CUT TO, CAMERA PANS, We see etc....

danshaw

Registered
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
Hi all
I am new to this, but am doing well on writing my first script, currently up to 80 pages and the story/characters are all fitting together nicely and my ending is all mapped out.

However, I know that there are issues with the technical side. I haven't paid too much attention with writing phonecalls correctly for example. I have concentrated on getting it all down.

I have read these and other forums on the subject and there seem to be so many DON'TS. Never use CUT TO. Dont use "We" see this, "We" see that. Use CONTINUOUS every time, don't use CONTINUOUS every time. Dont give camera directions (CAMERA pans left and we see the knife). Put all character names in CAPITALS.

I have read several scripts for commercial films (some shooting scripts, but some werent) and they all seem to contradict some or all of these rules.

So my question is
a) Is there a list of hard and fast Do's and Don'ts?
b) Can you recommend any scripts I can download for commercial films that are good to learn from technically (so not shooting scripts)

Thanks alot
 

alleycat

Still around
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
72,919
Reaction score
12,277
Location
Tennessee
Besides reading spec scripts, I would suggest getting a copy of The Screenwriter's Bible. If you don't want to buy the latest version (about $15), you can get a used copy of the previous edition for less than $10.

It will answer almost all the formatting and technical questions you might have.
 

Mac H.

Board Visitor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
406
So my question is
a) Is there a list of hard and fast Do's and Don'ts?
b) Can you recommend any scripts I can download for commercial films that are good to learn from technically (so not shooting scripts)

Thanks alot
Like any myth, the 'shooting scripts' story has an element of truth .. but it is mainly total BS.

Imagine that someone does the incredible - they sell a spec script. Do you honestly think that the director will say "I love the script - but unfortunately it's not a shooting script yet .. we need to pay someone to rewrite it to put in some camera angles so I'll know what to do." Of course not!

The myth seems to have been started because whenever people noticed that professionally written scripts break the 'rules' it was a handy come-back ... the idea that it was a 'shooting' script rather than one that a studio buys.

Sure, putting in a camera angle on every line and a 'CUT TO' at the end of every scene will be jarring. So don't do it. But that isn't the same thing as avoiding them as being unprofessional. (The change from the old style of 'CUT TO' at the end of every scene faded out some time in the 1970s, if I recall a conversation with an old-timer correctly)

There's some interesting threads on the 'rules' topic on DoneDealPro at the moment. And some decent pros who have made films that you've seen at the local cinema are putting their input into the conversation. (I'm talking about films like '3:10 to Yuma, Hotel for Dogs, John Tucker Must Die, Ocean's 13, the sequel to 'The Hangover', the spec script 'The Book of Eli' etc ..)

Good luck !

Mac
 
Last edited:

danshaw

Registered
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
Interesting MAC, I guess it also depends whether or not the director has written the script himself.
 

nmstevens

What happened?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
1,452
Reaction score
207
Hi all
I am new to this, but am doing well on writing my first script, currently up to 80 pages and the story/characters are all fitting together nicely and my ending is all mapped out.

However, I know that there are issues with the technical side. I haven't paid too much attention with writing phonecalls correctly for example. I have concentrated on getting it all down.

I have read these and other forums on the subject and there seem to be so many DON'TS. Never use CUT TO. Dont use "We" see this, "We" see that. Use CONTINUOUS every time, don't use CONTINUOUS every time. Dont give camera directions (CAMERA pans left and we see the knife). Put all character names in CAPITALS.

I have read several scripts for commercial films (some shooting scripts, but some werent) and they all seem to contradict some or all of these rules.

So my question is
a) Is there a list of hard and fast Do's and Don'ts?
b) Can you recommend any scripts I can download for commercial films that are good to learn from technically (so not shooting scripts)

Thanks alot

I can only tell you what I do and what seems to be the case in most scripts that I see these days.

