean occuring twice yearly.

There, I've passed on something potentially useful.

D-Jay --

That is a sad story. Took a minute to dry my eyes enough to continue, but now I'll tell you a quickie. In '78, while thumbing through the 'A' volume of an early 20th century encyclopedia, I came acoss a single sentence that grabbed my interest--about a slave ship whose crew had mutinied and were enroute back to Africa when it drifted into U.S. waters. So, through a lawyer friend I obtained a copy of the U.S. Supreme Court published decision on the case. As you've guessed, it was about the Spanish-registered ship 'Amistad.' I dove in an began writing a novel, got about two hundred pages into it and stopped, decided it would make a better film. So, I started on a script I had titled 'The Last Africa.' Following the Amistad decision, no other 'black-birder' (slave vessel) was given refuge in U.S. waters under the so-called 'safe harbor' provisions in effect in most treaties. (thus the title.)

So, fast-forward a few years, I had set the script aside and was into another novel and--Steven Spielberg announced an upcoming project...'Amistad.' You can imagine the buckets of tears...buckets my booty, I damned near flooded South Florida, where I was camping at the time.

Anyway, I feel for you.

D-Jay --

Yes, I truly do believe in simultaneous creation. Not to belabor missed-timeing...or bizarre coincidence, but in the '60s a friend of mine was head of CBS daytime programming (later produced the Judy Garland Show) and he passed along a series concept of mine that I had titled 'Bwana Tracy.' The story line is unimportant BUT...a couple years later a series appeared called 'Clarence the Cross-eyed Lion.' Not only were the charactes the same, some of the names were the same; only change was the veterinarian was changed from female (as in mine) to male. Now, seems I'd have had a winning suit, right? Wrong. My attorney could not show that anyone at CBS had ever had access to my idea because (many tears, God rest him, Paul Levitt) my friend had died and I could not show that the lion people had ever seen it. 'Spontaneous creation.' a phrase I shall never forget.

Yeah - hate to think the dilemma, should a mouse carry away one eye, another mouse the other - but somehow they're still in touch with the brain. A screenwriter wouldn't even have to INTERCUT to describe what's seen - or maybe it would be a challenge to clearly describe it. But if they were turned just right it would be a Bogart moment: "Here's lookin' at you, kid."

Ignore the typos - in a hurry to get somewhere by six, so gotta go.

Gil -

Thank you, and please try to overlook my previous statement. I didn't know you well enough to offer anything but an attempt to answer a query about a particular format issue. As you know, the screenplay format, though more constraining than others--poetry being an exception--is quite simple to master; it's the execution of a story in picture form, aided by film-speak as conversation, that is sometimes extremely difficult to accomplish. And the format is flexible to the extreme, and I offer Shane Black's asides to the reader as an example. You and I could not get away with it, nor I suspect, would we try. Have you seen Goldman's style? Cut to this, cut to that, hold, hold, hold! Now we.... Yet, he can get away from it.

Just a couple of thoughts.

I used to think I could only write if 'inspired.' The first novel I wrote only at night with a legal pad and pen. I would stare at the blank page and try to 'see' whatever the scene was; if it was a couple of people around a campfire, I had to 'be' there with them. Feel the heat, smell the smoke. Well, inspiration is an elusive to me as to everyone else, and many nights I wrote not a single word. But others I would write until I couldnt' see or hold the pen from lack of sleep. I got over that baloney, eventually. And another novel (400+ pages) I wrote in 11 nights, dusk to dawn; then it took many weeks to rewrite it. But, I know now that I could not endure an 18 hour shift, as MK mentioned. I'd die of heart failure at hour seven.

Gil -

I'll buy that scenario, but I suspect, having read some stuff from MK, that cummings took back with him, not only your style but MK's poetics.

MK - Thought I recognized your work from some older poetry I'd read somewhere.

MK -

Yes, you are a cool lady.:)

Hey, it all comes down to (as MK said) people always tend to do what is important to them. If someone is interested in your work, they won't keep it a secret. If they're a buyer, they'll buy, a looker, they'll look. Truth is they need us more than we need them. We've got the product; they want a piece of the pie. Money is always available to make movies, good scripts are not that easy to find, and that's why the hungry ones are out there searching. I have not doubt that you will sell your works. Five years working on them? You took the time to rewrite, rewrite and cut. Too often (based upon my experience as a reader) that the work is a first draft is obvious, and when the writer has taken the time to make it a solid easy read, it's even more obvious.

Good luck in your pursuits.

Hi -

Try Steve Elzer @ 310-967-6654. His name is shown on news releases for New Line Cinema, where Chickflicks was (or still is.) If he can't direct you to Chickflicks, ask him or go through New Line Cinema switchboard for direct contact with the persons you seek.

Good luck.

Ellum

Welcome back MK -

I surely do hope that an attempt at enlivening the forum with constructive discussions about our craft didn't have the opposite effect; I can't believe that our egos are that fragile.

To your question:

No. Consumating the deed when its been set up is a given. In the name of sensitivity, my work is always conservative in that area, as I see no real purpose in making voyeurs of reader or audience.

Point is, we writers should not be detail-oriented in out story-telling-- writing through a microscope. Our horizons ought be medium, not wide, because we want to focus the viewer without waving a flag that says, 'llok here.' If we describe rather than tell, the stream of our narrative becomes like the jerky movements of a crude robot. Another reason for withholding detail is that it arouses imagination in the reader/viewer. Further, it might prove as boring to the reader/viewer as backstory often does. Writers often feel the audience needs to know the whole thing called backstory, when they often need only to understand a vague character existence prior to the inciting incident. For instance, our hero who agrees to tramp through the jungle in search of a man-eating tiger did not recently come from Madison Avenue, but has some expertise in what he's after.

Back to the original question: adults know how to do it (or should) and younger viewers don't need lessons from us. Keep in mind that we writers are entertaining, not instructing, and few really give a hoot about seeing someone else's grappling on the big screen.

Marlene -

The problem with the line you quote from one of your scripts is that it cannot be filmed. It is prose appropriate for anything but film. The audience will never see your comments on 'what follows,' and the camera operator cannot film your comments. So, unless you are going to film the erotic interlude in all its detail, you will either end up with a montage or set up 'what is to follow' and leave the night of erotic lovemaking to the imagination of the viewer. It really comes down to those choices, with variations. Sorry, but although the script must keep the interest of the reader, it ought not contain even a single word that does not either tell where, when and who is in the scene, and the necessary dialogue that advances the plot (or reveals character, bearing in mind that action is character.) Otherwise, good writing and good luck.

Marleine -

Sorry I misspelled your name.

Ellum

Marleine -

Each of us has our own style - and opinion. I respect yours, though I could not disagree more.

Prose and direction are rarely the same. You are not telling your story (that scene anyway) in a picture with words, which is the accepted definition of a motion picture. Were you right, one could simply toss out a bunch of flowery phrases, and leave the rest to others in the film-making process.

"They meet on a busy street and instantly fall in love. They go somewhere romantic and learn about each other and their lives, then they get married and have the most wonderful life imaginable, sometimes really exciting, other times dull as hell as most marriages are, but they live long and happy and then they die. The last part should be really sad so the audience can experience their loss."

Is that a screenplay? I don't think so, and yet I've given the director and actors all they need to go off and make a movie. But will they? No.

A script is one way the movie can be made--the writer's way--and it must contain elements that are clear in intent, that can be portrayed by the performer and filmed.

It is clear that you believe your description is correct, equally clear that I disagree. Your prose is misplaced in a script, which is not to say that direction cannot be poetic, but direction is direction; it is not a suggestion or summary of what the characters are feeling.

Go into detail if you choose, which can get boring and irritating to a reader, director or performer. If you want them to ad lib, say so. If you want a long drawn out erotic scene, either write it that way, write a montage, or set it up and go on to the next scene.

That's my take on it. I would not, were I you, submit the phrase you quoted to a script analyst, whether taken out of context or not.

Marleine -

But first - MK: Your words fly off the paper.:) Also, did you coach the Bucs? You'v make a good referee.

Marleine -

A final couple of observations, then I'll leave the dog dead and in peace.

In your phrase you said "What follows is a night of lovemaking...." Other than a montage, which is what you are thinly suggesting, please tell me how 'a night of lovemaking' is to be filmed? And, how is a performer to portray that she is 'overcome by the magic of it?' Is she to swoon? How is the audience to know, the camera operator to film, and the director to direct that she is overcome by 'the magic of it?'

But, to something even more important that you stated, to wit: how do you know that 'time after time' scripts were rejected '...because the producers and directors did not want to be told how to make a film...'? Did they tell you or the screenwriter? Did they make a note of such when they rejected the script? And then you state '...by a new writer.' Were those scripts, if you've seen them, have other flaws--perhaps that they were poorly written, contained too much description of the scene, contained camera angles, etc. Or were those scripts written in the style of Harlequin love stories, flowery and irrelevant in style?

A final question, were you there and witnesed the alienation when the script was read, and therefore know that's why the script was rejected? Did the producer and director whisper to you, 'I'm alienated by this script and I'm rejecting it because I don't want to make this movie the way the writer has written it; he/she isn't going to tell me what to do, especially not since he/she is a new writer?' But, that's not all. Now the BIGGIE question:

On which planet did you find 'producers and directors' who actually read scripts? Rather than suggest that I go to hell, simply point out the planet with resident producers and writers who read scripts and I'll go there. I promise!:)

Forgive me for taking you to task, Marleine. But there might be beginning writers among us, and neither you nor I would want them to be ill-advised; the business is difficult enough without aiming new writers in the wrong direction. Your example that 'Two bodies come together in heated passion.' -- or however it was phrased, can be filmed. The comment about the fight scene in The Matrix being a throw back to other Kung Fu movies can be filmed, but writer asides such as that--for which Shane Black is infamous--are to be avoided by 'new writers,' for the very reason you point out--they are off-putting to many.

Now I am off-putting myself from this thread, with the promise to not add even another word to it.

Vince -

Thanks for your comments. However, to fully understand the issue and the point I was tryin to make, you'd need first read this thread from the beginning. It wasn't Marleine's question; she was commenting on someone else's question. I've stated my preference, not just in a sex scene but in any scene; and I commented on Marleine's quote from her script as being narrative prose of the kind found in writing other than screenwriting. I, too, have read many scripts, some wonderfully written, others not so, and I know of no writing teacher or author of a published book on the art of screenwriting who would condone the inclusion within a script anything, any word, that does succintly (unless your Mamet or Shepard) set up each scene, advance the plot or reveal character. It isn't a matter of style so much as a matter of screen writing. Each kind of writing has its own peculiarities; flowery prose as direction for a scene is, in my humble opinion, not properly included in a film script. It detracts from the flow of the script. I have heard of more than one director who, before reading a script, will take a felt pen and blot out all direction, leaving only the slug line and dialogue. But, to each his own.

Marleine -

Dear, dear Marleine,

You are a treasure.:) Thanks so much for being open-minded and understanding the heart of the position I was taking. If it appeared that I was questioning your background or intention, I apologize. (though I was doing that) We are first and always Word Artists, and we each have our way of painting the picture we see with our choice of words. And I was being not facietous (sp) which is cynical by definition, but an attempt at levity when I asked the planet that had life-forms in the image of directors and writers who actually read. I could expound on that by observing that to become a producer one need only call himself one--unlike some Reverends who need merely wander into a desert, grasp the first rock they come across and say, "I am a Reverend!"

But, enough. Thanks again for understanding my intent.

Though I was doing that in the above posting should read: Though I was NOT doing that. Almost got myself in deeper trouble.

Another error. 'directors and writers who actually read...' should have been 'directors and PRODUCERS....'

Grover -

The upside of placing the script on the web is that it is immediately available for scanning, if for nothing else but to get a feel of your writing style.

Since it is protected, I see no downside.

You are fortunate, indeed, to have thirty prodcos view your synopis. Since the reasons are endless on why they might not request the script, why speculate? All it takes is one.:) Maybe it'll be the thirty-first. Just write your best, and eventually it'll be read by the right person.

Being fully satisfied that, if the script is to be any leaner, it is not presently within my ability to improve upon it. So, it's on the the next one.

What have you found to be the most challenging aspect of screenwriting?

I began learning the craft after three novels and too many short stories to count. A friend--retired lawyer--had completed about two dozen screenplays, and after reading them, I thought they would be easy to write. Mistake number one.

I believe, especially for a novelist, making the transition to screenwriting, the most difficult to abide by is the length constraints. Prose flows easier than movie-speak dialogue. With other forms of fiction, characters can rattle on and on. Not so with dialogue, which has as much purpose as an axle on a train; keeps things moving along the track. With a novel, side tracks can be taken, which might serve a yet-to-be-revealed purpose, but--for the most part--the script must be structured so the viewer 'gets it' right away, because there might not be another chance for clarity of the point.

Anyway, what do you find most challenging, aside from getting the first blank page?

The last sentence should have read ...getting past the first blank page.

Well, that wasn't even the question; that's a marketing issue, but maybe for you--assuming you're that good--screenwriting offers no challenge. Perhaps that's why you find it so difficult to 'sell the damn thing.'

Marcel - good luck. I don't think I will ever stop writing, especially screenplays. I may never tackle a novel again, and short stories no longer have the excitement they did--perhaps because they are, for the most part, a single incident thing, and therefore somewhat easy compared to lengthier works. Unlike novels or short stories where I always work out the ending before beginning, the screenplay offers more options at crisis and climax time that are easier experimented with. With a particular script, I wrote four widely different ending, and still cannot decide which I like the most. But, so long as the challenge remains....

Use V.O. when a character, not necessarily a narrator, speaks but is not resident in the scene. Use. O.S. when a character is off screen but resident in the scene (for instance, a character is in another room but has been or will immediately be resident in a scene; not to be confused with O.C. when a character is in the scene but off screen (off camera.) Filtered is a good waya to show that the V.O. is electronically transmitted or altered; we all know how a voice sounds on a phone or over a transceiver (two-way radio.) If, for example, a voice is heard coming from a radio or TV that has been seen on screen, use the extention (after the character's name) ON TV or ON THE RADIO. Actually, if you simply think through your scenes, you will most often come up with an appropriate formatting, and it's appropriate if it's clear to a reader.

Well, good luck on your darned third act. As for lightening up, we each have our way of expressing ourselves, witness your little tirade above. Where's your sense of humor? The question of the tread was about screenwriting, not screen marketing, and I made that observation. No one has an exclusive on flippancy, not even you. If, when, anyone asks or responds in a semi-literate, sincere or professional manner, on this site or any other, I treat them accordingly. If one is flippant or insulting, I exercise my First Amendment right to counter with my opinion. And how judgemental of you--bad girl--to catagorize my statements as 'one-sided opinions.' How can you possibly know if there is no one else on my side? So, why don't you lighten up and join in the camaraderie that's the hallmark of this website. You might even enjoy yourself while learning.

Ellum

Well, let's try this again, even if it offends so many participants to the point that they suddenly having reading comprehension problems. To everyone who feels that selling your script is the number one thing on your mind, even before you type FADE IN: - I will tell you that, in my opinion--which is never meant to be arrogant or one-sided--you had better seriously rethink your priorities, else you are doomed from page one to abject failure, and it will be only your fault.

There are many challenging aspects to screenwriting, least of all format; that's so simple even an idiot can master it rather quickly.

Since few of you seem challenged by anything more than jumping on me in a personal way each time I venture an opinion, here's my answer to your misguided belief that marketing your script is so very important.

Number one most challenging aspect of writing a screenplay: STORY. And it had better be a good one and unusual, not the usual blabber rehashing what's been beaten to death for half a century.

Number two most challenging aspect of writing a screenplay: PLOT. And you'd better know the difference between story and plot, otherwise you lose.

Number three most challenging aspect of writing a screenplay: CHARACTERS. Not cookie-cutter one-dimensional who-cares-about-them types. They must be heroic or willing to sacrifice themselves to achieve a goal that is heroic. Art-house audiences might care about everyman and everywoman chittering about mundane, meaningless (except to them) matters. But PAYING audiences demand entertainment, exotic places, adventures (within or without) that excite them, that transport them to new environments, new worlds, or at the very least new circumstances.

The number four most challenging aspect of screenwriting: PACING, because that's what makes your story interesting. It isn't the characters, but the characters' involvement in your story. You can take the most interesting character in the world and put him/her in a static situation and who cares? If we watch Hannible Lecter just sitting around his cell, it would quickly grow boring, but give him some action, some goal, and then watch out.

The fifth most challenging aspect of screenwriting: to tell your story well within the time and format constraints of a script. It cannot be too short, it cannot be too long; it cannot stray too far from accepted format or it appears amateurish--though it might also be a ground-breaker and better than all else that came before it.

So, make your own lists, agree with mine, alter mine--whatever. And you know what? I'm through trying to spark some life into those of you who want only to be cute and witty, or personal and demeaning; and especially those of you who know it all, are too blind to see, and can no longer hear because you think you've heard it all before.

Now, adieu. And you make your own fates. Rather than wish you luck, I wish you reap what you are worthy of.

After 25 years, my wife finally noticed me, probably because I was using the computer and she wanted to go online to chat with her virtual friends.

Hannibal Lechter to Starling (about the murder of one of his patients) 'Best thing for him, really. His therapy was going nowhere.'

And, same film. Starling: Most serial killers collect souveniers from their victims. Hannibal: I didn't. Starling: No. You ate yours.

And CASA BLANCA - Police Inspecter: What brought you here, Rick? Rick: I came for the waters. Police Inspector: There's no water here. It's a desert. Rick: I was misinformed.

Cary Grant in ARCENIC AND OLD LACE: 'I'm at my most serious when I appear to be joking."

The Dragon in DRAGONHEART (when told by a beautiful young woman that he has a nice singing voice) "And how many dragons do you know?'

In UNFORGIVEN, Mundy (Eastwood) to Sheriff (Hackman) as Hackman lays on the bar floor, dying, and he protests that it isn't right that he should die that way because he's in the midst of building a house: Mundy: Right's got nothin' to do with it.

In THE OUTLAW JOSEY WALES, Josey to the old Indian: 'When I get to likin' someone, they ain't around long. INDIAN: I noticed that when you get to dislikin' someone, they ain't around long, either.

Bacall to Bogart (forget the movie) "You know how to whistle, don't you? Just put your lips together and blow."

While I agree with much of the previous posts, I also disagree, except for the most important point, which was made by Alexander, to wit: create, and to hell with cookie-cutter copies of what has gone before. Steve's so-called 'insider tips' are as trite as anything I've heard or read gadzillion times, most of which I make conscious effort to ignore or trample upon. I write my writing, my way, my plot choices, my length, my scenes, in ways that I care about. The characters are mine; they think exactly as I choose to have them think, and they do what I choose, when I choose them to do it. I never wonder if a scene is too long or too short by anyone else's standard; my scenes are exactly the length I require to move the plot at the pace I choose. Only after I've finished the piece and send it out to someone do I care what they think of it. I don't worry about it, and I have never changed a word because someone else suggested it. Everyone else is free to change their own works, but not mine. I don't write for a hollywood reader; they'll either see my vision or fail to see it - I have no control over their reaction to my efforts. I've sold things, had things optioned, and that's fine, but it is not why I write. I say ignore all the rules, see what comes from your imagination.

Bravo to each of you. Probably without realixing it, you prove my comments; each of you has a different approach, and each of you believes in what you are doing. Steven - my purpose in life is not to please you or defend myself to you, or to anyone else. You may be as good as you think you are. My opinion is that you probably fall way short of your own image of yourself. You keep acting as though only you have any insight or talent. Are you in for a big let down. When someone, like you, feels so strongly the need to convince the world of your worth, I say slow-down, relax, stop comparing yourself with others, and just do your thing. My suggestion to you, sincerely, is to offer your time and energy as a volunteer reader of the works of others. Much, you'll find is not to expected standards of producers, some is wonderful, even bordering on brilliant. When you think you know it all, as you apparently do, you only display your ignorance, insecurity and limited vision.

I don't agree with your 'insider' who puts down voice overs. They can be invaluable in exposition that might otherwise lengthen a script beyond the 110-120 page limit. They are as useful as any other part of screenwriting. Take a look at Orson Wells' work and try telling anyone that long scenes cannot work. Altman often has seemless scenes of varying length that are so well done you aren't even aware of length. A short scene can be as boring as a scene that is unnecessarily long, but to proffer rules or guidelines in advance of the creative process is, in my humble opinion, defeating and stupid, and serves only to stiffle a writer's talent. Screenwriting is as much an art as any other human expression, no matter that scripts are considered 'blueprints.' They are, singly, the most important contribution to any film. Music is an art, set decoration, sound effects - but not the script. Bull-kackie! As to style, theme, plot - I say there are no rules, no guidelines. There is necessary structure, a loose, so-called 'accepted' format, and length contraints - but everything else is up for grabs. Tarantino has obvious limitations; he's good, but not great, with dialogue, over-obsessed with violence, interesting with plot choices. But not a genious by any stretch. I have read the works of many 'unknown' writers who exceed his talents, and I disagree with Gil that there are no Dali or Altman or Mamet talents in this forum. I wouldn't be surprised if there are contributors here who will one day be recognized as superior to most now working in the industry. Barbara Marshall comes to mind, and she was recently finalist in Nicholl. Okay, that's it.

Richard -

Try making a movie about money, and while you're at it, be sure to give it some snappy dialogue, short scenes, and by all means follow all the rules you've learned about screenwriting. Be sure to let us know when you've sold it. And, by the way, who's 'whining about nobody understands my genius?' Perhaps Steve, but not I. I'm just rejecting all the so-called ways we're supposed to write, and I do it by asking, according to who? If, as the writer, I feel the story I have in mind is working, then I'll write it that way. Hey, fella, that's what makes horse racing. Isn't it? Nobody is asked to agree with me, but we all have equal freedom to express out beliefs, and do so without someone editorializing that it is so much 'whining.'

Steve, check out Winning Scripts for a brief bio. Since I'm not applying for a job opening with you, I'll reserve right to not give you a success-by-success list. It's none of your business what I've sold or optioned, what I've published or awards earned. I'm not here for your pleasure or approval - only to exchange ideas with those receptive to same, and if you don't like it, stay off the site and go boss your manager around or beat the hell out of a table top with a chain. Isn't that what 'furniture makers' call distressing?

Steven -

When the door is open to the world, even little simple-minded shits like you walk in. Stop threatening me and get the f--- of my case and check in with your therapist. If you call the crap you throw around 'shining' then God help us all. Compare my posting in February--that you felt the need to stomp on--with the trite offerings you so thoughtfully offered from your insider. My offering was meant to inspire; yours was to teach. No one on this site has ever asked you to teach them anything. An exchange of ideas, yes, but not to tell us how successful you are and how wrong we are in our approach, and never has anyone challenged another to present a bill of credits or accomplishments...except you. Again, it's an obvious sign of deep-seated resentments, insecurity, and out-of-control aggression. This site is not a competition, except in your mind--or what's left of it. If you have something positive to contribute, then contribute it. Otherwise shut the f--- up and stop attacking anyone who disagrees with you. If you need a few bucks to continue with your anger management and therapy, just let me know and I'll try to help you. Who knows, it might end up saving some poor sucker's life if you lose control in person as you do so often in this virtual world. And nothing is so obvious a sign of amateurism than someone like yourself who thinks their words smell of lilac. A pile of crap by any name would still stink, Mr. Steven Caldwell.

Richard -

Okay. Your comments are noted. Thanks.

Eleodora -

My apologies. Steven's insults have been going on since I first came to this forum. Don't know why and could care less, but once in a while I have to defend myself, even from his ilk.

Steven -

Thanks for reposting some of my comments, only next time you quote me, give me credit, rather than to retype my words and give the impression that they are yours. And please don't extract a small portion, out of context. That was not the posting I referred to, but it'll do, and the comments were observations I was offering as a competition 'reader,' with specific reference to scripts I had covered for a national screenwriting competition. I offered no 'guidelines' or 'rules.'

Warren -

Ellum is a man's name, but I find it interesting and disturbing that you would threaten a woman, as you thought you were doing in your final sentence. I neither teach nor preach. I state my opinion, and I don't care two cents whether anyone else agrees. Everyone is free to disagree, not that I disagree with the observation that what Canadian's call Special Forces, we fighting Americans call Boy Scouts. I will observe that we proud and brave Americans, of all colors and religions and ethnic pursuasions are giving Saddam and his cohorts a taste of what defending individual liberties mean to us. Did I forget to mention that there are no Canadians at our sides?

Alexander -

Thanks for your comments to Steve. He imagines himself strolling through the gates of Paramount. Obviously he's living someone's dream.

'How Not To Write A Screenplay' isn't a bad compilation of thoughts of the author, though Flinn borrows heavily from many of the great films of the past. Mostly, as he admits, he gives some examples of 'dumb mistakes' screenwriters made in some of the scripts he covered. But, I agree, it's definitely worth reading, though I suspect a writer, beginning or expert, would get more out of reading 'Silence of the Lambs,' 'Chinatown,' 'Get Shorty' - all good reads and tight writing.

A final thought - as to scene length - I wonder if there isn't some confusion in the minds of certain contributors herein about scenes and shots. We write in master scenes, without regard to camera numbers or placement, and without regard to editing, and it might be that what Gil was referring to as a scene might have been a shot within a master scene. I offer this possibility because a master scene is, itself, somewhat nebulus--as the works of Altman and Wells shows. In Citizen Cane and, especially, 'Touch of Evil,' the camera moves from scene to scene, or rather, actors move into the camera with their scenes and then move away. In 'The Player' Altman took the process to extreme, the camera moving into and out of individual and ongoing scenes. I agree that each scene is a miniature story within the overall story, and can and will vary in length. Some lengthy scenes are more significant than others, contain more character or plot development, offer more exposition.

As to voice overs, I can save a hell of a lot of time and sets and money--not to mention script pages--by using a voice over instead of the necessary scenes and dialogue to move the plot.

An example: Two men sitting around a campfire at dusk. One is Companion, the other Narrator. A shrill cry of a loon fades, and Companion turns to Narrator and says: 'The sounds we hear that echo across the bleak night plains, may not be the loon we think...."

Narrator (V.O.) His breath was heavy with whiskey he'd had earlier. I assumed that explained it. I hardly knew him, and I'm still unsure how he learned of my yearly fishing trips to the Farland. Child gossip, perhaps. We'd spoken a few times when I'd dropped off my daughter at preschool and he was dropping off his girl, Melissa.

An owl hoots in duet with the sizzle of sap from pine branches feeding the campfire.

Narrator (V.O.) He was depressed much of the time, ans as trip's end grew nearer, increasingly preoccupied. Indicators of a life coming unwound are clear to me now, though I failed to notice them at the time.

I'm not attempting to teach anyone anything. Please believe that. What I am showing is that voice over can be an effective way of providing needed exposition and defining character without it being boring. Chandler told many, if not all of his stories, in first person, and when they became radio plays or films, the voice over was used effectively. So, I disagree with the statement Steve quoted his insider with making--that voice overs are a sign of an amateur and the script will be trash-canned if a voice over is used. Absolutes are stupid in art.

Enough--I have to go work on my list of accomplishments, just in case such bona fides become a requirement for this site.

Connie and Mary Kay -

Excellent posts. I appreciate Connie's 'stand back and review this' approach to rewriting, and the 'if I've seen it before' is a good benchmark, for originality. I've had taped to my computer monitor for many years, a comment by an editor (who, incidentally, bought a novel of mine, many years ago): 'Make me laugh or cry, but make me feel something. Move me.' And my own mantra: Lean, clean, to the point; tell don't describe.

Mary Kay -

Warm to see you words again. Your bar scene example is precisely what I was alluding to--the difference between shots within scenes, versus scene. Your example was not static, it moved from one site within your master scene to another (the waiter's area) and the movement helped the momentum of the scene. When I hear Steve's insider dissuade writers from opening with an interior shot, 'Being There' by the late Jerzy Kosinski comes to mind. It setup Chancey's world, the maid/cook (who comes back into the story, later) and kick-started the story. And, it worked. Rules, rules, rules. Many thought Kennedy a nut-case until he wrote 'Ironweed' and in the opening sequence as Phelan rode across a cemetary gave us talking corspes and their thoughts about Phelan. So his characters not only spoke in voice over, but were long-dead, too. Rules. A woman recently used a similar artifice (was it 'Lovely Bones?' - I can't remember) by telling the story through a girl who had been raped and murdered. Rules, do's and don'ts. That's the shortcoming of Syd Fields' so-called paradim of story structure. A plot point by page 27, another plot point at 57-60, climax by page 97...blah, blah, blah. Linear-by-the-numbers. I say break through the eggshell and wonder at how limitless the horizons of imagination and creativity can be. That's why (Steve should avert his eyes, else it might rile him) after writing short stories, and selling them, and having them published, I grew weary of the discipline. It became too familiar, too easy, less challenging. Then I experimented with taking a short story and reducing it to a ballad, presetting my length goal and (Steve, avert your eyes again) not only entered some of them in competition, but won, sold them, spent the money and saw them in print. And the challenge waned. Novels offer too much freedom, I believe, and the most difficult writing I've yet to try is screenwriting.

I'm rambling. Keep up the good work, Mary Kay. Your postings are always thoughtful and helpful.

Susan -

Check your incoming mail. Mine arrived an hour or so ago.

Alexander -

I've read most of your posts, with the exception of the past couple of months I've been away from this forum, trying to finish some promised projects. You are far from a 'lone willow in the wind.' Your comments, observations and advice (dare I put it that way, for fear of inciting another outburst?) have been among the best of all contributions - in my opinion. Don't be chased away by insults such as 'Fuck you all!' from the likes of Steven. Other than lists, trite and otherwise, he hasn't offered much more than one would expect from his kind. Aside from that, your words are heard and heeded and are a valuable part of this site. Some have said that my offerings appear 'God-like' - not a compliment - but they've never been meant that way. I can't recall ever failing to qualify my statements as nothing more than my opinion. To be agreed with has never been the issue, though it's been painted that color. Stick around, keep up the good work.

As to lists of things to be avoided in scripts, according to Leslie Kallen--quoted in Skip Press' 2002-2003 Writer's Guide to Hollywood PRoducers, Directors and Screenwriter's Agents-- in her 'From Submission To Sale: Sixty Hot Tips For Screenwriters,' she offers the best advice I've come across. If you don't have a copy of the book, or access to it, I'm willing to copy it and fax it to anyone interested, except Steve. Her advice, alone, is worth the price of the book, and Skip offers much valuable information on everything from seminars to managers to contests.

Yes they do. In fact, it is often done. Good luck.

No, it isn't the war. What it is, if anyone is really interested in uncovering the facts, is quite simply that for reasons known only to Steve Calderwood--assuming his mind still functions enough for him to be aware of his actions--decided to insult every word I contributed to this site. Some of you are aware of how outrageous his comments have been. Others have simply ignored his insults, challenges and so-called 'exposure' of me 'for what you are' - whatever that is supposed to mean - and sided with him. So be it. This is still America. I am still free to express myself, and it ought to be a site mature enough to adhere to a policy of respect toward fellow writers rather than to slam each other. This site is not owned by Steven Calderwood. This site is not owned by any of you. You are not permitted to exclude anyone. You are free to ignore any post of mine. You are free to dissect any post of mine. You may freely use any information or advice I offer. But you may not, with impunity, engage in character assassination. I've read a lot of bullshit from many of you, and some of you offer sincere advice. Why don't you really try to rise above the petty and reach for something less mundane than jumping on anyone outside your clique or new to this site? It makes me sick, at times, to feel the need to defend my views to airheads such as Steven Calderwood, or to point out threats by so-called former members of Canadian Special Forces make in a public forum to someone he believes to be a woman. I'm not going to police the conduct of some members of this forum, but I do feel that some small portion of compassion is missing in those of you who do not condemn improper conduct.

Mary Kay - you disappoint me, greatly. Your previous email to me, pleading that I stay on the site and 'teach' now makes me want to puke on my keyboard. Treachery, it seems, is present, and it's good to be aware that your words are not to be believed.

