Hey, I got some questions

the_power said:

I would just like to say hello! I'm so excited for this forum since I'm new to screenwriting. I've been watching tons of movies, studying scripts, and reading books to help me write my movie. I love all the great info on this site.

Anyways, I just have 3 questions...for now, lol.

The first one is about a particular phone conversation. Now I saw the threads from the sticky about this, but I couldn't find my question answered. I want to know if it is acceptable to read the reader of my script unfamiliar of whom my character is talking to. I basically have my character on the phone asking someone if they could meet up and have a talk. I don't want the audience to know who it is until they have the actual meeting. Is this something I can withhold from the reader as well?

Now, in a scene, I have an employee yell out to his secretary. It goes

BOB
Hey Diane! Did you get those orders yet?

Now do I have to introduce her in a description paragraph? Or can I have her reply? How can I make it come across that she is his secretary.

Also, I have a scene where a character's brother is knocking at the door. But I have a problem introducing him as well. Is this acceptable?

A young man, MATT CROSS is watching TV in his room, when a knocking comes at this door.

MATT
Who's there?

SPEAKER (O.S)
It's me you idiot! Open the door!

It his Matt's older brother, JASON.

I guess you could say I have issues introducing characters, lol.

Thank you!

Click to expand...

First off, welcome. Hope you find the answers your looking for. As for the questions above...

1) Can you keep the reader in the dark about telephone voices?

I personally feel that it is okay AS LONG AS it is not done maliciously. What I mean by that is that when the phone conversation is going on, the reader/audience needs to at least understand that the person the character is talking to is someone they have been or will be introduced to.

If you simply have a misleading phone call thrown in to keep the audience on their toes...it's not very fair to the audience is it? That's also the easiest way to have an audience lose faith in the film.

So what you need to do if you want to keep the voice on the phone a mystery is to drop subtle hints while the scene is going on. Hints to the reader "The person on the phone sounds familiar, but we can't seem to place it." or certain ways characters say things, catchphrases they use, the tone of their speech, the themes they are talking about. These are all ways you can hide a characters identity while still painting a clear picture of who the caller is.

2) Is it necessary to introduce a character without a description?

It depends on the character. Since you say the character is a secretary, I have to ask this: Is she important to the story or not?

If she is and we will be seeing her somewhere outside of the office...by all means describe away.

If she isn't and we won't be seeing her outside of the office or even the scene she is in...then why bother.

The reason being, we should be able to infer from the way the two characters speak to each other what their relationship is. The "Secretary/Boss" relationship is normally a very clearly defined manner of speaking. The boss doesn't really talk about certain things, the secretary knows what not to ask about, the lines are normally clear. So really it comes down to the character, is she needed further or not? That will give you your answer.

3) Is it necessary to introduce a character before they are on screen?

This answer would really be a combination of the two previous answers. With the setup you gave, I would say that it is okay to go ahead and give the voice on the other side of the door a name, especially if they are about to enter the room. You don't have to go through the whole speal of saying "It's so and so's brother. he's 5 foot 10 inches tall, etc. etc." I'd say go ahead and give him a name so we know the conversation has already begun.

After he enters the room...

That's when we need some kind of description as to who the character is, if you plan on keeping them around for more then the single scene. If they are not around for more then the scene then refer to the second answer.

Basically it comes down to figuring out exactly what the character is needed for. From there you can figure out how detailed to go with the description. The thing about descriptions though is that you really only need enough to get a feel for the character, not a history report.

Hope this helps answer your questions.

the_power said:

For the phone call, I won't let the viewer know what the other speaker is saying. It is similar to the phone conversation in Dr. Strangelove, only in that case, we know who is on the other line.

In a scene preceding this phone call, the character comes in contact with his father who he hasn't seen in 10 years. He doesn't get a chance to say anything though. Then he makes this phone call. I will have him say something like....

BOB
I need to see you...It's important...I know it's late, but this is urgent.

Later, he meets up with a waitress that he befriended before. Is this an honest trick to pull? I'm hoping that the audience thinks he is finally calling his father, but in actuality, he is calling his friend.

