We see?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • We see?

    The way I write has none of "we see" in there, I leave that completely out. The way I write my screenplays is with a novel attitude-show/don't tell, active, and absolutely no camera directions. Just straight forward to the point where the story flows without any interruption from directive narration.

    But it seems to be different from these intrusive screenplays I read, that are top of the line mind you-they all include 'we see' we hear' 'we follow' 'you see' etc. littered throughout.

    On top of that, I keep hearing obey the rules of screenplays but also expend as much energy breaking them, because you want yours to stand out. And I also hear if your screenplay stands out in the slightest above what people see it is a goner.

    I'm just having information overload here and am wondering am I over-thinking this issue. It is maddening

  • #2
    Re: We see?

    "We see" is why God invented the carriage return.
    The Complete IfilmPro DEVELOPMENT FORUM (PDF)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: We see?

      I'd love to see one single legit coverage report from an agency, prodco, or studio that mentions "we see" or wrylies or any of these other so called rules that are talked about. I've seen several coverage reports, and I have NEVER seen a reader comment on such things.

      Just once I'd love to see living evidence that a reader in Hollywood gives a rat's butt about that BS.

      And that's what those rules are, typicalexbf. They're BS.

      Don't waste your time worrying about those rules. Leave that to those that need to fill pages in yet another screenwriting book.

      You focus on reading sold scripts and discovering how the story mechanics work. Then use that knowledge to develop your own stories that DO stand above the schlock.

      Those rules are a pen tease. They don't mean jack #### in the grand scheme of things.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: We see?

        Thanks for that-It's nice to hear that from another living being. I was beginning to think I just didn't get it!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: We see?

          I use at least one "we see" in each of my scripts...just to stick it to the man.
          "I hate to break it to you but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.- - Don Draper

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: We see?

            We are not going to go down this road again.

            For the classic Done Deal discussion of "we see" you can read the following:

            The famous "we see" thread

            Have fun!

            "The fact that you have seen professionals write poorly is no reason for you to imitate them." - ComicBent.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: We see?

              Thread re-opened by popular request.

              Have at it, guys!

              "The fact that you have seen professionals write poorly is no reason for you to imitate them." - ComicBent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: We see?

                Woohoo?
                "Tone is now engaged in a furious Google search for Leighton Meester's keester." -- A friend of mine

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: We see?

                  Comic (my boss) is a much better man than I. By his decree, this is opened again. But, let's not go over the deep end with this discussion.
                  Last edited by cmmora; 10-06-2008, 11:47 PM.
                  Never let the competition know what you're thinking... and never tell the unseen masses your story idea.

                  -- Rule 85, Ferengi Rules of Acquisition (updated by cmmora)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: We see?

                    CALLING JOENYC...COME IN JOENYC!!!!


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: We see?

                      I asked for it to be reopened.

                      Well I didn't necessarily ask for it to be reopened (thanks, Will). I inquired as to why it was closed. This is what I said...


                      I don't really get it when a mod steps in and routes a present day poster to a thread with a similar topic from three years (and sometimes longer) ago.

                      The site is constantly changing and evolving and new faces are continually emerging, making their presence felt for a time and then sometimes eventually moving on.

                      What if the poster of today wants the opinions of other posters who presently frequent the site as opposed to just looking at old threads filled with the opinions of people who mostly don't post on Donedeal anymore?
                      Is there an unwritten rule that once a topic has been brought up it cannot be brought up again?
                      "I hate to break it to you but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.- - Don Draper

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: We see?

                        Originally posted by ComicBent View Post
                        We are not going to go down this road again.

                        For the classic Done Deal discussion of "we see" you can read the following:

                        The famous "we see" thread

                        Have fun!
                        When Comic closed this thread, I thought the reference was to this famous "we see" thread...

                        It launched a nasty series of events, and some people aren't speaking to each other. Anyway, I think most of these "rules" are just things that we should practice to improve our writing, so that we don't overuse these privileges. Somehow they got turned into strict no-no's, and I hope readers (in contests and so forth) aren't using these guidelines to pre-judge scripts before they actually read them. If they do, they are missing the whole point.

                        Anyway, as Joe9 said, no producer who read a script of mine (albeit not many) has ever commented on stuff like that. I think "we see" works nicely when you work a "reveal" into a story; like when you withhold information from the viewer and then finally "we see" what it is we're supposed to be looking at. It captures the effect of how it would be revealed visually.
                        "THIMK." - Amomynous

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: We see?

                          I think it's all about what works best. Many things work, but only one works best. Whether that is "we see" or the avoidance thereof depends on the situation and the writer. Personally, I rarely find use for it. However, if writing a scene without it would be clunky and my only reason for avoiding it was the aforementioned "rule", I would use it. It's all about what makes for the most compelling and easy-to-read action.
                          For more of my thoughts on screenwriting, check out my blog.
                          Jonny Atlas Writes!

                          - Sic Semper Tyrannis.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: We see?

                            Use when necessary. Don't overuse.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: We see?

                              As long as you write clear, understandable, mostly grammatical English, nobody cares if you put in "we see" or the odd camera direction. Your structure, characterization, story development, dialogue, etc., are far more important. Nobody's going to see your action lines on the screen. The other things are the movie people will see (and the movie people will buy).
                              "Your intuition knows what to write, so get out of the way.-
                              ― Ray Bradbury

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X