Mary Kay -

Well, that was pretty much a rehash of what it's been said so many times. Wasn't it? Stick to the rules until you decide to break them. Great advice. I'll try to remember that, Mary.

So, someone said you are the best voice over writer they've ever read. Thanks for sharing that. Now, to pull a Steven Calderwood: It's time for you to put up or shut up. If you don't supply names and references, how is anyone to know that you didn't make it up? We're on to you, Mary Kay, if that's really your name. Yours in coming. You'll get yours.

The above is offered purely in jest and to illustrate the way my posts have been treated by some of the contributors of this site. Not pleasant, is it? Bet you felt really bad until you got to this paragraph.

Now, I'm goint to repeat myself. Format is necessary, otherwise the script will not be read by anyone in the business. But there are not, never have been, and never will be 'rules' or constrictions on content in screenplays. No-one has the supreme right to hogtie the talent, creativity, or imagination of writers. It's been tried in repressive countries since time began, and the artist has always found a way to express his/her vision.

That's all I have to say on the subject, except that talent will out, a good story will find an audience, and inovators of style, plot and subject matter will eventually prevail, in film festivals, competitions, art houses, and in the inner sanctums of so-called executives, readers, producers and performers. Try to write commercially by adhering to someone's rules if that's your vision, but I've never heard a working professional advise such. Passion and talent will always be more important, in every way, than rules and guidelines and shoulds and should nots.

Have at it Steven. Your destructive display of the day awaits in the words above.

Mary Kay -

Well, that was pretty much a rehash of what it's been said so many times. Wasn't it? Stick to the rules until you decide to break them. Great advice. I'll try to remember that, Mary.

So, someone said you are the best voice over writer they've ever read. Thanks for sharing that. Now, to pull a Steven Calderwood: It's time for you to put up or shut up. If you don't supply names and references, how is anyone to know that you didn't make it up? We're on to you, Mary Kay, if that's really your name. Yours in coming. You'll get yours.

The above is offered purely in jest and to illustrate the way my posts have been treated by some of the contributors of this site. Not pleasant, is it? Bet you felt really bad until you got to this paragraph.

Now, I'm goint to repeat myself. Format is necessary, otherwise the script will not be read by anyone in the business. But there are not, never have been, and never will be 'rules' or constrictions on content in screenplays. No-one has the supreme right to hogtie the talent, creativity, or imagination of writers. It's been tried in repressive countries since time began, and the artist has always found a way to express his/her vision.

That's all I have to say on the subject, except that talent will out, a good story will find an audience, and inovators of style, plot and subject matter will eventually prevail, in film festivals, competitions, art houses, and in the inner sanctums of so-called executives, readers, producers and performers. Try to write commercially by adhering to someone's rules if that's your vision, but I've never heard a working professional advise such. Passion and talent will always be more important, in every way, than rules and guidelines and shoulds and should nots.

Have at it Steven. Your destructive display of the day awaits in the words above.

Bryan -

Let me get this straight. You read my post and agree that people shouldn't insult others, even to the point of saying, "Ellum, you made a good point. This site is not a place for name calling or making belittling statements....' Then you can't resist advising, "...you need to find somewhere else to spew your poison."

You aren't very bright, are you? Just couldn't resist another insult, huh? You just don't get it. Let me see - Steven Calderwood is overtly agressive to the point of being a public menace, but that's okay with you. He's your buddy. And you are what's called passive/agressive, and can't see your own spewing of poison.

Okay, Bubble-head, I'll cross you off my list of persons reasonable and inoffensive. And the list gets shorter.

Bryan, I hold up a mirror so that you may heed your own advice: 'You need to find somewhere else to spew your poison.

And a very good day to you, too.

Coonie -

I agree with someone's comment above that you should try to get them to read the screenplay, but if it's a deal maker/breaker you have to decide whether to invest you time and energy on a treatment. As to the three-act layout, I'd advise against it. That's mostly a play thing, although in their minds, readers might be vaguely aware of act transitions. If your story is well-crafted, and I'm sure it will be, the act transitions will be seemless, though the plot points will signal such. As you will discover, or already nave, the treatment is an overview of your story without slug lines or dialogue. They are aften more difficult to write with the passion your story contains than to simply do the screenplay. And that's the major shortcoming; film is more than visual, it is primarily visceral, and that gets lost, often, in a treatment, because without the dialogue much of the visceral is not experienced by the reader.

In any event, best of luck to you.

Sorry about the Coonie - obviously meant Connie:)

Oops, you did it again. As I said, you just don't get it. I didn't ask for your compliment, nor did I ask for you 'spewing poison, bit. But you just had to go an copy your buddy, Steve.

As to Mary Kay -

I could easily go back into my emails from you and copy and post your pleading, and what you said about Steve. Shall I? Is it really even worth it?

Thank you Bryan for illustrating me point so wonderfully. You don't want to trade thoughts on writing; you only want to curry favors with your little-minded buddies by distorting the reality of their attacks and pretending that it's okay. It isn't okay with me.

Post a straight query or voice an opinion or thought, and that's what you'll get from me in return. You guys think that you can dish out your crap, freely, and others will simply ignore you. Think again. You dish it out, you'll get equal in return. Choice is yours. Act somewhat civil or continue with your junk. Your choice.

Now, have a really bad day 'dude.'

Mary Kay -

I have not the slightest idea what you are talking about - other names, questionable credentials, etc., but you apparently have something in mind. That said, would you either clearly state on this site what it is about me that feel is misrepresented - or, if you choose, email me. I won't defend myself, but I will provide whatever information might be required to allieve your suspicions. It might be best for everyone for you to state your case on this site, though. And, by the way, are you really who you say you are? And, does it matter? It would matter to me only if you are someone other than as you represent yourself. Are you a man, perhaps, or Robert Magee? David Mamet? Tarantino? In the absence of proof to the contrary, I'll accept you as Mary Kay, a writer working on her craft. I suppose that might be too much to expect in return...?

Amen.

On another thread I suggested that everyone stop the insults. Why are we here if not to learn and help others?

Got a question? Ask it. Let's see who breaks the peace first.

I suppose in your case Connie is a man's name. And, if so, how would you then know how a woman writes? Did Georges Sand write like a man or like a woman? Or like a man pretending to be a man, or a man wannabe? Howver, since you said that I write like a woman and you mean it as a compliment, just how does a woman write will forever be a question I'll ponder, or maybe I already know, having written an award-winner with a female protagonist, and another award-winner as a six year old First Nation girl. But, any insight you can offer, Connie, will be appreciated. So, thanks in advance for the wealth of information I'm sure you'll provide.

Goodness gracious, how rude of me. I should have ended the above post by saying that I meant every word as a compliment to you, Connie dear.

Connie -

You just don't get it. Do you?I'm nineteen years old, female but I prefer hot chicks - like you might be. I was born with 'monthlies,' so I can't help myself. When I try to write like a man, I swig some beer, belch, belt my woman, turn on a hockey game, like up a cigar and start typing. When I try to write like a woman, within minutes my head feels light, pressure builds in my skull, and nothing of significance comes of work. But, you won't get this either, so what the hell.

You are very slow on the uptake, Connie, so I refer you to Winning Scripts for a brief bio - since you seem so obsessed about who I am and the 'goods' I 'deliver.' An alter ego is not the same as a pen name, but for whatever its' worth - to me it's worth zilch - much of my earlier work was as Sherman Sage. This was told to Mary Kay in a private email, and that's what she referred to as having written 'under many names.' My earlier works were well-known in Canada. This probably doesn't clear up anything for you, but that isn't my problem. If everyone was challenged for every word they write on this site, nothing constructive would ever be accomplished by anyone. Reactions to others and their words are purely subjective, not that you'll understand that, and what one person might think arrogant, another might feel instructive. Perception, it seems to some, is everything. Since you cannot hear a cloud passing overhead, and didn't look up, how would you know it had passed? Ever hear a butterfly sing in French? But you'd swear that isn't possible, wouldn't you? Some on this site, who need not be named, remind me of a bunch of jackals snapping at the heels of a lion. The lion not being me, but anyone they perceive as challenging to their over-inflated perception of themselves.

Poor Connie. Try as you do, you just can't process information all that well. But, good luck to you anyway, Sweetie.

Odd that you could produce what is apparently a good and worthwhile work when you have such little enthusiasm for it. Imagine what you'll achieve when you have a real, measurable passion for the project. Congratulations that it's done so well. I imagine you'll quickly and easily surpass it with your next effort.

Hooray for one of the few intelligent and reasonable posts I've read on this site during the previous six months. Bryan came close, then slipped, then totally blew it. And it's been suggested that I, among other things, stay off salt and get some high blood pressure medication.

Writers and others are here for a myriad of reasons, and it doesn't take an Einstein to identify those who sincerely seek an exchange of thoughts on how to execute a screenplay that is exciting, fresh, tightly written and has something semi-original to offer. The single most off-putting thing I continue to read here is that you should or must or better stick strictly to someone else's rules - or else, the or else being that your ultimate fate will be failure, but your immediate existence will be made hell by the few here who disagree with you. I've never encountered a group of such tight-knit mud-slingers as here. Why such insecurity? It escapes me. They'll pounce on your every word, seemingly for the fun of it, but God help you if you object to such treatment.

I totally agree with your message, and hope that some of the (to quote Mary Kay) 'young 'uns' will clean up their act and concentrate on why they are here. If it isn't to learn, contribute, debate without name-calling and insults, then they are wasting not only their time, but everyone else's.

I, for one, am infinitely interested in learning from others what works for them and what doesn't - if they care to share such. Our time is finite, our hunger for knowledge endless. Mary Kay said she's been told that she and her writing partner have talent with voice overs. That is an exciting elements of script writing, and I'd like more insight from her - if she cares to share. Just an example...

Greg -

Has it ever been that an entrant failed to advance, but a rewrite entered in a subsequent year advanced to one of the top five? In other competitions this has happened.

Your a a perfect example of what's been said. Why not take Brian's suggestion and 'spew your poison elsewhere'? Who said that one must have credits on the silver screen for this forum? If that were the case, neither you nor your little buddies would be here. Were you aborted, or did you just perfect your crap by working at it in a septic tank?

Excuse me, Warren, I didn't immediately recognize you as one of the cowards from Canada who think this is their very own site. But when I looked up your bio and saw the 'Ex-Special Forces, after laughing hysterically, I recognized you as 'just one of the backwoods inbred hicks from Canada.' Down here we institutionalize your kind. Go skin another skunk and enjoy your dinner around your campfire, soldier, and loosen up.

A Wonderful, insightful overview, containing much of value. I don't have room around my monitor, else I'd tape it alongside some other mantras I've picked up over the years. Nice work.

A couple of possiblities come to mind. They might be new and without credits, which was true about every producer at one time. It could be that you'd got one great logline that grabbed them. Problem with that possibility was that they didn't bother to read your synopsis. That, to me, is a giant red flag. Before sending the script, I'd telephone them and feel them out. They might be legit; you'll never know unless you follow up. As to registration, they already know that, as you can't post on WSN without a registration number, though I suppose it's possible that some writers might have made up numbers. Seems to me that you've probably considered all these issues, but they're offered for whatever they might be worth. Good luck.

Read Goldman's 'Which Lie Did I Tell?' He gives detailed insight into his approach in adapting the novel that became the film 'Absolute Power.' In essence, he had to decide whose story it was, then he selected, or created, the important elements of the caper, the detective's investigation, the president's hoods tactics, and the relationship beween the burglar and his daughter. Your novel will be the basis for your script, but they are entirely different animals with respect to plot, so don't stay in love with the various parts of the novel, as you will inevitable end up deleting many of your 'little darlings.' Good luck.

Alexander -

You mentioned that you'd found out something 'not encouraging.' Does that mean that you've uncovered something negative about them?

What I would do is email them, tell them that you're excited about their request for a hardcopy of the script, and would they either contact you by telephone or provide a number where you can contact them by phone to discuss the matter. You didn't indicate, but I assume they provided an address. If so you can go online and find a reverse directory of their area and possibly locate their telephone number. Or - did they provide a P.O. Box? Unless they are willing to speak with you by telephone, I'd say you've got a condundrum on your hands - but, still, nothing to lose but postage and a copy of the script. I doubt they would steal it. Good luck.

Alexander -

Forgot to mention that I checked and neither name is listed in HCD Agents & Managers or HCD Producers. Sorry...

Greg -

Thanks.

Seems you and Mary Kay have what's called the great writing-sample script. I know one guy who has gotten writing assignments - rewrites, etc. - for years, based upon one well-worn and often shopped script, yet the script has never sold. Go figure...

Excellent point Mary Kay made. The bottom line for a producer is profit potential - for the most part. If someone believes the material would make a film that will attract an audience, you've got a shot. Otherwise, they pass with a mental note that your writing is superior enough to keep an eye on your work and possibly give you a rewrite down the line. No matter what, that you're attracting attention is reaffirming of your marketability potential.

You have nothing to lose by contacting them by telephone, fax or letter and telling them what you've got. No way to predict their reaction, though I suspect selling a book to be rewritten by some unknown--unless it was a best seller--might prove more difficult than selling the screenplay. But, there is no down-side that I can think of. Good luck...and why haven't you written the screenplay? There are other posts on here dealing with the process of adapting novel to script.

Steve -

Nothing listed in HCD Producers, and Google showed a zillion listings for his films and a couple bios. You might try WGA (East or West), Producers Guild or Directors Guild. Good luck.

You seem to be angry with half the world. Too bad you're so negative, but if it affects you so terribly, why bother?

Pretty much what Doc. Watson said, but another option is TITLE OVER: (and then type out what you want shown on the screen.)

FADE IN:

Iraq desert - night

Soldiers using Saddam as a soccer ball.

TITLE OVER: 18:00 HOURS, DAY 17 OF THE WAR\

Otherwise, as Doc. Watson pointed out, you'd have to fade in to black and TITLE OVER (or something similar) with your paragraph.

Be creative, start a trend. Good luck.

All good advise, just don't put any notation on your title page about how it's registered or a registration number. That's a given, and tends to flag you as anything but a working professional. Good luck with Nicholl.

Didn't mean that Nicholl won't know you're not a working professionl; meant the comment in general.

All good and thoughtful responses. I tend to go along with Marcel. Either introduce the inciting incident as quickly as possible, page one, preferably, or introduce a charismatic character that we can skate along with until the inciting incident occurs. Hannibal Lecter sitting alone is his cell, staring at the walls, would be uninteresting, unless we come to expect something that we think he should be doing but isn't--perhaps those around him are waiting for the something to happen and we ride along with them in anticipation--such could even highten tension. But, as Marcel and others point out, to wait until mid-point in your tale to have something happen - or not - is really asking the reader/audience to just kick back and have faith in you, that you will throw out something that made the wait worthwhile. Good luck.

Sorry this turned into a two-parter, but I forgot to point out that there seems to be some confusion on your part in that the 'turning point' that you mention happening around page 30 isn't the inciting incident, but rather the character's reaction to an incident which preceded and precipitated the 'turning point.' Say, he runs a small convenience store. He won't suddenly go out in search of armed robbers. But, if his mother, while tending the store is assaulted, perhaps killed - an inciting incident - he might then decide to go after the robbers, which would turn the story around and propel it in an entirely different direction. - and which would then be plot point one, or however you choose to describe it.

Sounds like a high-class barbeque.

Paul is 100% correct. What is it about this everyday guy that makes us care whether or not he gets the job or whether or not he's wrongly accused? Does he stick to his boring job and hope for a better one because he must --the checks pay medical bills for his mother or wife or child? I would need some virtue in this guy to want to root for him. Seems your project is more experimental than mainstream, and, if so, go for it and see how it develops.

Sherlock -

After rereading the additional information, I may have changed my mind about your piece - with one caveat, which I'll get to shortly. Your project reminds me of many of the good old dramas my era grew up with - not unlike Arthur Miller's 'Death of A Salesman.' Now, the caveat: within minutes of the opening in 'Death of A Salesman' we learn that he has been fired from the job he held for so many years--door-to-door salesman--because he's getting old and times have changed. As someone else suggested, why not open with your character applying for the new jobs, and we'll wait with him in anticipation of the outcome. A 'character study' such as yours might be can be compelling, but you might have to make some plot sacrifices to keep it interesting. Good luck, however you proceed.

Alexander:

Mr. Mudd 5225 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 604 Los Angeles, CA 90036 Phone: 323/932-5656 Fax: 323/932-5666 Types: Motion Pictures - New Media - Television

Credits: Of Mice And Men - Crumb - Man In The Iron Mask - Ghost World - The Dancer Upstairs - Kill The Poor - How To Draw A Bunny

Comments: Theater

John Malkovich..........Producer/Dir. Lianne Halfon...........Producer Russ SMith..............Producer Shannon Clark...........Production Exec.

No E-mail or Website noted in HCD.

Good luck.

Barbara Marshall with her script "Assumption" was finalist last year - one of ten. Look for more superior work from her.

Best of luck to everyone who enters.

Hollywood Creative Directory. Available in hardcopy or online - various editions, Directors, Producers, Agents/Managers, Performers, Below The Line, etc. Invaluable and recommended. Good luck with Mr. Mudd.

A suggestion - contact Sriptapalooza coordinator and explain your reason for wanting to contact him. At the least, they will probably forward your contact info to him. Good luck.

Good for you, Mary McKay! Keep up the good work.

Christine -

Good for you. Keep up the good work. Your time will come - perhaps the next contest, the next script.

Noel -

Welcome. Glad you had a laugh or two over some of the threads above.

Try contacting Pixar directly. My guess is that other than in-house projects there are fewer animation scripts than other types. Were it my script, I'd also research producers and prodcos in HCD for those who specialize in animation. Then I'd push Disney, Buena Vista and Spielberg's Dreamworks.

Good luck. And I wouldn't change a word except your own insight in rewrites, until or unless someone offers you money to write something their way. Until then, it's yours - and probably better than they could do...or they'd be doing it. (I'm referring to agents, etc., who may have 'a few suggestions.'

Richard -

A good post. I'm glad Noel stuck around and saw that the site offers some good points, not just in format and inspiration, but marketing and who the ripoff individuals and companies are. Many that have been mentioned were new to me, but not, apparently, to some who were solicited by them. Someone advised--can't recall who it was--to never pay anyone, agent or prodco, to read their work. Really good advice. And, I agree with you--the main thing is to keep writing.

Gil - Based upon your experience and the intelligence and craft-knowledge you've shown in your posts, I'd say you're probably more advanced in technique and execution than the members of the group you mentioned. I'd also guess that they might see something special in your work--aside from what you've admitted were weaknesses--(probably do entirely to the fact that it was a rough first draft, and except for Hemingway, most first drafts are the crude and hurried essence, the birth of creativity) and since they've offered nothing but negative for you and pats on their backs (were it me) I'd pack up the script and leave them to their narrow egos. Certainly, I would not be bothered by the experience. Some groups are honey and you leave uplifted, and others are poison and you leave wondering why you even bothered.

Chin up, it's their loss. And, by the way, I think it was bold of you to share the first draft with anyone; you exposed some of your insights and thought process...not something just anyone would be will to do.

Keep up the hard work. In the end, it will have been worth it.

What you're describing is, I believe, what many of us go through--to a greater or lesser degree--during the rewriting process. I agree with the post above...you are probably aware (and were when you rushed to get it to Nicholl within the deadline) that it could use more work. If nothing else, it's a learning experience. Not that it's likely to be of any help to you, but what you described is what I go through for months, sometimes years, before I put a first draft on paper...and repeat it, endlessly, during the next thirty to fifty rewrites. Welcome to the world of screenwriting.

Gil -

Just wanted to say that, since you told them it was a first draft, their reaction seems to me to have been even worse. What does anyone expect of a first draft except a rough plot of a rough story, peopled with interesting characters--who will only get more interesting with rewrites--and perhaps a satisfactory ending? It's like inviting them to view photos of a boat you're in the process of building. It isn't finished, you've told them that, and it's obvious to the viewer. So, it would be extremely unfair and rude for someone to mention that the bulworks aren't installed, the interior is unfinished, there's no rudder or mast or wheel. Duh! But what can be seen are her lines, her freeboard, her bowsprit...and aren't they graceful and fine! Can't wait to see her launched!

I've read some real junk by Goldman--an exerpt he included in one of his books--but it was a first draft, and we know what he's capable of when he polishes it. The problem seems to be with the general make up of the group, and they seem fixated on the negative--at least to the new member of the group. Leave, find another more supportive group, keep writing - and to hell with the nitpickers.

Better to have one pearl than 15 stones.

Thanks, Greg, for the tally.

Paul M. -

Good post, good advice. I couldn't agree more.

Nothing to say, either, except that this is an exciting post...where-ever it might go.

Just a post script, Marcel, to your post. Remember Post Toasties? Ummm, good!

In what language would the option contract be written? Portugese? Under whose laws would a legal dispute be brought? What rights do they want to option? Do you have a lawyer with whom to consult? Are copywrites reciprocal between the U.S. and Brazil--which I would imagine they are--and, if so, do the Brazilian courts protect your work equal to protection in the U.S.? How would such an arrangement affect your future efforts to market it in the U.S.? Does the prodco have credits and credibility? Do you get a Starbucks discount with the deal? Good luck.

Connie -

It could be--probably is--that you've read each word, each sentence, so many times they seem stale to you. But, they won't be stale to a new reader, and I'll bet the excitement you wrote into the piece is still there. Imagine a mystery ride at a carnival...the first time the skeleton jumped out from behind the boulder was a surprise and scary. By the third ride, it seems boring and contrived. Don't worry too much about it, but as Paul mentioned in a different post, it probably indicates that you are pretty much finished with the sript--for now--and can now move on to something else...a new script, perhaps.

Good luck.

Thomas -

Just me, but...I'd take the WGA basic minimum for a feature-length script--which is somewhere around $65,000.00--and I'd estimate the time to complete the first draft (not easy, I realize, especially since you're working with someone else's story/plot) then I'd double that time estimate and divide the $65,000.00 by the resulting hourly estimate. If you think of 10 hour days, five days a week, and three weeks to complete the first draft--150 hours--doubled--300 hours--roughly $215.00 per hour. Then allow an equal time for rewrites...and it would be roughly $108 per hour, assuming your original estimate will turn out to be half wrong. And, since you will both be sharing screenplay credit, I'd go for $55.00 per hour, not to exceed three hundred hours for the first draft and three hundred for all rewrites, plus equal writing credit. That's about in the range for a union electrician, so you'd be giving the co-writer a hell-of-a deal...unless he thinks he can find a non-union electrician as creative and experience in writing as you are.

Others will have their own ideas, but this is a start. What the hell, even writers have to eat, and why give away the products of your creativity for less?

Greg Beal -

Any figures on this year's entries?

The Saturday Evening Post was left on the post to the right of the newell post, but it came post-haste.

"How Not To Write A Screenplay" by Denny Martin Flinn is a wealth of information, as the title states, common mistakes most screenwriters make. Also, the William Goldman books give an overview of the movie business (albeit from a rather lofty position) and some do's and don'ts. Max Adams wrote a funny and informative book called "Guerilla Tactics" (or something like that) that covers some areas such as coverage, agents, contests and queries that worked for her (but might not work for everyone, given that she won Nicholl and Heart of Austin, and many others.

Sherlock -

First, make sure you're at the beginning of your script. Then go to 'elements,' then to 'paragraph' and enter the new parameters. Then click 'apply' or 'okay,' and you should be all set. If not, check back here and we'll take it from there. Good luck.

Gil -

Paul Mrockza's 'The Watercress' also made the cut. Honored to be in the presence of you two esteemed writers. Congrats and hats off to both. Gil, casually mention it next time you meet with the rude group...and note their reactions. Should be good for a laugh.

Paul Mrockza's 'The Watercress' has advanced to semi-finalist in the Winner Takes All annual screenwriting competition.

Congratulations.

D. Jay -

First, don't believe everything you read on these sites. What was Venna's blessing, anyway? Guess I missed that. Second, don't retain every word you've written. If you know you've overwritten, which isn't unusual for a first draft, then go back and extract only the essence of each scene, even if that means throwing out the dialogue and starting over with each scene. Then decide if you want a feature-length or a short, and take it from there. If you must believe in blessings, then write one that you feel best suits your current needs. Was Venna some kind of psychic? Or maybe just another run-0f-the-mill psycho. Don't blame the dead--or the living--for needing to rewrite. Just do it...and it'll turn out better than 'Semper Fi' - and maybe advance even closer to a Fellowship with Nicholl. Good luck.

Terri - I agree with Gil. I've used Final Draft for about 6 years and have had zero problems with the program. It is as flexible as I can imagine ever needing. I wouldn't trade it for anything short of a Nicholl Fellowship. Well, maybe a Chesterfield or an Oscar.

Who tried to verify Veena's death? Why? Where was a search made? Maybe she's still alive. Who said she died? D. Jay, what was the blessing? There might be a story in this for someone.

James -

Nice post. The trend to action/adventure and thrillers is simply because they tend to sell tickets, but that doesn't mean that good stories, regardless of genre, won't find an audience. We writers must always keep in mind with our works for the screen that a movie is more than action and dialogue, more than a visual experience...but a visceral reaction to the conflict we pose for our characters and how they resolve--or fail to resolve--them. 'Erin Brokovich' didn't work for me. I cared not a whit for the protagonist; the cliche' plot was a bore; the investigation and courtroom machinations were equally cliche'...but the short scene where Brokovich told the mother about the award was a moving moment, and I think that's what we strive for: (and this will sound cliche', also) a story well-told that moves the audience. One of the best short stories--that could easily make it to the screen--I've ever read was a three page short by Bruce Holland Rogers published a couple of years ago in Rosebud, entitled 'The Dead Boy At Your Window.' Well worth looking up.

Greg Beal -

Thanks for the insight and the advice. Have you a final number of entries for this year's Nicholl competition?

Mary Kay -

A couple of years ago Artisan Entertainment and Landscape Entertainment merged. You can find any information you might be looking for on Artisan's website: www.artisanent.com

Good luck.

Colin -

Montana to Miami is out of the question at the moment, but all best wishes to you. And congratulations! You're on your way.

Deep elephant footprints.

Allen -

Hello, and welcome to Moviebytes (if you're new). Some time back I had the pleasure of reading your "Under The Mango Tree." You're a wonderfully funny and polished writer. Enjoyed the freezer business, especially the maid who was, coincidentally, the mother. Good stuff. Good luck. You write movies, not just screenplays.

Ellum

James -

Terri and Steve are both right on target. Format is important, but a prodco isn't buying format; they're after a story they feel they can sell. Format is ever-evolving, and there is a current 'acceptable' format style, but the examples you gave go way off into left field. And I think the 'producer' has issues unrelated to your script. Ignore him and move on. You are, as you state, an award-winning screenwriter...something the producer cannot say. Keep on writing.

Hello Vincent -

If your Laserjet is H.P. (either 1200 or 1300 series) total cost per copy will run about 2 cents--a much better deal over copy services: each copy will be an original--crisp and clean, and on white paper...not the gray that passes for white at copy services. Bright white paper, (92 minimum) on 20 pound bond is best. Good luck.

Ellum

James -

Another way, to use Steve's example, combined with what Terri was pointing out--and I agree with Terri...it's the way I've been doing it--would be as follows:

Int. Ted's house - day

In the living room, Ted is dancing.

THE KITCHEN

Ted enters...blah, blah, blah.

BEDROOM

Ted dances in. Blah, blah, blah.

No need for complete slugs. Slugs are only for the camera operator...and you're indicating scene changes in an abbreviated (but sufficient) way. To use complete slugs (ie, Master Scenes) as follows...

INT. TED'S BEDROOM - MOMENTS LATER

...would only clutter the page and does not offer any information that is not obvious in the abbreviated slug and directions.

Just an opinion. It works for me.

I'd add to the above--Ted Talley's "The Silence of The Lambs," Cameron's "True Lies." Also, dated but wonderfully written, "Casablanca." "Chinatown" must not be forgotten, nor Jerzy Kosinski's "Being There."

Victor -

Do it exactly as you said. For example:

Soldiers duck between tanks advancing across the berm. A mortar round explodes nearby. A scream echos...

FREEZE FRAME

TITLE OVER: ANOTHER WAR. ANOTHER COUNTRY GONE MAD.

...the scream is lost amid small-arms fire.

ACTION RESUMES:

The lead tank explodes...

Blah, blah, blah.

(Something like that, anyway.)

James -

As you know, the European metric A4 paper is 210X297mm, which converts to 8.27X11.69 inches--as compared to the U.S. A (letter) size of 216X279mm, which converts to 81/2X11 inches. Were I in your circumstance, I would not sweat the less-than-a-quarter inch narrower or the 2/3rds inch extra length (never underestimating the adage of longer being of some advantage).

What you might consider is to asterisk a note at the bottom of the title page to the effect that you have retained U.S. Film Industry-accepted standards in margins...thus giving notice that the rough page-to-minute of film can be relied upon (as if it ever could be).

Were I an American producer just picking up a script on A4 paper, I'd consider it a refreshing change from the ordinary; then, when I'd read your work, I'd be convinced that the change was for the better. (Of course.)

Ellum

Terri -

You're correct. He invented the Steadicam, not the dolly. My research produced the following, which is the earliest mention of a camera dolly:

Yevgeny (also spelled "Yevgeni" and "Evgenii") Bauer (1867-1917)...Russian director and set designer who was influenced by the Art Nouveau and Symbolist movements. Bauer was regarded in the 1910s and his country's most important filmmaker but was later condemned by the Communists as "decadent." He directed The Twilight of a Woman's Soul (1913), which features the first known use of a camera dolly in a feature film. His other films include One Thousand and Second Ruse (1915) and The Revolutionary (1917).

Hope this is of some help to you.

Ellum

Terri -

At the risk of your withdrawing the Chryler prize, I also located the following, which is probably the true source of the first use of a 'dolly shot.'

Film and theater director Rouben Mamoulian, born in Tiflis, in Russian Georgia (1897). He worked at the Moscow Art Theater at night while studying law by day. He came to America in 1923, directed on Broadway, and then in Hollywood. For his first film, Applause, in 1929, he introduced two technical advances: he put the camera -- which up until then had been virtually stationary -- on wheels for dolly shots; and he recorded the sound on two channels for later mixing. Mamoulian also directed the original stage productions of Oklahoma! and Carousel.

A favorite of mine is Horton Foote, who gave us "Tender Mercies," "A Trip To Bountiful," "To Kill A Mockingbird," and many others.

David Webb Peoples, who gave us "Blade Runner," "Hero," "Unforgiven."

Anything by Paddy Chayefsky (except maybe "Paint Your Wagon," with Clint Eastwood and Lee Marvin singing...off key, although Mr. Eastwood is good on piano and composing).

My name is Ellum McCurdy, and like many on this site, I'm a writer of screenplays.

"Mannequine" was the best script ever written. Nothing compares to it. Why it was overlooked by the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will forever remain of of life's greatest mysteries...to me. I admire everyone involved in the making of the film; I'm their greatest fan. The best business minds in the industry, aside from the film's producers and the studio that backed it, were the distributors.

When the big Academy in the sky holds its awards, God will give well-deserved recognition to the screenwriter of that wonderful piece of filmdom, and I'm confident that if I ever see the movie or read the script, I'll like it even more.

Go Chesterfield! Another of my personal favorites; always has been, always will be.

Ellum McCurdy Word Artist and writer of screenplays.

Victor -

From what you've revealed of your script, I'd do it thusly:

As the soldiers climb over the berm

FREEZE FRAME ON SGT. YORK

MOVE BACK TO REVEAL

Sgt. York, forever twenty-two and ever the courageous soldier, is now but a yellowed photograph trapped behind a dusty glass in a cracked leather frame.

The frame is displayed upon a mantle, alongside a flacid football and a trophy from Midland High, class of 1953.

(Something like that).