CUT to: -- I almost never see it, and when I do, it's used for a specific effect -- that is, to call attention to a particular cut, like,

Sheila raised the the pair of garden clippers, approaching Henry's neck with a look of fiendish glee.

CUT to:

Janine holds a pair of scissors. She snips the head off a rose.

Or something like that.

CONTINUOUS -- again, very rarely and only under circumstances where there might be some doubt as to whether two adjoining scenes might be continuous or not.

As for "we see" -- same deal. It's not absolutely forbidden, but it's the sort of thing that one uses very rarely and the only justification for using it is in those circumstances when you're calling attention to something that "we" -- by which I mean "we" the putative audience watching the movie in the theatre, are meant to see or notice something that those characters participating in the story don't see or notice.

Now, a lot of times, you can simply convey that sort of thing simply by describing it. But you're going to find that there are some circumstances that distinguish between things that one merely "describes" and the requirement that things be *seen* in a particular way for purposes of story.

I mean, we've all seen those kinds of moments in movies where we only see the feet of the bad guy approaching, or the hand, or a scene is shot in such a way -- say in a long shot, so that the identity of a character is obscured.

The general advice that the writer should simply "describe what happens" simply isn't going to fly in those sorts of situations -- because, for story reasons, it won't work to simply describe what happens - you have to describe what "we see" -- that is, what the audience watching the movie is going to see when they watch the movie.

And that's when it's legitimate to use "we see."

And also, to a lesser extent, when it's legitimate to use camera directions, but one must be extremely cautious in the use of such things. The only time I've used any reference to a camera at all in any script I've written in years is in one of those scripts that's supposed to have been shot from a live camera POV, like Blair Witch -- or in moments, again, where we're supposed to be seeing something from a surveillance camera or something like that.

That is, I've almost never in the last twenty years referenced the actual camera - the camera that's being used by the D.P. to shoot the narrative movie -- talking about pans and zooms and dolly shots.

As for character names -- they are capitalized when you first introduce them and also they are capitalized as CHARACTER headings for dialogue. That's it. No other time.

JOHN JONES, thirty, steps into the room. We've never seen him before.

JOHN JONES

Hi, I'm John Jones.

John Jones looks around, then leaves the room.


That is a hard and fast rule.

NMS
 

Hillgate

On location
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,322
Reaction score
114
Location
Europe
I really don't mind any number of Cut to/Fade to Black/we see/continual capitalisation of character names/other formatting blimps (but I detest bad grammar and spelling though) as long as the script's great because all of those 'small' things are ridiculously easy to fix. They take minutes. Crafting a superb screenplay that someone is going to want to (a) read (b) option and (c) make into a movie and (d) distribute and (e) buy as end-user is a different matter.

Anyone who rejects your script because of a formatting issue, as long as it's consistent and the script's highly readable from page 1 until the very end is a bit of an idiot. Unfortunately, there are some idiots out there, so unless you know who you're submitting to or they know what your style is then maybe it's best not to offend anyone.

Time for a glass of red I think.
 

nmstevens

What happened?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
1,452
Reaction score
207
I really don't mind any number of Cut to/Fade to Black/we see/continual capitalisation of character names/other formatting blimps (but I detest bad grammar and spelling though) as long as the script's great because all of those 'small' things are ridiculously easy to fix. They take minutes. Crafting a superb screenplay that someone is going to want to (a) read (b) option and (c) make into a movie and (d) distribute and (e) buy as end-user is a different matter.

Anyone who rejects your script because of a formatting issue, as long as it's consistent and the script's highly readable from page 1 until the very end is a bit of an idiot. Unfortunately, there are some idiots out there, so unless you know who you're submitting to or they know what your style is then maybe it's best not to offend anyone.

Time for a glass of red I think.

This is my opinion about this -- sure, if you write a great script, most other things will be overlooked.