And for the secretary, she is only in that one scene. I had her enter the room when her boss called for her, then said in a description:

This is DIANE, his secretary.

And for the last part, I should give him the name before even really addressing him in a description? I kind of fear like that throws the reader off course and will have them saying, "who is this?"

I guess my most basic question is:
In a screenplay, can you reveal character identity before the audience founds out his/her name?

Click to expand...

As for the Phone Call:

I would personally say...no. I don't feel like it's very fair but this is one person and it can be open to interpretation. I think with proper setup you can sell it but its one of those things that needs to be done with caution.

Introduction of the Secretary:

It's fine to give them a little introduction even if you don't use them beyond the scene. It wouldn't hurt anything. I don't think it's entirely necessary though.

Introduction of Brother:

What I was talking about was giving him the name before he actually enters so the reader knows that the same character who was outside is now inside and continuing the conversation/scene. You don't want to change character name mid-scene. Even if it's going from "Visitor" to "Jason".

kind of like this:

MATT is sitting in his living room watching TV when he hears a knock at the door.

MATT
(Walking to door)
Who is it?

JASON
(Through door)
Jackass it's me. Open the door.

MATT opens the door to reveal his older brother JASON standing there covered head to toe in pig fat.

MATT
What the hell happened to you?

JASON enters and is about to sit down on a chair.

MATT
Wait a minute, let me get a towel.

JASON
Fine. Just hurry, I've never walked that far in my entire life.

ETC. ETC.

Something like that is what I was talking about. The point is to make the connection that the character is the same even though we haven't physically seen him yet.

Can you reveal character identity before the audience knows the characters name?

Think of your reader as being just like the audience. They are on this trip much like the audience will be if its produced. So they need to experience it the same way an audience would. A mystery story isn't a mystery if everything is given away. The catch here is that you can make your script as complicated and convoluted as your heart desires but it still has to have certain qualities in order to get sold. You might want the audience to figure out some things and not figure out other things, but you still have to be able to explain it.

The story still has to make sense.

The major thing to understand about the audience is that they don't know anything unless you tell them using one of the characters. They can speculate based on character interactions with other characters but they don't know the details until you tell them.

Use that to your advantage, but keep it honest.

Hope this helps.

The trick with identity reveals is to make your spec script read like watching the movie. If you want the reader to have the same sense of surprise when the identity is eventually revealed - (and you DO) - then you have to slug the character in the way that the VIEWER will experience it. True with phone conversations or 'mysterious' masked or disguised characters. Simply slug the character or voice as the reader/viewer would experience.

The 'reveal' comes later, when the character is revealed and double slugged ONCE. So
the MASKED MAN or MYSTERIOUS WOMAN then is slugged MASKED MAN/WESLEY there after it is simply WESLEY.

Another way is to give the description AFTER the subject speaks, instead of upfront. So you meet the character the same way your MC does - WHEN THEY SPEAK, then get the description afterwards. (See McQuaig's example above. The description comes AFTER the character is slugged in dialog)

No, you misunderstand. The MYSTERIOUS/JILL slug goes over dialong not within the action description.

Stephen picks up the phone and makes a call.

STEPHEN
I need to see you tonight.

(Note: We don't know who he called - THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT THE READER TO EXPERIENCE - same as the viewer. We don't know if it's male or female. It's just 'a person')

INT. DINER- MIDNIGHT
Stephen sits at the dirty formica tabletop. A tall blonde woman wearing an overcoat that barely hides her curves, enters the diner and heads straight for the counter next to Stephen.

STEPHEN
Thank you for coming.

JILL
You're lucky I was awake to answer that.

JILL SMITH (30) is Stephen's ex-wife. She reaches for her purse and..... Whatever.


In the example above - the reader/viewer doesn't know who Stephen calls. In the next scene, we see what the viewer would see - the woman walk up to Stephen and begin talking. We see the name Jill - so we have something to attach to the character - but the character DESCRIPTION follows after the initial speaking moment. This is one way to maintain 'the reveal' for the viewer/reader.