A short list of the major characters, their relationships to one another, (if any) and how they figure into the plot.

Colin -

Just my two cents worth (maybe only a penny) but you cannot copyright or otherwise protect an idea or a title, and since they only wanted to option and pay you for what is freely available to them....

As we've learned, when the main character fails to achieve his/her goal, it's a tragedy-- no longer a drama--and most of Hollywood avoids 'not happy' endings, though "Romeo and Juliet" has endured for centuries, and I suspect that we'll see more 'real,' if not 'feel good' endings that naturally flow from events within the stories, such as "Cast Away."

Well, of course James and Terri are correct.

Vincent -

While I agree with you, as a fellow artist, it must not be overlooked or taken lightly that a producer wants to make as much profit as possible from his project, and many (not all, thank the gods) believe that those final few moments of film, and how the audience member reacted to those moments, are what movie-goers tend to remember when they discuss the film experience; and it's a given that they will more readily recommend to a friend that the friend share what they felt good about, as opposed to something that saddened or depressed them...given that the experience of sitting in a darkened theatre for two hours is a momentary escape from the real into an imagined world.

To repeat my earlier comment, I suspect that we will see more (and I hope so) endings that naturally flow from events within the story...and I am confident the viewer will appreciate the honesty. Isn't it just too damned bad that in almost every film we know that no matter the complications facing the 'hero,' he/she will come through it all relatively unscathed. Of course we identify with the protagonist, become the character, and who of us wants to end up eater alive by the man-eater or unable to escape a fiery death or the plunge over the cliff into icy waters?

In the last sentence above, 'eater' should read 'eaten.

As in "Spinal Tap" - 'How could I leave this behind?'

'Big bottoms, big bottoms...talk about your bum-cakes, my gal's got 'em.'

Terri -

I intend to see it. Thanks. Wonder if the 'wind' resembles Mel Brooks' cowboys sitting around the campfire eating beans and...?

Hello Heather -

It isn't so much that writers 'admire' scripts simly because they got made, but rather that we appreciate the ones that work, learn from those that don't, and re-enforce our concept of what constitutes good vs. bad writing in others.

In defense of Chesterfield--that certainly needs no defense from me--not only are they rated number two or three, (on a par with Heart of Austin) but just look at the names attached to Chesterfield Writing Project...a verible 'Who's Who' of the business. Just because they've not bothered to update their bio/public relations release should not be skewed as indicating that they are of the past. How did the man currenly in charge get to be 'in charge?' No doubt the decision-makers behind Chesterfield are not only in a better position to evaluate his credentials, talents and abilities, but they decided in the affirmative. I, for one, would not challenge the decision. He is a writer, and obviously has the capability of evaluating the writings of others...rather accurately it would seem.

Oh, I forgot to add: "Mannequin II" is my second most favorite script of all time. Mr. Hogan has got to be the very best greatest actor alive today. As with "Mannequin", if I'm ever lucky enough to see "Mannequin II" I'm certain to the depths of my soul that I will like it then as much as I do now.

Terri -

I could use some help here.

I do, Terri. Really, though I'm happy for TJ, of course.

Marcel -

I do.

Some years ago in Singapore I saw a TV commercial for snake soup. As I recognized the shopping center, the following day I went there and searched through the stores until I located the item. The can art was that of a large cobra, hood expanded, ready to strike, but I was disappointed when I read the ingredients and all it said was "Three kinds of snake meat." Making it even less appetizing to an Occidental, other than the golden hued cobra the can was a split-pea green, with black lettering. Naturally, I purchased the store's last five cans and made gifts on them upon my return. Never did hear if any of my friends actually followed the directions: "Heat and serve."

I was supporting 3 cats and a diversion from pessimism with a light touch of parody.

Kevin -

Yes, I do believe that the writer presently in charge of Chesterfield has earned, by his writing experience and other talents, his position. When you organize your very own competition, no matter how small or large, I hope you recall your own skepticism about qualifications, or lack thereof, of contest directors. I know a lady who owns her own successful script consulting business and operates a successful biannual (yes, I know you think biannual is spelled bi-annual, but either way is acceptable to Webster) screenwriting competition, and she is a great writer and a piercingly astute evaluator of writing excellence; she can even see the rough gem, though it is yet to shine. And I believe she's typical within the business, rather than the exception. The scam artists and pretenders are the exceptions. Color me optimistic.

I will, though I can't offer advice on his question. But, with an Emmy, it should wake up some of the busy execs. Many of them can't honestly state they've earned that little statuette. Good luck.

Add a vacuum; makes it easier to retrieve the innards. (innerds?)

Bravo, James.

Marcel -

Was the oriental person of Asian and also American? If not, can't be Asian/American, I'm afraid. How about a black man born in Italy --African/Italian? Maybe just Italian of African descent.

The British called it the 'Near East' and the 'Middle East' and the 'Far East.' It was all to the East of London. If you're from Ohio, makes you a Mid-Westerner no matter your ancestry. I'm 1/4 Choctaw and 1/8 Cherokee, lots of Irish and Scottish, some German and English, but mostly just American.

A slightly funny scene goes like this. A transient rider of trains rescues another man from captivity in a warehouse. The rescued was suffering from some injuries, and the rescuer, having been a Medic in the Vietnam 'police action' (as it was called to justify sending the intitial troops there) set about tending the wounds. Both men are black. The injured man was abducted from Italy, and has no idea where he is.

RESCUED: Italiano?

RESCUER: Me? American. Of African descent.

RESCUED? Where?

RESCUER: Where what?

RESCUED: Where if Africa?

RESCUER: Whole damned continent, far as I know. And you...Italian?

RESCUED: African. Of African descent.

RESCUER: Can't you see we're brothers? Why you want to insult me...ask if I'm some dumb 'Italiano?'

RESCUED: I meant no offense.

Anyone here build their lives around screenwriting contests and lotteries? Didn't think so. If you're sick of the topic, feel free to stop reading the posts. And for your information, there are no 'dumb' writers on this site, unless it's a new addition with little tolerance for levity. America is still on a 'heightened' alert, and it's not yet against the law to laugh and digress from everyday tensions.

Robert -

Nice post. I'll check out your website.

Ellum

Marcel -

This is just a wild guess, but seems to me you haven't developed the story idea much. You've a vague character with an occupation. Now, you need a story, a plot, some complications, rising action, climax (there's that word again) and a denouement. Voila! Another script. Keep on writing.

Hello Victor -

The sample shown is correct, except the title is shown in bold, which should not be done. Either enclose your title with quotation marks or underline it; either way is acceptable. Paula is correct: don't include registration or draft dates, but do include draft dates if your agent/manager is shopping the script. This is done so that everyone is assured of having the latest revision. Otherwise, good luck and keep writing.

Ellum

Marcel -

Some do, some don't. I'm of the latter.

Marcel - part two:

I will for all characters with dialogue; all others are stuck with lower case.

A man pushes through the crowd, hands Corbett an envelope.

(were I to mention the man again, it might be:

Corbett glances at the envelope, tucks it into a pocket, looks around for the Man, but the Man has vanished within the crowd.)

Do it however you choose; when you become successful, others will copy you.

Keep writing.

You be assumin' rightly, Miss Terri, but dah sample be done wrong as rain on July dah fothe! But, me, from dis moment, be doing dah title thang in boldness. (and "...but I don't know nothin' 'bout no babies!"

I agree with Marcel. What you've given us is a short, short synopsis - not a logline, which is a 'line' that hints at the essence of the story. Omit character names and details; it isn't important to know her name or that she was a crime-scene investigator, nor that she was fired, nor that she experienced hallucinations...unless they might not have been hallucinations (but that's probably another unnecessary bit of info for a logline). The essence seems to be her ability to detect aliens; I'd go in that direction.

Good luck.

Ellum

Looked it up and discovered that I had done a dreadful injustice to the late and great Butterfly McQueen, who actually said, (in "Gone With The Wind") "Oh, Miss Scarlet, I don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' no babies."

Now I'll go and hit the brew - least I can do to ease my guilt.

Back to the title page issue, I had glanced at three scripts (without realizing they were my own) and found that one had the title (in caps) underlined, the other two enclosed in quotation marks. None was boldinized, though. Sorry, Terri. I'll improve with time. I hope.

Lost the message I was composing. Pronouns should be avoided, but not to where the repetitive use of a character's name gets in the way of 'the read.' As example:

JANE

No. Afraid your visit has been for naught.

She takes the basket of flowers and returns to

THE VERANDAH

Victor follows with his cup of tea. Jane sets the basket of flowers on a table.

JANE (to the servant) Vase of water, please.

She sits, ignores Victor, resumes her sewing.

If I said Jane does this, Jane does that (especially when it is clear who it is that is the 'she' in the scene) it would, I feel, impede the flow of things.

But, do it your way and it'll be fine, as long as it's clear and keeps moving.

Marcel -

Guess I should have said that I don't use caps for extras, for example:

Jim and Kowlie join the Village Elder in morning tea. Villagers watch in b.g., but do not crowd the visitors. A MALE VILLAGER approaches.

MALE VILLAGER

Protect us, Sahib. We will show you where the woman was killed.

Two other villagers move forward, then another, and another. Now the entire village, men, women and children join the Male Villager, mumbling agreement to join him.

Others may do it differently. This works for me.

Well, of course minor characters are important in a script. So are miners. It's just that I prefer to cap only what I want the reader to give extra attention to. I'm not writing a casting or production script; I'm attempting to write a spec script that will get read by someone who might pass it along for consideration by someone in a position to buy it (then they can cap every word if it delights them). By doing as I've described above and in previous posts, the script moves along. Seems to, to me.

Edgar -

I may have misread the post about Marc, but I believe the complaint was that there was no response even to the e-mail query that was invited by Marc. No doubt he was inundated, but queries from writers who believe in the product of their considerable efforts should not be ignored as if they were telemarketers or solicitations for charity. To be busy and successful is no license to be rude. Marc would be starving were it not for the creation of writers for him to peddle.

One opinion -- from a Word Artist.

Because the eye tends to fix upon the bold (and the beautiful) and I want the reader to stay gripped by the brilliance of the trip I'm leading him/her on; I don't want them to pause and reflect upon the format - not the minor characters, or sounds, or that I'm directing an 'angle on.' couched as a new sentence, capped, with a character's name.

How old are the scripts you're looking at? To quoteth the One Of Knowledge, Terri-herself, "Remember, successful screenwriters are using the style (read 'format') they used when they sold their first script." (and much of it is dated, decades old). Just as format has evolved to lean and clean and easy to read, with lots of white space on the page, CAPS of minor characters sans dialogue, and extras, unnecessarily call attention to them, perhaps (I'm only guessing) to the detriment of the 'fast read.'

A BUS

pulls to the curb.

THE DOOR

opens, and

STACY,

a fireplug imitation with pimples on her mid-teen face, and

BILL,

with a body like a gorilla and a waddle like a duck

exit the bus.

A DOG BARKS.

A YOUNG BOY

restrains the dog, whose attention is focused upon

A CAT

clinging to the shoulder of

AN ELDERLY WOMAN.

Sitting beside the Elderly Woman is

HER HUSBAND,

a scrivelled OLD MAN, who is now LAUGHING at OTHER PASSENGERS - A GIRL holding a violin case, A TEENAGE BOY, who is reading a comic book, and A BLACK MAN, who is wearing dark glasses and balancing a cane across his lap.

Now OTHER PASSENGERS, who have been waiting to board the bus, come swarming aboard, including

A PREGNANT MOTHER, holding A BABY to her breast,

A YOUNG MAN carrying a guitar,

LITTLE BO-PEEP and A FLOCK OF SHEEP,

THREE POLICE OFFICERS,

A NEWSPAPER SELLER,

A FULLER BRUSH MAN,

A POSTMAN,

A POSTWOMAN, and

A TROOP OF BOY SCOUTS, a half-dozen

GIRL SCOUTS,

A TRANSIENT with a bag of aluminum cans...ad naseum.

None of them will speak,(except maybe the sheep, ad-libing affection for the shepherd). I've seen scripts resembling the sample, admittedly exaggerated....

Logline: Man cannot live by Spam alone.

Synopsis:

A man from the North goes 'wherewolf' when postal authorities refuse entry of his monthly supply of Spam. The furry fella is forced by stress of circumstance to join a team of sleddogs, but not before he attends Spam Anonymous, learns to contol his addiction to Spam, discovers how delicious smoked salmon fed to his pack-mates by their unemployed UPS driver/caregiver is, and how very attractive a Husky-Malamute-Wolf bitch can be during the long, chilly (and discretely dark) times of winter in the Northland.

He was no beast; he was just human-genetically deficient.

Go for it, Marcel.

Terri -

Phoo! And I thought the example was, if anything, understated. Okay, I'll try it your way.

"And how many dragons do you know?"

A YOUNG GIRL, perhaps six years of age, accompanied by A BOY, about ten year of age, followed by THE ENTIRE VILLAGE, consisting of MEN, WOMEN, CHILDREN, THE ELDERLY, and THE INFIRM, hurry to the well.

Is that better, Terri? Or shall we move on FGS! (only joking!)

Marcel -

It has been noted (can't recall by whom) that a script should (hate that word) consist almost entirely of action verbs and nouns, no adjectives, no adverbs, and few pronouns.

Keeps things moving ever forward, without the intrusion of modifiers or words ambiguous.

Terri -

Are you present?

I would imagine the purpose to be a way for yet-to-be-purchased writers to get a toe in the door, plus they get a copy of a screenplay that was purchased and produced. How's the food, Terri?

Steve -

Just a rough guess, but I'd imagine that thousands of great and worthy scripts never even get read for every mediocre and trite cookie-cutter copy that sees the big screen. Must be, because I know many talented writers whose worst script is infinitely better than most of the trash that's shoved down the throats of moviegoers.

Ah well, keep writing - never can tell when a masterpiece might get mistaken for something 'commercial' that might sell some popcorn.

Under Writers Wanted, Grey Line recently solicited submissions from Moviebyters.

I have taken the time to go to their website and copy their submission guidelines. They are copied below.

A word of caution: when they say 'no multiple submissions' they mean within the writer's lifetime. So, select carefully your submission to them, as you may not ever submit another project.

I resent being called a 'prospective writer.' Guess, in their parlance, Grey Line Entertainment is a 'prospective management/production company.'

Grey Line Entertainment is always interested in hearing from prospective writers. If you have a project you would like to submit, please follow the guidelines listed below. SUBMISSION GUIDELINES:

All initial queries should only be sent via e-mail to:

Sara Miller, Submissions Coordinator submissions@greyline.net

Note: Do NOT send attachments. Any queries that include an attached file will be deleted unread. Further, in order to fairly respond to the large amount of queries we receive, we do not accept multiple submissions. (This covers submitting a list of completed projects in one query as well as under separate cover for each.)

I, for one, will never submit a prospective project to this prospective group. (But good luck to any who does.)

Richard -

Their website states that they respond within 6-8 weeks on requested material, but they also state that they respond only if you've enclosed a SASE.

Good luck.

Okay, Gregory.

A treatment is longer than a synopsis and shorter than the script, but I'll let Terri or someone else give you details.

How did it come about that someone requested a treatment? Did they see a synopsis or logline?

Oh, Terri -

I bet you say that to everyone who posts something that is honest, to the point, and priceless.

Are you Carl or Michael - or both?

Terri walks into Outpatient Small Surgery room. Says to a Nurse:

TERRI

What's with the fat pillow with the hole in the center?

NURSEHello, fellow writer. Have a 'Sherry,' and toss me that fat pillow with the hole in the centerwhile they're 'Lansing' Marc's Hernandez.

Terri walks into Outpatient Small Surgery room. Says to a Nurse:

TERRI

What's with the fat pillow with the hole in the center?

NURSEHello, fellow writer. Have a 'Sherry,' and toss me that fat pillow with the hole in the centerwhile they're 'Lansing' Marc's Hernandez.

Terri walks into Outpatient Surgery, says to a NURSE

TERRI

What's with the fat pillow with the hole in the center?

NURSE

Terri walks into Outpatient Surgery, says to a NURSE

TERRI

What's with the fat pillow with the hole in the center?

NURSE

Hello, fellow writer. Have a Sherry. The pillow's for Marc after they finish Lansing his Hernandez.

(Sorry about the two incomplete posts above. I had some trouble with the keyboard, or not enough coffee.)

Hello James in Denmark -

1 - If your 5 books on screenwriting have no consensus on format, either write your scripts five different ways -and hope one is acceptable, (you'd have five chances at getting it right) or toss them and buy another book. (Or ask Terri.)

2 - Selling a screenplay isn't necessarily an indication of talent. Could be luck, good timing on subject matter, excellent taste on the part of the buyer, or lack thereof.

3 - 'Lack of love as a child' is too subjective for anyone else to comment upon. Sorry. Hope your next life has a happier beginning.

4 - If your 'true calling is to be a monk' you'll know it. (The Big Guy is known for giving strong hints in that direction.) And monks have a reputation for recording and creating great works of literature. Some can even chant in a commercial way.

Oh, the sanity of it all.

Yeah, Marcel, but what about the spam script? You've got the makings of something interesting. Will the 'wherewolf' marry the sled-dog? Will they have a litter of little 'wherepuppies?' Will the postal authorities relent and allow the shipment of spam into the country before it's too late? So many what-ifs, so little time.

I've simply decided to have nothing to do with anyone in the film business who is too busy, too calloused, or too 'important' to exhibit at least a modicum of professionalism and mutual respect. They ask for a description of what I have to sell, I expect an acknowledgement to my response, not silence.

The only time silence that's an acceptable response, to me, is an unanswered prayer.

Persons, such as Marc Hernandez (since he's the one who's been put on the hot seat) are successful and 'too busy for courtesy and professionalism because we writers have flooded them with our scripts, and he's been able to peddle them to his own financial gain. I don't resent his success, but I am aware that without the products of our sweat and brains and talents, Marc would still be doing whatever it was he was doing to pay his bills before he turned to the entertainment business. Was he so aloof and dismissal of others then? Doubt it.

Simply because there are so many in the business who have forgotten their pasts, their Mother-taught manners, and that they are not the only ones who harbor dreams, have ambitions, and work hard to actualize their potentialities, does not make it acceptable to me.

If women, African-Americans, Asian, Latino or Moses' people had accepted the roles they were cast in by others, the world would be one ugly-ass place. But, by uniting and resisting the bullshit (excuse me, Mama) they, like Paddy Chayefsky's character in "Network" - said, 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!'

I can always earn a living; I choose to write, and I elect to be discriminating with whom I will do business. I can be rejected as easily by a person of good character and work ethics as by the run-of-the-mill 'bigwig' agent/producer cum shaker/deal-maker. And I know I'm not alone.

Interesting approach, but keep in mind that the audience do not and cannot know what these minor characters' names are. On screen a man passes and envelop to someone. He is not Jacob Haddasah, 43 years old, father of two, a property owner and small business entrepreneur (s). Nor is any of that important for them to know, else it would naturally fit within the plot.

A villager is just that, unless it is a specific villager with something to say or add to the plot. Giving every character a name is something that might be reasonably done in a novel, but (only my opinion, of course) to do so in a script makes for a muddier appearance and slows the read.

As I've learned, if a characer doesn't say it, wear it, or do it, omit it; it cannot be filmed. Minor characters' names cannot be filmed. (Forgive me, Terri. I do not mean to demean an extra playing a role of a villager. He is on call to portray his character in the background. He is not important enough to be CAPPED or given an individual identity.)

Terri -- How'd it go at the doc,s?

What's with Arnold?

Are ghosts ever hungry? Do they pee? Are they afraid of things in the light that don't go bump in the day? Do ghosts have emotions? Why are some ghosts invisible? If an English speaking ghosts meets a ghost from Peru, will they understand each other? Can a ghost hurt itself. Accidentally? Deliberately? Could a morbidly depressed ghost commit sui-alive? How can a ghost move its mouth to speak? Do ghost have rigor-mortis, then get all limp? Do ghosts sleep. Dream? Do they awake from sleep? Would they know they'd been in a dead sleep? Are ghosts afraid of daymares? Where do ghosts go to die? Or to live?

Perhaps Terri can enlighten me.

And how would you know that, Paula? (It's a joke!)

Will the real K. Smith please stand up? Why must some persons on this site think a person isn't real? Could it be because they don't agree with the person's post?

I hate it when someone questions the validity of an other or of their right to expression.

And I hate it when someone accuses an other of a 'fake persona' - without a scintilla of evidence to back it up. (This isn't a joke, Paula.)

Because, Terri, million dollar diamonds are a dime a dozen. Maybe this agent just likes to read scripts; maybe he wants to be a writer. A million maybes....

They've got good P.R. - apparently. But, other than teeny-boppers (and all their parent's money they spend on drivel) who cares?

Isn't Fosters beer from Australia?

Terri, naive one, the old fart needed the money, that's why you were scheduled for an office visit. Also, he likes looking at you - and he has an extreme foot fetish.

I haven't the slightest idea or interest in whether of not Arnold is a 'big guy.' But, what directions did he give? That confuses me. Doesn't he have Terminator Twenty-eight coming out, soon? Wonder if Cameron wrote it.

Saw a credit for "Terminator" that read: Written by James Cameron with Gale Anne Hurd. Not 'and' or '&' but 'with.' Would that mean that "Good Will Hunting" wasn't written by Afleck and Damon, but 'with' (the editing and notes of) William Goldman?

Terri -

Bravo! Just got back from a business trip and haven't caught up on everything that's been going on, but harrassment of the aggressive type you've described can be construed as 'terrorist activity' and many police departments and other government agencies get rather excited at the prospect of investigating such. Were I you, with the evidence you've saved on the hardrive, I wouldn't hesitate to contact a law enforcement agency and file a complaint. Send the sonofabitch to jail for an extended period, if for nothing else but to show those who are unfamiliar with our American laws that we take seriously our freedoms and rights, especially the right to be free of threats, implied or expressed, and invasion of our computers by hacks, as well as hackers.

You can also report him to the Moviebytes webmaster and publicly expose his (her) identity right here. Bet he/she doesn't have many friends, here or elsewhere, and certainly no one who would countenance such behavior or respect a sleazeball a--hole who would slither from under his/her rock and act as this person/pig has.

Also, if you're using AOL 8.0 plus you can permanently block the person's e-mails. Meantime, a toast to you for the restraint you've shown -- more than I or most others would be capable of.

Have a really good day. You deserve it!

Sign me a fan of yours!

Ellum

Hello Frederick -

Can't you use your powers to permanently bar James Barclay from this site? Nothing is to be gained by any contributor to this site by having someone like this person insult half the contributors, incite threats of violence (not the first, unfortuntely, from the same person by the initials of Steven Calderwood)and then use the lame excuse that he used the name of another person 'as an experiment'? Bar the freak from posting garbage, and let's get back to the relatively sane world of creative writing. This is a gathering place for writers, and we're quirky enough without being subjected to the truly insane.

Thank you.

Ellum McCurdy

Frederick -

Sorry the 'D' got dropped from you name.

I always use the same as Paula described. Until someone buys it, it's my script and I want it to arrive in good condition with not bent corners, and make an impression that at least hints at a degree of pride and professionalism in my work.

Colin -

Read your post, in which you boast "...I'm successful, young and smart...." Those are not bone fides. 'Success' is relative; if you're truly successful, what have you sold, to whom, and what compensation was paid to the writer? Who gives a diddley if you're young? We all were at one time, but it's nothing to brag about, and in many ways it could be a detriment. As for being 'smart,' I imagine your clients would expect you to be somewhat more than 'dumb and dumber.'

And you, too, are among the rude. I know more than one writer you did not reply to (No, I am not among them). You would be well-advised to bear in mind that your success is inversely proportionate to the scripts that talented writers permit you to attempt to sell on their behalf.

James Barclay claimed an IQ of 148, two points shy of genius, but I doubt he was tested by Mensa.

No, only annoyed-amous. Must is because 'must ain't' doesn't sound right.

Can't say I agree with you, David. Ilsa did love Rick, at one time, and she chose someone else over him. Rick probably loved Ilsa more than he should have, and he eventually learned to accept that the love was not and would not ever be reciprocated, could not with the intensity he felt, because, circumstances being reverses, Rick would not have chosen anyone over Ilsa. As for appropriate ending, Rick exhibited his love for Ilsa and how he valued her love (though it was directed to someone else) by killing the man who stood between Ilsa and her happiness. If Ilsa had betrayed her husband and chose Rick, what would there be for Rick to love in such a person? Rick was, most of all, (aside from being on the losing side of love, and knowing it) a pragmatist; he was never political and would probably never be, but he well-understood his position relative to Claude Raines', thus the comment about them being in for a long relationship as Ilsa flies away to live happily-ever-after. It was a cat-and-mouse game, played with equal skill by each.

Paul -

As usual, you stated it so well and in so few words. You are a poet.

Ellum

Banning and barring select persons from social settings has been a mainstay of humanity since humans came together in formation of societies. Pedophiles are barred from unsupervised interaction with defenseless children; criminals are barred, for varying lengths of time, from social intercourse. We aren't speaking of high crimes, here, but rather a civilized exhange of ideas on creative writing. Admitted frauds and liars, spammers, harrassers and their ilk ought to be denied a forum for their garbage. Many gathering places will summarily eject participators who engage in offensive and disruptive activity. Long live freedom of speech, but longer live our basic freedoms to be free of threats and harrassment, synonomous with the spirit of July 4th, an integral part being the 'pursuit of happiness.' - which has been widely interpreted as being at peace and living without fear.

Steven -

You may now say that you 'responded like a character from "Jay and Silent Bob," but I doubt if anyone other than your friends believe it. Just take a look at your tirade of fury. As I said, this isn't the first time you've totally lost it and used threats to express yourself. It is clear, at least to me, that the criticism leveled against your Winning Scripts post -- logline and synopsis -- which were accurate, was something you are unable or unwilling (probably both) to accept. Spelling errors in what is supposed to be an example of your writing ability is no reason to threat assault and death, regardless of who points it out to you, James Barclay or your wife, manager, or a producer. To now state that you were 'bated' (learn to spell at least two sylable words before you call yourself a 'Canadian Professional Writer' -- such a title tends to demean other 'Canadian Professional Writers') is a coward's way of squirming out of possible legal ramifications. Don't know about Canadian laws, but in the United States of America, we prosecute those who make threats, no matter whether the threat is made in person, through the mail, over the telephone or on the internet. You should consider yourself extremely lucky that James Barclay also turned coward -- as he was about to be exposed for the fraud he is -- and couched his previous post (that you felt 'bated' by) as 'an experiment.' That you are 'out of here' is unquestionably to the immediate benefit of those of us on the site who wish to exchange ideas and suggestions about screenwriting free of your attempts to intimidate and threaten us to silence. If you ever threaten me again, you have my promise that I will do everything within my power to have you hauled before a court of law to answer for you actions. And, Mr. Caldwell, that is no joke.

Aside from WGA might require of an agent -- paramount among which would be an affirmation that the agent would abide by all the WGA rules, including minimum compensation to the writer -- if should be clear as babie's tears to everyone that 1. The agent does not meet WGA minimum requirements for membership, and 2. That the agent does not intend to abide by the minimum compensation scale, as set by WGA for its members. Thus, the agent is free to peddle the script to anyone for any amount of compensation, whether for purchase or option. Never would I consider a contractural arrangement with anyone who is unwilling or unqualified to agree to acceptable rules and ethics, all of which are designed to protect the writer and the writer's product. For me, no agent is better than one not accepted by WGA.

Thank you, Terri, for your usual calm, sane and reasonable statements. FYI, nothing 'went on before' between Steven Caldwell and me, except, as noted above, his threats and attempts at intimidation -- same as he lashed out at James Barclay, aka Smith, et al. And, of course, a few of his friends, Canadian and otherwise, jumped into the situation, defending his behavior. That's it, and it's over as far as I'm concerned.

Speaking out in defense of oneself can never be considered unprofessional or uncivil, but failing to speak up, when it is proper to do so, is an indication of cowardice and weakness. No matter the level of a contributor's writing experience or success, words of encouragement, suggestions, the exchange of thoughts ought be delivered in the spirit and comaraderie of helpfulness.

I've been accused by Paula Smith of lying and using other names/genders, and I mark it up as claims of a closed mind -- God please keep her off a jury! -- and some time back Mary Kay Labrie strongly insinuated the same as Paula, though she did not go over the line and say it. I marked that up, also, as impulse thoughts of a simple mind. Do I care if Mary Kay, Paula Smith or Steven Caldwell continue to post on this site? Absolutely not. Steven and Mary Kay will never fail to boast about how good they belive their writing is or to repeat what they say has been said to them about how good their writing is; and Paula will continue to be the skeptic that life has molded her to be. That brings you up-to-date, Terri. You didn't really miss anything before returning to this site. And I must tell you that I resent being compared to Steven Caldwell. We are nothing alike, and though it was kind of you to say that we must be good writers, I would rather never write again than to be thought of as a member of the same profession as Mr. Caldwell. He calls himself a 'Canadian Professional Writer.' I'm not, thank God, Canadian, nor am I (or is he) a 'professional writer,' as that title is reserved for those writers who are actually paid for their efforts. So, only the 'writer' part is, for the moment, accurate.

Thanks Ron and Terri for the info and insight, but I still will never sell a script for less than the WGA minimum -- and even that will amount to a few cents an hour for the time involved. Nor will I option for less the WGA minimum, whatever that is. I believe initial membership for a writer is around $2,500.00 who has accumulated the minimum points; Terri is correct, a feature-length film intended for theatrical distribution would qualify the writer for membership.

No, Terri. He's just rambling on while he looks for gems to help his writing 'talent.' He needs no therapy for ego/self-esteem issues. If he sticks around long enough, Steve will lash out at him, or someone will accuse him of being a she/someone else of a different age. Keep on looking, Grover, and keep on writing, develop that self-professed talent. Oh, and one other thing: "How many dragons do you know?"

Ron is funny, and he's chock full o' good info. (Same as you are, Terri.)

Again, thanks Terri and Ron for the insight and suggestions. Terri, I didn't mean to imply that you would ever sell for less than WGA -- just reinforcing my own position thereto.

Terri -

Sure helps me! Might look him up. Thanks.

I've never heard anyone in the business or living in the greater Los Angeles area refer to the West as 'Hollyweird,' only Canadians and Mid-Westerners, none of who will probably ever work in the business. Figures.

I say use language that fits, and to hec-, I mean hell with anyone else thinks is necessary or unnecessary. If he (she) is a producer, let them produce, and once they've purchased your script it becomes theirs and they can delete the words they believe 'unnecessary. In the meantime, the writer should write true to their heart, the language they compose to fit the character, time and site of their story. A street urchin of East L.A. might say, "The fuc--- chicken," and another urchin of Liverpool might say, "The bloody chicken." A writer I know from the San Fernando valley would say, "The damn(ed) chicken."

But, Terri, again you've amused us with a funny experience. Thanks for the laugh.

But you're a nice person, so it matters not from whence you came! I agree with the Los Angeles area. Lived there a while in the 50's and 60's. Loved it, had many wonderful friends. Some have passed on, others simply moved on, but L.A. has a nice mix, each adding to the pot.

Goodbye Mary Kay. I won't miss you.

D. Jay, funny post. Nice to see that some posters here can enjoy the sometimes weirdness of it all.

Terri - Maintain the levity, and in the spirit of 007. This place could use a laugh or a million.

Maybe Fileppe Marques -- who needs no address, fax, E-mail or telephone numbers posted; the world will find him -- can describe for us what is and is not 'commerical.' Someone believed Harrison Ford and protege were 'commerical,' but it flopped bigger than a high-diving whale. "Heaven Can Wait," bankrupted a major studio, and "Ishtar" never earned back in gross receipts the cost of film. Bruchheimer (sp) might know a commercial project; James Cameron knows, as does Mr. Spielberg. But how many others? Mr. Marques? I'm waiting.

Dennis -

Many never walked in, though you would think that Hoffman and Beatty would fill theatres. Beatty couldn't in "Heaven Can Wait." And I understand he's a perfectionist.