In my time, I've gotten screenplays where it was clear that the writer had only the most passing familiarity with the basic formatting rules of screenwriting -- but it was a very good script. And it ultimately became clear why -- it was because the writer was professional writer. He was a novelist (mostly of crime thrillers) was giving screenwriting a crack, and you could tell from the writing style that you were dealing with someone who knew what he was doing, even though he didn't quite know all the rules of formatting.

The point about formatting rules, like rules of grammar, even spelling rules, is that they exist for a reason.

A lot of times, especially when conveying these so-called "rules" to beginners, the tendency is to deliver them as mere "rules of thumb" -- this is never done, this is always done, without really trying to convey why certain things are done in certain ways.

When you understand why, for instance, you should tend to stay away from things like flashbacks and fantasy sequences (which beginnings are often warned to avoid) as opposed to simply accepting it as a rule of thumb, then you avoid the sorts of arguments that always start with, "Well, so-and-so uses them, and so-and-so uses them" -- and the replies that go that it's okay when they do it because they're big successful screenwriters, as if promulgating the false idea that there are rules that beginners have to follow but which the pro's get to break.

No. There are things that are difficult to master which beginners tend to get wrong because their understanding of the craft is limited early on, but which, as they become better writers, they can master later on.

Things like "we see" are easy to get wrong. Things like flashback and fantasy sequence are easy to get wrong.

It's not that professionals are somehow given a free pass to "break the rules" -- it's that they understand the rules.

That's why my electrician knows when he needs to turn off the breaker when he's doing something with the wiring and when he doesn't. I, on the other hand, don't know well enough. If he's changing a wall socket, he doesn't bother to trip the breaker. If I'm changing a wall socket, I do trip the breaker.

That's not because he's "breaking the rules" -- it's because he knows the rules a hell of lot better than I do.

So you always have a choice when you're giving advice to beginners -- you can just say -- "always trip the breaker" -- and that's it.

You can say, "Never use 'we see.'"

But then you inevitably have to deal with the fact that they're going to see other people use it and wonder why they manage to get away with it.

And part of the reason that those people manage to "get away" with that sort of thing comes from the same source that allows them to write first rate scripts that sell.

They have mastered the full palette of professional skills that allow them to write scripts at a professional level.

They aren't "getting away" with anything, any more than a prose writer who chooses to use sentence fragments is "getting away" with something - they're simply using these particular things for an intentional effect.

They can do that because they understand how to use them.

And it seems to me best to try to convey not simply the "rule of thumb" to beginners but to at least try to make the larger rule -- the "real" rule clear in respect to these things.

NMS
 

FabienRoy

Registered
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
20
Reaction score
1
Location
Province of Quebec.
I have found most answers and the ones you are asking about in the screenwriter's bible by David Trottier. He lays out the skeleton of a script and for the flesh use STORY by Robert McKee and top it off with scriptwriting software (i use final draft) and you got all the tools you need. a shallow investment for the confidence it procures.

Trust the music and always dance as if no one is watching.
 

stuckupmyownera

Mostly lurking
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
608
Reaction score
59
Location
UK
That's why my electrician knows when he needs to turn off the breaker when he's doing something with the wiring and when he doesn't. I, on the other hand, don't know well enough. If he's changing a wall socket, he doesn't bother to trip the breaker. If I'm changing a wall socket, I do trip the breaker.

That's not because he's "breaking the rules" -- it's because he knows the rules a hell of lot better than I do.

So you always have a choice when you're giving advice to beginners -- you can just say -- "always trip the breaker" -- and that's it.

Great explanation, NMS.

But personally, I play it safe and omit all camera directions, cuts and 'we's. I don't like to read them, so why include them in my own writing? I'm confident that I can handle pretty much any shot without. In fact, in all my screenplays so far I've used ONE camera direction - and in the second draft I realised there was a much better way of handling the reveal and took it out.

You wanna just show the bad guy's feet?

BAD GUY'S FEET creep to the door.

You wanna pan left and show a knife?

On the side table, his knife waits.

How's this?

