Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

    BattleDolphinZero says, "No one should need to tell a writer most of what we're talking about.-

    -- This is a nice sentiment, but not practical.

    What's the problem with a new writer asking a question in the basic forum on what's the purpose of this transition or that transition and could you please give me an example.

    It's just a better learning experience if he comes to it on his own? Please, don't let me flounder around going down wrong roads until I figure it out. A big waste of time for something so minor.

    Please, just let me know the foundation about this transition or whatever basic element, and I'll promise you my own style will eventually evolve from that.

    Remember, this thread was started by someone who said, "It seems like whenever I or others have a technical/formatting question (i.e. CUT TO:s, we sees,...-

    What's a better way for a new writer to learn then by others who've been down that road before them?

    BattleDolphinZwero, those examples that you gave were an excellent way to show about how one could go outside the norm, where it never would've occurred to a new writer, but if everyone took your advice, "No need to tell a writer most of what we're talking about-... well, you get my point.

    Comment


    • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

      That's an excellent post JoeNYC but do you realize you've just hit "666" posts.

      We're all cursed, it's over -- quick, run everybody. Get out of here!
      Forthcoming: The Annual, "I JUST GOT DUMPED" Valentine's Short Screenplay Writing Competition. Keep an eye on Writing Exercises.

      Comment


      • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

        Originally posted by chilldivine View Post
        Maybe it would be useful to stop thinking of this stuff as arbitrary "rules" and appreciate it as "principles that some people's experience has taught them is more likely to result in clear, concise writing than not". I've stayed out of commenting on so-called gurus one way or another, because I've read McKee et all and I can't for the life of me recall "we see" being mentioned one way or another, so perhaps there are a new set of gurus I don't know about (seriously though, gurus? Do they wear robes or something?)

        I think it's been firmly established at this point that rules, principles, whatever, are there to be broken or ignored when necessary, but to dismiss it all as arbitrary bollocks some random person thought up purely to annoy writers is doing yourself a disservice, in my opinion. My feelings on camera angles and "we see"s etc, etc, aren't simply pet peeves in the way that if someone eats a banana in front of me I'll hate them forever, it's stuff that having read eighty bazillion scripts over ten years has taught me tends to interrupt the read, signal otherwise bad writing, suggest that the writer is a pain in the bloody arse.

        If passing that on makes me sound like some arbitrary writer-hating guru, well I don't have any robes handy, but I will go and put my dressing gown on.

        Because if you're just way too cool for formatting, then why stop there? Why not unique spelling too? Shakespeare never spelled his name twice the same way (and never once "Shakespeare", incidentally) why should you? Why should my ideas of putting letters in a particular order so that I know what word you mean stifle your burning desire for pointless wackiness, in order to make my life easier?
        Yes, ahh, but listen...oh Warrior-Princess of the 'Muddying the Waters... thread.

        It's been stated to the point where many professionals have died from exhaustion (there's one on life support right now having dehydrated having just tried to read this whole thread, and he only got half way!) creating or trying to create a safe environment for writers to write and express themselves freely, without obsessing about formatting. They never said be sloppy, but appealed to common sense...

        I use Christopher Riley's Hollywood Standard which also says, this isn't the only way, but it does have the advantage of clarity, clear-thinking, the tried and tested, so it's a good place to start. And then as a personal style exerts itself, you can move away. And as JoeNYC said, very new writers need some help to get there, but there's a lot of confusing information out there.

        Gurus, yes -- they wear robes, without much underneath I hear, and have a handshake only known to them.

        On Shakespeare:- the English language wasn't settled at that time, and there was a dearth of abstract words, so he formed words, and until Samuel Johnson tidied it all up, English was a bit of a mess, but arguably a little more fluid and this may have assisted with the way people thought and wrote. Who knows-

        nb, he did use "Shakespeare"btw, that's a popular myth, check out the covers of his Quartos beginning with Richard, or as some call it... Dicky III.
        Forthcoming: The Annual, "I JUST GOT DUMPED" Valentine's Short Screenplay Writing Competition. Keep an eye on Writing Exercises.

        Comment


        • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

          Riley's "The Hollywood Standard" is a great book on formatting. So is Flinn's "How Not to Write a Screenplay", although it deals with different issues (or so I seem to remember.)

          The best way to understand formatting, though, is reading professional screenplays. Sometimes certain books or websites can point you to issues you haven't encountered yet or didn't pay enough attention to, but they are no substitute for reading actual screenplays*.

          If you read screenplays you realize that in most cases there isn't a single right way to do it, and thus you avoid pointless dogmatisms.

          ______
          *And more specifically, good screenplays. I don't know why so often people, even pros, say it's good to read bad screenplays. I've been reading a lot of amateur screenplays lately, and I don't feel I've learned a thing from them. To me this is counterintuitive, it's like telling a painting student to look at a lot of awful paintings instead of goint to the Louvre or any other great museum to study the masters.