Jamie - you wrote:

It said it was commercial and it pointed out my obvious mistakes(there wasn't alot, but there was a few). Like my 82 pg flashback. But it was a pass nonetheless. What if I do everything the coverage says then will it be better or is that still relative?

Carefully reread what you wrote. Too many major grammatical mistakes for a writer, aspiring or otherwise. 'There wasn't a lot,' should have been stated: There weren't many. Your next sentence is a run-on, lacking punctuation and clarity. A good mentor should be easy to hook up with. Good luck.

And, 'There was a few,' should read, There were a few.

I write incessantly, day, night, makes no matter. Whenever I have time, I go to the computer and work on something new, or reread and rewrite completed (not that they ever really are) works. And I read. Makes no difference what it is. Classifieds, Classics, scripts, novels, whatever. I've never experienced 'writers block,' so I'm lucky, I suppose. Before I begin a new project, I've thought it through sufficiently to know -- if it's a script -- just about every scene and sequence. Odd thing is (just how I do things) that the story is sometimes a result of plot. I'd have thought it was the other way round, but no. Not all the story details are clear, but become so as the plot unfolds. Not to say that I have no idea where the story is going, because I do, having thought about it for, sometimes, years. I'm rambling.

Danny -

How can an award-winning writer - yourself, of course - ever state that you probably wouldn't write if not for the (writing) group you attend? Aren't lawyers supposed to tell the truth? Though of course everyone knows about that:) I suspect that, like all those who find expression through the written word, that you cannot but write, and know it, though you protest, even publicly, that it isn't something you are compelled to do, and do it every day. Right? "The Paper Route" (hope I got that right) has won First Place in more than one competition. I might consult with you on some procedural issues involving death penalty appeals, (fictional) but not attorney/client, because I'm sure I could not afford your fee schedule -- but writer-to-writer. But, that's down the line.

Good luck. Keep writing. Keep attending the group that inspires you.

Ellum

Robert seems to me like the proverbial black cloud that hovers over all that's positive. He cannot spell, has a builtin radar that warns him when he gets close to correct punctuation, spends his time finding fault (or making it up) with others to offset his own awareness of his many failures and ineptitudes. Worms often get eaten. Bullies get chased away, and the Roberts (not all; only the one above noted) simply rot themselves to piles of unidentifiable excrement. Will someone please flush the toilet?

Terri -

You have our sympathy for the injuries you've been suffering. Hope the surgery helps. You are one of the truly knowledgeable, helpful and positive souls here on Moviebytes.

Bravo Terri and Christine! 'Illiterate bug up your ass' is a phrase I shall always remember.

Ideas are a billion for a dime. Everyone has them. It's how you create the world in which the idea lives. Writers don't come up with original ideas; we simply think up a situation, which we find of interest, then wonder what if. Politics, murder, duplicity, fall-down-funny. (We think.) It isn't the idea; it's the way we choose to present it.

Sorry, John TWalker, but you could not be more off base. Here, I'll prove it to you. Remove the writer from every film that's ever been made, and what do you have? No 'process.' Hell, you have no film. Remove the writer from any publication, and you have nothing. Writers aren't 'part of the process.' Writers are the genesis of all that follows. Every collaborator on a film - from the set designer to the caterer - owes his/her profession, job, and income to the writer, without whose initial creation there would be no film business. What about the silent films you say? We wrote those, too. 'Casablanca' wouldn't even have a title, but for the writers. Think again, Mr. TWalker.

Deep or otherwise, he created it. Without him there would have been no Shrek in the world, no need for a producer or director or animator; no need for an audience, because who will pay money to sit in a theatre with a blank screen? (Although, a blank screen might be preferable to watching some of the junk that's been a waste of good film stock. Let's approach this from a different angle, the creative one mentioned in a very good post above. The writer gives to the world something that was not there before. Not so the actor or director or producer; they merely interprest the writer's vision - not always well. On any film the director can be replaced, and the writer's creation would remain. Ditto for the producer, the performers, etc. But remove from the equation the creator of the imaginary world that's to be interpreted, and there's nothing to interpret. Financiers can always be found, as can actors and directors and producers. Hell, they're just waiting for the next creation from the minds of writers. But the writers? We are stricken by a spark of imagination, and we utilize our skills as storytellers, and we create from the ether of this world, a new world peopled with characters who never existed, doing things that have not been done before (not exactly, anyway) and by doing this, we writers create an industry for all that follows. If you don't believe this, you cannot possibly be a writer, and if you are a writer, you know the truth of it. As said above, 'Put the Capra touch' on a script of bound, blank paper - and see how many directors and producers and 'stars' fall over themselves rushing to interpret the nothingness that is there without a writer.

Terri -

Yes, Ron's story was inspiring. I don't have a story about your eventualy success, except to say that I have faith in you, that you will not only become a selling screenwriter, but you will someday - as Ron as envisaged - be the recipient of major awards. Keep writing, keep the faith, know that your talents and hard-earned skills will prevail, regardless.

Ellum

And, I trust, you will overlook minor typos in any future posts of mine:)

Never mind the bra. What did the assistant for Kevin Spacey want?

Jerry - You'll always get good advice on this site, and the above posts are on target; you really can't go wrong on any of it. Now, my single dinar's worth: write. And read as many scripts as you can find and have time for. Good and bad are equally helpful in evaluating your writing. Contests are good, but you won't learn much, though you might get some helpful notes. Practice - you will get better. I'm not overly impressed by someone who has never written a screenplay, whether or not they make a living evaluating the works of others. When we read, our reactions are purely subjective, and so will the reactions of those who teach, those who are 'readers,' and those who later publish books about what makes good writing, what defines bad writing.

John TWalker's asinine comments bear a strong resemblance to those of James Barclay. Neither had an iota of originality to contribute. Certainly not anything of use. 'How important is the writer? About as important as a p.a.' What a stupid statement for anyone above kindergarten to make. John TWalker claims to be 'in the business.' Doing what? Emptying the waste receptacles of teenaged 'readers' of never-produced-and-probably-never-will wannabes? 'And how many dragons do you know?' Mr. TWalker. Didn't you forget the period and space between 'T' and 'Walker?' Betcha didn't even notice, huh?

Howard Koch was one of many who worked on the film adaptation of "Everybody Comes To Ricks," that we have come to know as "Casablanca." Let's not forget the contributions of the Epstein brothers. But, who remembers the playwright? Think I'll look it up and give a proper salute.

Ron -

Thanks for the particulars on "Casablanca." I read (don't recall where or when)that none of the cast knew, while shooting, what the ending would be, not even the Epsteins. Too bad there's no Director's Cut that might show other endings that were considered - though the ending chosen is appropriate, in my opinion.

Yeah, sad old Bob's gone, but just think who his neighbors are now: Chaplin comfortable in the 3rd cloud to the left, Gleason peering down from the fluffy cumulus above. Now he and his buddy, Bing, are working on the never-ending Road to Heaven.

Comedians of the calibre of Hope never die; they just become greater legends. Thanks for the memories, Mr. Show-business. You set the bar beyond reach of anyone else. But then - '...what's heaven for?'

And God bless Ron for sharing. I'd be interested in more about Beckman.

Well, what can I add to what's already been well-stated - except, I'm not trying to make a sale; if it happens, great, and if it doesn't, I don't consider it an indictment of my writing. It would be an achievement to be offered a Nicholl Fellowship, but if not, it won't impede my striving to be the best writer I can be, to tell my stories in a way that others enjoy, to investigate new ways of expression. To everyone who advanced in Nicholl or any other competition, my hat is doffed to you. To those who did not advance, keep working and improving - not advancing, not winning is less a comment about your writing skills and talents, but more about how one or two persons reacted to your work. Hell, with 6 1/2 billion yet to applaud you, I wouldn't worry much about it. Good luck.

Terri - I'll bet your friend who advanced with an action/thriller is thrilled, and not advancing further will only prompt more work on his/her part.

Terri -

My comment about not trying to make a sale was in response to an earlier statement that making a sale is proof of the quality of a writer's work. I couldn't disagree more. A sale simply means that someone wanted to make a movie that you've written, and it probably will not end up to be the story you wrote, but will be altered by everyone in the movie-making process that has an opinion and the clout to enforce that opinion.

Writing cannot be about sales. I believe those writers whose visions are set on potential income are bound to be disappointed, and that writers who strive to tell their stories with compassion and honesty, in an engaging style, peopled with characters deserving of our emotional involvement, will attract readers and viewers; those that do not tell their stories in interesting ways will not.

I realize that this will seem egoistic, but the biggest critic -- and the only critic I have ever cared about -- is my own evaluation of my work. Have I done with the material the best I am capable; have I accomplished with the selected material what I believed was possible at the outset; have I produced a work that has been worth the effort? When I can answer affircative to the critic within, I feel that my work has been successful and I can leave it and move on to another challenge.

I hope that no writer ever begins a new project with contest-winning in mind. Such a goal cheats the writer of pride in his/her work that should naturally flow from creative expression. There is no formulae for contest-winning. There is no formulae for writing a 'commercial' script. There is a formulae for literary success: write what interest you; write everyday; write something that others have not thought of writing; write with clarity and grace and about things that touch our inner-most fears and longings; and be glad that you can leave something behind for others to experience when you're gone from this world.

I may not have answered your question, Terri, and I'll continue to try to sell what I write, and I'll continue to write without allowing rejection by any person to dissuade me.

Terri-

Hey, I met that gal in a pool hall in the mid-60's. Same flat nose, same missing teeth. Promised me a house in Malibu, too -- but I didn't believe her:) Same as your experience, I knocked on the office door, and after waiting a loooonnnngggg time, she opened the door. But, unlike your strength, I could not resist, and I peeked: nothing on below the waist, but I'm pretty sure it was female. Not certain, just tend to think so.

Good for you, Peter Scott, though your needn't have wasted time defending American Accolades against Mr. John TWalker's feeble criticism.

What Mr. John TWalker finds plausible is altogether unimportant, as the lack thereof -- fairy-tale or not -- was the stated opinion of another; and that person's opinion was what was, rightly, acted upon by American Accolades.

I'd find it implausible if Rudolph, The Red-Nosed Raindeer, was bastardized by a copycat writer whose imagination was too limited to create a character. To make circumstances more absurd, the writer's friend voices dismay that a contest reader found the 180 degree change in Babe to be implausible? Would I believe "Psycho" Bates as a reformed family relations counsellor? Not me, too implausible.

No, Terri. What it means is only that you have not heard from him -- yet. And, even if he doesn't respond, so what? Certainly doesn't mean that you're a bad writer, for chrissakes! Get a grip. He's ONE agent, who just happens to have gotten the usual flood of submissions by posting on this site. So, he's sold one or two scripts; that means that some lucky writers got their work purchased. Doesn't mean that wouldn't have happened, anyway, with or without this agent's (or is he a manager?) shopping the work around. I say take everything for what it is: luck, timing, and that the writer just happened to have what a certain buyer was looking for. View the quality of your work by the reaction of one person, and you are not only cheating yourself, you're headed for a brick wall that will get in the way each time you send out samples. To quote a writer by the intials of Terri Dickey of a few days ago -- fagettaboutit!

Brenda might have a wee bit o' trouble finding a buyer for a work with that title, though it is what I would call a High Concept title.

How about: "SUPREME, ONE-AND-ONLY UNIVERSAL CAN'T BE OUTDONE LEGALLY BLOND PRETTY WOMAN WITH THE UNMISTAKABLE SCENT OF A WOMAN IN A CITY BY THE SEA SLUT - THE MOVIE."

Terri -

Good for Jeff Davis - but...?

Terri -

Just seemed that the issue was left hanging. Are you going to continue to attempt to contact him, or to determine if it's the same TANGO MAN writer? Must have made quite an impression, if you've been thinking about him, lately. Who says there's no such thing as 'fate?'

Terri -

Just seemed that the issue was left hanging. Are you going to continue to attempt to contact him, or to determine if it's the same TANGO MAN writer? Must have made quite an impression, if you've been thinking about him, lately. Who says there's no such thing as 'fate?'

Yeah, Terri - call him and get it over with, then move on to other things - such as reading some interesting scripts. Never can tell, might find something really exciting.

Everyone gave good advice. Do what works best for your script. Good luck. Never forget that it is your scipt, not a group effort, and in your lonely room, you are in control of the entire universe you've created. Need a flashback for exposition? Use it. Non-linear are, usually, most interesting. I read somewhere that ... (can't recall his name, but he produced The Sting) said that when he opens a script and sees a flashback he immediately thinks the writer is having trouble with the story. I disagree. Those stories were not his to decide how they were to be told. Depends, greatly, upon when you decide to begin the story. Remember Little Big Man? How much would have been lost if the interview had never taken place? How interesting would it have been to follow the protagonist from youth to old age? Be creative with each artifice you choose, and your writing will shine. Good luck.

Heck, Terri - sit there, smile and be happy for me. I need it, too, you know:)

Terri -

You can twist my knickers anytime.

As for your posts ever being 'condescending,' I've found them to be informative, helpful, gracious, filled with valuable facts, names and other specifics. Be yourself; others will react as they chose to: some positively, others who enjoy spewing negativity.

Why post self-promoting advertisements on this site, not even thinly disguised as publicity releases? Should be listed under NEWS, but it's free, so.... And, why state twice that 'Pichirallo will oversee the project?' Writers 'get it' the first time. Redundancy is redundant.

Here, here, Ron -- well-stated, and a bit of reality.

To Marc H.

Just begin a new thread with whatever is on your mind, and rest assured that you will get plenty of replies:) (some of which will be so positive you'll pee your trousers). We aren't your enemies, you know. We are your bread and butter, a new Mercedes, pad in Malibu, fat wallet, and might even surprise you with some originality.

Have fun; I know everyone else will.

Not a bad assessment, Terri. Rather to the point, matter of fact:)

I don't believe that the business of film-making is a game; nor do I think that silence is an adequate response to a query made by a writer to an agent, prodco, manager, or anyone else in the business, most especially not if the material is requested. For a writer, or anyone else, to passively accept, as 'part of the game of Hollywood,' rudeness that is unacceptable in any other art or profession -- and would not be tolerated -- speaks disappointingly of writers, professional and otherwise. (the otherwise being those who have not yet been compensated for their works.) To be ignored is uncomfortable, but it is more revealing of the character of the 'young, smart, and successful' wannabe, who's achieved a modicum of quick success, which obviously pumped his ego to such gargantuan proportions he feels he's above the faceless mass of writers. Would I ever knowingly do business with such a person, enrich them in even the slightest way? No, nay, never! He is not the only lump of greed on the flabby beast of power, but he is one lump whose name is indelibly etched within my brain. I would rather never do business than to do business that repulses me. Call me...a writer with still a little pride.

Sue --

The Austin site gives info on notifications.

Best of luck.

I didn't submit anything to Colin, and I'm not taking his rudeness personally. My comments were observations, removed from any emotional involvement. If he's in the process of moving his offices, he should send out a general alert to all who did submit material, and relieve their obvious anxieties. To not do so is, in my opinion, callous and rude. So, shoot me.

Gil's advice is sound enough to be a mantra: No news is bad news; move on!

I like that. Thanks, Gil.

People tend to do what is important to them. They prioritize, constantly. Colin is no different. He structures his time and devotes his attention to what is most important to him. Didn't acknowledge receiving your submission? Didn't bother to contact you with a 'pass?' You aren't important enough. Accept it. He'd return your inquiries -- e-mails, letters, telephone calls -- if he viewed you as important enough. Would he return Spielberg's phone call? Would he ignore Goldman, et al? Keep it in focus, accept it as it is; it isn't going to change with such persons.

People tend to do what is important to them. They prioritize, constantly. Colin is no different. He structures his time and devotes his attention to what is most important to him. Didn't acknowledge receiving your submission? Didn't bother to contact you with a 'pass?' You aren't important enough. Accept it. He'd return your inquiries -- e-mails, letters, telephone calls -- if he viewed you as important enough. Would he return Spielberg's phone call? Would he ignore Goldman, et al? Keep it in focus, accept it as it is; it isn't going to change with such persons.

Does this romance mean I need another goal for each of my two main characters?

I'd appreciate any comments.

Since you asked...

No. But the romance could be a super-duper obstacle for both to overcome, and a whole new conflict could arise by making the serial killer Meg's brother. Or father. Or make the serial killer female. Tom's sister...or mother.

I agree that your story presents many opportunities. I do not agree that it is 'fund(a)mentally flawed.' Avenging a death fo a loved-one, vigilantism, has been a mainstay of this genre.

Good luck.

Yeah. I agree with Terri. Any attention the writer focuses on their ineptitude might push them into the defensive mode. Probably would, and they might snicker among themselves, "Look at how this guy reacts when he doesn't get his way. Who does he think he is? Forget him. He's just another writer."

Not good to go out of your way to shake their tree. Of course, if they come onto this site, they are fair game:)

Z. Core:

How do you know that Nicholl semifinalist letters were 'mailed yesterday?' Are you with Nicholl?

Greg Beal, help us out here.

Thanks

Marleine --

Thanks. May I enquire if you are now a semifinalist?

Thanks.

Ellum

Nicholl, Chesterfield, Austin Heart of Film, Walt Disney.

The character is what he does, not what he says. His words can reveal, conceal, lie or pour out his heart, but they're only words. Remove all dialogue and you'd still understand the story. Words, in film, are more for emotional impact, so that the audience can more easily identify with the protagonist. Each character is the reel world -- assuming the writer has any talent -- will be different, as are people in real life, and we don't give a banshee's wail about the story; we care about the character.

'...is the reel world...' should have read: '...in the reel world...'

POLICE OFFICER Johnson is down! We're after a cop killer now. Let's do this by the book fellas. We don't want some judge letting him off on a technicality; so let's make sure we do our jobs.

***

The above example is, mostly, unnecessary, and fully cliche.

Assuming that the speaker is the Police Officer, who is speaking on a two-way radio, (were his audience present, they would know that Johnson 'is down,' and would not need to be told that) the only part of the message to fellow officers that is required is 'Johnson is down.' With that information, the other officers would, or could, surmise that they are now searching for a cop killer, (at the least, a cop assaulter) and that any perimeter, intended to contain the suspect, has probably been breached.

Since they are trained police officers (as opposed to security personnel) it is a given that they that they do not want to see the perpetrator get off on a technicality,' and that they will, in fact, do the job they have been trained to do and are expected to do, and will do it 'by the books.' Thus, the only dialogue needed is the relay of information that 'Johnson is down.'

This stupidly written scene reminds me of watching a dumb television account of some major crime that is summed-up by the reporter or some police official or politician by assuring the public that '...the investigation will continue until the person or persons responsible are apprehended.' Duh....

There is no 'dialogue challenge,' but if the example given is indicative of the script, major rewrite is suggested.

Jerry --

No doubt Tommy Lee Jones could recite a phone book and we'd find it interesting. I may be wrong, but the need for dialogue is not for an actor to have fun with, but to reveal character and advance the plot, often by giving needed exposition, and disregarding which actor might or might not have fun with it, if the dialogue does not serve the cited purpose, then it is not needed and should be eliminated. David Mamet, Tarantino and a few others rattle on -- interestingly, admitted -- often unnecessarily, and the river of words gets in the way of the story. Each word in a script should add new and needed information; if not, leave it out.

AND -- each word added to our information, did it not?

Count me in.

Thanks.

You can research submarines and ocean liners, but you'll need someone with a bit more knowledge than the requirements you mentioned in a collaborator.

Good luck. And don't be so afraid of 'telling too much.' It's unlikely that anyone, other than yourself, will have interest in your ideas -- they are, as you will discover -- a trillion to a penny -- sufficient to want to steal them.

And thanks to Terri, too.

Before pitching anything, practice the word 'practice,' and note the correct spelling.

Good luck.

Well -- of course an idea can have value, even great value, depending upon how close to unique it might be, or how commercial a buyer might think it is, how the idea is presented, and to whom.

Ideas are bought almost daily, pitched by those with such talent to someone receptive.

The idea can be as important as the execution of it -- E.T, for example. But, for the most part, it comes down to the writing style and ability of the one putting the idea into story form, and the choice of medium.

Some ideas are appropriate for oral story-telling, others to novel. Some fit theatre, (Mamet, for example) and some for film.

Ideas are valuable properties, but not to be guarded to the point of paranoia.

You also be takin' a 'wild guess' that David Lucas be British. Maybe is, maybe ain't. One things fo' sure: he ain't be spellin' practice the right way, and his mind be speedin' past his learnin'l, 'cause we all be knowin' Mr. Lucas, Sir, gotta have the smarts if'n he guawn become some writer of the merits. Lawdy, but what with this sun hittin' on my head, done causes some ramblin' on the part of my self.

We writers shouldn't ought to be doing nothing but writing.

Who was shooting you down? Not I, not Jerry.

You did, remember, put out some feelers by giving some information about your project. Both Jerry's and my comments about ideas were merely opinions that ideas float around, constantly, and few ideas are ever stolen by others. Borrowed, yes; exploited, to be sure, but there is a very good and logically sound reason why our legal system does not allow someone to protect an idea, and that's called spontaneous creation or spontaneous insight; however it's named it means that two or more persons can have an idea that is similar or exact, and do so at the same time. It's when you move beyond the idea into an original creation -- an outline, overview, breakdown, summary -- the details of which might be unique, that you can then claim ownership of an intellectual property by reason of authorship.

We were simply cautioning you against being overly protective of an idea that is not unique, not even unusual:)

As for helping new writers, I am unaware of any contributor to this website who has ever been openly unwilling to offer suggestions to others.

There are no 'new writers' here, only writers with varying degrees of experience, success and -- forgive me --talent. You are neither a new writer nor an aspiring writer. You writer, therefore you are.

Good luck.

The last sentence should, obviously, have read: 'You write, therefore you are.'

Them bad boys got banished to Van Deman's (sp) land, for sure. Must have been one superior stock of men and women to survive and then to found a nation. Whoppee! How 'bout that Ned Kelly!

Amen.

And the best news of all is that anyone who reads your screenplay with even the slightest thought of purchasing it is NOT looking for typos or words correctly spelled in Britain that would be incorrectly spelled in America; they are looking for only one thing: a story that's well-told that moves them and can (in their opinion) be marketed to a wide audience. (not to be confused with an audience that is wide of girth) Some participants to this board have fun picking out minutae, though not in a critical way:) STORY, STORY, STORY; nothing else matters much in a script. Not format, not even page count (though both could turn off a reader). And by story I mean characters facing unusual situations at great risk to themselves or loved ones.

Sorry I forgot your birthday, and the anniversary came and went so quickly I didn't even have time to remember it, not to mention that I've been so busy with things important to me, that just could not be put aside to consider you and your needs, but just be patient and go along with me; next year, after I've established my rep, I'll plan a little dinner for just the two of us, but it'll have to be later in the week and late in the evening, because the appointments just keep piling up -- I never did get to St. Kitts this year, which means I missed Jennifer and Brad, and they'll be disappointed, for sure -- and immediately following our quality time alone, during which you can fill me in on your new writing projects, I'll have to leave you -- you can take a taxi (and be sure to send me the bill) because I'm still trying to sell that incredibly witty and funny action/drama my cousin wrote, which I think will bring a mil, at least, half of which is mine:) So, keep doing what you're doing, and know that I'm in your corner and counting on you. Never can tell where your next million will come from, huh? See you at the Awards. Ciao, baby!

Colin (or someone pretending to be him) just checked in. And, guess what? He started his own thead! No doubt this one just got a little unweildy, off subject, and piled sky-high with kaka of the dooky kind, which, to some, is known as CRAPOLA! Wish I had a cold diet something-or-other. Got to go now. Back in a few days, barring an accident.

Wayne --

1. Be gracious. Thank those, profusely, who have taken THEIR time to read your script, or any portion of it.

2. Be gracious. Thank those, profusely, who have taken their time to read your script, or any portion of it, and GAVE YOU A CRITIQUE THAT WAS FREE OF ANY AGENDA OTHER THAN HONESTY.

3. Be gracious. Keep writing.

4. Be gracious, and be grateful.

Well then -- '...and how many dragons do you know?'

When you sell it, can I touch you?

Success by proxy, was all I meant:)

Erin -

'Wary' I you, I'd send the script. Good luck.

Even a fool could have figured out that the e-mail was from Mattakac Handler, and for those unfamiliar with a Mattakac, let me explain: the Mattakac is closely related to the Wooley Mammoth. Unlike its larger cousin, the Mattakac, to survive, shrank in size over the past 100,000 or so years until it is all-but-invisible to the unaided human eye -- more like a flea, but with exceptional intellect and unequalled temper. Certain computer viruses have been incorrectly named 'Worms,' but in fact are a subspecies of the Mattakac. They are all-but-untameable, vicious beyond belief. They have been known to turn on their keepers without apparent provocation.

To say that one is a 'Mattakac Handler' is a boast approaching the outrageous. In all the history of mankind only one person was acknowledged to be a Mattakac Handler. Her demise was sudden and senseless -- but that's another story.

Within action lines, has it become customary to capitalize nouns and verbs? Examples: The DOG RACED across the street. He FINDS a BONE and CARRIES it away.

Some do, some don't. The trend is to lean, which translates to an easier and faster 'read.' To capitalize any word is to call attention to it, not often of any importance, certainly not when it interferes with the fluidity of the 'read.' I say don't capitalize action words or sounds. Just tell the story as simply as possible.

The word "CONTINUED" is on almost every page at the top and the bottom.

This is outdated. Used to be done, now isn't. They take up space and slow things. Avoid the use of them.

Characters' names are in (). Ex.: A MAN (JOHN).

Ages in (). A WOMAN, (GLORIA),(35).

Just introduce the character, unless it's important to point out, for example: A GIRL, six-years-old....

Include CUT TO; DISSOLVE; FADE IN and FADE OUT (within the script).

FADE IN: is used only once, at the beginning of a script. Something fades in from a black screen. FADE TO is sometimes used when the screen fades to black and immediately fades up to something else, but it isn't a good idea. FADE OUT is used only once in a script...at the end. Never otherwise. CUT TO and DISSOLVE TO are not to be used. These are editor's and director's choices, and not for a writer to be concerned with. Write, don't direct.

Indicate placement of Titles.

This is sometimes used to clarify (identify) a location and/or era. Various ways to accomplish this, most easily: (and clearly) TITLE OVER: SAN FRANCISCO - 1867 (SUMMER)

Some of these things I've seen in other scripts besides this one. Like I said, I haven't kept up with everything but some of the scripts I get just look a little bizarre to me. Any feedback would be appreciated.

The undisputed expert on format is Terri Dickey, who is, apparently, asleep. She'll no doubt correct many of the opinions I've expressed, and add some suggestions:)

Good luck.

The use of 'a beat' or 'pause' is outdated, and shouldn't have been used by the writer anyway; it's an attempt to direct the presentation of the dialogue (personal direction) and is to be avoided. Leave the delivery of the dialogue to the actor and/or director. If you must show some silence that you feel needs explaining (though I don't agree that such should be necessary) then use something like (thinking), or some business, such as 'turns away,' which will be ignored by the actor and director anyway:) I've seen scripts with 'a beat' or 'pause' in every other line. It's annoying, amateurish and not the job of the writer.

SOUND EFFECTS used to be capped, but now are not. Sometimes ACTION verbs are capped for effect, but it doesn't make the read any easier, nor does it make the story flow. CAPS do IMPEDE the READING process.:)

'Queen Terri' is correct, not to be confused with 'queen' Terri. She's not a he-she. I suspect Terri is short for Terresa, but I've never asked.

Ellum is a man's name, and it's properly assigned. And I stick by my guns: pause or beat should not be used, as both are personal direction, which should not concern the writer.

If the writer feels that capitalizing action or things, (other than a character's name when the character is first introduced) or that the writing needs something to make it stand out and 'more interesting,' I suggest that the writer should closely examine what he/she has written. The written word, if it's good, is without need of explanation or interpretation, and certainly not caps interspersed to add 'interest.' A gimmick does not take the place of careful and concise choice of words.

Jerry --

As with Bill, you should do whatever you feel will get your script read, but as a 'beat' is a direction, vague and of duration varying from one person to another, and can be a dramatic moment, such is better left to the actor and director, (a beat is an actor's term, anyway) as they will not only interpret the writer's intention, they will often change it and deliver it the way they choose to.

A pause, which is often and erroneously used to signify a 'beat,' can best be indicated by use of an ellipse...which is correctly used at the end of a sentence to indicate something left unsaid...and can be used within a sentence to indicate an interuption in speech. This is particularly useful with telephone conversations where we hear only the character shown, but need to show a moment where the character is listening.

To Jerry's example: I would ask the question, then indicate that the speaker waits for a response, and when none is forthcoming, resumes the dialogue.

OFFICER: Did you not see the enemy before you fired?

The soldier maintains eye contact, does not acknowledge the question.

OFFICER: Silence is not an answere, soldier!

The soldier blinks, stoic, confident.

OFFICER: I could order you to answer...but what good would a forced confession do either of us, hmm?

The soldier smiles.

OFFICER: (

Absolutely correct; a well-written script will never by tossed aside for any reason, least of all a variation of format. Ever read a Goldman script? He directs the camera, pacing and shots. 'Hold. Keep holding. Hold. Keep hold. And now....' Difficult to read, but he is clear on what he wants you to see. He uses a lot of 'cut to' also, which for anyone else would be a no-no. The final word will always be a good story.

Number two would be: What's the meaning of life?

Number three: Where's the nearest Starbucks?

Mary Ellen --

Congrats to the 'wonder from Dallas' on your placement in Austin. Good for you.

Renee --

I have faith in you. Hang in there, remain confident, and know that you really never can tell where your next success, and million dollars, will pop up. Might be today. Might be next week. It WILL happen!

Linda --

Good for you! Always pleasant to hear of the successes of others. Keep up the good writing -- and sell something!

As they ride, this our marine has his head buried in a book. Another marine yells across the truck:

Hey Joe, whaddaya reading?

Our marine looks up and replies:

The Book of Psalms.

The other marine looks at him incredulously and says:

You're supposed to be Mr. Gung Ho marine.

Our marine replies:

Do you know what's down that road?

The other marine says:

No.

Our marine gets in one more lick. Anyone who is interested in finishing this off is welcome to try.

**

Another Marine tries unsucessfully to read the title of the book. Gives up.

MARINE #2:

Don't know what happened, but here's another try:

As they ride, this our marine has his head buried in a book. Another marine yells across the truck: Hey Joe, whaddaya reading?

Our marine looks up and replies:

The Book of Psalms.

The other marine looks at him incredulously and says:

You're supposed to be Mr. Gung Ho marine.

Our marine replies:

Do you know what's down that road?

The other marine says:

No.

Our marine gets in one more lick. Anyone who is interested in finishing this off is welcome to try.

**

Another Marine tries unsucessfully to read the title of the book. Gives up.

MARINE #2: Girls?

MARINE #1: (without looking up) Psalms.

MARINE #2: What happened to the 'Gung-ho' crap?

MARINE #1: Know what's waitin' down the road?

MARINE #2: Action! Won't be time for prayers once we engage --

MARINE #1: You afraid?

MARINE #2: Me? Hell no!

Marine #1 tosses the book to Marine #2.

MARINE #1: Only ones not afraid are already dead. You still got time. I'd make peace with Him now, I was you.

There's an interview featuring Cynthia Whitcomb on the 'News' thread that is worthwhile reading. She teaches screenwriting and says that 10% of her students have sold a script. Ten scripts, according to her, seems to be the threshold. By then, she feels, if you have the talent you will be producing marketable scripts.

Would you want a desperate competitor passing public judgement on your product, while trying to promote their own? Not I; I'll take a disinterested reader with no agenda any day. But, good luck.