Code:
EXT. APARTMENT BLOCK - EVENING

A FLORIST and a BAKER, in neighbouring premises, turn their OPEN signs to CLOSED 
and switch off the lights in unison.

They leave their shops, lock the doors, and walk to the apartment building door, 
between the two shops. Each tries to usher the other in first. They chuckle.

The decaying apartment block rises five storeys above the shops. The two men are 
visible through the hallway window of each storey as they climb the stairs.

Two apartments on each floor. All with their curtains open, revealing the 
occupants watching TV inside.
No wide shots or cranes or pans or 'we see's (all right, 'are visible' is perhaps a slight cheat, but I find it unintrusive so it works for me), but I expect what you see when you read this is pretty close to what I see. SO why complicate things?
 
Last edited:

PrincessofPersia

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 19, 2010
Messages
1,430
Reaction score
132
I do the same thing, stuck, but I don't use all caps except for when I'm first introing a character. But yeah, if I want a specific shot, I just write it in a way that forces you to imagine it that way without throwing in a camera angles. Seems to be working so far.
 

Hillgate

On location
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,322
Reaction score
114
Location
Europe
Great explanation, NMS.

But personally, I play it safe and omit all camera directions, cuts and 'we's. I don't like to read them, so why include them in my own writing? I'm confident that I can handle pretty much any shot without. In fact, in all my screenplays so far I've used ONE camera direction - and in the second draft I realised there was a much better way of handling the reveal and took it out.

You wanna just show the bad guy's feet?

BAD GUY'S FEET creep to the door.

You wanna pan left and show a knife?

On the side table, his knife waits.

How's this?

Code:
EXT. APARTMENT BLOCK - EVENING

A FLORIST and a BAKER, in neighbouring premises, turn their OPEN signs to CLOSED 
and switch off the lights in unison.

They leave their shops, lock the doors, and walk to the apartment building door, 
between the two shops. Each tries to usher the other in first. They chuckle.

The decaying apartment block rises five storeys above the shops. The two men are 
visible through the hallway window of each storey as they climb the stairs.

Two apartments on each floor. All with their curtains open, revealing the 
occupants watching TV inside.
No wide shots or cranes or pans or 'we see's (all right, 'are visible' is perhaps a slight cheat, but I find it unintrusive so it works for me), but I expect what you see when you read this is pretty close to what I see. SO why complicate things?

To play devil's advocate and to show that maybe not all people see what you think they should see:

1. You say the shops are adjacent and then you say that there's an apartment block in between the two shops. I'd obviously need to know which it was and how important either siting was.

2. I'd avoid saying 'waits' as this sounds a little lyrical/hackneyed/author's ugly head reared and also gives the game away that it's waiting to be picked-up. And no need for left instead of right. It stops me in my reading flow. Unless of course 'left' is crucial, which it may be. 'A knife rests on a table' would do me fine.

3. 'Tries to usher in the other' - does one of them move first or is it a coordinated sequence where they do everything concurrently/mirror image? At the same time? With a nod? A hand? An eyebrow (which would of necessity indicate a close up)? Do they/should they speak? Why do they CHUCKLE (CAPS maybe to make it easy for my sound guy)? Is there a look of recognition between them before they chuckle?

H
 

stuckupmyownera

Mostly lurking
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
608
Reaction score
59
Location
UK
1. You say the shops are adjacent and then you say that there's an apartment block in between the two shops. I'd obviously need to know which it was and how important either siting was.

No, I say the door is between the two shops, but point taken.

3. 'Tries to usher in the other' - does one of them move first or is it a coordinated sequence where they do everything concurrently/mirror image? At the same time? With a nod? A hand? An eyebrow (which would of necessity indicate a close up)? Do they/should they speak? Why do they CHUCKLE (CAPS maybe to make it easy for my sound guy)? Is there a look of recognition between them before they chuckle?

Does it matter? I'm not the director. And that's important to learn to - when a detail is important and when it's not. We're here to tell the story, not to fill in every detail. ;)
 

nmstevens

What happened?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
1,452
Reaction score
207
Great explanation, NMS.