          Comment


          • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

            Gurus only muddy the waters if you let them. There's usually some value in their books and seminars, some useful piece of information/inspiration to gain. Is it worth spending money for? I don't know. Probably not in most cases. Just remember, they're in it for your money and need to distinguish themselves to get more of your money. Knowledge will be bastardized to serve pocketbooks, and so advice and promised results are made easy to digest, packaged with patented catch phrases, hooks, do's and don'ts, 1-2-3 methods...

            Excerpt from Save the Cat:

            "The real inspiration for this book started with one simple desire: I had a whole bunch of snappy rules for screenwriting and I wanted to get credit for coining them."

            These things don't teach you how to write. They show you how to fake it 'til you make it, which will slow your development as a writer if you swallow this stuff whole.
            Standing on a hill in my mountain of dreams telling myself it's not as hard, hard, hard as it seems.

            Comment


            • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

              Originally posted by chilldivine View Post
              because I've read McKee et all and I can't for the life of me recall "we see" being mentioned one way or another
              McKee criticizes its use in STORY. At least he did in the edition I read, waaaaay back when. He might have removed that section by now.

              At any rate, the first and only time I ever went through a script and removed every instance of "we [anything]" (and then twisted my prose in knots trying to provide the same description) was because of him. Again, it was a long time ago and I was a gullible young scribe. GullyScribe.

              Comment


              • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                Originally posted by SuperScribe View Post
                McKee criticizes its use in STORY. At least he did in the edition I read, waaaaay back when. He might have removed that section by now.

                At any rate, the first and only time I ever went through a script and removed every instance of "we [anything]" (and then twisted my prose in knots trying to provide the same description) was because of him. Again, it was a long time ago and I was a gullible young scribe. GullyScribe.
                Yes. This is what happened to me. But when I realized any other approach was too wordy and confusing, I changed it back. However, it was actually a good exercise -- forcing me to look closer at why I make certain choices. If the "we see" is not doing anything special for the line take it out, but if it enhances the visual effect you're looking for use it.

                I think a writer needs a couple of scripts under their belt before they become flexible in making these kinds of choices (I use flexible for lack of a better word). I know some people have hit home runs with their first ever scripts and sold. Heck, I tried by querying my first, too. But in hindsight I'm glad it didn't go anywhere because it gave me time to get deeper into discovering my own process.

                And I think that's what's at the core of what the pros say about the rules. Following the rules won't really make your script better -- that's why it doesn't matter.
                Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                Comment


                • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                  Riley's "The Hollywood Standard" is a great book on formatting.
                  True. John August named this as the go-to source for all format related questions, so he'd waste less time debating them on his blog.
                  If you really like it you can have the rights
                  It could make a million for you overnight

                  Comment


                  • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                    Originally posted by odocoileus View Post
                    True. John August named this as the go-to source for all format related questions, so he'd waste less time debating them on his blog.
                    That's why I bought it
                    And I bought Screenwriter 6 after reading a post from Mazin on how he was making the switch from FD to MMS (well, not exactly, I had researched and tried both programs, but it was when I really made the decision.)

                    Comment


                    • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                      Given the contradictory answers from this book to that book, or this guru to that guru, or this buyer to that buyer, why isn't there a clear cut industry standard? Why isn't there a clearly spelled out standard set of acceptable formatting elements that is used by everyone (or at least the major companies) that spells out exactly what is acceptable and what isn't? It would just be so much simpler if WB, Paramount, Dreamworks, et al, just sat down and figured out what they want and told everyone, "here are the guidelines: we won't take 'we see' under any curcumstances, 'CUT TO:' is acceptable only in X,Y, and Z situations, music is only to be specifed in a script in A, B, or C circumstances, etc."

                      For all the talk of art, craft, vision, and other creative terms, this is still about developing a product for a very limited and specific market. I don't think it is unreasonable to say, "here are the rules that we, the market, have set, go write within those limitations and stray not," just so that everyone is on the same page.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                        Originally posted by Steven R View Post
                        Given the contradictory answers from this book to that book, or this guru to that guru, or this buyer to that buyer, why isn't there a clear cut industry standard? Why isn't there a clearly spelled out standard set of acceptable formatting elements that is used by everyone (or at least the major companies) that spells out exactly what is acceptable and what isn't? It would just be so much simpler if WB, Paramount, Dreamworks, et al, just sat down and figured out what they want and told everyone, "here are the guidelines: we won't take 'we see' under any curcumstances, 'CUT TO:' is acceptable only in X,Y, and Z situations, music is only to be specifed in a script in A, B, or C circumstances, etc."