Gary --

Since there aren't that many blind monkeys who offer writing critique, I assume the one to whom you refer is the one who read my first script, spattered it with paint and other things more smelly, then ripped it to shreds. To test the monkey, as I could not then accept its actions as a comment to my writing, I recorded the entire script, set up the tape player so that the monkey could control the volume. Each time I turned on the tape, the monkey literally went ape shi- and turned off the volume. A further test: actors were engaged to act out the scenes. Not only did the monkey covers its ears, in many instances it anticipated what was to come next and acted out the remainder of the scenes -- and then threw some unmentionables at the actors. A final test: I protested that, if the blind monkey thought he could do better at writing a script, just try! I supplied the computer. The rest is history; not only did the blind monkey, as you know, win First Place in every screenwriting competition from Nicholls to Tucumcari, it now sits on the selection committees of Warners, Turner Classics, Scot Free Productions, Castle Rock, Universal, Disney and Paramount. The Academy has chosen him as a future recipient of the Thalberg award for lifetime achievement, President Bush has agreed to honor it with the President's Gold Medal of Freedom, it's rumored to be on the shortlist for Nobel and Pulitzer, and has been offered full tenure at UCLA's film school. There seems to be something inherently unfair, that such an inferior mind could produce art of such obvious superior quality. What does the outlook for a hack writer such as I? Bleak, but like the fog that creeps on tiny cat's feet, ideas keep invading what's left of my mind. I dream of the day when my work will cause the blind monkey to go bananas, and leave the writing to us.

So, now you all know Gary's secret. I can't wait to learn Terri's!

Gary -

Don't tell me that you were the blind monkey's ghost writer. Is that your secret? What talent! What character, what nobility (a word often used in an historic epic my writing partnter -- not the blind monkey -- and I are working on)to sit back and allow your student to get all the glory! I admire you beyond all the worship the world has heaped upon that sightless, hairy little limb-swinging human's nephew! Write well and remain true to your vision.

Teresa -

The story is yours. You might want to copy it and use it to pitch Colin O'Reilly. Never can tell about the taste in fine literature managers have. Or is he an agent? Makes no matter. If he thinks he can sell it, he'll snatch it up. Otherwise - don't wait by the phone!

Teresa --

Anything on film would make more money than GIGLI.

Everyone who saw that movie went out for ice cream that evening; The man had a hot-fudge sundae. His date ordered a double-dip peach on a cone. The theatre chain went broke, Ben cracked a few jokes, Colin O'Reilly ate steak, and we writers just gnaw on a bone.

I'd try it a different way -- same results, fewer words:

Leger picks up something, extends his closed hand to arms' length, opens his hand, and...poof! A cloud of smoke appears.

As the smoke dissipates, the hand is now that of a 26 year old MAN, and we are now inside the

STARDUST LOUNGE

At the Man's side is an easel with a placard that reads: “LEGER DE MAIN.”

Thank you, Queen Terri.

So the sentence I wrote:

Leger picks up something, extends his closed hand to arms' length, opens his hand, and...poof! A cloud of smoke appears.

Should have been written:

Leger picks up something, extends his closed hand to arms' length and opens his hand. Poof! A cloud of smoke appears.

No ellipse.

Question: Oh Mighty Queen Terri, you wrote:

INT. STARDUST LOUNGE (LOS ANGELES) NIGHT

Since you cannot film (LOS ANGELES) and you are not informing the viewer, why did you include it in the slug line? Could you not have used PULL BACK to reveal -- the STARDUST LOUNGE, or SUPER OVER: STARDUST LOUNGE, LOS ANGELES - TWENTY (or whatever it would be)YEARS LATER.

Another question: As there are no windows in the Stardust Lounge, why do you say NIGHT in your slugline? How is the audience to know if it's day or night? Or are you to always note in the slug line DAY or NIGHT for the benefit of the reader--not the viewer? And, in any event, the slug line is for the camera operator, is it not, in addition to allowing for orientation of the reader? And, if so, the viewer cannot know DAY from NIGHT without some clue. The dancers or audience members of the Stardust Lounge could be dressed in pajamas and night-caps:) Or the Town Crier could announce: NINE OCLOCK AND ALL IS WELL. SLEEP WELL, TOWNSPEOPLE!

Wayne

Point well-taken. My focus was on other things, and as I always rewrite, would have (I like to believe) deleted the 'we are now....' Thank you for catching it. But, the Format Police are after bigger game, such as Nicholl Fellowship aspirants and Austin Heart of Film winners:) (neither of which describes me).

And Wayne -

Watch those misplaced ellipsis!

Sounds exciting. Good for you. I'll keep my fingers, etc., crossed that you sell it, become really famous, and let me say that I knew you 'when.'

Hey Sue --

How many readers failed to recognize the genious of your masterpiece? One, probably; two, at most. Their loss. Do not let their lack of understanding, their inability to appreciate your work affect you in the slightest. When you sell it, you'll look back and snicker! Promise. Keep up the good effort; only those who give in to the goofiness lose; the ones who keep on keeping on will succeed.

'genious' should have read 'genius.'

Sorry, but you can't insert two locations into a single slug line.

You must set up each scene. Following is one way to do it.

Int. Kitchen - night

Doug pick up a phone. Dials.

Int. Bedroom - night

Sharon stares at a ringing phone. Picks it up.

INTERCUTTING:

Doug: I missed you at the party.

Sharon: I decided to stay at home.

When you've completed the intercutting, you should so note:

END OF INTERCUTTING.

Some writers do not include the end of intercutting, and it's perfectly acceptable to leave it; a new slug line is sufficient transition. I use the end of intercutting for clarity, for the reader.

Wayne --

Bill can, of course, speak for himself, but I believe that what he meant about the difference between drama and melodrama can be clearly appreciated by comparing INDIANA JONES AND THE RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (clearly a melodrama, and just as clearly a copy of the melodramtic elements of serials, such as PERILS OF PAULINE, where immediately following resolution of a crisis, another crisis confronts the hero); and A TRIP TO BOUNTIFUL, clearly a drama. The melodrama is overdone in every respect, superheroic deeds, a near-indestructible hero -- and the hero will always prevail:) -- and there is no 'character arc,' as there is no need for the character to change or grow, only to beat the shit out of all the bad guys, and maybe utter a few memorable things, such as 'I'll be back!'

For further clarification, consider the following:

Melodrama From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A melodrama, in the broadest sense, is a serious drama that can be distinguished from tragedy by the fact that it is open to having a happy ending. In practice, it is a rather pejorative term.

Historical sense Melodrama, in its historical sense, was a sort of play with a romantic, sensational plot which also contained songs or music used as interludes. The word itself is a portmanteau word made from melody and drama. In 1775, Jean-Jacques Rousseau produced a play, Pygmalion, in which music was played to accompany certain scenes and the spoken words of the actors. The addition of songs to plays together with spoken passages was, of course, the beginning of musical theatre, the operetta, and the German Singspiel. The use of unsung musical accompaniments to action on stage was a precursor of the modern film score; almost all films have musical backdrops in certain scenes.

Current use

Poster for The Perils of Pauline, (1914) Salty Sam was tryin' to stuff Sweet Sue in a burlap sack. He said, "If you don't give me the deed to your ranch, I'm gonna tie you to the railroad tracks!" ---Along Came Jones, by The Coasters In current usage, the sensationalistic plots of these original melodramas have swallowed up the other senses of the word. Melodrama as currently used is a mildly pejorative word in literary and other sorts of criticism, meaning a drama primarily characterised by sensational plots and blatant emotional appeals to conventional sentiment, but which is typically distinguished from tragedy by often having a happy ending. When melodrama is used in the pejorative sense, it is usually because the critic feels that the sensationalism of the plot lacks realism, or that the characters are stock heroes and villains with little room for characterization. Melodrama is ubiquitous on television: it is evident, for example, in a long series of TV movies about diseases or domestic violence, or the large number of hour-long television programs about lawyers, police officers, or physicians.

Paul is correct. The intercutting between two (or more) persons and locations does not inhibit any of the characters from action, nor the writer in describing what the character is doing. While on the phone, to use someone else's example, one character could be downing a beer, another shooting pool, and a third could be strangling his landlady, and each, all the while, on the telephone. Not a pretty example, but it illustrates the point. We've seen many instances where a character, while on the phone, is being seduced, and on the other end of the phone conversation, someone is getting dressed, or scolding a child, or loading a gun, etc. When there's action, it makes for a less-than-static scene, and not as boring as the old Doris Day/Rock Hudson films with both lying in bed and looking pretty. Or, in the case of Doris Day, handsome:)

Yes, Grover, and advertisers have the clout to keep on the air, or cause the demise of, any program that suits their interests. Hmmm? Well, at least we still have subscriber/public supported channels:)

Silence of the Lambs Unforgiven Usual Suspects L.A. Confidential Sixth Sense A Trip to Bountiful Tender Mercies To Kill A Mockingbird Braveheart Being There Lethal Weapon Lonesome Dove Legends of the Fall Casablanca Sunset Boulevard Network Old Man and the Sea Out of Africa A Clear and Present Danger

(In no particular order:))

Spacing was correct - one title to a line - when I typed it. Sorry they ran together, but you can work it out.

Yes you may, Terri:)

Since you mention a director/written script, I'll add TRUE LIES to the previous list. As an action script, it's quite good. (IMHO)

HIGH NOON should not be overlooked.

I didn't include M. Night, because I don't consider him in the same league with Foote, Talley, Peoples or the Epsteins. (IMHO)

My error; I did include M. Night, but meant to omit it, for the stated reason.

Let's not overlook Mamet's STATE AND MAINE.

Can't throw this party without a facility. Maybe that little detail should have been addressed prior to the time/date setting.

Sounds worthy -- if it happens:)

Allen -

Check out the posting for a script to be shot in Florida. Read your UNDER THE MANGO TREE for a competition a couple of years ago. You might find a sale for it. Funny, funny. And also, funny.

Maybe her cuddle buddie will be twins. Then there'd be that '3' again.

Terri --

Here's one with disinfectant. Just in case....

Jamie --

If you mean the time it might take to hear an answer, that's simple: somewhere between immediate and never. Two months seems a fair amount to wait for a response before initiating contact again.

An insulating attitude is that they would respond if interested, and if they do not respond, well....

Marco --

In defense of Terri, who needs no defense, she is far from 'an aspiring screenwriter.' I enjoyed the MALTESE FALCON, not so much for anything about it that was outstanding, but for Bogart. The script could have used a little less telling and a lot more showing, but there were probably budget restraints--not that it overcame the weakness of so much exposition by dialogue--and I agree with Terri that it could be made better with rewrite. Just MHO. I'm not 'an aspiring screenwriter,' either.

Well, it's all about networking, isn't it, and shared experiences that might be of value to others: things and people to avoid, receptive agents, prodcos seeking scripts, how to and how not to. Why does a screenwriting website have to be 'practical' any more than a cup of $5.00 Starbuck's coffee. I find it a veritable treasure chest of valuable information and contact.

I would use the character's name, then designate V.O. and beneath the character's name, note FILTERED.

For example:

FADE IN:

INT. BEDROOM - NIGHT

Moonlight through lace curtains illuminate the room. On a bedside table a telephone answering machine is playing back a message.

JOHN (V.O.) (filtered)

...so she'll regognize that her options are severely limited by the discovery of the hand bone. Just a matter of days until the skull is found and identity confirmed.

I agree with Paul and Terri. You should identify who is speaking, for clarity, for the reader; the audience will not know, for example, that the male voice is that of John, until later when John is introduced. Whether you use FILTERED or ON THE RECORDER, it should be made clear to everyone that the voice heard is not a narrator removed from the action taking place in the bedroom--the playback of a previously recorded message.

All I can add is that the 'produced writer' must have written plays, not screenplays. Probably salts his fried bananas, too, for all we know. As Terri said, just write your story the best you can.

I'm considering A. Ward Winning, or Jacklon Done. For Terri, I'd suggest Mara Lynne Monroe.

Sounds like someone's off their medication, else thou has one gigantic, out-of-control ego that feeds upon itself. Me thinks I'd pass on any writing to group to which thou is part of.

Terri -

Poor dear. (to know a Henry who seems similar:)

For you, words of caution:

'There are events in one's life that, no matter how remote, never fade from memory. To know that one is being followed at night--no matter how bright the moon may be--by a man-eater intent on securing a victim, gives one an inferiority complex that is very unnerving, and that is not mitigated by repetion.'

You recognize the author, no doubt.

'And how many dragons do you know?'

re pretty much in line with Terri and Gil, and the others, with one exception: the project was entirely your own. In writing it, you did not seek anyone else's input. Thus, your vision was put to paper. Now, it seems that others feel you should change things. Well, everyone either thinks they're a writer or that they could do better than someone else. If they could, they would, but since they haven't, it pretty much indicates that they might criticise but not create. Everyone has something to contribute. You wrote the piece to your vision. Until, unless you feel rewrite might improve the script, I'd go on to something else. Let some time pass, and you'll be thinking about the script and the observations that have been offered. Somewhere along the line you'll either realize the suggestions were on the spot, or that some other change(s) might improve the script. It might be, also, that you will feel that you've done the best you can with the material. Maybe not:) I wouldn't go rewriting simply because someone has suggested it. If they are offering money, that's something else. Otherwise, in Hollywood everyone--gardener, waitress, banker, parking attendant, and even writers, feel they can not only write, but rewrite the works of others. Remain true to your vision; you might have better insight to the work than others. Who knows?

All above is great advice, and I can't add to it. But, I will advise you to not tell anyone that the script you are submitting is your first and only script. The material must always speak for itself, so don't denegrate its importance by saying that it's your first effort. It might be a masterpiece. It might need work. But why shoot yourself in the foot before starting the long race toward a sale? And, congratulations on having stuck to it through to the end. More than some are capable of. Good luck.

Penny --

What was the cost?

Thanks.

Ellum

Tom --

Can't comment on the 'bang, bang, shoot, shoot' script that advanced, but it was obviously more than that, and whatever it was/is, the readers recognized it--fortunately for your friend. Seems apparent (to me) that, as a writer, your friend has talent, and the talent has been, somewhat, recognized.

To your work, and your reaction, I agree with the post prior to mine: if you give up so easily on, perhaps, the premier screenwriting competition on the planet, it will be your loss; and if you react so negatively to rejection of your work, then, as a writer, you have much maturity ahead of you.

Have you considered that your work is not 'polished' sufficiently to be competitive with the many thousands of dedicated writers who, like yourself, are sending out the products of their souls, hoping for acceptance and a measure of recognition? Another possibility is that your work, perhaps a masterpiece, simply slipped through the cracks or wasn't to the taste of the initial reader(s)? It's a given that some worthy scripts will not advance beyond an initial reader, for no reason other than genre, lack of a hook, the writer's voice, lack of clarity in the opening scene, or the color of the cover stock:)

Accept that the writer's way is a tough one. Rejection will become your middle name. Your skin will toughen, (as Hannibal noted in SILENCE OF THE LAMBS) and it won't hurt as much next time.

Write, don't brood about what you cannot control, that is a natural part of the life of an artist. If you allow it to tear you up so much, you will not be able to concentrate on your next masterpiece:)

Keep at it. Improve. Learn. Success is the completion of your work, not whether or not you win a writing competition. If everyone agreed on everything, had the same taste, wouldn't the world be too bland to want to be a part of?

Good luck on future endeavors.

Tom --

You continue to make the same mistake. You might think that you've written the best screenplay ever written and that it will languish, unrecognized. Wrong on both points, my friend. You have not written the best screenplay ever written, and to quote Sissy Spaceck: The best bait in Hollywood is a great script.' Good writing will, eventually, be recognized, and a script that someone feels has the potential for attracting an audience will be snatched up by someone. Stop editorializing, stop comparing your script with a single script you've read that did advance in a major competition in which yours did not. Whining never got anyone over the age of three anything from anyone but a close relative, and even then it should not have received positive reinforcement. Writing isn't easy; if it were, everyone would be doing it. (I know a few who do not write:)) Have you considered the possibility that you want immediate gratification for a meager investment? Seems that way to me. Winners work at their craft; losers bitch when they don't get their way. For the most part, the choice is there to make. Compare yourself to others at the peril of your fragile ego.

Best of luck to you...should you decide to work at the craft of writing.

Bravo, Z. Core! I recalled the post, but not the name. Nice reminder:)

Ellum

Interesting analogy, that entering writing competitions is akin to poker. Unfortunately, there's no comparison. Unlike poker, where you play--poker-faced or otherwise--with a hand dealt you by, among other things, fate, with writing you bring your talent, skill, confidence and patience to the table. And, if you're bold enough or desperate enough, and confident enough, you send out your work, and fee, to be considered by others, with who you have no relationship.

Tell me once again how M. Night, Ted Talley, Shane Black or Horton Foote's work would not advance in a major competition; then remind me how the worst assortment of words, loosely stung together in mostly-trite and cliche sentences will win prize numero uno, if the writer has just a little luck going for him.

I suspect that the writers who advanced in Nicholl, rather than sending 7 hastily written entries, submitted their labors-of-love that they'd rewritten 7 times 7 times. Of course, that's only a guess.

Interesting. One way would be as follows:

Richard, now 36 years old, lounges by the fire.

Richard, now in his early 50's, casts a line into the stream.

Richard, now old and age-bent....

Wherever the new scene takes place, you must note it in a new slugline:

INT. RICHARD'S HOUSE - NIGHT

EXT. RICHARD'S ORCHARD - DAY

INT. RICHARD'S DEN - NIGHT

Keep in mind that everything is really simple when it comes format. The main thing is clarity.

Good luck.

Well, the character's name will remain unchanged throughout the script. What will be noted in direction is the age progression, if it needs to be mentioned for clarity (of the reader; such will be clear to the audience).

There is no need, and might even be confusing, to amend a character's name as he/she ages, though various actors might portray the character. YOUNG JOHN, TEENAGE JOHN, ADULT JOHN, ELDERLY JOHN.

Michele -

You chose a wise method in your script that makes everything clear (even to readers:). Writers must always be aware that before the script can become a movie it must be a 'good read,' else it will not get the 'recommend' to the producer who might buy it.

Clear, lean, fast; brief, essential, active. Make me care.

I keep notes like that taped to the monitor.

Thanks for the kind words.

So many beasts. So litte time.

What happened to this thread about Nicholl?

Someone likened producers, writers and critics, and I disagree. Each has a different agenda. The writer wants someone to appreciate his/her work, and perhaps buy it. The producer is looking for a script that, as a movie, might attract an audience and produce a profit. The critic thinks he/she can be the judge on how well the material was executed.

Anyway, long live Nicholl, and thank you Greg Beal for being a kind person in a sometimes difficult and unkind business. Keep up the good work.

Colleen --

Where've you been? Your input has been missed.

Stick around. Help us.

I don't know what a 'pro submittee' is, but I do agree with Terry that, when asked to read and critique a work, the reader should give the material the respect the writer deserves--and that the reader, in turn, would expect of their own work--regardless of the reader's initial reaction to the opening pages. Comments about those opening pages are exactly what the writer is seeking. It is disrespectful and unfair to dismiss a writer's work as not worth the time to read it after you've agreed to such, and if I were the writer who was treated that way by a (so-called) friend, I'd be more than a little pissed, too. How good a friend were you when he needed you? How supportive were you when you cut out his heart and soul by cruel and undiplomatic, and very non-constructive dissing of his work? He's better off without you. You're a good example of the adage that some people are honey and others are poison. In which catagory do you suspect I place you in?

Well done, Michele. An achievement that not only affirms and establishes your talents and skills, but very well might open the right doors.

If you weren't so old, I'd ask you to dance.

Wait a second...need to correct that: if I weren't so old, I'd ask you to dance:)

Best of continuing successes to you.

Well, Paula, Steven, Terri and others all made good points, not that I agree with everything they said, but they did raise valid issues: there is a lot of jealousy in this business of movie-making; writers should be supportive of other writers; when asked, we should try to give constructive pointers on what worked and what did not work (for us) in someone else's writing. What I most disagree with is the concensus, or so it seems, that a person who reacts defensively in the face of criticism is not a true writer. Anyone who sits down to a blank computer screen or sheet of paper and puts into words images of their imagination is a writer, and as such, deserves our respect, regardless of whether or not it fits our definition of good or bad. And, we ought not dismiss callously the effort as just, 'Oh, I couldn't get into it.' As Steven wisely observed, maybe the story kicked into high gear on page 17, and from there to the end it was one hell of a roller-coaster ride. Maybe we'd suggest that the writer do some editing of the first 16 pages to bring the hook or inciting incident nearer the beginning. We all get enough sarcasm from strangers; we should get something approaching acceptance from friends. Just MHO, and I suggest that, if we aren't willing to invest our time to read someone else's script, when asked, then we shouldn't accept the offer. In the end, our critique will be entirely subjective, anyway, and one opinion out of a billion. But, the writer wants some feedback, and might even have confidence in our observations, especially if he's a newbie.

Happy birthday, Birthday girl.

So, you went to an Italian restaurant. (I'm being Sherlock, or trying to.) And, you may not have consumed seven pitchers, but whatever it was, my guess is that it was brewed Down Under.

And, you may no longer be 22, but I'm guessing that you still look as fresh and attractive--a year or so older.

I have a gift for you, but it can't be delivered over the internet. No, it isn't what some nasty minds might think, but when you win that major award, I'll be there to applaud you:)

Many happy returns to you.

I agree with Terri and with Greg.

'Of course, others have argued that off-screen from another locale is always (V.O.) even if the person will soon be on-screen.'

Greg's observation is interesting, in that the director could have called both actors to the set, set up two cameras and filmed each actor doing their parts. Whether or not both are eventually seen on screen is a director's/editor's choice, and not the writer's. The writer's job is to suggest one way the scene can be done, and so long as it is clear, no one else will care.

The 'rule' of resident within the scene buy not on camera would dictate O.S., while not resident in the scene and not seen would be V.O. And who knows if the director will shoot only one actor and schedule the other phone participant for a voice only recording?

Make it clear and simple, and keep any of it from impeding the story, and it'll be fine.

When dialogue is interupted by a single line of direction, you don't need to use CONT'D when the dialogue resumes. Don't use CONTINUED at the bottom of the page, don't use MORE at the top of the page; these only take up space, add clutter to the page, and aren't needed. In fact, the trend is to not use CONT'D at all; any reader can see that dialogue continues. Lean, clean, clear. Congrats on your option. Way to go!

Steven -

Try looking in format or page layout, if preferences doesn't work. I use Final Draft, so am ignorant about MovieMagic. Good luck.

For clarification, I said that every writer deserves our respect, as fellow writers; I did not say that their work would be 'worthy of respect,' superior or commercial.

Letters, notes, etc. and...

'plot that defines the characters and their goals...'

is foreign to my understanding of story-telling.

Plot, in no way, 'defines' a character.

Plot is the unfolding of the story.

Character is defined, solely, by the actions of the character.

His/her words might add to our conception of who the character truly is, in the absence of action--when the story is set, for example, in a jury room with deliberations in progress--but the dialogue only adds, never defines.

A character smiles and says I love you, while withdrawing a concealed pistol and shooting his fiance. The dialogue, in that instance, is pointless and perhaps should be deleted. But the smile and the act of shooting are actions that define.

All comments are merely MHO.

A little confusing, David:

'Chimera gets into her husbands car just before it explodes.

Don dies of a heart attack and his adopted daughter Brittany shows up to claim his estate.

Brittany and Chimera are the same person. Leger and Brittany live happily ever after.'

Sure sounded to me like Chimera/Brittany ended up as so much mincemeat in the car explosion, and it would be ackward for her to later show up when the will is read...unless someone delivered a vial of human remains.

Haven't the slightest idea how you can distill the machinations into a clear logline. Maybe it should be a generic murder/mayhem/get-even type logline, like: A murder's perfect plans go awry when the intended victim turns the tables on him. Or: A daughter avenges her mother's murder by....

After Mr. Horn sells his FD6, I still have a download or two available, which I'll contribute, gratis, to anyone in need. Mine is 6, also.

Hollywood Symosium have announced competition results for 2003: FIRST PLACE: "THE PAPER ROUTE," by Danny M. Howell, howedm@aol.com

To pay the rent demanded by his unemployed father, a fifteen year old boy must collect a way past due newspaper bill from a crazy redneck neighbor. The boy's collection efforts lead him to discover an escape route out of his oppressive life-but fleeing would mean leaving his little brother behind in the clutches of his abusive dad.

HONORABLE MENTION (alphabetical by author):

"DEATH TAKES A VACATION," by Gil Christner, xnerg@aol.com

Sweet but depressed hotel manager Emily discovers she cannot commit suicide because the Angel of Death has checked into her resort to take a break, and he refuses to work. Emily finds herself falling in love with the Reaper as her greedy family and friends scheme to use the Angel of Death for their own fast buck agendas.

Congratulations to both -- and Michele, you're in our thoughts, hoping for that Nicholl Fellowships award with your name on it.

WGA regulates wages but won't give you the time of day unless you yourself finds a buyer, then they jump on you like a magnet. Remember that

Well, I've never heard anyone even indicate that WGA ought to be in the business of procuring writing assignments, members or not. Sounds like you have a bug up your ass; either that or you've been rejected too much, never came close to a sale, and really wish you could qualify for membership. Sour grapes. Remember that, too.

In my most humble opinion, you have it assbackwards.

Good writing is numero uno. Always. Period. It can make mundane matters intriguing, but a wonderful--even original--concept, poorly written, is just so much dribble. And the flood of dribble, to every prodco, agent, actor and manager, is what prevents others, who might have honed their craft and executed their material in what might be considered to be well-written, from being considered. There is, let's face it, only so much time to wade through the hundreds of queries, pitches and scripts submitted, daily, for consideration.

That's not to dismiss 'original concepts.' Those, too, if they appear to translate to 'commercial'--whatever that might be--will find a market. But, it's those who master the craft--art--of writing, who will eventually succeed. Ideas are a billion to a penny; good writing is the gem among the rocks that every agent, producer and performer is ever on the look out for.

A final comment: note that screenwriting competitions all contain the word 'write,' and none, to my knowledge, contain the words 'original concept.' Even the newest, smallest writing competition is seeking scripts that are well-written, regardless of genre--except those that are genre specific.

'Even the newest, smallest writing competition is seeking scripts that are well-written, regardless of genre--except those that are genre specific.'

I didn't mean that 'genre specific' writing competitions are not seeking scripts that are well-written, though that's how it seemed when I wrote it. Illustrates the value of 'good writing.':)

Obvious, to me, why your writing has 'been rejected by the best.' Lack of clarity; a fatal mistake of many writers, whose works, prolific though they may be, are lacking in quality of execution.

If you meant to criticize agents, you should have said so, instead of dumping on the WGA.

Nor do I want to know you. My comments were based solely upon your inability to clearly convey simple thoughts. You dump on WGA, then claim otherwise. Heck, guy, read your own post, stop patting yourself on the back, rein in that ego and tell us something helpful to the craft of screenwriting. Songs, novels -- must be a B.B. for those endeavors.

In case you forgot what you wrote:

'WGA regulates wages but won't give you the time of day unless you yourself finds a buyer, then they jump on you like a magnet.'

I sure do hope you 'finds' a buyer for your work, but I doubt it'll happen. But, good luck to you.

Veiled threats won't help your writing nor temper your, quite obvious, out-of-control ego. Did you also, in your mind, create the world and the air we breathe?

Consider the thousands of queries each producer--so-called or otherwise--gets each month, and it should be obvious to anyone who can count to 37 cents why they are unwilling to shell out hundreds of dollars just to respond--especially if they are not interested in the work queried.

They will never pay to return a manuscript, whether or not they have requested it. That's the nature and economy of the film business, so why rant about the obvious?

Bearing the cost of return postage is solely the responsibility of the writer sending the material for consideration. Enclosing a SASE will, most often, ensure the return of your rejected material. If you cannot bear to part with postage, try using the internet. The trend is electronic mail, and most prodcos and producers utilize it.

If/when you are ever lucky enough to have someone interested in purchasing something you've written, you'll find them more than willing to pay their share of postage expenses. Until then, live with it--threat free, if you can control yourself. A little less sarcasm, directed at everyone who dares to exhange thoughts with you, might serve to advance your writing career. When others join in, you might even--to your immense surprise, no doubt--learn something.

Steve --

Great post!

Jerry -- keep up the good work. As for clarity, you got it, crystal.

Gil is correct, bible aside.

When you want the audience to see something, a photo, news article, necklace, etc., simply state:

INSERT: A photo of Ann at about age 6. BACK TO SCENE

She tosses the photo aside. Blah, blah, blah.

Gil is doubly correct; the formatting was correct, but got screwed up (two works or one, hypenated?) by the software used on this site.

And I screwed up. 'works' should have read 'words.'

Later.

Assuming that you have worked out the essential story you want to tell, the important thing at this stage is to begin writing it. I don't mean a spurt of a few pages, but a steady output--page six, page seven, page eight.

Do not fall into the trap that many others have/do: don't rewrite what you've just written. You WILL get stuck in the endless process of rewriting. Leave the initial rewrite for after you've told your story.

A good way, one that works for me (when I follow my own advice) is to (if you must have a hard copy, now) turn each page facedown, and at the beginning of each writing session reread only the last page or two, to get you up to speed. Then continue. Don't fret about the first draft. It will probably seem terrible, to you, but it'll be the rough sculpture you'll polish into the finished work.

After you've told your story, you will rewrite, many times--perhaps, too many:)--and you'll tighten it, cut it to pieces, add to it, change it. And someday, you'll let go of it and move on to a new project.

It seems clear to me that a writer who has optioned a work, but has not 'earned more than $5,000 as a screenwriter,' should remain eligible through the Nicholl judging process, unless, during that process, the option he gave is exercised AND he (or his agent/manager) receives payment that, combined with the initial option payment, exceeds the $5,000 ceiling set by Nicholl.

It isn't a question of whether or not the writer needs the monetary award that goes with the fellowship, but rather that his/her writing is superior quality and deserving of recognition by the Nicholl judging committee.

Who among us would not delay payment for a script until after the judging, if we were fortunate enough to advance that far?

The writer in question may well be lucky, and he is also, obviously, skilled and talented. Congratulations to him.

I'd probably enjoy adding to this thread, but Z. Core came dangerously close to the inciting incident of my next screenplay, only Z. had it backwards: In my script, tentatively titled THE SILENCE BEFORE THE LAMBS--a prequel to all that Thomas Harris has yet written--Hannibal, a child of about five, witnesses my prime character, herself but a tender girl of four, eat a bunch of cossacks (sp) who stumbled upon the shack where Hannibal and Hanna lived. Their vodka-enduced laughter awoke sweet Hanna (something Hannibal had learned never to do.) Hanna had a temper. She becomes the source of Hannibal's inspiration and his mentor. The head scene in HANNIBAL is a tamed version of Hanna's eating habits. She not only sucked the Cossacks' bodies dry of blood, she chewed off the tops of their heads to bet to the brains.

I'm shooting for a PG rating, but you never know what technicalities might work against it.

I don't give 'a flying crap' about your opinion, or your right to an opinion. But I am bothered by a so-called writer who'd rather criticize and demean someone else, instead of encourage them. And where were you when they passed out acceptance, tolerance and kindness? Probably off giving someone a 'flying crap' lesson of one sort or another. No doubt your ego intrudes into your fiction writing as well... another fundamental flaw with some writers.

Have a happy 'flying crap' 2004.

Christina -

The reality is that your approach to writing is something that works: by memorializing it--though it gestates for months--it becomes a project, not just an idea. I think putting it to paper so that it can be rewritten, edited, shortened--whatever--is the most important step in creating a script. You'll eventually come to enjoy the rewriting process... and seeing your gem transformed from the rough stone it was, initially.

A simple formatting issue explained clearly by Z. Core. Everyone's free to write their scripts as they choose, but the professional--and industry-accepted--way is, as Z. Core stated.

Alysha -

The same term is used--denouement--often added to tie-up any loose ends following the climax of your story. But I agree that giving away the ending, and denouement, in a synopsis might be to your detriment. If the potential reader already knows how you've resolved the issues facing your hero, he/she might not feel impelled to ask for the script. Tease them and leave them wanting more. Good luck. Ellum

'Even after having left L. A.,'

Dreck.