But personally, I play it safe and omit all camera directions, cuts and 'we's. I don't like to read them, so why include them in my own writing? I'm confident that I can handle pretty much any shot without. In fact, in all my screenplays so far I've used ONE camera direction - and in the second draft I realised there was a much better way of handling the reveal and took it out.

You wanna just show the bad guy's feet?

BAD GUY'S FEET creep to the door.

You wanna pan left and show a knife?

On the side table, his knife waits.

How's this?

Code:
EXT. APARTMENT BLOCK - EVENING

A FLORIST and a BAKER, in neighbouring premises, turn their OPEN signs to CLOSED 
and switch off the lights in unison.

They leave their shops, lock the doors, and walk to the apartment building door, 
between the two shops. Each tries to usher the other in first. They chuckle.

The decaying apartment block rises five storeys above the shops. The two men are 
visible through the hallway window of each storey as they climb the stairs.

Two apartments on each floor. All with their curtains open, revealing the 
occupants watching TV inside.
No wide shots or cranes or pans or 'we see's (all right, 'are visible' is perhaps a slight cheat, but I find it unintrusive so it works for me), but I expect what you see when you read this is pretty close to what I see. SO why complicate things?

I don't want to get into a discussion of a scene, since that really belongs more in the "show your work" area, but honestly, I found it a bit confusing. I'm not necessarily sure that referencing shots or using "we see" would make any difference, nor would the use of either really relate to the specific circumstances where I indicated that it would be appropriate.

All that seems to be happening here is that two men leave their stores and go up together in an apartment building. Whether they're seen doing it from the outside, from inside, or whether we see them doing it at all, from a "story" point of view, is really up in the air -- again, unless there's some critical story reason for us to be seeing this stuff happening from outside the building.

There can be reasons for things to be *seen* in a particular specific way -- on screen.

That is, it's not simply a question of how events happen, but really, what the audience in the theatre specifically *sees* happening on the screen.

It can be something like this.

EXT. THE DESERTED FIELD - DAY

John drives up to the end of the road and stops the car. Beyond the end of the road, there's a fallow field -- naked earth stretching as far as the eye can see.

He steps out. Around a hundred and fifty yards away, standing in the midst of the deserted field, is a FIGURE in a heavy dark coat and. At this distance, the figure is too far away to make out any details -- we can't even be sure if it's a man or a woman.

John hesitates a moment, then crosses the field, moving away from us toward the lone Figure.

The two meet in the distance. They speak together. We don't hear what they say.

The Figure passes something to John. He pauses a few seconds, then reaches out and takes whatever it is, shoving it into a pocket, turns and moves quickly back to his car.

He enters his car and drives away.


The point is, for *story* purposes (let's presume this actually was part of a story) it might be necessary for John to meet with somebody. We need to see the meeting. We need to know that he's gotten something. But we can't know who he's met with, what's been said, or what it is that he's gotten.

It's perfectly reasonable, in a situation like that, to stage a scene in the way that I've described it above -- to do it in that way in order to serve that purpose.

Well, if it's okay to do it that way, for story purposes, then there's nothing wrong with describing it, in the script -- for story purposes. That's our job. The story.

And again, the question of whether one might be able to rebuild it in some way so as to eliminate the "we" from the text is really beside the point. If using "we" conveys the necessary information in the most concise way -- why do it in some other way?

NMS
 

Hillgate

On location
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,322
Reaction score
114
Location
Europe
Does it matter? I'm not the director. And that's important to learn to - when a detail is important and when it's not. We're here to tell the story, not to fill in every detail. ;)

I'd ask you this in script development which is the only reason I mentioned it. It's a reaction thing and I think you could make more of your duplicate-action set-up with a little more written reaction. It's not like you'd have to describe in detail the intricacies of the grain on the doorknob. ;)
 

Hillgate

On location
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,322
Reaction score
114
Location
Europe
One of my writer/director friends loves using 'in his mind's eye' in his script to indicate a warped reality moment or dream-sequence and he doesn't bother indicating a new scene or altered state via a new slug or even a 'DREAM SEQUENCE' semi-slug.

