Attention to Detail??

Hello,
Just a quick question. I have noticed that the SP I am working on is clouted with details. Should the details be left to the director? When I am writing I want to get into the details, for some strange reason. For example when explaining a location I tend to go into specific detail on the surroundings. Should I simplify things?

Thanks for any info.

If you don't provide an example -- even if it's a faked example -- who can tell?

-Derek
My Home Page

you ask but you already know the answer
usually, details are for novels
scriptwriting needs more concise descriptive words to set up tone and atmosphere
the only details needed in scriptwriting are those that are essential to the story
admit it - you knew that before you asked, am i right?

You include the details that are necessary to your telling of the story. It's your script, so you're really the only person that knows for sure which details fit that criteria.

Some people subscribe to the belief that the details in a script should be spare as possible. While I agree that there is value in concision, I also think there's something to be gained from writing that is fun to read, and from details that may not be crucial, but add interesting life to the script.

If you've got big chunky blocks of text, you're probably overdoing it on the detail front. You'll need to find the balance between writing description that belongs in a Tolstoy novel and description that reads like stereo instructions.

Need more info. Is it sci-fi or fantasy? If so, then I think details of settings are good (read James Cameron's "Aliens" and you're see what I mean). If it's mainstream/contemporary then I'd say no -- brief details are just fine. Historical -- well, a castle is a castle, for example. It depends on your settings.

Heres an Example!!

The story is an adventure, set to the old west. I am sure there are ways to unclutter, I just feel that it sets the mood. I am overly critical!!! Thanks for all the info.

Int: Cabin - NIGHT
We see a older man with a thick beard, the HOWLING has awoken him from sleep. He sets up from his makeshift bed, throwing his bearskin cover to the side. He is dressed in longjohns with a animal skin hat covering his ears. Through the low light of the fire we can see the remnants of animal hides, and horns covering the walls. The man grabs a poker and stokes his fire. Suddenly we hear a horse NEIGHING. Concerned, the man puts his boots on. He lights a lantern setting on a small table. He grabs his rifle from the corner and throws a ammo belt around his shoulder. He starts to load the rifle when suddenly the wolf HOWLS again The HOWLING is getting close. Determined, he grabs his coat and hurries to the door. With rifle in hand he starts to walk out. He suddenly realizes he forgot the lantern. He turns around and grabs the lantern before heading out.

THe next scene it outside. In the formatting would I use a cut to, or just the scene heading?

Thanks again!!

Re: Heres an Example!!

The details are fine, I think. But you write in prose form. Which is okay if you don't go overboard. Generally you want to be use very precise, crisp language for screenplays.

re:

Int: Cabin - NIGHT
We see a older man with a thick beard, the HOWLING has awoken him from sleep. He sets up from his makeshift bed, throwing his bearskin cover to the side. He is dressed in longjohns with a animal skin hat covering his ears. Through the low light of the fire we can see the remnants of animal hides, and horns covering the walls. The man grabs a poker and stokes his fire. Suddenly we hear a horse NEIGHING. Concerned, the man puts his boots on. He lights a lantern setting on a small table. He grabs his rifle from the corner and throws a ammo belt around his shoulder. He starts to load the rifle when suddenly the wolf HOWLS again The HOWLING is getting close. Determined, he grabs his coat and hurries to the door. With rifle in hand he starts to walk out. He suddenly realizes he forgot the lantern. He turns around and grabs the lantern before heading out.

Click to expand...

IMHO there's far too much there for what happens. The details really slow the pace down.

For example, "Through the low light of the fire we can see the remnants of animal hides, and horns covering the walls. The man grabs a poker and stokes his fire." can be cut with no negative effect on your story. Unless the fire or the poker come into play later in the sequence he doesn't need to poke it.

Also be careful of the tense you write in. "the HOWLING has awoken him from sleep" should be... a HOWL wakes him (or something similar).

And another thing to be careful of is telling us how a character is feeling. "Concerned", "determined" and "realizes he forgot the lantern" for example. His actions should tell us these things.

Re: Heres an Example!!

trek, ever heard the phrase "too much black"? Big chunky blocks of text are harder to read than smaller, neater paragraphs.

The following is just my humble opinion, you understand, don't take my suggestions as gospel:

Int: Cabin - NIGHT

Sluglines are CAPITALIZED, e.g.

INT. CABIN - NIGHT

FYI, most screenwriting packages I've used or trialed act upon the user typing "int." or "ext." with the period, which prompts the software to insert a scene heading, so you might want to get into this habit (using period instead of non-standard colon).