Terri --

'Which reminds me, I was at a meeting the other day and the Agents and Producers were saying how they've read the scripts of Finalists in the Nicholl and could NOT figure out how the hell those people even placed.'

Can't resist, so I'll ask: You don't suppose your finalist placement could have been among the scripts they referred to, do you? ONLY JOKING!

I've heard similar criticism, and I toss it off as just so much hot air. Everyone with a partial brain knows that the Nicholl is the premier competition. When you were finalist--forgive me for pointing this out--the number of entries was less than 6,000. Imagine all the talent that's out there--worldwide. The unworking talent soon learn that placing high in the Nicholl could be the career-opening achievement they're seeking.

I put little value in what a couple of gossiping producers have to say about the quality of Nicholl finalist scripts. I've read winning scripts--including one written by you--and I found the level of writing to be a standard to aspire to...for any writer. Oops, there's the dash/elipsis combo that's supposed to be a no-no.

BTW, those producer/critics - what was the caliber of their creative offerings? Just because they've produced doesn't mean they've produced anything of lasting quality. IMHO.

Paula -

No, I was joking!

Your phrase 'Even after having left L. A.,' just struck me as a funny way of stating the thought.

Sorta like 'Even before ever having arrived in L.A....'

Seems to be a lot of sensitivity around here lately...even before I having read some of the posts.

:)

Sending out scripts--solicited or not--is like tossing out chum. Might get a nibble, might get a strike...might seem like a waste of chum.

If you can afford the expense of copying and mailing--and can refrain from over-reacting, no matter the response-- (or lack of one), I say send away.

Silence is as clear a response as 'No.'

With so much 'dreck' flooding every producer and agent (and their gardeners, cooks, manicurists, and all their relatives and friends) it should surprise no-one that there is not enough time or personnel to reply to each submission.

Who in their right mind is going to pay someone to pump out letters and e-mails stating expressly that which is implicit in no response?

When the quality of the work, and the genre, meets the criteria/commercial potential of those who write the checks, a deal will be made. And when that happens, the lack of professional courtesy that went before (and the depression of rejection) will fade away into yesterday...and all will be forgiven.

Are we happiest when we complete a project that roughly compares to our initial concept, or when someone else appreciates the accomplishment...or when we get cash rewards?

At my age, just living another day, during which I can add to a work-in- progress, is the greatest reward I can hope for...having learned that, for me, the writing is the ultimate reward (even if no-one else ever reads it).

'Buffalo Bill killed your client?' 'Best thing for him, really - his therapy was going nowhere.'

"I didn't.' (keep souveniers) 'No, you ate yours.'

'I'm at my most serious when I appear to be joking.'

'When I get to likin' someone, they aint around for long.' 'I notice when you get to dislikin' someone, they around for long, either.'

'I lied.'

'Right's got nothin' to do with it.'

Ripley: 'Get away from her, you bitch!'

'You know how to whistle, don't you? Just put your lips together and blow.'

'Here's looking at you, kid.'

'A man's got to know his limitations.'

'So, what you got to ask yourself is - do I feel lucky. Well do ya, punk?'

'I thought you said your dog doesn't bite.' 'That's not my dog.'

'First comes the spring, and then the summer....'

Pinky

Know what kiss my ass means? Or is your brain too addled to understand the message?

Same to you, O'brien. You've never shown much intelligence either. Is it your shared syphilis that makes you and Pinky so arrogant and rude - or were you simply born angry losers. Guess you marriage isn't all you hoped it would be, eh? Oh, almost forgot: Kiss my ass !

'I'm trying to stay out of your downward spiral, but you need to pull yourself together. Don't give the rest of us here a bad name.'

Michele -

Anyone who comes to this site and reads the posts--if they choose to believe not only the content, but who the author claims to be--will make up their own mind. The only 'downward spiral' I've noticed on this BB is how some seem to wait for the slightest reason to insult someone else. No doubt a psychologist would recognize the symtoms of a deeply disturbed mind, but the reality and the sadness of it all is simply that when the portals of the internet are opened without any means of knowing anything about who the posters (and posiers) are, and when there is no monitoring of the portal, anyone can wander in and spew their venom - with seeming impunity.

It's seems much harder to insult and demean, slander and threaten than to exhibit tolerance - to contribute something uplifting by way of congratulations to others for their hard-won achievements. As I reall, Terri was the first to learn of your advancement to finalist at Nicholls and to offer her congratulations to you; and she even began the thread that told others of your success. Why you, or anyone, would question her 'motives' is something I can not comprehend.

This BB used to be a place where writers could check in, offer advice, suggest ways of formatting that might be helpful, give information about who's buying or looking for specific scripts or writers for hire. And a few individuals with ill intentions seem to have ruined the place. And it's too bad, because no-one ever benefits from uncivilized, rude behavior - not even those who practice it. Where have all the professional and mature contributors gone? They certainly have, for the most part, left this BB.

And Pinky - you know that we have never met, and I won't respond to your slander, except to point out that if you ever did 'unspeakable things' with an instructor for a better grade, it doesn't say much for you as a person - does it?

Michele --

I am NOT Terri Dickey. I am ONLY Ellum McCurdy-Devins. As Steve, and many others know, I was resident here long before Terri joined us, and before you came along. I do not, and have not, used any other name on this BB. When I feel that I can contribute something useful, I comment; when I'm attacked, I most often defend myself - but sometimes don't feel the insult is even worth responding to.

I don't know how this identity verification can be made, unless Frederick could somehow check to see that my computer is not even in the state where Terri posts from.

My career highlights are posted on Winning Scripts; I notice that many others are not posted - either because they chose to not disclose information about their careers, or because they have no track record.

I am not a cheer leader for Terri, but I have found her contributions and her energy of immense value. If she leaves this BB, it will be a loss to everyone else. As a writer, I have always been grateful for any help, from any source, that might in any way improve my craft.

Peace.

Well D.J. - if that's really you - you have the right to your own opinion. Take some advice, though: don't go into law enforcement, and try to stay out of the police procedural genre, because your attempts at deduction turned out way off base. I'm not familiar with the writer who had or claimed to have brain cancer, but from some of the recent posts, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that there is much eating away of brain tissue rampant on this BB. Check out Practical Paradox, 2001 competition and Nicholls 2003 quarterfinals. You will find my name there, and it will nor read Terri. Other than that, your skepticism neither surprises nor bothers me.

Ellum

Frederick --

Please verify that Terri Dickey and I are not the same person, so that the paranoia and insecurity displayed by some of the posters can finally be put to rest. You should have my e-mail and telephone on file; if not, please advise and I'll e-mail or telephone you and provide whatever you may require: Bank account, drivers license, pilot license - whatever. And please do the same with Terri Dickey.

As to Pinky, I, too, hope the person can be exposed and his/her true identity known to all.

Thank you so much for anything constructive that can be done about this issue. I am quite sure that most of the contributors would rather exchange ideas relative to writing than to exchange petty insults.

'Guess ya 'ant those chains knocked off.'

'...generous advice and great insights about screenwriting contests....'

Hello Nancy, and welcome.

You'll find plenty of advice here--some worth heeding--but I'm afraid there is no such thing as 'great insights about screenwriting contests' to be found anywhere. You might seek out a posting by Z. Core of some weeks ago on contests; it's about the most valid observation I've come across.

Even if you'd omitted 'contests' from your statement, I'd refer you to William Goldman's books and his comment: 'In Hollywood, nobody knows nothin'.' That might not be an exact quote, but sums up his decades of experiences. And, he is right only partially. Many good, and some great, films are made each year...along with a heap of bads ones. And they all had the same genesis: a script.

Another observation of Goldman's was that '...it all comes down to story' - perhaps the most brilliant way of putting it.

If you're really new to screenwriting, you might want to read through some of the threads and find the one containing suggestions about screenwriting books and scripts to read. There is no secret to writing screenplays, no matter who tries to tell you otherwise. There are length restraints and basic format issues, which are so simplistic even a fifth-grader could become good at in a day or two. But, it's the story and the plot, and of the two, plot is most important. Almost daily I hear how someone is afraid of having their idea appropriated by someone, and that's groundless paranoia; it isn't the idea or even the story, but the execution of the concept. It's a simple fact that anyone can call himself a writer, and many who should not, do. Which is my final point: with so much trash being mailed to producers and agents each day, it is extremely difficult to get anyone to read your work. But, if your work is good, it will eventually find a buyer.

Keep writing, keep writing well - and good luck.

Ellum

All posts above are good advice, and I agree that capitalizing sounds is passe and anything that slows the read ought be left out or changed. However, there are instances where you want something to STAND OUT, even momentarily, and to be certain that it isn't overlooked by the quick reader. If used sparingly, caps can work in your favor. For example, in one of my scripts, beneath a tree is a dead wolf. We return to the dead wolf three times, and each time two Crows are nearby - perched on a limb, on the ground, etc. The forth time we return to the scene is as follows:

EXT. TREE - DAY

Beneath the tree where the dead wolf had lain is

A MAN.

He is laying on his side, head resting upon an outstretched arm.

I capped A MAN to draw special attention to him. Contrast that with:

EXT. TREE - DAY

Beneath the tree where the dead wolf had lain is a man. He is laying on his side...blah, blah, blah.

This is a personal choice, and as mentioned above, avoid anything that slows the read, but use what you feel works best for you.

Peter's point is well made. If she was not closely related to Francis, what chance would she have had of even getting her script read? Next to zero, because it certainly was not the 'lightning in a bottle' that will surely be read. Murray was Murray, and even he, jokingly, said that he still did not think she knew what she was doing. Yet, she got financing, Murray, three nominations and an Oscar. Not bad.

Paula covered it well. I never use CUT TO or DISSOLVE TO, as they are editing choices best left to the director and editor, but Paula cites examples where their use might improve clarity of the writer's intent. I avoid all camera directions and personal direction, and realize others might not.

I'd not use the phrase 'we see.' Just set up the scene. It's been noted by others with more expertise than I - if a character doesn't say it, wear it, or do it...omit it.

I would not place the year in the slug as suggested.

The slug tells the camera operator (and reader) where the scene is taking place - INT. BEDROOM - DAY. If necessary for clarity, the year can be noted in parenthesis (1967) at the end of the slug.

Another way would be, below the slug: SUPER: CLAYTON, IOWA - 1967

Or:

EXT. CEMETARY - DAY SUPER: NYERI, KENYA - 1961

Use transitions sparingly. If you mean to show that there is a shift backwards in time, FLASHBACK: could be used instead of DISSOLVE TO: Then set up the scene with the standard slugline. When the flashback scene is concluded, note it with END OF FLASHBACK.

If you are returning from a flashback to the scene that immediately preceded the flashback, you should note: END OF FLASHBACK - BACK TO SCENE. Underline BACK TO SCENE. If you are not returning to the scene that immediately preceded the flashback, then begin the next scene with a new slugline.

You have an obvious talent for story-telling. Good luck with screenwriting.

THE SIEGE meets PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN in this modern-day tale of crime, recompense and atonement in the South China Sea.

Don't get too specific, because, as stated in above post, you are giving personal direction to the talent, which is best left to the actor and director.

A 'beat' really isn't the way to describe a pause; a 'pause' is the way to describe it.

I like Gil's example, which is comic, impossible, and conveys the writer's intention.

Use of an ellipsis is not a 'beat' or a 'pause,' but denotes part of a sentence that is omitted; and is properly used at the end of a sentence. Some writers incorrectly use '...' to denote a pause, presumably their thoughts on pacing the delivery of the dialogue. (and it is still incorrect to do)

If you cannot resist 'directing' the talent, then use 'pause.' (But don't intrude in the directing process any more than you absolutely feel compelled to.:)

And, good luck with your project.

Since you cannot protect an idea but can protect the execution of the idea, my reaction to trying to sell ideas is that you're wasting your time.

A 'pitch' is a synopsis and, as such, can be protected--and ought to be before exposing it to the world.

There are some excellent 'pitchers,' and you might be among them. If you are, you might be able to skip all the creative effort, time, commitment, talent, sweat and lack of sleep that many of us go through from inception to completion of a first draft. For me, the greatest enjoyment comes from writing it.

And, good luck to you.

Benjamin --

Paula gave you the best advice you're likely to ever get on BBs.

You should concern yourself only with writing your story in the most interesting, concise and clear way you are capable. As you will discover, the first draft is merely the rough road map to its final form. You will, if you are typical, probably end-up with at least a half dozen drafts.

Screenplay format is simple; good writing, although it might appear to be effortlessly executed, is anything but a simple accomplishment.

Good luck with your writing.

Benjamin -

See Paula's suggestions on your other thread.

'We see' is not used in today's scripts. Set up the master scene, then briefly describe who is in the scene and what they are doing. When the camera operator and director begin filming, and when the editing is completed, the audience (we) will 'see' what is on the screen. Until then, it's a collaborative process, and your script is ONE WAY the story can be told.

If, in your question, you mean that, on screen, photographs of three persons in a park are shown, you could write it:

INSERT: photographs of (name the characters) in a park-like setting.

RETURN TO SCENE (or use a new slugline for a new master scene.)

If, in your question, you mean to show three persons in a park, you could write:

EXT. PARK - DAY

Three persons (two men and a woman; three girls, etc.) leave a footpath and move toward a grouping of picnic tables.

If you have not yet introduced the three persons, do so now by capitalizing their names, and briefly describe them, especially gender and age. Reading scripts that do not give gender and age can be especially frustrating. Billie could be male or female. Sally's mother could be twenty-something or eighty five. You get the idea.

Good luck.

Benjamin --

As you've no doubt learned from the above posts, opinions vary as to what is presently 'industry accepted' format. Paula (and others) gave good advice and examples.

CONTINUOUS is sometimes used to denote action that is continuing from one master scene to another. When you think about it, especially with action and thriller genres, isn't all action 'continuing' from one scene to the next? Of course it is.

I would only use CONTINUING in the slug line in something like the following:

INT. SALOON - DAY

Big Jim and Bob Freak square off and everyone else dives for cover. Bob Freak grabs leather, and Jim backhands him. They grapple and tumble through the doors and into the--

STREET - CONTINUOUS

--and Jim falls atop Bob Freak, knocking him unconscious. Jim rushes back into the--

SALOON - CONTINUOUS

--and downs half a bottle of Rye.

Even in that example, with a fight spilling out into the street, the use of CONTINUOUS gets in the way and slows the read.

In someone's example where characters are moving from one room to another, the use of mini-slugs is unneccessary, and identifying the rooms is all that's needed. If the characters are in a house, for example, and they move from the kitchen to the dining room and from there into the living room, you can set-up the master scene--

INT. BILLIE BOB'S APARTMENT - DAY

--and then simply note that they move into

DINING ROOM

--and then they move into

LIVING ROOM

--etc. Or you could use the no-no camera direction:

FOLLOWING:

I've noticed that almost every good script differs, somewhat, from other equally good scripts, because the writer has his/her own style. The basic format will be adhered to, but there doesn't seem to be a solid-and-only-acceptable format requirement.

As others have pointed out, what readers and producers are seeking is a story that's well-told and not cookie-cutter or formula.

William Goldman said 'It all comes down to story,' and he was half right: It all comes down to intriguing characters who capture our momentary interest because they are involved in circumstances that might result in undesireable consequences, and whose actions we identify with because we want to become them; and we are made happy or sad or angry, vicariously, in the darkened theatre, for about two hour. It takes more than story; it takes a story that is well-plotted.

Good luck with your writing.

Final Draft does indeed continue to use 'More,' Continued,' and CONT'D - and they also offer a trigger to disengage them.

The 'trend' has been towards the lean, clean and uncluttered page with plenty of white space. More and Continued not only tend to clutter the page, they are unneccesary; anyone reading a script to the end of a page will know that something continues to the next page - until they read THE END. Using CONT'D after a character's name seems to not be used much anymore; however, I do see (Continuing) used in parenthetical beneath a character's name when dialogue continues after a short bit of direction. But even that seems to be fading from use.

A fair representation of current format can be found on Nicholls website. Greg Beal can be considered 'fairly up-to-date on format useage - and I, for one, would not want to debate him on technicalities.

As others have more poignantly pointed out, the story and the characters are so much more important than format minutea (sp) that it's really pointless to beat the matter to death. If we all put into our stories the passion we exhibit about minor matters of script composition, I imagine we'd produce superior works of art.

Writing is, mostly, experiential.

Script format is simple and contains only three elements that separate it from other forms of writing: direction, dialogue and transition. How the writer utilizes these elements gives a reader an indication of not only the writer's vision of the work, but--with the ever-changing 'look' that's expected of professional screenwriters--also shows that the writer is hip to contemporary norms.

Some 'readers,' writers, and others, have a tendency to complicate a simple process. A script is not a work of art, nor is writing one akin to brain surgery. Not everyone claims to be a brain surgeon.

Robbie,

Check out http://zeal.com/category/preview.jhtml?cid=1168330

You're likely to find more information than you ever will use.

Good luck.

'As long as your work looks like a script you can do whatever you like.'

That is so succintly stated, I'm going to tape it to my computer as a reminder that gems are to be found, occasionally, on BBs. It ought to be the opening remark of any screenwriting class. Sets the tone, establishes the need to present the work in recognizable form, and gives free license to be creative.

Left a 'c' out of succinctly.

I haven't posted for some time, as anyone who checks such things could verify; nor have I felt compelled to comment...until now.

Wayne covered it rather nicely, as did Ron and Eric, but as gentlemanly as there comments were, one salient point was not made, and that is that the sour-grapes display of Michele O. and her clear envy of Terri, always intrudes in her posts and serves primarily to deny others Terri's insights, contacts and helpful tidbits of the goings-on in the business.

If a poll were taken of the relative contributions to this BB by Michele O. and Terri, my money says that no real competition exists...except in the mind of Michele O. What has Michele O. contibuted, other than some information about a near-fatal incident involving one of her loved-ones...that served no purpose other than eliciting some expressions of sympathy. Such actions on Michele's part seem to me dangerously close to Munchousen-by-proxy. Aside from that, she has not failed in the self-serving, back-slapping that is indicative of an ego out of control. Perhaps her brush with fame--being another runner-up, but not winner, in a major screenwriting competition--came too quickly and too easily for her apparently fragile-though-transparent personality to assimilate with any mature degree of perspective. I strongly believe that, no matter how hard one might try to conceal one's attitudes, the real person shines through the writing endeavour; and it amazes me that Michele's writing, irrespective of the quality, was given recognition, though, in the end, there must have been something very wrong that was perceived by the judges; and perhaps that's why she is, like many of us, still a runner-up and not a big winner...except in her mind.

Many of the posts on this BB are helful, most are encouraging and offered with genuine best wishes; and occasionally there are the poisonous attacks on well-meaning persons, such as Michele's venom-spewing paranoia of Terri Dickey. Do we really care that Michele harbors resentments, questions Terri's motives, is an insecure and envious person? I could care less, except when Michele's attacks-- unwarranted attacks, in my opinion--are designed to quell valuable contributions of someone else.

Aside from anatomical differences, Terri is considerably younger. Without going into whether or not I believe that 'other lives' is possible, I'm quite certain that I was not reborn a female, a couple dozen years after the date on my birth certificate. I'm sure this message will be received with skepticism by some. So be it. I could care less.

Don't BOLD sluglines. Don't underline or italicize anything, especially not dialogue; to do so is considered 'directing' the performer. Write. Leave everything else to the other collaborators. Good luck. Ellum

Thanks to Ms. Doyon would seem empty without at least a token of our deep appreciation for the priceless advice she's given. I think it would be more fitting if we create a pool and each of us throws in a thousand dollars, to give her an idea of how we value her worth. Fifty dollars for an evaluation of a feature-length script? She'd doing it practically for free!

So, here's my thanks, Barb, and I'll get the check in the mail as soon as I'm financially able. Hope it's sooner than later. Ellum

Triple Dog by Barbara Marshall and MacArthur Park by Catherine Dutko are the winning entries of the 6th Annual Cynosure Screenwriting Awards.

Congratulations.

Ellum

Judith -

'Basically, we would collaberate...'

Overlooking that he needed 'spell check,' he's offering you the chance to pay him for suggestions - his take on your script - on how you should rewrite it - as your contribution to the new writing partnership - the collaboration - which will give him equal rights to the finished product.

Thieves and scam artists seem to be multiplying, daily.

Send $50 to Barb Doyan (sp) and she'll give you the best advice you'll likely ever get . . . and the rewritten script will remain 100% yours.

Good luck.

You might not always get what you pay for when you send a check to a person who promises to market your material for an up-front fee.

There are always persons who call themselves writers -- anyone can, skilled, talented or otherwise -- who are so desperate to feel or seem a part of the business that they will pay to have their work read and, so they believe, submitted to legitimate production companies.

If an agent or manager -- anyone can be a manager, simply by bestowing upon themself the title -- believes that they can sell your work and earn a percentage of the purchase price, they will invest in postage, copying and telephone expenses. Writers do it everyday and think nothing of it.

Only the desperate respond to scams disquised as SOP of professional reps.

Managers, unlike agents, won't agree to the constraints of a code of ethics or licensing . . . and they want a larger slice of your pie.

Managers, in my opinion, are in the same league as real estate entrepreneurs who try to put together packages for a finder's fee, rather than being bothered by licensing and training that real estate sales-persons and brokers must undertake.

Do good work, become skilled as a writer, be patient and cautious.

Buon Natale, Joyeux Noel, Schone Weinachten.

Hoping each of you have a productive and lucrative 2005.

News release from the Thirteenth Revised Global Academy Awards Association:

The world's oldest living person, Ricardo Yaranon, has been named the recipient of this year's Best Screenplay written for the screen for his "Methuselah The Second," which is based, in part, upon the writer's life. For the past 167 years, the 243-year-old has held the New Revised Guinness Universe Record for the most entries--9,728--in the Disney, Time-Warner, MegaMedia, World, Earth & Sky Entertainment Group's annual Writer's Workshop Competition. This is Ricardo's first literary excellence award. Ricardo, known throughout our Mother Universe for his hundreds of Holographic Epics (he is the wealthest person in the known universe, mostly from residual checks from his countless commercial successes) had this to say about his career: 'If I'm remembered for only one thing, it will be that I am a patient man.' And, a master of understatement.

Congratulations Ricardo.

News release from the Thirteenth Revised Global Academy Awards Association: The world's oldest living person, Ricardo Yaranon, has been named the recipient of this year's Best Screenplay written for the screen for his "Methuselah The Second," which is based, in part, upon the writer's life. For the past 167 years, the 243-year-old has held the New Revised Guinness Universe Record for the most entries--9,728--in the Disney, Time-Warner, MegaMedia, World, Earth & Sky Entertainment Group's annual Writer's Workshop Competition. This is Ricardo's first literary excellence award. Ricardo, known throughout our Mother Universe for his hundreds of Holographic Epics (he is the wealthest person in the known universe, mostly from residual checks from his countless commercial successes) had this to say about his career: 'If I'm remembered for only one thing, it will be that I am a patient man.' And, he is a master of understatement.

Congratulations Ricardo.

Yeah, I can understand why you think you've started an exciting new thread: it's all about YOU. Well, aren't you special!

Happy New Year to all others.

It was offered in humor.

Indonesia has the largest number of Muslims of any country in the world, and they suffered the greatest number of casualties. Saudi Arabia pledged 10 million to help ease the suffering. Dell Computers also pledged 10 million. Pfeizer gave 35 million, and, thus far, in cash only, the United States has donated 350 million.

Where are the petro-wealthy nations whena their fellow man (and woman) could use a little help? Hoarding and increasing their trillions. The word 'disparity' has never been so clearly exhibited by the actions of a nation. With a daily income of many billions, all the Saudis could bring themselves to part with is a measly 10 million? Seems to me that the citizens of Sumatra are being made to suffer further because of the continuing unrest and clashes of political policies in the Middle East. What a shitty way to begin another year on planet Earth. We can only hope for improvement; things could scarcely be worse.

Wow! Oh, Daddy, stand back! Talk about answered prayers; for days I was fretting that the faces of the Paulas of the world might crack and fall off because they smiled, just a little. Thank you, God! Thank you. And thank you, Paula, for affirming that my prayers were heard and answered! What a way to begin a new year! I'm so damned happy now, I think I'll give the squirrels an extra treat, and the jays and the rabbits.

Thanks again Paula - and don't believe those rumors that, other than your family and close friends, there might be someone who likes you and finds you . . . well, funny other than in appearance.

Don't give up your day jobs--assuming you are employable in some mundane task--you'd both starve.

Hee-haw, hee-haw, hee-haw.

Kuwait is as beyond the state of being embarrassed as was the Saudi prince who was told by Guilianni where to stick the couple of million dollar check, after the Saudi opined that it was the fault of the U.S. that we were attacked on 911.

Apparently Paula missed something: the U.S. did not cause the quake or reulting tsunami; it is not, and should not be, the sole responsibility of the U.S. to fund the cost of providing medical supplies, food, water, temporary (and later, permanent) housing for those affected; the U.S. always has been and will continue to be the first of help our fellow human beings, (and other animals) as we did in rebuilding most of Europe after WW2--and we didn't start that war, either.

War is not President Bush's thing; protecting the citizens of the U.S. from mass murderers is his responsibility, and I think he's done remarkably well. If Paula, or anyone else, doesn't want to be so protected, they have the freedom, guaranteed by the Constitution, to move to any other country of their choosing, where they might feel safer and feel less critical of their government leaders--just be aware that criticism of their new leaders, freely and openly voiced, might cause bad things to befall them.

Saw one I wished I'd had: a white T with an angry (red) face of Nixon - and beneath the picture, 'He's back, he's rested and he's pissed!'

Another that I thought was great showed a photo of Sting, with a lyric from his stalking song, 'I'll be watching you.'

Leroy Sampoh's THE ATTENDANT is a semi-finalist in British Short Screenplay competition for 2004. He directed the short THE SNATCH in 2002, released by North Kensington Video (London U.K,)in 2003. The lead talent in THE SNATCH was Belinda Heaslip. Belinda can be reached by E-mail at belindactr@yahoo.com or by telephone at 077 8952 4920.

Good luck.

Ellum

Alicia -

I'm going to hazard a guess that most of the participants of Moviebytes do not know enough about 'readers' and 'story analysts' to comment on who is or is not a 'union story analyst,' or even if such an organization exists. Most everyone knows who Greg is, and probably an equal number are aware of Barb. Rather than playing 'twenty questions' about such an estoteric group as 'union story analysts,' I challenge anyone who reads this thread to give an example of any first-hand experience with Barb that was anything less than professional, insightful, helpful and encouraging. When someone gives me advice on writing, I am only interested in the validity of the advice; I could care less if studios or production companies have also sought that person's advice.

There have been a few instances, similar to your 'twenty questions,' where contributors have attempted to elicit qualifications from others who read these posts, as if there is some standard for participation here. Of the twenty thousand who, according to Frederick, regularly visit Moviebytes, I doubt there are three others who approach the calibre of Greg, Barb and (since you named her) Terri. They've 'been there' and 'done it,' on a daily basis, with those who actually make a living in the industry that the rest of us are still trying to break into.

Just some thoughts from one of those you call 'chicken-shits.'

My apologies, Alicia - I meant to say, 'Billie Mason's 'twenty-questions.' Sometimes, I write faster than I think; more of late, as I progress nearer to 70 than to 60.

When you are working--writing and getting paid for your work--you will know that you've arrived at the 'professional level' in your writing career; you won't feel the need to solicit affirmation from others, who are, themselves, not at that level.

You didn't respond to Randy's query about why you posted your message here. Apparently, since you've written so many screen and teleplays--and have written the story--you are simply apprising the rest of us of your (perceived) encounters.

I had a good friend who, occasionally, went off his meds (he was a paranoid schziod with accute despression) and he often told me of his encounters with, among others, the characters from MEN IN BLACK. He once stood, nose to a corner, at a concert because a being from another, presumably distant, world approached him and instructed him to do it.

Perception is, of course, reality to the perceiver; not necessarily in synch with the reality of others.

As for having been done before...ab infinitum. And, your story might be of immense interest to some.

Good luck.

Thank you, but my comments were not meant as a 'joke,' though you further illuminate the meaning of 'perception.'

I mentioned my friend, perhaps from a lingering guilt that, many years ago, I was unable to prevent his suicide, though I did 'perceive' that he needed professional (medical and pyschological) help and had him involuntarily commited. He stayed 10 days in a county facility and when he was released, I drove him to the airport, paid for his ticket and saw him off to his family outside Baltimore. His mother and sister both phoned with gratitude that I had 'gotten him some help.' Too little too late, it seems; he commited sucide less than a week after arriving at his parent's home.

Sorry, but I do not have 'all the answers.'

'Let me ask you this...if someone or something from some other "place" approached you during a busy lecture series in a crowded arena and gave you important information, then encouraged you to do something with it...wouldn't you give it a try?'

Jim -

You might want to reread the above statement you made. No doubt you one-thousand-percent believe you experienced it. So, you must have. Right?

I won't respond to your rudeness and your inability to discipher simple sentences, but . . . I do question the government security clearances you claim to have had. I'll just betcha some little something caused someone to have second thoughts. (That was a joke, by the way.)

And, since you've been 'encouraged to do something about it' by your friend, may I again inquire your purpose in posting it here on Moviebytes . . . other than to apprise us of your 'encounter?'

Had a few too many, Randy? Perhaps, as usual? Greg, Jeremy and I never argue. We do, occasionally, share thoughts.

'People like you are why we hanged our neighbors for witchcraft.'

Jim, poor fella - you shouldn't admit to homicide on a public forum. Dang, someone who is 'affliated with law-enforcement' ought to know better.

Now, to the mission I sent my assistant to fill you in on - you remember: the seminar, etc., and it walked across the stage and shared with you the information. Well, here's the deal: you were told, clearly, to not cause a scene with your fellow Earth inhabitants, to act as normal as possible and to hold the 'encounter' in the deepest confidence. But, you violated that edict, and now you must be punished. One trillion of your eggs are forfeit; seven of you sixty-three beaks are to be removed; all slaves presently held on Grothand will be terminated in your name, and you will shortly be evaporated here to Headquarters. In the meantime, you are to apologize to any of the Earth inhabitants you've insulted. That is an order! You will not receive any further contact from us, and our final instruction to you is to share your words here with someone in your family who cares for you; take all prescribed medications; check into a mental care facility, give up thoughts of hanging Earth inhabitants who disagree with you . . . and never speak of your encounter again. Signed: Leader of all known or imagined worlds.

Hello Z -

Seems you've got a pretty good handle on how writer's compensation works. From the minimum schedule you've quoted from WGA to the seven-figures a few well-established writers reap, you can see that much depends upon the negoitating skills of the writer's rep and the writer's track record. From obscurity to the-sky's-the-limit, most writer's are clustered at or below the obscurity line.

In any event, good luck. You have chosen what is, for many of us, the most rewarding and challenging careers.

Ellum

Hello -

Query some agents and enter it in some competitions. If it does well, someone might want to read it.

Good luck.

You might also consider a title change to one that has not been used before. ('The only one who could ever move me was . . . .'

Creative writing is a craft. It is also, I believe, an art form equal to sculpting, painting, music.

I'm not sure I agree with Jeremy's analogy. When paint is put to canvass, when the sculptor has removed the excess stone, the creation is evident. It can be readily appreciated, contemplated, interpreted. One can point out the subtle layers and nuances. Writing requires more participation from the 'viewer,' who must imagine the world offered by the writer, with all its blatant description, nuance and--as Hemingway stated--what is purposely left out by the writer, to be filled in by the reader's interpretation and imagination.

I agree, too, that a screenplay is a blueprint, and by its nature requires the collaboration of many others to bring the world created by the writer from the page, the imagination, to the screen. But there would be no sets to build, costumes to be sewn, nor music to be composed and integrated, if not first for the artistic creation of the screenwriter.

