Angle On

[chris cobb]

Re: Angle On

ANGLE ON... my ass!

No sorry. That should read:

ANGLE ON

My ass.

And the gurus say you shouldn't use it ever.

Not the ass. The angle.

[TwoBrad Bradley]

Re: Angle On

... when we type ANGLE ON, we're simply saying to the reader "visual continuity has been disrupted... instead of looking at what we were just looking at, we're now looking at...."

But isn't that what happens when:
- we add a Scene Heading.
- insert a Transition.
- start a new Action paragraph.
- switch back and forth with Dialogue.

Just when this stuff starts to make sense I ruin it by thinking.

[BattleDolphinZero]

Re: Angle On

Posted this elsewhere in a response and re-posting here since it's on topic.

I didn't say "angle on" would get your script thrown out, I said don't do it. Several people over the years have told me, don't do it. Especially directors, the ones I've talked to absolutely hate it. "Write the script, don't direct the film."

Who? I am not trying to be mean but who?

Craig has a movie in production and is working with a big director, Jeff is working with a legendary director and probably has 37 other things he's developing...oh, and both of them have directed films...I'm working with a filmmaker on something and a studio on something else...Todd, exact same thing...MichaelB is everywhere all the time...

None of us have heard a discussion about angle on. Many of us use it.

That said, if you're Craig Mazin and your script is pretty kick ass, of course even if someone doesn't care for the camera directions, they are going to put that aside and like the script as a whole. Or they might not care. But if you're like most people and have a ton of different things wrong with your screenplays, you have to start cleaning them up somewhere.

Mazin's juice matters in that people who won't read your script and my script will indeed read his. But a read is a read.

I guarantee you if you go out with a hot spec, you're gonna get read by the same people as me. And most of those people won't know either one of us. Never heard of me. And our agents will probably be same level also.

So tell me, what's the difference between the read we get? I argue none.

And anyone else who wants to jump in please do. I'd like to hear what you think the conversation is when I go out with a spec and what it is when you do...how does my script get read differently? Again, i'm saying there is none.

[Screenplay Savant]

Re: Angle On

So tell me, what's the difference between the read we get? I argue none.

And anyone else who wants to jump in please do. I'd like to hear what you think the conversation is when I go out with a spec and what it is when you do...how does my script get read differently? Again, i'm saying there is none.

When I worked in development, I would come to the read with a different mindset if the writer was repped and/or produced or if the script was referred by someone that I knew and trusted than if it was a script requested off a query from unrepped, unproduced writer.

I had greater expectations of the first group but was also more forgiving. Meaning I would give those writers the benefit of the doubt and continue reading even if it started off slow or if things bumped me, or I wasn't impressed by the writing, because I believed the script would get better as I got into it. unrepped, unproduced writers usually didn't get the same benefit of the doubt.

I did not start out that way, this mindset evolved over time after reading many scripts from both category of writers and discovering the large majority of the unrepped scripts did not live up to the promise of the query - and many of them just plain sucked.

I've had this conversation with other development people so I know I'm not the only one who had this mindset, although I can't say it's prevalent or the norm.

[Hamboogul]

Re: Angle On

I'd like to hear what you think the conversation is when I go out with a spec and what it is when you do...how does my script get read differently? Again, i'm saying there is none.

I can only speak from my experience. My spec went out to a few producers in March more as a writing sample than anything else. Since I had no previous introduction to the marketplace, my reps chose about 10 producers to show it to. Luckily, the reception was favorable that my reps then showed to a few more producers. Then the development community started trading my script pretty actively.

So I think the difference is two-fold. If I were somewhat known, the script probably would've gone out to far more places initially, especially if I had a fanbase of previous work. But also, because I was a brand new writer, development execs passed my script to their colleagues and friends with zeal. If I were more seasoned, I don't think they would've done the referrals as actively as it ended up being. I think people genuinely get more excited about brand new writers with scripts than veterans with new scripts, especially if there's some buzz on the script.

[BattleDolphinZero]

Re: Angle On

So I think the difference is two-fold. If I were somewhat known, the script probably would've gone out to far more places initially, especially if I had a fanbase of previous work. But also, because I was a brand new writer, development execs passed my script to their colleagues and friends with zeal. If I were more seasoned, I don't think they would've done the referrals as actively as it ended up being. I think people genuinely get more excited about brand new writers with scripts than veterans with new scripts, especially if there's some buzz on the script.

I think you're right about the fresh meat buzz. Having been fresh meat and seen my boy Todd Karate become fresh meat, they love it. They wanna feel like they discovered someone or got in on someone before other people.

[SuperScribe]

Re: Angle On

This still doesn't address...

Oh, fuck it.

[Hamboogul]

Re: Angle On

I will go even one step further to say that I probably had an easier time getting signing meetings at the three agencies because I was such a clean slate. If I were an established writer looking to switch, I probably would've been judged on my filmography, scripts, demand, and quote.

[BattleDolphinZero]

Re: Angle On

When I worked in development, I would come to the read with a different mindset if the writer was repped and/or produced or if the script was referred by someone that I knew and trusted than if it was a script requested off a query from unrepped, unproduced writer.

I had greater expectations of the first group but was also more forgiving. Meaning I would give those writers the benefit of the doubt and continue reading even if it started off slow or if things bumped me, or I wasn't impressed by the writing, because I believed the script would get better as I got into it. unrepped, unproduced writers usually didn't get the same benefit of the doubt.

I did not start out that way, this mindset evolved over time after reading many scripts from both category of writers and discovering the large majority of the unrepped scripts did not live up to the promise of the query - and many of them just plain sucked.

I've had this conversation with other development people so I know I'm not the only one who had this mindset, although I can't say it's prevalent or the norm.

