Angle On

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • #31
    Re: Angle On

    Originally posted by Centos View Post
    So ANGLE ON is kind of like WE SEE on steroids?

    (I don't know about others here, but I think I may have actually learned something -- thanks to this thread.)
    It's similar to WE SEE in use.

    I tend to use "WE SEE" for things are wider in scope, and often things that are seen by both the audience *and* the character(s). For instance:

    John presses a button, and the wall behind him EXPLODES.

    Through the gaping hole in the building, we see:

    A MASSIVE CITY, filling a basin miles away, its gleaming spires rising up in the distance.


    I use ANGLE ON for smaller things, typical "this would be missed by most, but you, the audience, can see it" type things. In many cases, the characters do *not* see the ANGLE ON thing. Only the audience.

    John enters his password. The laptop screen begins scrolling through data.

    ANGLE ON: the lamp behind him. PUSH IN to find:

    A MICROCAMERA - focused on the laptop screen. The white of the scrolling text reflected in its tiny lens.


    Am I "directing" this?

    No.

    I'm telling a story visually. I'm conveying my intention. This is absolutely standard. More than that, it's necessary and part of the job of the screenwriter. We aren't hired to write sluglines and dialogue. We are absolutely hired to paint a visual story, with clues and hints and specific descriptions of how that visual story ought to be realized.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Angle On

      Originally posted by Craig Mazin View Post
      It's similar to WE SEE in use.

      I tend to use "WE SEE" for things are wider in scope, and often things that are seen by both the audience *and* the character(s). For instance:

      John presses a button, and the wall behind him EXPLODES.

      Through the gaping hole in the building, we see:

      A MASSIVE CITY, filling a basin miles away, its gleaming spires rising up in the distance.


      I use ANGLE ON for smaller things, typical "this would be missed by most, but you, the audience, can see it" type things. In many cases, the characters do *not* see the ANGLE ON thing. Only the audience.

      John enters his password. The laptop screen begins scrolling through data.

      ANGLE ON: the lamp behind him. PUSH IN to find:

      A MICROCAMERA - focused on the laptop screen. The white of the scrolling text reflected in its tiny lens.


      Am I "directing" this?

      No.

      I'm telling a story visually. I'm conveying my intention. This is absolutely standard. More than that, it's necessary and part of the job of the screenwriter. We aren't hired to write sluglines and dialogue. We are absolutely hired to paint a visual story, with clues and hints and specific descriptions of how that visual story ought to be realized.
      Now I understand. Thank you. Very clear examples.
      STANDARD DISCLAIMER: I'm a wannabe, take whatever I write with a huge grain of salt.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Angle On

        Wow - thanks Craig. That really did explain things.

        I've definitely learned something in this thread. Before the explanation with examples I could clearly see that your 'ANGLE ON' was better than my 'WE SEE' in that scene .. but I couldn't figure out *why* yours was better.

        Now I wonder how I could have ever missed it .. it just seems obvious.

        Thanks.

        Mac
        New blogposts:
        *Followup - Seeking Investors in all the wrong places
        *Preselling your film - Learning from the Experts
        *Getting your indie film onto iTunes
        *Case Study - Estimating Film profits

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Angle On

          Craig, the examples you provided read really cool, but I still don't get the necessity of this Angle thing :-(

          It's as if you were drawing a detailed storyboard cut-for-cut. What if it went like that:

          John enters his password.
          The laptop screen begins scrolling through data.
          On a lamp behind John...
          is a microcamera. It focuses on the screen.

          What I usually do is I just start a new line to imply the angle change.

          Do you think I lost something along the way?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Angle On

            Originally posted by goldmund View Post
            Craig, the examples you provided read really cool, but I still don't get the necessity of this Angle thing :-(

            It's as if you were drawing a detailed storyboard cut-for-cut. What if it went like that:

            John enters his password.
            The laptop screen begins scrolling through data.
            On a lamp behind John...
            is a microcamera. It focuses on the screen.

            What I usually do is I just start a new line to imply the angle change.

            Do you think I lost something along the way?
            Yes. It's not fun to read. It's flat. No sense of emphasis.

            I see dead writing like this all the time. And if I'm seeing it, it's because they want me to rewrite it, which means the guy who wrote it got booted from his script.

            Engage the reader. Thrill them. Make them curious. Reveal dramatic things--

            -- with DRAMA!

            Right?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Angle On

              Originally posted by Craig Mazin View Post
              Yes. It's not fun to read. It's flat. No sense of emphasis.

              I see dead writing like this all the time. And if I'm seeing it, it's because they want me to rewrite it, which means the guy who wrote it got booted from his script.

              Engage the reader. Thrill them. Make them curious. Reveal dramatic things--

              -- with DRAMA!

              Right?
              Thanks. To understand that a script is a tool of excitement, a dildo for the reader's imagination, was really a major step for me. That I should think and convey my feelings like the most excited audience member to ever see that movie... because if I'm not excited, who the hell would be.

              But it was a lesson from you guys.