The first ten years of my writing efforts were, to me, mostly a learning process. The second decade was an excercise in self-editing, mentally, before a first draft was attempted, and that process often took months, years, as I imagined and rehearsed in my brain's eye until I was prepared to try to put it to paper. The third decade became known to me as the period during which, through continual experiment and experience and improvement, I came to think of myself as a sort of word-artist . . . and into my fourth decade now, that's how I view every writer.

Novice or otherwise, every person who puts words to paper is a word-artist. Some are better at it, but all are artists. Is a screenplay a work of art? Most say no. I don't know, but I'm certainly entertained and moved by many scripts, less so by others.

Someone else might know more, but it's my understanding that once a work of fiction is offered to the public without notice of copyright reservation by the author, it's in 'public domain' and therefore up for grabs. Such was Louis L'Amour's experience with some of his earlier works.

Dinah is mostly correct, but a slight correction isn't out of order. The creator of a work, fiction or otherwise, owns the work from its inception; however, that does not mean that it is protected by laws pertaining to copyright, which is a procedure for securing the rights through registration, etc.

There's a valid reason why trade names, logos and other works always carry the c-in-a-cirle symbol--giving notice that it is protected, etc. Anyone who cares to look up Louis L'Amour's plight in that regard should find it easy enough.

If Terri reads this, I'm sure she can shed more light on the subject.

Dinah's advice to proceed with caution and to seek an attorney ought not be ignored.

Dinah wrote: 'Copyright law probably doesn't distinguish between a work let loose on the public for free and one sold to the public.'

Actually, that's precisely what the copyright protection was designed to do: to give notice that a work is not offered to the public, gratis, and may not be appropriated and used by anyone else without obtaining (and usually paying for) permission of the holder of the copyright; and such distinction is what the court will look to in an infringement of copyright claim.

Matt wrote:

'...and please, no more typos or incorrect word usage. You'd get shut down right there. Then craft your logline/synopsis ten times more carefully then you think you need to. Read books on doing it. Memorize articles on it. Submit it for feedback from a coverage service. For the fifty or so bucks, well worth the cost. Because you have one sentence to grab their attention. As they say, it's like vomiting into a thimble. And it's not easy, even if you do have that needle in a haystack idea.'

Criticism is easy, and when you make the same mistakes, it makes one wonder.

You began your comments with incorrect spacing for an ellipsis. An ellipsis is 'space, dot, space, dot, space, dot and always ends with a fourth space and dot (or a question mark).'

Your sentences are incomplete, or your punctuation and capitalization is incorrect. You wrote: 'Then craft your logline/synopsis ten times more carefully then you think you need to.' Either omit the first word, 'Then,' or tie it to the previous sentence with a comma or semicolon. Further, didn't you mean to say ' . . . (than) you think . . . ?'

'Well worth' is a hyphenated word combination, as follows: 'well-worth.' The rest of your comments had the same errors. We all, at times, write so fast that we overlook misspellings and other minor errors, and, as you are experiencing, it isn't comfortable to be made the butt of someone else's English lessons.

Sue -

Frank's suggestion is correct. Another (and, possibly simpler) way would be:

JONATHAN

(IN ITALIAN)

'ITALIAN' should be underlined - and whenever a word is spoken in a language other than English, it should be underlined, too.

So, if one character speaks French note that in parenthesis and underlined immediately below the character's name, as you would with personal direction. Do the same for other characters in the scene, if they speak anything other than English. And, if you want to, note that there is to be a sub-title of what they are saying.

One reason is that the reader might not understand Italian, and since you are noting that the dialogue will have sub-titles, the writer wouldn't, in addition to the dialogue, also write out the content of the sub-title. It just makes for a simpler, cleaner page, and read. But, feel free to write it any way you choose, because there is no fast, set rule. As with all format issues, the important thing is to be clear, clean, lean and fast - and to make the page look like a script is expected to, generally, look.

Others with more experience will contribute to your query query, but my advice is to NEVER send a query addressed to 'to whom it may concern.' If you won't invest in some research to determine who works where and what their interests might be, why invest your paper, time and postage?

Yes, they do. It shows that you have more than just a passing interest in the business of making movies.

Give a brief description of the script(s) you currently have available; just might be exactly what they're looking for. You might, for example, inquire if anyone with the agency is open to taking on new writing talent. Don't use the phrase, 'new writer.' You are a writer seeking representation; not a beginner. Write a letter that is intelligent and professional. Don't come off as a neophite (sp).

Good luck.

Richard:

Your comment:

'Or maybe this: Joe (In Spanish w/subtitles) Hello, friend.'

To write it that way implies that both the dialogue and sub-titles are to be in Spanish. Is the film intended to be for an audience of Spanish-speaking persons? If so, the direction is right on; if not, it might be confusing for the reader, and in any event the direction further assumes that the reader understands Spanish.

Some years ago I had a similar situation and resolved it this way:

PETRIE

Richard:

Your comment:

'Or maybe this: Joe (In Spanish w/subtitles) Hello, friend.'

To write it that way implies that both the dialogue and sub-titles are to be in Spanish. Is the film intended to be for an audience of Spanish-speaking persons? If so, the direction is right on; if not, it might be confusing for the reader, and in any event the direction further assumes that the reader understands Spanish.

Some years ago I had a similar situation and resolved it this way:

PETRIE

Richard:

Your comment:

'Or maybe this: Joe (In Spanish w/subtitles) Hello, friend.'

To write it that way implies that both the dialogue and sub-titles are to be in Spanish. Is the film intended to be for an audience of Spanish-speaking persons? If so, the direction is right on; if not, it might be confusing for the reader, and in any event the direction further assumes that the reader understands Spanish.

Some years ago I had a similar situation and resolved it this way:

PETRIE

Richard:

Your comment:

'Or maybe this: Joe (In Spanish w/subtitles) Hello, friend.'

To write it that way implies that both the dialogue and sub-titles are to be in Spanish. Is the film intended to be for an audience of Spanish-speaking persons? If so, the direction is right on; if not, it might be confusing for the reader, and in any event the direction further assumes that the reader understands Spanish.

Some years ago I had a similar situation and resolved it this way:

PETRIE

Richard:

Your comment:

'Or maybe this: Joe (In Spanish w/subtitles) Hello, friend.'

To write it that way implies that both the dialogue and sub-titles are to be in Spanish. Is the film intended to be for an audience of Spanish-speaking persons? If so, the direction is right on; if not, it might be confusing for the reader, and in any event the direction further assumes that the reader understands Spanish.

Some years ago I had a similar situation and resolved it this way:

PETRIE

Richard:

Your comment:

'Or maybe this: Joe (In Spanish w/subtitles) Hello, friend.'

To write it that way implies that both the dialogue and sub-titles are to be in Spanish. Is the film intended to be for an audience of Spanish-speaking persons? If so, the direction is right on; if not, it might be confusing for the reader, and in any event the direction further assumes that the reader understands Spanish.

Some years ago I had a similar situation and resolved it this way:

PETRIE

Something went haywire. The example is as follows:

PETRIE

I understand you aren't a friend.

She heads for the door.

PETRIE (CON'T)

Ayn L'cha baytzim' (The Hebrew should be underlined)

ENGLISH SUBTITLE: "You have no balls."

Just curious if anyone's heard about quarter-finalists for this competition.

Thanks

Michael -

Thanks for the info. Good luck with your entry.

Ellum

Carolyn wrote:

' . . . The other relies on internals, using the most words possible to take us into the inner lives of people . . .'

Perhaps your novels can be so described, but I doubt you'd get Hemingway to agree with your view of the novel.

It might be that one prefers script writing to novel writing because the screenplay requires more discipline and has inherent length constraints, within which the writer attempts to tell the story in a compelling way - and, with rare exceptions -- as Carolyn pointed out -- one can imagine, but not know, what a character is thinking.

Anyway, good luck.

Kim

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and what Randy and Paula wrote makes sense - for them. It might seem reasonable to you, too, but my advice to you is to never give away your work.

So, it's a short, but it's YOUR short. To permit someone else to turn your script into a film they will use to promote and further their career is senseless, in my opinion. That film-maker will purchase or rent film, equipment, and will, at least, pay for some of the crew; and he/she will shell out festival entry fees. So, why would the writer be unworthy of payment? Only because/if the writer is so desperate to have someone film her/his script.

Since you've had some genuine interest in your story, why don't you just expand it into a feature-length, and not give someone else a free ride with your material? Other artists would not consider giving away the product of their creative endeavors - and writers ought not, either. True, there are so many writers hoping for recognition, and (seemingly) so much competition, but if your work is worthwhile you are already in the upper 5%, in talent and skill. Value your own work, and insist that others do the same.

Who would write for free? Those who cannot write and the truly desperate. No-one would give, gratis, a short story for publication, reserving the right to expand it to novel-length.

Anyway, just some thoughts. Do as feel most comfortable - and good luck.

Ellum

Gregory -

It's simple:

ON THE MONITOR: WRITER ACCUSES DIRECTOR.

Yes - then return to existing scene with BACK TO SCENE - or move on to a new slug.

Jerry Pinn -

Maverick Films, 331 North Maple Drive, Beverly Hills, 90210 (310) 276-6177, (310) 276-9477; AND: Maverick Films, 9348 Civic Center Drive, Beverly Hills, 90210 (310) 276-0652.

This from a recent publication:

Founded by Madonna and Guy Oseary, Maverick Films has developed its own fresh and distinctive approach to making movies. Under the supervision and guidance of CEO Mark Morgan, Maverick houses and supports a talented group of independent producers, who are encouraged to find, acquire and develop a broad range of properties that appeal to their individual artistic and commercial tastes. This approach has enabled Maverick to place nearly a dozen projects in various stages of development with major and mini-major motion picture studios and national television networks. In addition, Maverick is currently developing approximately thirty other film and television projects.

Maverick projects include "Queen of the Rodeo" for 20th Century Fox, "The Whale" for Dimension Films, "My Sassy Girl" for DreamWorks, "Feels Like the First Time" for Spyglass, "Agent Cody Banks 2" for MGM, "Alyx" at Touchstone/ABC and "Gravedancers" with Neverland Films.

Maverick Films is committed to discovering and nurturing young and emerging talent, and seeks to do so by aggressively developing, packaging and producing quality content.

I am offended by the reference to 'young (and emerging) talent' in their publicity release, above quoted.

Good luck.

Ellum

Lisa -

My (quickie) research through Google didn't turn up the positive reaction Steven mentioned.

Check out WordThunder.com - or simply Google Robins Agency, and make up your own mind.

One of the comments on Wordthunder (none was any better):

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Robins-Agency is a scam. First, they will say the book needs editing in order to be marketable and they will charge like $5 a page. The editing process will take a year or more. Then when they think the book is ready to sell they will set up a marketing contract. They will ask you to put up $500-$2500 up front, and the contract won't say they have to sell your book, but it will say that you can't interfere with their marketing or try to publish your work on your own. You won't hear from them for six months, but everytime you call they will say they are working on it, have some prospects, and will ask for more money to keep this party going.

They don't list the titles they place, because there are few to none. If they don't place you, you are just out of luck and will have wasted a few years when you could have marketed your book elsewhere. They take on too many clients, not really caring whether or not they place them all. Sorry. Find someone else. Also, do a google search on Robins-Agency and see what others have to say. Best wishes with your writing.

____________________________

Good luck, Lisa. I wouldn't waste time or money with them. You can do better than a rep with a mailing address in Saint Louis, Missouri.

Lisa -

This is what Predators & Editors had to say:

Charges fee. Promotes its own editing services. Not recommended. "We are currently looking for new writers in the sci-fi/fantasy, horror and mainstream genres. We are a full service literary agency specializing in the marketing, development and sales from new writers." 7/20/04: a writer reports they have poor reading skills.

Lisa -

See posts under Agents for new writers thread.

Ellum

CMOTP -

This is a screenWRITING board, not a place to advertise your work or yourself; nor is it a place to solicit buyers. Desperate persons are part of the reason 'This ugly Biz needs help.'

CineStory Announces Feature Script Semifinalists

In alphabetical order, by writer:

Lorelei Armstrong THE EVENING AND THE NIGHT Los Angeles CA --------------------------- Isn't this your umpteenth win/semifinalist? Good for you!

And congratulations, Marc - two of your entries advanced.

Ditto.

Spent the winter in near-Arctic conditions - research for an exciting script my writing partner, Terri Dickey, and I are working on.

Jeez - just use simple sense. If the character is African-American, say so; if Hispanic, say so; Chinese .... Otherwise, leave it to the casting people.

Hello Hays.

You might have noticed that this is Moviebytes, not Craigslist - so, maybe you should offer the same 10% discount to persons who use your service, having seen your offer here.

Ellum

To illustrate why ADVERTISING on these boards is out of line:

I do custom marble installations, electrical upgrades, custom (hand-made) cabinets, desks, etc. - plus, I have a generator, Ford diesel truck and three kittens for sale, and I am expert in animal training. (pitbulls excepted)

ondeck k -

To reward you for the wonderful post, and to introduce you to my services, I am pleased to confide that another of my specialties--for which you will receive a FULL writer's discount of 4%--is evaluation of plates depicting royalty. My usual charge--which I have been wrongly accused of inflating (for purposes of later reduction, designed to give impression of 'bargains'--is $50.00 per plate; this, of course, includes our 'prescription' as to the plate's viability in today's market. For instance, is the design, finish and maker's mark something I feel has significance and will find a ready market with collectors? I include, free of other charges, a photograph (autographed by me) and quill pen drawing (also signed) for your collection.

But that's not all!

If your Money Order, cash or Cashier's Check (sorry, I can no longer accept checks, IOUs or objects of so-called equal value) is post-marked before 11:02pm, April 30th, you will also receive a beautiful chef's edition knife set, consisting of 500 steak knives, a cleaver, hammer, drill, nails, screws and lag bolts, stainless washers and a manual clothes washer! AND, for a limited time, your choice of an all-expense paid trip to Timbuktu, Paris, Baghdad OR -- a new mini-van! (you pay all applicable taxes)

Should you wish to verify my credits, please request them; I will be happy to create--I mean 'obtain'--them from the many past and satisfied customers of mine. Oh, BTW, would you be interested in an unrestored Edsel? It is quite rusty, but cheap!

A big congratulation for your accomplishment.

Telling:

Cronin: I'm becoming attracted to you.

Sheryl: I'm not ready for anything but friendship.

Showing:

Cronin kisses her. She pushes him away and leaves.

Ed -

From a song, (When You Say Nothing At all) perfectly describes the difference between showing and telling:

The smile on your face let's me know that you need me There's a truth in your eyes saying you'll never leave me A touch of your hand says you'll catch me whenever I fall But you say it best when you say nothing at all ---------------------

Of course, writers have to say something, but everything in a screenplay is best when it's less; a gesture, a reaction, an action - are almost always stronger and more revealing than words.

Good luck. Ellum

Ed -

The song quotation was copied from another website - sans punctuation.

Frazier, Lassie, Them, Ronin, Rocky, Ali, Ray - and Glitter!

The 20/20 Contest has announced their Fall 2004 contest finalists. They are (in no particular order):

Steven Saunders “Shadowblade”

Carolyn Haywood “The Angel Gabriel”

Barb Doyon “Questa”

Greg Duda “Golem”

Tim Morgan “Green Fox”

Tommy Wood & Marc Benton “Pieces of Eight”

Guy Winch “The Lamb”

Andrew Bennett “Blink”

Michael Compton & Christienne Best “Carjacked”

Dane McCauley “Fury”

Jeremy Shipp “Nester”

Laurel DiGangi “I’m With Cupid”

Doug Molitor “Lost Time”

Steven Saunders “The Witch Lover”

Bradford Richardson “The Seraphim, aka- the Unforgotten”

Dane McCauley “Divorce in the White House”

Katherine Carter “Hoka Hey, Betty & Dean

So, keep on writing - well.

I won't attempt to respond to your other questions, but with respect to:

'What if you send a script in to a contest that isn't up to standard format? Will they toss it into the bin? What if it's missing pages? What if it has spelling errors?'

You should NEVER send out work that isn't as nearly perfect in the areas you mentioned as you can make it. Non-conforming format, missing pages, spelling errors are indications that the writer is lazy, sloppy and unprofessional. Competition is fierce, (in quantity if not always quality) and readers, prodco personnel and agents are WAYYYYYYYY toooooooo busy; they simply will not consider your work worthy of their time. If the writer does not respect his/her work, it's doubtful anyone else will. Invest some time and effort in learning the basics of the craft you're considering, then work your butt off trying to create something of interest that's, perhaps, original in some way. Good luck - and just because everyone seems to be doing it, or tryin to do it, doesn't mean that it's easy.

Connie ( so she says ) wrote:

Hey, I look in here once in a while to see if anyone has entered contests, outcome, etc.--but I gauran-damn-tee-ya, if anyone is on here continually giving advice, like Terri Dickey and Ellum McCurdy (same person) that person isn't doing anything but being on here giving advice.,

****************** Seems that every few weeks some idiot posts something about which they know zero and make unsubstantiated and false claims.

I am not Terri Dickey.

I work everyday at the craft of writing - and at other more mundane tasks that help pay the bills. I don't give advice to anyone except to my daughter - and only when she seeks it.

I'll just betcha, Connie (or whatever your name is) that I've succeeded with my writing a big glob more than you have - and I would never accuse you of being stupid, though you obviously are. Since you suggested that others 'look up' Terri, why don't you do the same with me?

Terri wrote:

I think that even if your protagonist is a bad guy--like Mel Gibson in PAYBACK--he needs to be "likeable." And Mel Gibson's character was very "likeable." Plus, he was an honest bad guy! Which, I'm sure, is one of the idiosyncrasies that made him "likeable." ************************

I think that Barb is most correct - that we must understand and empathize with the protagonist, and that we must, even if its limited, feel that his objective is worthy of pursuing - though we would not necessarily pursue it in the same way.

I didn't find Mel's portrayal half as interesting as was Caan's in the original; Mel played for laughs, which is his way as an actor; Caan simply reacted to having been wronged by (as was the way with The Godfather) someone who was a bigger thief than Mel's character - which was, I suppose, intended to be justification for multiple murders. In real life, he'd just be another psychopath - but, it's only a damned movie, and it's a clear example of the argument that the end justifies the means ... if you choose to view things that way. Personally, I found the premise and the protagonist suffering from fatal flaws, and would never have had the slightest interest in writing Payback. But, 'that's just me talkin'....' (to quote Alan Jackson and his Talkin' Car Repair Blues).

You might want to leave that to the director and simply note: SUPER: Three days later. That's just me talkin' - it's really up to you.

No.

"An escaped prisoner tries to go home, but he must deal and fight the elements."

Is the prisoner in a foreign country - does the prisoner have to traverse hostile terrain, such as mountains in winter, desert, jungle, etc. - which would add the element of survival to the flight/pursuit? Does the prisoner go home, or merely try to go home? What's waiting at home, other than a building? What makes your story compelling, different, exciting, interesting? You need a hook, and escape and homeward-bound doesn't do it for me. Good luck.

Randy Roberts wrote: 'It's "chum": Shoved overboard for you to talk about NOTHING.'

We were discussing stories, conflict, character - and the elements of drama.

If that equates to 'nothing' to you ....

Connie noted that this type of story has been done before. No kidding?

Louis L'Amour wrote (over-wrote) a story similar to this one, in which an American escaped from a Soviet gulag and traveled cross-country, in winter, alone. Omitting his (in later years) extreme tendancy to over-write and (to a reader) his insistance upon repetition, the basic story was okay.

An Israeli mother's hunt for the terrorist who murdered her family propels the Middle East to the brink of holy war when she is falsely implicated by the terrorist in the abduction and apparent murder of the pope.

Too long, too busy, too much information?

Connie --

Your story sounds interesting enough to read, but what bothers me is '...when she suspects...'

Suspecting something, and actually knowing it are worlds apart - and perhaps neither is justification for contract murder, but if your protagonist is going to engage in what you hope an audience will feel is justifiable, and 'revenge', then she ought to possess more than an indication that her spouse, cheating or otherwise, caused the death of her child.

Just my take on what little information you gave. Good luck.

Connie --

Further to my comments, can we really care for her complicated love life or her hired killer/lover? Might be more honest as:

Two losers share erotic moments while planning the murder of a cheating spouse.

I wouldn't be interested in reading such a story, but that's just me.

'...and some of the producers laughed about Nicholl, claimed that they had yet to read anything from it that was commercial...'

Those producers are as stupid as those who quote them. Nicholl has furthered the career of many writers; check the Nicholl website for a partial list.

Anyone who calls himself a writer ought to have more sense than to generalize in such idiotic statements and then to subscibe to them as gospel. The Nicholl did not earn its reputation as the premier screenwriting competition on this planet without merit.

George -

My statement certainly was not directed to you; your assessment of the remark was that it was '...their two cents...' and in the larger scheme ot things, you were geing generous, in my opinion.

Few stories translate well to exciting theatre experiences, and fewer scripts are thrilling enough to induce producers to invest in them. The producer you mentioned probably has little, if any, experience actually producing a film, and most likely is searching not for some writer's creative offering, but a cookie-cutter of yesterday's success.

So many readers and producers speak of finding the elusive 'lightning in a bottle', when what they are really searching for is the fading rumble of a storm that's passed into oblivion--a fading rumble that can be produced on a budget about the size of a half-ton pickup full of corn husks. Which reminds me: 'Second Hand Lions' is worth the cost of admission.

Happy thanksgiving to everyone in the world, especially to those who are hungry or cold.

Contest of Contest Winners Announces Results

The Contest of Contest Winners has announced their winner and finalists:

First Place: Michelangelo, by Lorelei Armstrong.

Congratulations, Lorelei.

I agree with Connie - and she left out some invaluable facts surrounding the script. Damon and Afflect had been in the busy for years; thus, they had valuable connections, among them, William Goldman. Goldman was asked to read their draft and to make suggestions. Goldman rewrote the script without asking for screen credit. That rewritten script won Best Original Screenplay. Probably the biggest thing they had going for them from the outset was Miramax's commitment to getting it made.

Whenever I read a Goldman script, I am, no matter how otherwise discouraged, reinvigorated as a writer. Given that some of Goldman's scripts ended up as good movies, I have yet to read much of interest in his words-on-paper, and am immensely underwhelmed by his 'style.'

Completed film adaptation of the Old Testament - 23 years of writing, excluding Sundays. Halfway through first draft script of the New Testament - sticking, religiously, to the scriptures.

Completed a prequel titled Going With The Wind - pre Civil War, before Scarlet was born, etc.

Completed Prince Kong about 20 years ago - mostly his monkey business as a teenager.

Currently working on The Big Bang - an eyewitness's account of the Big Bang, as memorialized in 170 million-page diaries, recently unearthed (un-marsed?) on the Red Planet. Hope to have a first draft in about 30 days.

In the noncanonical book of Jubilees (3:6), Adam and Eve have sexual relations as soon as God introduces them. It is literally love at first sight. According to rabbinic tradition, Eve is not even Adam's first wife. His first wife is Lilith, who leaves him because during sexual intercourse Adam won't let her be on top.

Well, Troy - there you have it. Google has all the answers, it seems.

Nong -

I believe that what Terri was referring to can be found in the following: (these things are easily found on Google)

President of the Continental Congress

Wikipedia President of the Continental Congress The President of the Continental Congress was the presiding officer of the Continental Congress elected by the delegates to the congress. After the Articles of Confederation were adopted on in March 1, 1781 the office was known as the President of the United States in Congress Assembled.

Though the United States was an independent country at the time the office was established, the early president of the congress was not yet America's full Head of State. The position is perhaps best likened to a presiding chairman, and its occupants held very little power for only brief terms.

Because of the title of "president" (at the time still quite unusual) many naturally draw a connection between the office of the Congressional President and the modern-day office of the President of the United States (see below).

While all of the delegates to the congress are worthy of note, two have gained a unique place in the consciousness of many Americans. John Hancock was president when the Declaration of Independence was adopted and signed. His large and bold signature on the declaration has led to his name becoming a slang term for a signature. John Hanson has sometimes (incorrectly) been called the First President of the United States, for his service as the President of the congress.

List of Presidents The following men served as the President of the Continental Congress:

Peyton Randolph (September 5, 1774 – October 21, 1774) and Henry Middleton (October 22, 1774 – October 26, 1774) Peyton Randolph (again) (May 10, 1775 – May 23, 1775) John Hancock (May 24, 1775 – October 31, 1777) Henry Laurens (November 1, 1777 – December 9, 1778) John Jay (December 10, 1778 – September 27, 1779) Samuel Huntington (September 28, 1779 – March 1, 1781) The following men served as President of the United States in Congress Assembled:

Samuel Huntington (March 1, 1781 – July 9, 1781) Thomas McKean (July 10, 1781 – November 4, 1781) John Hanson (November 5, 1781 – November 3, 1782) Elias Boudinot (November 4, 1782 – November 2, 1783) Thomas Mifflin (November 3, 1783 – October 31, 1784) Richard Henry Lee (November 30, 1784 – November 6, 1785) John Hancock (November 23, 1785 – May 29, 1786) Nathaniel Gorham (June 6, 1786 – November 5, 1786) Arthur St. Clair (February 2, 1787 – November 4, 1787) Cyrus Griffin (January 22, 1788 – November 2, 1788) †On March 1, 1781 the title of the office changed, but Samuel Huntington remained in the chair.

Style of the name The adoption of the Articles of Confederation changed the authority of the Congress and its relation with the states. There were also some changes in the names of institutions and offices, including that of President. Throughout the earlier sessions there had been minor changes in the way congress described or named itself. Now, through the articles, three names became standard:

The United States of America was the name of the Confederation or country. The United States, in Congress Assembled became the normal name for the Congress. The full name of the Congress, rarely used, was The United States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, in Congress Assembled It may be useful to compare the naming of these entities with the naming of entities in the United Kingdom Parliament (which operates a similar system), for example The Honourable The Commons in Parliament Assembled.

President under the Articles Adjusting to the style changes of the government the formal title of the presiding officer became The President of the United States, in Congress Assembled. Except for John Hanson, most of the Presidents used this title only for treaties and on the diplomatic credentials for ministers. As an office, the Articles gave the president no powers at all. The only reference was to limit the term of the delegate elected the presiding officer to one year out of three. When Congress was not in session, a 'Committee of the States', consisting of one delegate from each state, would act as the government.

The view that the office of President was a precursor to that of President of the United States is still held by some, but appears to be limited when contemporary documents are examined. The Congress as a whole was the Government. It embodied legislative, judicial, and executive powers. In practice, this system of Government proved flawed, and as a result the United States Constitution separated the powers, and defined the powers of the President.

'Arggh!'

The only sound the out-of-work peg-legged pirate with a stuffed parrot on his shoulder is capable of uttering in response to a question - as recently depicted in a television commercial.

I agree with Randy and Michele: omit camera direction - and possibly add a minimum of character description, to make it easier to visualize them. Aside from that, as Randy pointed out, its somewhat long, and it doesn't develop much other than the boy's fear (of everything?) and an abusive parent

'... Ok, I'll omit camera direction, I noticed that a lot of scripts miss that out but the temptation is too hard to resist when you know exactly what it is you want! I don't want the director to mess it up!...'

You might want to to teach yourself to ignore 'exactly what it is you want', because you are not, and probably will not ever be, the director, the camera operator, set designer or musical director.

A film is a collaborative effort. If you cannot accept that, then - unless you are gifted with directing talent and wealthy, and in a position to bring your story to screen, without anyone else's input - you ought to consider writing a novel, where you can create and control the world of your imagination.

You are attempting to write a script that is somewhat original and might be interesting to a reader; the reader (audience, eventually) is incapable of knowing anything about you or your story, except what they see (and hear, if it is ever filmed). If your character is afraid of a storm, make that clear; if your character is only acting scared in order to protect the girl from someone else, make that clear, also.

Writing that is simple and straight-forward is good; narrative that is concise is better; writing that is clear is essential. Lean, clean, fast - and make the reader (audience) feel something.

In addition to Terri's observation about similarity to Little House On The Prairie, you might want to read (reread) Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird, which has a similar opening scene: Trooper, (Boy) in a tree; Scout, (girl) hanging onto a swing at the base of the tree; and the children's father, Atticus.

Good luck.

My understanding of 'High Concept' is a story that is universally recognizable by its title. Jurassic Park, Star Wars, Pearl Harbor, Gladiator, Aracnophobia, King Kong, Tarzan, Superman, Batman, Nero, etc.

A well-written script, timing, luck, perseverance... and a couple of lifetimes to devote to the search. Good luck.

I would omit the word 'accidentally' - as it is unlikely that anyone would deliberated awaken an unholy presence (though that might make an interesting story).

Ghost trackers investigate a widower's claim that workmen restoring his dilapidated Detroit mansion awakened an unholy presence.

'...deliberated' should have read 'deliberately.' (obviously)

Terri wrote: '... I had an Agent who was one of the top "Young Terks" at a big Agency....'

But, did you mean young Jerks, or young Turks? Or - turkey-jerky? (Wasn't that a dance in the early '60s? Maybe it was the Turkey Trot - or Jerky-Trot.

A sale would jump-start your career. I say give it a chance - worse thing that might happen is a sale. Good luck.

Alexis wrote:

The camera pans along the flat space that is an unplowed field, across a country road that leads to the front garden of the farmhouse. Blossoms fall off the trees as we fly through the orchard, up to the window where DEREK WHITMAN (24 years old) looks out.

********************

You might want to delete all camera movements -- and you might want to cut every word that does not advance your story, reveal character or provide required exposition - and you might want to find a more creative way of relating exposition.

A quickie example might be:

EXT. FARM - DAY

Across an unplowed field, a farmhouse in disrepair. A picket fence leans in surrender around a garden conquered by rambling weeds. A hearty cypress points upwards to a window, where DEREK WHITMAN (24) looks down upon the dead brown lawn.

INT. FARMHOUSE BEDROOM - DAY

Derek, at a weather-streaked window, as TJ (40) steps quietly into the room and aims a shutgun at Derek.

DEREK: Hello, TJ.

TJ: (lowers shotgun) Derek?

Derek turns.

DEREK: You look the same - little older, maybe.

TJ: No 'maybe.' Been... six years, 'cordin' to my calculations. give or take... Came to that place to see you coupla times.

DEREK: I know. Thanks.

TJ: You 'know'? They said you was --

DEREK: -- In a coma.

TJ: Woke up, huh?

DEREK: Man can only sleep so long.

TJ: You was the lucky one, that's for sure.

DEREK: (turns back to the window) Yeah, that's me -- Mr. Lucky.

TJ: Anyone else... come to see you?

DEREK: Jennifer? How would I know -- I was asleep.

He turns and leaves the room.

DEREK (O.S.) Grass could've used some water, you know.

************

Good luck.

Ellum

'... But don't tell me you can't think of circumstances that could create the desire to kill your husband. For example if you were to learn that the man you married, a few years ago, had killed two previous wives without even being suspected by the law....'

*******************

This scenario is regular fare on Court TV and City Confidential. Double Jeopardy used it, also. Certainly not 'original' (if there is such a thing), but it's the telling of the tale that can intrigue us. A little too cliche, so I wouldn't buy it from you, at retail, plus shipping - or on a close-out table at Barnes & Noble. I admire your willingness to invest money in your own work, and wish you good luck in your publishing venture.

First novel leaped onto pages (400+) in thirteen days; first rewrite took about six months; further rewrites a couple of years.

A screenplay - political thriller - took most of ten years.

A truly bizarre twist on lycanthropy is into year eighteen.

An action adventure script took about four years, then (with a writing partner) another half year.

A short-story adaptation of a lengthy poem/ballad took a couple of years, and later adaptation to short script took another half year.

My works gestate as they demand, until the time when they insist upon being transposed from thought to words.

Sorkin and Cannel are able to pour out one hour TV scripts in just a few days.

We each write at our chosen pace. My hope is to write well, not fast.