                        For all the talk of art, craft, vision, and other creative terms, this is still about developing a product for a very limited and specific market. I don't think it is unreasonable to say, "here are the rules that we, the market, have set, go write within those limitations and stray not," just so that everyone is on the same page.
                        Because if I was an alien from Mars, a producer would want to obtain the rights to my story even if I wrote it with the blood of newborn human babies on the back of nursing kittens.
                        On Twitter @DeadManSkipping

                        Comment


                        • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                          Originally posted by Steven R View Post

                          ...why isn't there a clear cut industry standard? Why isn't there a clearly spelled out standard set of acceptable formatting elements that is used by everyone (or at least the major companies) that spells out exactly what is acceptable and what isn't? ....
                          I think the answer is inherent in the question -- because formatting is not a major problem for the studios. It seems to only be a sticking point with gurus and online message boards.

                          There's no reason for all the majors to get together to solve a non-problem. Bad scripts are a problem but not formatting. If you have a good script anything is acceptable.

                          This all goes back to the original post in this thread. Someone told the writer readers would think he's a rank amateur because he used CUT TO too many times. That's ridiculous. If your script rocks, no one will care if you used CUT TO incorrectly. They probably won't even notice.

                          One could delete all the camera directions, wrylies, we sees, etc. etc., and satisfy all the gurus' directives and one's script can still svck. I suspect our desire to know the rules and follow them to the letter goes back to elementary school conditioning that if we follow rules we'll get a reward -- a gold star, a pat on the head - some recognition. But it doesn't apply here.
                          Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                          Comment


                          • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                            Originally posted by sc111 View Post
                            And I think that's what's at the core of what the pros say about the rules. Following the rules won't really make your script better -- that's why it doesn't matter.
                            Actually, I think it's even simpler than that: there really ARE no rules. At least not ones that originated within the industry. Or if they did, they didn't come from the heart of the industry -- more like the fringes.

                            Remember Zoditch? (How could anyone forget Zoditch?)

                            I once asked him where all of these various "don't do"s came from, and he told me that he had never heard of any of them before he started hitting message boards populated by amateur writers. And he'd been a working writer for twenty years.

                            That gave me serious pause. (This was a while back. I don't pause for shit now.)
                            Last edited by SuperScribe; 06-08-2012, 02:03 PM. Reason: to remove some wonky thing that inserted itself in my post

                            Comment


                            • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                              Originally posted by JoeNYC View Post
                              BattleDolphinZero says, “No one should need to tell a writer most of what we’re talking about.”

                              -- This is a nice sentiment, but not practical.

                              What’s the problem with a new writer asking a question in the basic forum on what’s the purpose of this transition or that transition and could you please give me an example.

                              It’s just a better learning experience if he comes to it on his own? Please, don’t let me flounder around going down wrong roads until I figure it out. A big waste of time for something so minor.

                              Please, just let me know the foundation about this transition or whatever basic element, and I’ll promise you my own style will eventually evolve from that.

                              Remember, this thread was started by someone who said, “It seems like whenever I or others have a technical/formatting question (i.e. CUT TO:s, we sees,…”

                              What’s a better way for a new writer to learn then by others who’ve been down that road before them?

                              BattleDolphinZwero, those examples that you gave were an excellent way to show about how one could go outside the norm, where it never would’ve occurred to a new writer, but if everyone took your advice, “No need to tell a writer most of what we’re talking about”… well, you get my point.
                              I think I made one of the most practical points on this thread. I don't know what to say about CUT TO's and WE SEE's specifically. I cited my use of "CUT TO" to buttress my overall point which is that...

                              Most writers don't need anyone to tell them this stuff. They just don't.

                              The same way I came to use CUT TO exactly like Jeff, without anyone telling me, any real writer is going to start off with the basic foundation of screenplay structure -- slugs, character slots, dialogue blocking, etc... and amend, manipulate, twist and bend that structure as they see fit.

                              You say:
                              What’s a better way for a new writer to learn then by others who’ve been down that road before them?
                              The writers who have been down that road are basically saying, "yo', man, read some sh!t, try some sh!t out. Apply the sh!t you like, make up new sh!t." To me that amounts to...

                              "I can't tell you how YOU like to write."

                              Max Landis writes descriptions in the transition slot. That's his thing. He got there on his own. I doubt anyone needed to tell him anything.

                              I think maybe your post is specifically about we sees and cut toos, though, right?
                              Please, just let me know the foundation about this transition or whatever basic element, and I’ll promise you my own style will eventually evolve from that.
                              I'm saying no one here can tell you to use them or not. And if you have the option of using them or not, that means there is no way to tell HOW to use them because like most things discussed here, they are optional tools. Some writers don't ever use "we see" some writers don't ever "cut to"...so there is no answer. Just make sense.

                              Actually, i have the answer...

                              If you are confused by how to use a collection of words, do not use them.
                              Let that be written in stone.

                              There's your answer and I think it is fair and applicable.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Are the Screenwriting Gurus Muddying the Waters?

                                I thought by now someone would quote ... one absolute rule ... made up by one specific screenwriting guru ... with maybe a book title ... and a page number.

                                That should be easy.
                                "I am the story itself; its source, its voice, its music."
                                - Clive Barker, Galilee

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X