              In books and at film school we are taught to be dead. With a reason, I think. Because when most people write emphatically, the result is ridiculous. Dead is safe.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Angle On

                Craig wrote:

                ANGLE ON: the lamp behind him. PUSH IN to find:

                A MICROCAMERA - focused on the laptop screen. The white of the scrolling text reflected in its tiny lens.

                Am I "directing" this?

                No.

                I'm telling a story visually. I'm conveying my intention. This is absolutely standard. More than that, it's necessary and part of the job of the screenwriter. We aren't hired to write sluglines and dialogue.
                We are absolutely hired to paint a visual story, with clues and hints and specific descriptions of how that visual story ought to be realized..

                To me, the above is clear when we realize we are telling a story to people who are in the movie making business. The reader may be anybody in the business, a studio Reader, a director, producer, actor, other screenwriter, etc.

                Our writing should paint a visual story for those people. A visual story in this context means the reader will visualize a movie in their mind as they read the screenplay. Better writing presents a better visual story.

                We are not writing a novel for the gereral public or for literary critics, and that audience is not familiar with certain screenwriting terms and conventions. Readers of screenplays understand that certain terms have different impacts and meaning, depending upon where they are used. For example, Angle ON has one meaning as a camera direction in a shooting script, and another meaning as a clue, hint, or specific description in a spec script.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Angle On

                  Originally posted by jonpiper View Post
                  Angle ON has one meaning as a camera direction in a shooting script, and another meaning as a clue, hint, or specific description in a spec script.
                  -- As far as I'm aware, the purpose of the screenwriting tool ANGLE ON is to shift focus from one person or thing to another. It's not that it has two different meanings. Yes, you could use this shot/camera direction in conjuction with the scene description to write your visual story with it's clues, hints, reveals, etc.

                  haroldhecuba says, "the examples above are not good.-

                  -- The examples are fine. You're over analyzing my simple point. At the end of this post, I'll do the exact same thing with Craig's example.

                  You say, "It has to work within the context of the story you're telling.-

                  -- Put your glasses on and take a look at the last line of my post that you've highlighted.

                  You say, "...it's not about the guy's eyes. It's about the alleyway.-

                  -- Do I have to write the whole scene out for you to get my point? You can't use your imagination like maybe the guy walks into an alleyway, and then we cut to a closeup of the guys' eyes.

                  Since there might be some bias going on toward my examples because I'm an amateur and not a pro, though I must point out that my latest script "The Okie- advanced in the Page Screenwriting Competition against 5,000+ of my peers, so I can't be that bad of an amateur, but seriously, I'm gonna make the same point using a pro's example, Craig's:

                  ANGLE ON: a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                  CLOSEUP ON: a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                  WE SEE a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                  A MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                  -- Again, let's not analyze which is better. The point is any one of these will get your intent across to the reader that it's an important shot of a mirror.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Angle On

                    ANGLE ON: a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                    CLOSEUP ON: a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                    WE SEE a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                    A MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...

                    -- Again, let's not analyze which is better. The point is any one of these will get your intent across to the reader that it's an important shot of a mirror.
                    You really don't see the difference between those? It's pronounced.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Angle On

                      Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                      You really don't see the difference between those? It's pronounced.
                      Jeff, if you believe one shot is more stronger to use over another, than that's cool. You're entitled to your opinion. For me personally, I believe either one would be effective to express to the reader my intent.

                      Craig says, he tends to use something like "we see" for things that are wider in scope, and often things that are seen by both the audience and the characters, and he tends to use ANGLE ON for smaller things, typically where the characters do not see the ANGLE ON thing. Only the audience.

                      This is Craig's personal preference and maybe because his circle of readers knows about this method of his, it'll be a quick hint to his readers on what he's doing visually.

                      I believe you won't lose the effectiveness if other writers use it differently, such as reversed from the way Craig does it, or use "we see" for both wider and smaller visuals. I've seen it in scripts and as far as intent, it didn't matter which way the writer used it.

                      ANGLE ON: a bloody KNIFE lying in the middle of the floor.

                      CLOSEUP ON a bloody KNIFE lying in the middle of the floor.

                      WE SEE a bloody KNIFE lying in the middle of the floor.

                      A bloody KNIFE lies in the middle of the floor.

                      -- To me, any one of these will work, but Jeff, if you feel CLOSEUP ON or whatever would be more pronounced than WE SEE or whatever that's cool. As for me, my taste and style is the last one.

                      goldmund says, "What I think Harold meant is, using those terms in your examples makes no sense unless in a very specific context..."

                      -- It was a very simple demonstration for a very simple tool to express its function. I can understand a new writer might be confused by my example if he didn't have an understanding of what it is (a type of shot), it's purpose ( to shift focus from one person or thing to another) and an example of its use in the context of a story (Craig gave examples).

                      The ANGLE ON tool has been discussed for 25 pages so there should be no confusion on this topic. New writers and especially experienced writers such as HH should be able to understand my example and point without me having to write out the scene.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Angle On

                        My circle of readers is "Hollywood." I don't have a cadre of people used to my quirks. I write for all sorts of people at all sorts of times. Until I wrote Identity Thief, I had never written anything for that studio, that producer, that director, or those actors.