The 'double slug' would come if you introduce a character with one name, and later reveal a different identity. Could be MASKED MAN could be MAN IN SUIT could be SUSAN. And you write the screenplay. Later, in a different scene - the MAN IN SUIT or SUSAN is revealed to be someone else.

So MASKED MAN is talking through the movie - then during the fight, his masked is pulled off to reveal he is JOHN SMITH. His dialog becomes MASKED MAN/JOHN SMITH the moment he first talks after the reveal - thereafter he is JOHN SMITH.

You need not DUAL slug for obvious alter egos. BATMAN is Batman when he is in the suit, he is BRUCE WAYNE when he is not.

WriteKnight was able to word the idea better than I. You want the reader to experience the script like a viewer would experience the finished film.

the_power said:

Thanks a lot guys. Jill is a waitress that appears in the script before. So I don't need to introduce her. It's been done.

Should I double slug her as WAITRESS/JILL when she is the server for my main character. He knows and mentions her name because of her nametag.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's necessary to double slug it. Just be sure to mention that JILL is the waitress for the scene.

the_power said:

Doesn't that throw off the reader as to the significance of her? I feel like if I write Jill as the one who is speaking, then they think of her more as a friend. But I fear that if I write waitress, then it feels awkward since we know her name.

Also, for CONT'Ds. Do you write CONT'D for this example:

JOHN
I've already had three beers tonight, Alex.

John takes out his wallet and pays the bartender. He then gets John the drink.

JOHN (CONT'D ?)
See what you made me do, Alex?

And also, which of these parentheticals is worded properly?

JOHN
(Loud)
Can we go already?

or

JOHN
(Speaking Loudly)
Can we go already?

Can parenthetical like those be just one word? Or should they be more phrase-like?
​

​

Click to expand...

I'm not too sure what standard practice is for using "CONT'D" on character lines. I use a script writing program and it does it like your example when the character speaks two or more times in a row within the same scene.

Is it proper? I don't know. I try to keep those type of things to a minimum if I can.

As for the parentheticals:

I normally try to keep them as short as possible. One - two words or a short phrase (three - four words). Anything longer than that becomes, in my mind, an action line.

Again I'm not sure about standard practice but this is just how I try to do it.

The second one was worded better by the way.

Most scriptwriting programs will insert the contd. automatically. There is some variation on the approach, depending on which program, and whose book you're reading. A lot of people feel it's unnecessary. I do.

'Wrylies' - the little parentheticals that instruct the actor on how a line should be delivered are to be avoided unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. It's not the writer's job to direct the actor. Trust me, the actor and director will find ways to deliver the line that you can't even begin to imagine. I use 'wrylies' only to clear up any sort of misunderstanding that may creep into the reader's mind. For instance, in a three-way dialog, where John, Mary and Sam are having a discussion, It might help to put (to Sam) under Mary's line if she was just talking to John a moment before - OR if a line needs to be whispered, so as not to be overheard by someone nearby (whispering) - that sort of thing. Never give instruction on HOW a line is to be delivered - hence 'wryly' or 'sarcastically' or 'urgently' or any other instruction.

Short actions can also be inserted, but keep it to three or four words - beyond that you'll need an action line.

Honestly, most of these things are covered in any screen-writing book written. Perhaps a quick visit to a library will answer your questions, and facilitate faster progress in your work.

Yeah, I totally agree with WriteKnight.

Thinking back, I really only use the parentheticals in the instances your talking about. "3 person dialogue", etc. etc.

And I agree, most of the issues being discussed are pretty basic. Not trying to insult or anything.

A good book about the topic would really help you out a lot. You're gonna wanna make sure you get a book about "screenwriting" though, not "script writing".

Reason being, "Script writing" books are going to be more about the actual craft of script writing and not the standards or practices of "screenwriting".

Not to say you *shouldn't* get a book about script writing, It can do nothing but help you with your craft. It just might not deal directly with screenwriting and not answer the questions you have.

Aside from that though, enjoy the process and have fun with it.