You might want to research long-term coma and how it affects the muscles, lungs and heart. Aside from all else, the body withers, dramatically, and a person awakening from a years-long comatose state would be able to move only slightly - and with immense effort. They would not be able to walk, for days, perhaps weeks.

You might want to have your protagonist slowly, and secretively, regain consciousness and remain awake, undetected, for some days or weeks, regaining the use of atrophied muscles. And you might want him, in his escape from the sanitarium, retrieve his files, which might contain records of visitors, mail, etc. - all of which would bring him up-to-date on what has transpired since he lapsed into unconsciousness. One of Seagal's films (the Above The Law actor) had an opening sequence where he came out of a coma and was almost entirely paralyzed.

Backstory is often un-needed. Writers tend to feel otherwise, but the audience is sharp and 'gets it.' Fargo, for instance, never went into why Jerry needed money so desperately; he just did, and we accepted that on its face. Lack of backstory did not detract in any way from the story - and, often, backstory impedes, rather than enhances.

Good luck.

Good luck.

David wrote: '... As far as I know the editor's job is to find fault with manuscripts. If mine was full of clichés I would've expected her to mention it....'

I don't agree. An editor's job is to edit. It is not the editor's job to tell the writer that the subject matter might be cookie-cutter fare.

Self-publishing, in many instances, is simple vanity - which is why is referred to as vanity publlishing. With so much drivel that's poorly written, yet published by established publications, it just makes you wonder how awful a novel has to be to be rejected by everyone... not that yours necessarily falls into that catagory. In any event, you've taken a bold and admirable step, and I hope it works out for you.

Have you considered adapting it for the screen?

Hey, I'm really excited about my first movie. I shot it in 16mm, because I couldn't afford professional stuff. Just wondered if anyone might be sympathetic enough -- you've all been in my position, I'm sure -- to buy a copy from me. Here's the story: A guy has been fighting with this girl he knows - he's sorta in love with her, but she thinks he's a smuck -- so he decides to show her that he's super macho, so he goes alone up in the high mountains and has some encounters with bears and stuff, then he comes back to the neighborhood where the girl is living with some other guy she met while he was gone, and he throws some rocks at her bedroom window one night and when she opens the window and sees him standing there on the grass, getting all wet from the sprinklers, and wearing these rags, with a scruffy beard and stuff, she runs out into his big arms -- he put on some muscle, you know, chopping wood and stuff -- and they get into his old truck and even though I didn't have space to show it, we all just know they'll get married, or something.

You can send me $112.78 in U.S. dollars, or $178.33 Singapore, 1,862 pesos (Mexican, only) or some gold coins from anywhere - or I might take a mountain bike in trade, if it's a Trek or something like that. Oh, and you'll have to include $14.89 (U.S.) for postage, and $15.00 for handling.

It's a really great movie. I hired this free-lance movie critic woman to look at it -- I couldn't get any studios to consider it -- and she told me that it's the very, very, very, very best movie she's seen since Casablanca or Creature from the Black Lagoon - or maybe it was Brown, I can't remember. But, anyway, I told her, when I gave her the $1,525.00 in cash (she wouldn't take a check) that I would only use her for my next movie if she really, really, really liked this first one, and she gave me her word, as a professional movie reviewer, that she would be 1,000,000% honest about how much she would love my work.

Oh, and take a 4% discount if your order is for three or more copies.

I just know you'll love it - and thanks for helping out a struggling movie producer.

I can be reached at Ellum's Major Studios - P.O. Box 1, Suckers! Island, Nova Scotia.

P.S. Absolutely no returns - so just don't think you're going to see my movie for free. I'm not stupid - hell, I'm a professional producer with more credits to my name than you have.

Thanks again!

David wrote: '... even negative attention is good for me....'

Don't bet on it, David.

And, BTW - if you had no shortage of agents to submit your work to... and you got not a single thumbs up, that says gobs, hmmmm?

Still, best of luck.

'... etc., etc., etc., because they were "blessed with a penis....'

Some are 'blessed,' some are cursed.

I'll reiterate: spec scripts ought to be written in master scenes, and that means a slug line for the camera operator, below which is brief direction. As someone else pointed out, limit exclamations and keep personal direction to an absolute minimum. (or not at all)

Of course, writers must adhere to their own artistic integrity, but if you want someone to read and consider your work, it must conform to contemporary norms of format and appearance - with lots of white space on the page, which makes it more inviting and a heck of a lot easier to read. Otherwise, seek to write the best story with your chosen idea... and GOOD LUCK!

Should have read David's bio - he's a tele-marketer, so he must know what he's doing in that field. Might have more success with his self-published work than would ordinarily be expected. Good move, bad move, it wasn't for us to decide - it was his choice, and will be interesting to see updates on his progress.

No - the crashes were too cliche for me, and combined with the voice overs it was an awkward way to attempt to hook the viewer. Show and tell is a child's game - a movie is a story told in pictures, with minimal dialogue, sufficient to move the story; dialogue does not reveal character - what the character does is who the character is.

You might want to rework your opening, or where you think your opening ought to be, to subtly show your protagonist has a problem to figure out that's of sufficient import to a viewer to make the viewer want to come along for the ride. If your character is not interesting, with an admirable mission, who cares whether he/she achieves their goal or not? You might want to work on understating everything, leave something for the viewer to figure out.

Good luck.

'... What we say and how we say it can reveal who we are....'

My statement was that a character's actions define him/her - not his/her words, and that the primary purpose of dialogue is exposition, not charcter revealation. Some writers - Mamet, Tarantino, et al - can be witty and entertaining, and excessively verbal; that's their style, but you can remove 99% of their characters' dialogue and it wouldn't detract from the story.

Just my opinion

I don't mean to appear nit-picky, but in your V.O., immediately following the crashes, Derek says:

'... As for me, irony says that I have not one scratch....'

If we accept that, what caused his 6 year coma?

Also, he is standing in an upstairs bedroom, having (we presume) entered from outside, and having seen the condition of the grounds and the house, so why is he surprised when TJ tells him that no-one has attended the property for 6 years? And why doesn't TJ know what year it is, but Derek does?

As Z. mentioned, a little colloquialism goes far; too much departure from normal grammar makes for difficult reading. You probably should write your dialogue in ordinary English, and note in direction that the character speaks in a regional dialect or slang.

You stated that you refrained from giving a location where your story is set, that it could be anywhere, but you really should give the reader more information than just a farm. Is the farm located in Germany, Kenya, Australia, America, etc.? The broken English dialogue would hint that it might be a Southern state in USA - if so, say so.

Z. pointed out:

“David was killed … Jennifer is still alive.” [Tenses don’t match].

I believe, in the context of the V.O. - the moment in which it is spoken, as though the narrator is at the accident scene and is making the statement, the tenses are correctly used.

Example: A character is shown (on screen) at an accident scene, surveying the aftermath and says: (in voice over) "The impact of the train demolished the car, (a few minutes ago) but the trailer was snapped free of the hitch (a few minutes ago) and (at this moment) is undamaged." The tenses used would be correct, though they appear to not match.

If a character is shown (on screen, present day) relating (in voice over) a past event, it would have to read: "The impact of the train demolished the car, but the trailer was snapped free of the hitch and was undamaged." The tenses match and are also correct.

Otherwise, ditto to each of Z.'s other astute observations.

Nothing, David, for too many reasons to mention here. But, here are a few that beg to noted: The buyer might have zero experience or talent at evaluating the quality of writing; might have money to burn; might be your spouse or other close relative; might truly enjoy poorly written fiction; might be mentally challenged; might be secretly compensated by someone wanting to bolster your (perhaps sagging) self-esteem. Might even be a cruel joke.

David, David...

Who are we to question your talent? I do owe you and apology; I stumbled upon this website and, in my haste, thought it read Movingbytes. As a long-haul trucker who occasionally earns a dollar (plus fuel sur-charges) with various interstate moving services engaged in transporting mothers' goods, I was excited at the prospects of sharing some OTR tid-bits with other truckers. So, who is a trucker - even a mother trucker - to say that you are without talent; albeit of such that persons in the everyday pursuit of publishable material rejected you, resoundingly? Hmm?

I have always, and will until the end of time, wish you the very best luck in your writing/self-publishing pursuits.

How did you determine, from past experience, that you were able to sell something to each one in then thousand?

Keep on truckin'!

Z.

Were I writing it, (which I would not ever be doing) I'd skip all the dialogue at the crash sites, except maybe have someone state that only Derek, the girl he pulled from the wreakage and Jennifer survived - and even that could be held back and revealed, if necessary, at a later time. But... that's just me talking.

Shattered ribs, steering-wheel-crushed skulls, etc. is filler best used, if ever, in novels. A gory automobile crash needs no embellishment.

wreakage should have read 'wreckage.'

Wreakage is, as everyone knows, fluid draining from the remains of a vehicle wreck. As: There was a considerable wreakage of transmission fluid, which caused a shut-down of the 410 freeway for cleanup.

'I'll let you know when I sell the movie rights.'

No doubt I'll have been long dead by then, but do tuck a note into the flower holder at my grave. (I hope to check messages, from time to time.)

David,

What's wrong with self-publishing? Well, what's wrong with your statements:

'... If I was wealthy I could've attended all kinds of events where I might have met agents, publishers or other people who could've helped me. Although, if I was wealthy I wouldn't need to....'

You can't answer, because you don't know, but a middling proof-reader could quickly point out that, when you use a suppositional phrase - 'if I' - it is 'were', not 'was.'

One assumes, based upon the way you express yourself in your posts and your incorrect use of--or in many instances, a lack of--punctuation, that the quality of your writing just might not be all you believe it to be.

There is literature, and there is writing that falls somewhere beneath that standard. My guess would be that 'Death Benefits' is not literature.

You stated that your objective was to make money, more money than an author ordinarily expects, by self-publishing your work. Doesn't sound too passionate, does it?

Most writers will tell you that their finest works were those about which they felt strongly about expressing. Those who have dealt with Hollywood will also tell you that scripts written to be 'commerical' and to earn a quick buck, almost never get bought, almost always get filed in the waste basket.

Why do you bother trying to convince others--who will probably never read your work--that your writing is of high quality? So what, whether it is or isn't? Have you no inkling that there are many fine writers trying to market their novels and scripts to agents and publishers? Hack writers are not your competition; you are up against some of the best writers, and on a scale of one-to-ten, if you arent' an 8 or 9....

A former writing partner of mine is extremely talented; she works, she writes as often as her schedule permits; and she actively markets her products. She will someday do us all proud by selling her scripts, but her's is not a get-rich-quick scheme of self-publishing, nor a lame attempt to market her works to other writers on this and similar websites. She is a serious writer and dedicated to learning her craft. You'd be well-advised to do the same.

'... I've spent seven years learning and improving my craft but obviously if I'm still using was where I should use were I've learned nothing....'

Apparently not enough to objectively evaluate the so-called 'editor' you hired with funds that might have been wiser spent on transportation and registration fees to screenwriting seminars, where you might have encountered a real editor, or two. Then, having had your flawed grammar pointed out to you--instead of merely an occasional misuse of quotation marks--there might have been a slight upwards turn in your learning curve. You might also have learned that you are not the perfect writer you profess to be. Someone wiser than either of us said: It's what you learn after you know it all that is most important.

If you choose to react to constuctive observations, when proffered, the negativity you mentioned is your own--plus the aforementioned, apparent inability to learn.

This is a writing forum; writing is discussed here. This is not, as someone pointed out, a board for posting classified advertisements that are intended to elicit sympathy from so-called fellow writers. As the name might suggest, even to you, Moviebytes attracts, for the most part, writers of movies and those who are inclined to adapt other stories to scripts. Novelists are, of course, welcome. Just don't think you are the only novelist around.

David asked: 'By the way what have you done in the last seven years?'

David, I'm a surgeon. I excise malignant narcissism. I try to restore sight and insight to those stricken with know-it-all-itis. Sadly, even with massive injections of humility, the rejection rate is remarkably high among egoistic self-publishers and tele-marketers - patients who seem to have lost the sense of wonder in discovering things new (to them) and vital to their recovery. Malgnant narcissism slowly eats up the soul - sorta like a strep infection. Self-testing for MN is simple: read Hemingway; stand at the feet of David; see the throbbing of the veins of Jesus in Michelangelo's Pieta and - and ask yourself: am I so important after all?

David, if we accept that you have, according to your calulations, already sold 143 copies of your book, then it is already a resounding success, by any measure. Dang, a three hundred dollar investment and a return of $5,000! Whoa - who says a writer must know basic grammar? Shut my mouth and kick Grandpa where it hurts the most.

Oh, you wrote: '... none of you have read...'

Sorry, David - incorrect again. 'None' is a contraction of 'no-one.' You should have written ... none of you HAS read... (and you could have omitted 'of you' - if you'd been inclined toward economy and clarity of statement).

Sue wrote: '... Sorry, I didn't realize that you had been appointed the poster-police-person ----who checks all of our posts for errors...'

Actually, Sue, David is a wonderful writer, and he's taken all of this in stride. I figured that the least I could do, as a fellow-writer, was to keep this thread alive and get him as much exposure as possible. He hardly needed it though: his gross profit, as compared to his initial investment, puts him in league with the producers of The Blair Witch Project.

And, Sue, you wrote: '... person ----who...' The use of the four dashes (or any, for that matter) is incorrect. I do enjoy your occasional posts and the wisdom--cliche though it be--of your quote.

Sue wrote: '... BTW, Ellum, that last statement was an incomplete sentence...'

Sorry to disappoint you, Sue, but the sentence was quite complete, even to the placement of the period.:)

Ellum, sweetie, I like you and all, but, you're wrong. Go back and read my sentence... it's fragmented, honey. There's no verb. V-E-R-B.

You're right. I thought you were referencing my 'last sentence.' Mine was correct; yours wasn't.

My statement about not buying David's book was prefaced by observation that his brief synopsis was too cliched, that it was too similar to what you get on Court TV and City Confidential, everyday. It was not an indictment of his writing abilities; I simply found his choice of material to be other than stimulating.

As for Michelangelo's Pieta... if you'd seen it before the glass security partition was installed, you'd know what I meant by the veins; Michelangelo's mastery over marble was such that it seemed (to me) that you could almost see the blood flowing. Too bad your reading comprehension isn't all it could be. You might otherwise have gotten it at first read.

I do enjoy your posts, and I'll just bet that, aside from not knowing about my election as 'posting-police,' other things might have slipped by your quick wit and intellect.

And, no. I haven't seen the Mona Lisa or Michelangelo's paintings, but one day I will and I truly hope that when I come away from that "experience" with the rendering of Jesus - that I'll have a better attitude than you.

Sue, Michelangelo's Pieta isn't a painting. It's a white Carrera marble sculture depicting Mary, holding Jesus in her lap. The veins couldn't/wouldn't have pumped blood, as He was dead - it just struck me that they were so real they could have had blood flowing through them.

You apparently missed much of what I was doing with David. That's okay. Humor takes many forms. Who cares whether every post is perfect? I certainly don't, and I've never indicated that each of my posts had been proofed. I simply tossed out some things for David to think about - or not.

"It's amazing the number of times I see people walking out of a movie theatre saying "Wow. That movie was great. Did you see how they used their ellipsis, correctly?"

Hey, I saw those movies! The one that really stands out in my memory was a biography of Paula and other writers without wit--Writer's Resistance--a high-concept film, as the title implied. It was tragi-comedy, one in a long series of similar films turned down by producers and development persons who recognize (and insist upon)proper punctuation, and who appreciate writers who respect the craft enough to submit scripts that exhibit professional execution and standards a notch above that of a MIDDLE school dropout.

Not everyone who claims to be a writer actually is a writer; it takes more than a self-bestowed title and a been-done-a-thousand-times idea.

'...settling down just became a tad difficult...'

But not as difficult as finding someone or something to care about in your rough synopsis.

I agree with Randy and Terri: too complicated, too vague and too crowded.

Can we root for Marcus, a 'strugglling R-rated standup comedian'? Maybe, but couldn't he be just a struggling comedian?

Can we care about Farah, 'an exotic dancer'? What is there about her that might make us care? That she's pregnant? Not hardly.

Marcus can't pay his rent; he's pressured by a loan shark; his lover is pregnant; there's a 'nut-case heckler. That's pretty much everyday stuff - sometimes called life.

That he's being 'hounded by the illegal Kama Club's owner and his ruthless thugs' is probably the central conflict in your story of Marcus and Farah. I'm going to guess that the club owner wants Farah for himself, and, if so, you have a triangle, which might be interesting IF the club owner is, somehow, sympathetic. You'd have a love story. If the club owner is a stereo-typical sleazeball, you'd have something else - and whether anyone else would care is problematical.

As Terri suggested, complete your story, then capsulize it.

Good luck.

You could use the voice over - or insert text - before FADE IN, because when you FADE IN it must be to something from a blank screen. You can't FADE IN to only a voice, but you could fade in text.

Alexis - no-one is knocking you as a writer. On this board we offer suggestions without regard to anyone's experience as a writer.

Having your script proofed for grammar is almost as simple as checking it for spelling errors. That isn't a biggie.

What separates us, as writers, isn't so much the story--although that is central--but our unique (sometimes:)) way of telling the story. If it's been done to death the expected reaction will be ho-hum, so we try to say something different, or the same thing is a different way.

Don't worry about back-story--it isn't of much importance, except to the writer.

Finding the starting point of your story is simply (not so simple, at times) finding the point at which nothing that happened before it need be told in order for the reader to understand what is unfolding.

Initiation, complication, resolution - or beginning (inciting incident, which identifies the protagonist's problem); middle (complication - with mounting obstacles that get in the way of the protagonist and hinder his/her mission); and ending - resolution. Sometimes there is a denuement, where details are tied-up, but the ending really occurs when the protagonist has achieved (or not) his/her goal - and nothing further need be told. Structure is vital - and it is always best to understate.

Having read your opening, it is clear that you are a writer with talent and imagination, so the things I pointed out are probably of little value. Just the same, good luck and keep on writing!

Give them first names.

For continuity and more interesting viewing, you might want to do something like the following:

FADE IN:

EXT. HOLLYWOOD MEMORIAL CREMATORIUM - DAY

A CROWD in mourning has gathered close to a pink marble wall studded with bronze metal name-plates. A veiled FEMALE steps forward and places a lighted candle on the ground near the wall, turns and walks away.

ON AN INGRAVED NAME-PLATE: Sarah Proudstone

SUPER: A STAR SOMETIMES FALLS FROM HEAVEN, BUT ITS SHINE REMAINS FOREVER.

FEMALE (V.O.)

She was an A-list actress for two decades, until age and alcohol could no longer be hidden behind Max Factor and spearmint breath mints. For another decade she struggled to maintain her, by then, desperate grasp on fame, supporting herself with ever-diminishing earnings, in a succession of seedier... 'abodes.'

The veiled Female turns back and places a photograph of a strikingly attractive woman stepping from a limousine onto a red carpet. Scrawled at the bottom of the photo is: Your big sister loves you, always. Sarah

The veiled Female walks quickly away.

FEMALE (V.O.)

Sarah was too theatrical to ever refer to a house, an apartment, or a rat-infested flop-house as anything but her 'current aboding.' God bless her - though I doubt she's 'aboding' in heaven. I'm not catholic, but seems I heard somewhere that killing someone--or three someones, as she did--and snapping your own neck with an electrical cord tied to a balcony railing in a short leap to enternity--pretty much voids any free pass you might have thought you had to the other side.

***************

Something like that.

Good luck.

INGRAVED should have been engraved.

'At least I now know that this isn't the best place on the internet for advice.'

No-one, to my knowledge, ever made that claim--true or otherwise. You've gotten plenty of answers, so chose the one you're most comfortable with. That you even bothered to ask--ignoring your successful writing friend's advise--shows that you don't take suggestions well; and judging this website so harshly, because you are less than pleased with one response, seems rather immature, hmm?

As Z. succinctly observed, these minor variations of format are of little consequence... if your script is any good.

And, by the way - this really is (IMHO) the best internet scriptwriting forum, not that I'm at all interested in whether or not you remain a participant.

Man born into money goes to Washington, ingratiates himself into the political elite, gets appointed to some high-profile jobs; Government finally recognizes existence of planet's most populus country; man gets appointed U.S. Ambassador to China, gets appointed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations; Buddy chooses man as running mate and gives man a free ride on ticket to Presidency; man finally runs for first elective office, as part of encumbant party, and becomes President of most powerful nation on planet. The American Dream. Same man's lips are read and disbelieved; man is soundly rejected for second term.

Not all tales have morals.

'The silly postings before on your question reflect a cynical view held by Democrats who had their hats handed to them in the past two elections.'

I'm neither Democrat nor Republican, nor did I vote in either of the last two elections, so--as Carlin said--it ain't any of my doing!

Good one Z Core. Some of us see the American Dream derailed and that is more serious than derailing a thread.

Bless you, Paula.

No - made it up, spontaneously - but, it was really a teaser: it's the way Mickey Spillane used to open his stories; the way many short stories are introduced; it isn't my idea of how to give a movie audience exposition. So, although I tossed it out, as filler, the example was really only one way to introduce your quote - everything after the beginning of the first Female V.O. was... tongue-in-cheek, so to speak.

I have a third draft script of Silence of The Lambs, and Ted Tally used a separate page, immediately following the title page, for a quote. It is not all caps--it is a quote from a poem, so it's in line verse--and it is not enclosed with quotation marks. Simply the chosen four lines of verse, then double space and -- William Blake. Beneath Blake's name is "The Tyger"

My guess is that Tally offered the quote, but left it for the director to decide how and if to incorporate it.

'... Companies don't like when you just send them stuff that they didn't ask for...'

Many will not even open the envelope unless it states on the cover: Requested material. Their legal departments will not allow them to even look at material, for fear of litigation. Should that producer exhibit material in the future that even remotely resembles yours, you're half-way to a court win for plagerism,(sp) because you can show the court that they (the producers) had access to your creation. Good luck, just the same, though, as pointed out above, it's not an easy road for any writer.

Ted Tally's quote actually made it to the screen.

Instead of multiple FADE IN/FADE OUT-- which probably should be FADE TO BLACK/FADE UP FROM BLACK--the writer should leave these to the director and editor, as they are in the same category as DISSOLVE TO - CUT TO - JUMP CUT - MATCH CUT, etc.

Suggest a quote, if you must, but leave the rest to those who will have ultimate control of the film, and concentrate, instead, upon telling the best story you can. You don't want the editor to write; the editor doesn't want the writer to edit.

Every time I see a contest extend their deadline I can't help but think that they haven't received "enough" entrants. *********************

More often than not, that's exactly the reason--sometimes they even cancel the competitiion for lack of sufficient interest and entrant checks to meet the advertised prize money plus profit margin. There can be many legitimate reasons for delay in publishing the results: not enough readers, delay in return of readers' evaluations, etc. Usually, delays are posted on the website, which is probably about all that should be expected (IMHO).

I don't need validation because I know I can churn out a darn good script. I've gotten a couple writing assignments with using this one as a writing sample. I have a contract sitting on my desk as I type. ******************

You're way ahead of most not-yet-established writers - and your self-stroked ego isn't in much danger of deflation.

Placing anywhere in Nicholl is not only validation of story-telling skills, it opens doors that would ordinarily be tightly sealed, and behind those doors are readers who, by reason of a Nicholl placement, are receptive to reading at least the opening/closing few pages. Oh, excuse me - you didn't even place, did you?

Without a read, there can never be a sale. It takes more to succeed in the business of writing than simply convincing yourself that you can '... churn out a darn good script.' Maybe you can churn 'em out, darn and good - but you have to prove it to someone other than yourself, hmmmm?

My point is that writers should always include everything they feel is important to their story, but where and how to interject a quotation, and how to fade in and out of a scene are issues that have little, if anything, to do with writing; they fall more within the purvue of editor and director.

Inclusion of specific musical pieces is a no-no; suggesting some jazz or classical work is acceptable.

Telling the editor or director how to synchonize the images is, IMHO, not what a writer ought to be doing--especially a not-yet-established writer. To do otherwise hints at trying to control too much of a collaborative process. Too much camera direction, set description, personal direction, details about the fiber and weave and subtle blending of pinks and grays on Jane's tight-busted dress with flowing waist and full bustle and intricately knitted appliques, ab nauseum, is just plain silly and not what a writer ought to be concerned about. Tell me the story, don't describe it, don't direct it, don't send me costume drawings or set blueprints. Make me feel for the characters and their plights, and I'll get someone to dress them and photograph them.

And if you failed to suggest a line or two by some famous person that--by V.O. or superimposition on a black screen, white screen, pink or baby blue screen prior to, during or following the opening scene--might set the tone or define the theme, I'll have my PA or parking valet or chef, gardner or kindergarten attendee come up with a few.:)

I agree with Terri. Last impression you want to hit a reader with is even a hint that you might be less than professional. When they read your script--unless you write like and just might be William Goldman--they will know nothing about your experience or successes. They can only judge you by your masterful command of language, singular tone, exquisite writing style, compelling story and nearly unique characters - and they'll bang on their employer's door at midnight, screaming: 'Look who I just discovered! The title is 'A Dim Light In A Large Space' - but it's the first true example of 'lightning in a bottle' since Casablanca or Sunset Boulevard.'

There is more to the opening than the 'we see' that needs editing, but I won't go into to except:

'A hollow Texas wind blows through it all.'

The viewer cannot know from whence the wind came, thus the 'Texas' in the 'Texas wind' ought to be omitted - and the same goes for 'hollow.' The use of adjectives is, usually, unnecessary and slows the action.

Scripts are best written in verbs and with concise sentence structure; more is not less, and less is best. Novels have space for fillers and excess description, scripts do not.

Door -

'A coverage writer from LA told me that I have to make a script atmospheric and that it takes a combination of writing a novel and writing a screenplay.'

You were ill-advised. Think of a novel as a saga, a script as haiku, and you won't be far off the mark.

Paragraph-length direction following slug lines is too long; you need only tell who's in the scene and what the character(s) is doing as the scene opens. Each word in a script should contribute directly to the whole, and be necessary.

Good luck

Oh, and forget about 'semi-aerial shot.' Tell your story and let the director decide how it's to be shot.

'I also found it interesting that the Writer chose to tell us WHERE--as in what state--this was all taking place (rather than in the slug). I thought it was an interesting/excellent choice to make.'

I disagree. A script should contain nothing that cannot be seen on screen. A better choice might have been to show that the newspaper was from a Texas city - otherwise, state in the slug line where the action is taking place.

And... how do you make a wind sound hollow? Do you first make it sound solid, and then remove the core? A wind can be a whistling wind, a strong wind, a sandy wind, but it cannot be (in a script) an ill-wind, angry wind, bad wind... or a hollow wind. As with the wind in your example, such things are best left to SF persons and sound engineers.

I know... scripts should be enjoyable reading experiences, and that's probably the most valid reason, if you must, for deviating from the norm.

And when the big-rig came barreling along the highway, there could have been a sign TEXAS SR 117.

-is this over-written???????

INT. VICE DANCE CLUB - DOWNTOWN MIAMI -NIGHT

"...body looks like honey, manicure, pedicure maxed, hair, good, skin-tight costumes, nice, hot, I wouldn't put some ice near that body...

... pissed off, Marcus leaves...

EXT. ... Marcus leans against his car, dispirited, staring into the lonely night -- bright lights big city...

*****************

'Over-written' doesn't accurately describe it, Door. Among the issues you might want to recondsider, are:

INT. VICE DANCE CLUB - DOWNTOWN MIAMI -NIGHT

Unless you had shown in an immediately preceding scene that the club was Downtown Miami, the viewer cannot know that. Instead, just write:

INT. VICE DANCE CLUB (if that's the name of the place and the viewer knows that)- NIGHT

"...body looks like honey, manicure, pedicure maxed, hair, good, skin-tight costumes, nice, hot, I wouldn't put some ice near that body...

What is this? Voice Over? If it is V.O., then write something like:

Marcus enters, moves toward the bar and glances at the stage. He stops, stares at a YOUNG WOMAN, simulating a sex act with a chrome pole. He moves closer to the stage, but stops short of the lights.

MARCUS (V.O) Hide her face in a paper sack, I'd know those legs anywhere. Molten lava would seem chilly next to her.

*******************

'... pissed off, Marcus leaves...'

This isn't needed. When you show Marcus outside in the next scene, it's understood that he has left the inside of the Dance Club.

**********************

EXT. ... Marcus leans against his car, dispirited, staring into the lonely night --

The night isn't lonely - it's just night. Marcus might be lonely, but we can't be inside his skin. Keep it simple; it's more powerful that way.

EXT. DANCE CLUB PARKING LOT - NIGHT

Marcus leans against a car. Glances at the Club. Climbs in the car and drives away.

'...bright lights big city...'

Always avoid cliches!

Do you think they all operate on the same level?

No, but each receives seventeen trillion inquires per hour (fewer on Sundays). Anything that interupts their work routine can be irritating. Most of them have posted, somewhere, their guidelines for submissions, and they assume that professionals have familiarized themselves with the guidelines. Generally, phone calls are frowned upon. Letters rarely get a response; E-mails fare worse. Most business--agents, producers, et al--is conducted with referals from trusted sources. Specific projects are actively sought. Few inquiries are ever answered. Now, Terri, correct what you find incorrect about the foregoing.:)

Terri -

I've got to run into town, but see the following:

Door wrote:

'... main character sees his lost girlfriend for the first time on stage.'

She is alive, and she has a body like honey, etc. (Unless she's decomposed and her body looks like honey, partially emersed in a pool of body fluids. Yuck, clarity isn't always easy to read, is it?:)

Terri -

Maybe we should collaborate, sometime. I have an unusual tale about a wolf that you might be interested in. Later

emersed...?

immersed!

Sluglines, sweetie. Sluglines. You know - those INT., EXT. info lines.

EXT. SUE STANDING BY HER JAGUAR - NIGHT ********************

Sue, the only info a slug line contains is INT./EXT. WHAT OR WHERE - AND WHEN

EXT. DRIVE WAY - NIGHT

Sue stands near a Jaguar automobile (so the car isn't mistaken for the animal).

Nervously, she waits for Keith Urban.

She polishes her nails, Ruby Red.

After downing a bottle of 7up, she takes photos of her new Jag.

Rather bored, she writes 20 pages of her exciting comedy.

Finally, Keith shows up, but his BAND is with him. Bummer!

KEITH Hey, baby. Let's take a ride.

And off they go on his Harley.

Oops! Did I mention this was a Dream Sequence? ********************

'Nervously, she waits for Keith Urban.'

She might act nervous - pace around, look at her watch, etc. - but you cannot show that she's waiting for Keith Urban - and we cannot see into her mind. This can be done in a novel, but not in a screenplay.

'After downing a bottle of 7up, she takes photos of her new Jag.'

These are separate bits of business, so you must show her 'downing a bottle of 7up--though you should not use a specific brand, because such placements are worth mucho bucks to the producers--and then you show her getting a camera from somewhere (or was she wearing it around her neck?) and photographing the car.

'She polishes her nails, Ruby Red.'

She polishes her nails red. Omit the 'ruby'.

'Rather bored, she writes 20 pages of her exciting comedy.'

If she's bored, that's it; it isn't 'rather bored.' It would be cumbersome, at best, to show her writing 20 pages, but what does she use? Pen and paper? Computer? This would have to be shown, not told UNLESS... most everything you described was in V.O. with montage - which would be expensive to film

Otherwise, you're writing something other than a screenplay.

EXT. PARAKEET CAGE ON PATIO *****************

Mildly funny, Sue - but you continue to write your slugs incorrectly.

EXT. PATIO - DAY

ON THE PARAKEET IN A CAGE:

or

ON THE PARAKEET CAGE:

The slug identifies where (EXT.) WHO OR WHAT THE CAMERA IS TRAINED ON (parakeet or parakeet in a cage) and WHEN (DAY OR NIGHT)

If you have been writing your slugs the way your examples have been, then it's a sure sign of someone who is less than professional.