                        It's safe to presume that no one needs a decoder ring to understand what I'm doing. It's safe to presume it's a fairly common utility, as common as (beat) or SMASH CUT TO or REVEAL... all terms specific to screenwriting.

                        It's not that you have to use ANGLE ON, and it's not that there isn't more than one way to skin that cat.

                        It's just that it's weird that you're so invested in avoiding it. It's innocuous. Don't use it if you find no need for it, but don't avoid it on the basis of some imagined problem with it.

                        There isn't one.

                        That is all.

                        LOCK THE THREAD! FAST!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Angle On

                          Originally posted by JoeNYC View Post
                          Jeff, if you believe one shot is more stronger to use over another, than that's cool. You're entitled to your opinion. For me personally, I believe either one would be effective to express to the reader my intent.
                          I'm saying your four examples lead me to think of four different shots. They're not interchangeable, IMO.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Angle On

                            Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                            I'm saying your four examples lead me to think of four different shots. They're not interchangeable, IMO.
                            It would be great if you could explain what the difference of the four shot is so that people reading this thread who want to learn something (I believe there are at least a few) can learn something.

                            Thanks.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Angle On

                              Originally posted by Screenplay Savant View Post
                              It would be great if you could explain what the difference of the four shot is so that people reading this thread who want to learn something (I believe there are at least a few) can learn something.

                              Thanks.
                              I'll echo ATB - really?

                              The OP didn't ask how to use it. He asked if it was okay.

                              I find that 90% of people who demand example after example (and there have been plenty in this thread) are people who think it's not okay, so they fire question after question about exact rules, exceptions... It's a never ending parade of "gotcha." When someone like Two Brad asks, it's so he has ammo to use in his next ignorant salvo, not to actually learn anything. I say that with some certainty, having had this exact discussion with the same people for too many years to count.

                              It's especially odd that you're asking - you're always talking about your numerous jobs, as well as your career as a development professional, screenwriting consultant... Do you really need to know?

                              But here, if for no other reason than not to suffer another round of "WHY WON'T SOMEONE ANSWER A QUESTION THAT NO ONE ASKED?!?":

                              ANGLE ON: a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...
                              Calling attention to an important action/object in the room.

                              CLOSEUP ON: a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...
                              A very different shot. We're tight on the mirror, so it fills the frame. I wouldn't use this for this shot - we want to see it bouncing in the context of its position on the wall, not just see a mirror moving up and down.

                              WE SEE a MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...
                              I'd use this if no one in the room noticed it. If someone was sitting in a room and the mirror was bouncing behind them, and they weren't aware, this is what I'd use. I use it to show that the audience has the knowledge before the characters.

                              A MIRROR on the café wall. It's bouncing...
                              Feels like a fragment or a typo. Or part of a list: I can see using that if we're flying around a room, describing what different objects are doing in reaction to an event. For example, if an earthquake hit, I might do something like:

                              Over the LOW RUMBLE of an earthquake, we see it growing in severity:

                              A MIRROR bounces on the wall.

                              A DRESSER shakes back and forth - the drawers fly open.

                              A WINE RACK tips over, the bottles smashing on the floor.

                              ---

                              Again, these are my thoughts. Not rules or absolutes. But every time someone says some variation of "I don't use X, because I can write it Y and get the same effect," they invariably write something totally different.

                              I think it's what Holly said - people who don't understand how to use these terms should go read a hundred pro screenplays, not ask for definition after definition.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Angle On

                                Jeff says, CLOSEUP ON: A MIRROR... is a very different shot. We're tight on the mirror, so it fills the frame.-

                                -- In this instance, true. It's not interchangeable. This is why I switched to the "EYES- shot example.

                                Jeff says about his use of "we see-: I use it to show that the audience has the knowledge before the characters.

                                -- I know this is your personal preference, but my personal preference in how I think of the purpose of these type of camera direction shots is to emphasis/highlight -- any -- specific visual to get the reader's attention to help him really "see- (importance, impact, whatever) the image/expression a writer wants to get across.

                                ANGLE ON: BOB

                                He stands in the middle of the classroom looking dazed.

                                WE SEE Bob standing in the middle of the classroom looking dazed.

                                BOB stands in the middle of the classroom looking dazed.

                                -- Interchangeable or not, very distinct or not, to me I see no difference, they all express the same purpose and get the same expression across to the reader that the writer wanted to get across.

                                I know you feel different, and I don't know about the others, but, for me, until I hear of a reason that makes sense to me, I'm gonna stick with my opinion.

                                If holly wants to explain her opinion on how these above examples are very distinct from one another, I would be very interested in hearing, but I'll be a tough audience to be convinced that there will be a certain context of a story where it'll be better to get across my intent to a reader by using, WE SEE Bob standing... instead of BOB stands...

                                Jeff, I'm not trying to play "gotcha- with you. You put out your opinion on these shots, and I just wanted to put out an alternative opinion so the members have a wider view to choose which style is best for them.

                                My style is to write lean, using only words that are necessary to get across my intent, my expression to the reader.

                                There are others who feel using "WE SEE- or "ANGLE ON- is necessary to get across their intent, their expression to the reader.

                                Whatever works.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X