We see a older man with a thick beard, the HOWLING has awoken him from sleep. He sets up from his makeshift bed, throwing his bearskin cover to the side. He is dressed in longjohns with a animal skin hat covering his ears. Through the low light of the fire we can see the remnants of animal hides, and horns covering the walls. The man grabs a poker and stokes his fire. Suddenly we hear a horse NEIGHING. Concerned, the man puts his boots on. He lights a lantern setting on a small table. He grabs his rifle from the corner and throws a ammo belt around his shoulder. He starts to load the rifle when suddenly the wolf HOWLS again The HOWLING is getting close. Determined, he grabs his coat and hurries to the door. With rifle in hand he starts to walk out. He suddenly realizes he forgot the lantern. He turns around and grabs the lantern before heading out.

I think the horse might be neighing because it's choking on the size of this paragraph! Consider, just for fun's sake:

INT. CABIN - NIGHT

Dim firelight reveals animal hides and horns covering the walls. A sleeping man-shape occupies a primitive bed covered in bearskin.

A WOLF HOWL awakens an OLD MAN who jumps up, throwing the bearskin aside. He's wearing longjohns and a skin hat with ear flaps. His eyes are wild, his bushy beard wilder still.

He waddles to the fire and stokes it using a poker. Outside, a horse NEIGHS. The old man throws the poker down, sits on the bed and pulls on his boots. He lights an oil lantern, shrugs on his coat, slings an ammo belt over his shoulder and grabs his rifle.

The WOLF HOWL comes again, much closer this time.

The old man thumbs back the hammer and heads for the door. He stops, remembering the lantern. He snatches it up, throws the door open and plunges outside.

...or not, shrug, each to their own. But note the shorter, easier-to-read paragraphs. Note the direct telling instead of the weaker "we see" this and "we see" that (optional, not a hard rule, but as someone once said, "Of course we see it, it's a movie!"). Note how the location gets described first for clarity's sake. Note how the old man puts on his coat before he throws the ammo belt over his shoulder (a more sensible set of actions). Compare the above with yours, decide which you prefer.

THe next scene it outside. In the formatting would I use a cut to, or just the scene heading?

I'd drop the CUT TO: which isn't necessary. Older scripts seem to feature these, or perhaps someone inserts them into the production scripts, but technically a new scene is, by default, a CUT TO: so what's the point?

As stated above everything's my humble opinion, it's just how I'd write things. Everyone should feel free to jump in and point out the error of my ways.

-Derek
My Home Page

Thanks

Thanks to all for the great insight!!

Derek,
I see exactly what you mean.

I look forward to more constructive criticism as I progress..

Matt

Re: Thanks

Caveat: I have nothing but rejection letters, so what do I know?

---------

Way too much going on in that paragraph. Think about what is really going on here:

a guy wakes up to the sounds of wolves, puts on his britches, takes his gun and leaves.

Pretty simple. And you need to write it succintly. We know he lights his lantern if he takes it. We know a bed covered in skins is "primitive". Don't have to explain how he sits on the bed to put on his boots and then his laces break so he has to go to the cupboard, blah-blah-blah . . .

Your job is not to block the scene. Your job is not to set design and art direct, unless you describe something that absolutely no-one can imagine; all that tedious description is weighing your action and is a prime example of "padding". Tell us there is a woodsman living in a run-down hunting lodge and we can perfectly well imagine the bones and trophies, thank you. Boom! Done! Move it along!

And never *ever* tell the actor her/his job: "he waddles", he is "determined", he "plunges outside" (whatever that means!)

You are not making the film. The director is using your material to make the film - allow them their vision.

Re: Thanks

Well, you can't help but tell the actor how to do his/her job, simply because you're the person that establishes who the character is. If the character "waddles", you're free to say that. If you keep worrying about stepping on someone's toes, you'll end up with 100 blank pages. If the actor and director decide not to have the character waddle, fine. But at this stage, it's still your script.

Something you do want to avoid is telling the actor how to read a line. It's an insult to the actor (and the reader) to assume they won't understand the dialogue if you don't put "sarcastically" or "angrily" or "with enthusiasm" in parentheses somewhere.

"Is determined" would be weak because it's a state of being and not an action. Since the audience can't get inside the character's mind while they're watching the movie, it's better to describe the character DOING something.

Dave...

Re: Thanks

That's the problem with novelist trying to write screenplays. As a novelist, you tell your characters how to act and think, and you describe in details the settings and the character's action. You are the director and you want to put your "movie" on the page for the readers to see.

As a screenwright, you don't. Your job is to write what you can show and hear on screen, and nothing more. And you don't have to choreograph every move or show every expression of the character. You leave room for the directors and actors to interpret the story and bring their own vision to it. If something IS important to the story, show it (forex, show the character is holding a knife in his hand, because it's important -- later he is going to use the knife to kill someone... you still don't have to say what kind of knife unless that information is also important). If not, skip the nitty details.