Unrepped and queries are one thing, but that's not what I'm saying. In my post I made it clear that we're talking about writers with real reps. THAT relationship matters.

I'm talking about "new" "unproduced" "unsold" writers (with real reps) being treated differently than me. Don't buy it. Don't buy it cuz I've been working for 11 years, I've brought up--or helped out--young writers so I've intimately seen them go through the process.

I don't buy it because 70 - 90% of the time, the people in my meetings don't know I've been produced. 100% of the time they don't know I've sold specs/pitches. So why would they give me the benefit of the doubt? Because my reps told them some sh!t on the phone that they don't bother remembering?

How does this conversation lead to a 'benefit of the doubt'?...

INT. OFFICE - DAY

A Studio exec answers the phone. On the other end is BDZ's rep.

REP: "Hey, you know BDZ? Worked on blahblahblah and blahblah?"

EXEC: "Sounds familiar but no."

REP: "Right, whatever, he's the guy who is great at blahblahblah and he's got a new spec about blahblahblah."

EXEC: "Sounds like the exact kind of thing this studio is looking for, send it over."

Now this exec (be it Screenplay Savant or anyone else) is gonna get dozens of calls like this. And he's gonna get calls about big projects with stars and directors attached. And projects that are in production are going over budget. And projects that are wrapped are testing terribly...

With all this going on, is he gonna do due diligence on finding out more about me? No.

So my script gets to his inbox, he doesn't read it when he said he would because there's too much other sh!t to deal with, let alone remember the phone call when he reads it--and a dozen other scripts--over the weekend.

And Savant you're telling me you or any exec is gonna spend an extra minute reading me over Hamboogul or Ven--who have the exact same agent--because that agent said something about whatever and some movie?

Do

Not

Buy

It.

[Screenplay Savant]

Re: Angle On

And Savant you're telling me you or any exec is gonna spend an extra minute reading me over Hamboogul or Ven--who have the exact same agent--because that agent said something about whatever and some movie?

Do

Not

Buy

It.

I was specifically talking about repped vs. unrepped. If someone was repped, even if I wasn't familiar with their work or they hadn't sold yet, being repped said to me that the writer was vetted in that the rep thought he was going to make money off the writer. And that one thing - knowing someone thought they'd make money off a writer - and I assumed, the script being submitted - made me give the writer more latitude during the read.

So you, ven and hamboogul would have gotten the same benefit of the doubt

[SundownInRetreat]

Re: Angle On

Who? I am not trying to be mean but who?

Craig has a movie in production and is working with a big director, Jeff is working with a legendary director and probably has 37 other things he's developing...oh, and both of them have directed films...I'm working with a filmmaker on something and a studio on something else...Todd, exact same thing...MichaelB is everywhere all the time...

None of us have heard a discussion about angle on.

Good call - as I commented in the "summing up" thread. There comes a point where you just have to do this - for the sake of the poster citing nameless pros if nothing else.

[Craig Mazin]

Re: Angle On

I'd put it this way.

ANGLE ON doesn't affect the way you tell your story.

Summing your characters does.

You can see ANGLE ON: but many times when summing up characters you can't.

But it's not even these two practices in general. When we are learning screenwriting, one of the best things we can do is read scripts. If the pro or repped scripts I read all have differing practices, how am I, as an aspiring writer, to determine which ones are right?

Thanks again, Craig.

[Craig Mazin]

Re: Angle On

If you add HIGH to it, then sure, it's implying camera placement.

So does this:

Jim flips the the quarter in the air.

THE QUARTER - spins slowly

JIM - watches....

ANN - watches... waiting........

If you guys know of a way to write a screenplay without constantly implying camera placement, then good luck with that.

It seems like a bizarre goal.

I've only been doing it professionally for 16 years, and not one single director, producer or studio executive has said a single thing about it.

Not one.

In 16 years.

Craig Mazin says, "ANGLE ON isn't even a camera direction! It's actually an EDITORIAL direction ... we're simply saying to the reader 'visual continuity has been disrupted ... instead of looking at what we were just looking at, we're now looking at...'-

-- In my opinion, camera direction and editing direction, or also known as continuity editing, are practically the same thing. Directors follow a conventional pattern of camera placement and editing.

Continuity editing is a style of editing that the director uses to make the film authentic as possible for the audience that matches the relationships from shot to shot to maintain a continuous and clear narrative action, so the viewer isn't distracted by awkward jumps between shots, such as: Establishing Shot, Re-establishing Shot, POV Shot, Long Shot, Medium Shot, Two Shot, Reverse Angle Shot, Extreme Close Up Shot, etc.

When I see something like...

EXT. AFRICA - DAY

HIGH ANGLE ON the treetops of a lush green rainforest, beautiful and mysterious and seemingly endless.

...it sure seems to me to be a camera direction expressing the placement of the camera.

[Geoff Alexander]

Re: Angle On

Wondering what people think about using the descriptive element "angle on" in the action text? I've seen a few pro scripts recently that have utilized it sparingly, and I kind of like how it helps breaks up blocks of text and focuses the attention. Mostly I equate it with a close up shot. You?

The minor slugline "Angle On" isn't the problem, using it isn't a problem, it's amateurs using it without being conscious, overusing it, and generally using it badly that is the problem.

So, when you start reading something by a new writer or an unrepped writer and on page one it's camera directions all over the place, then you do get bogged down a bit.

Craig Mazin is going to use it judiciously and with intention which means, I suspect, that he doesn't use it often. Andy Amateur is going to use it in a bad way, and probably often, because Andy Amateur doesn't understand that the story is the most important thing, not creating a document that "looks like" a script.

[Richmond Weems]

Re: Angle On

I think the best thing that came out of this thread is the fact that I'm now going to change my real name to Andy Amateur. When I get sold, I'm going to change it to Peter Professional.

HH