So he'll write: 'In his mind's eye Wilbur sees a cruise missile heading for the prison block. He blinks, and it's gone.'

Or: 'In her mind's eye, Jessica sits on a throne in Ancient Egypt, a snake wrapped around her neck and gnawing at her hand, but then she snaps out of it and realises that the till is jammed and that her hand is stuck inside it.'

Thoughts?
 

stuckupmyownera

Mostly lurking
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
608
Reaction score
59
Location
UK
One of my writer/director friends loves using 'in his mind's eye' in his script to indicate a warped reality moment or dream-sequence and he doesn't bother indicating a new scene or altered state via a new slug or even a 'DREAM SEQUENCE' semi-slug.

So he'll write: 'In his mind's eye Wilbur sees a cruise missile heading for the prison block. He blinks, and it's gone.'

Or: 'In her mind's eye, Jessica sits on a throne in Ancient Egypt, a snake wrapped around her neck and gnawing at her hand, but then she snaps out of it and realises that the till is jammed and that her hand is stuck inside it.'

Thoughts?

I've certainly used that before, for quick flashbacks or imaginings.

I'd start a new line for a new shot though, and I'd be tempted to capitalise to emphasise the change, though maybe that'd upset some people.

IN HIS MIND'S EYE: A cruise missile heads for the prison block.

HE BLINKS and snaps out of it.
 

WriteKnight

Arranger Of Disorder
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
1,746
Reaction score
247
Location
30,000 light years from Galactic Central Point.
I'm working on a script that has a Vet suffering from PTSD and a head injury. He moves in and out of hallucinations. I use capital letters and slug lines to indicate the change.

INT. RECRUITING OFFICE DAY

Don walks into the office. The Recruiter looks up from his desk.

DON'S POV - HALLUCINATION

An Iraqi insurgent looks up from the desk.

RECRUITING OFFICE - REALITY

The Sergeant stands up and extends his hand in greeting.


That sort of thing. I think it's important to indicate the shift in fantasy viewpoints - just as you would indicate a shift in a flashback, or dream sequence. It can be with a POV sort of slug, or IN HIS MINDS EYE - Though I think in order to set up the "MINDS EYE" slug line as a fantasy POV - the first time it is used, it needs to be explained that MINDS EYE is 'fantasy' or 'hallucination'.

But yeah, I think some sort of capital slug line to indicate change is needed rather than burying what could be a major set change, or special effect - somewhere inside an action segment. If you're going to jump from a contemporary setting, to some sort of fantastical or period setting - it should be set off.
 

lkuey126

Registered
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
11
Reaction score
3
I do tend to include camera angles and transitions because I actually tend to make the film eventually. And it's usually ME that makes the film (I'm nowhere near as experienced enough to submit it to anyone) and because I not only direct but also edit the film too, I kind of need the camera angles and transitions. I don't think the actors need to read it, but I feel it should be there for the director/editor's reference
 

WriteKnight

Arranger Of Disorder
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
1,746
Reaction score
247
Location
30,000 light years from Galactic Central Point.
I do tend to include camera angles and transitions because I actually tend to make the film eventually. And it's usually ME that makes the film (I'm nowhere near as experienced enough to submit it to anyone) and because I not only direct but also edit the film too, I kind of need the camera angles and transitions. I don't think the actors need to read it, but I feel it should be there for the director/editor's reference

This then, is a SHOOTING SCRIPT - not a 'spec script'. As a filmmaker, I include camera directions and coverage in my shooting scripts - but not in spec scripts. Different animals.
 

Royal Mercury

I think I am, therefore....
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
211
Reaction score
11
Don't worry too much about camera and editing directions. That's why they have a director and an editor.