Screenwriting : WHat is best--Sequential story or Flashbacks? by Thomas Ray

As far as the element or transition of flashback I think you could date the action in a scene heading. It's an interesting question and perhaps I'm wrong but dating the scene heading might be better. e.g. Abandoned Hangar- Evening She cocks her head, gets starry eyed. Then the scene heading is main character's house- 1984, such and such park-1987, such and such town-1993, local bar- 1997 then after the sequence of whatever Abondoned Hangar, Present Day- Evening Her starry eyed look dissapates, determination, purpose comes over her, she looks at the carnage, exits hangar. Maybe someone was referring to element of flashback and not the story containing flashbacks. Opening scenes to flashbacks happen all the time and they are interesting. If she is a vaguely known character tell the back-story if it is interesting. I wouldn't spend more than fifteen pages or fifteen screen minutes telling her back story especially if the story is not about her. You could do periodic flashbacks as the story progresses and an event is relevant. This is just conceptualizing hashing out a direction but I don't think you will find a diffinitive answer in sequencing. I hope not anyway. Many things in screenwriting can be standardized but sequencing is one element that really is more conceptualizing at least in my opinion and I've probably rambled too much. I'm learning and please don't take anything I say as gospel these are just my idea's opinions on the fly so to speak.

Don't be apologetic. THIS is exactly what I am looking for ---NEW suggestions or options I may not have thought of yet. Thanks

Unless it pushes the story forward - don't use it. Pages of necessary backstory AND flashbacks take away from a read. Your protagonist should have a well defined goal and plenty of obstacles in the way of that goal. That's what you need to show. Use the first 10 pages as a setup about who your character is and what they desire.

If you're an unproduced spec screenwriter, best to avoid flashbacks. Once you've got a screenwriting reputation in hand, then go to it. Audiences hardly ever have a problem following flashbacks, but studio execs often assume they do. And, bottom line, it is easier to follow a story that uses traditional linear story structure.

The suggestion that flashbacks shouldn't be used in a screenplay is utterly ridiculous. In the first place, flashbacks and nonlinear chronologies are specifically cinematic tools screenwriters can deploy over and above other creative media. Pulp Fiction, Memento, Election, Annie Hall, Godfather II, - my God! - how could you ignore these structures? Imagine reading the pilot to True Detective with no flashbacks? In the second place, if you are writing in certain genres (David Lean-style epics, Fairy Tales, most dramatic Bio-pics, weird David Lynch-style noir), flashbacks are expected to show you've mastered the genre. Film makes flashbacks easy to follow, because in film every thing happens in the now. So if your reader is confused by flashbacks they're either inexperienced or your writing is lacking. I say, use more flashbacks (and flashforwards)!

I think it really depends what the flashbacks add to the story. For example, in Highlander the flashbacks were crucial to the storyline and understanding who the main characters were. If the flashbacks just add a little backstory that isn't pertinent to the overall storyline, I'd avoid it. If its crucial to explain where we are today, go for it.

Not knowing your story, I'm not sure if my suggestion will be helpful but here it is. Give some thought to your antagonist and your villains (some people use those terms interchangeably. I distinguish between those who oppose the protagonist but may be good guys, antagonists, from those who simply do evil stuff, villains). If as you say, 'the setup for the Protagonist is a bit slow at the beginning', start with some action by either your antagonist(s) or your villains, something which cries out for some action from your protagonist, and see if that opening works, perhaps even without flashbacks, with you introducing your protagonist after we see the 'need' for him/her. Flashbacks are a tool. That's it. Well used, they can work. If not, they won't. As someone observed above, if you have set it up so that the reader/audience is desperate for the information in the FB, they'll go for it. (The classic in this regard would be the FB in Casablanca. Because of the set up, We REALLY want to know the history behind the relationship between Ric and Ilsa.)

Well, what makes it a bit slow sequentially is that the protagonist, who starts out as a hero, is captured by the antagonist, goes through the "traumatic experience", physically recovers, swears vengeance, and obtains the friends and the means to carry it out---before the REAL exciting action happens. It takes 50 pages (120 page Script) for this set up for the Characters. I was thinking of starting with the protag, present day, ALREADY recovered and engaged in the first of several battles, THEN flashing back to the character/story set up phase, coming back to present day for the final conflicts that defeat the antagonist.-----That way the audience is hooked on the protag from the start and wants to know who she is and what motivates her--The flashback will reveal what happened to her and why she is fighting---And then the story can continue to its final outcome.---That's my idea anyway. I just do not like that long flashback stretch in the first half of the story---But it is ALL important. As THIS is the FIRST of a series of scripts using these characters, I will not have this problem in future installments as the characters and situation will be established. I am looking for different ways and approaches I might handle this 50 page set up problem.

Mitchell and Michael, dates do NOT belong in a scene heading. If a specific date is critical to the story this information must be conveyed visually, either with a calendar, a banner or sign at an event showing the date, or an old fashioned SUPER: in the action line. One might argue that they 'saw it done in a script before', but I'll bet you a doughnut it was in a produced script written by a pro. ~ Regarding flashbacks, they can be done well and they can be done poorly. Watch 'Batman Begins' to see the former. If you feel like you're flashing back too much you can sometimes abbreviate a scene by condensing they core element of it and then having one character share the past details via dialogue. As the character shares details of the past we hear his/her voice as V.O. as we see what happened in the past. Sometimes what is being told and what is being seen don't match, which creates conflict. This technique keeps the reader or viewer in the present while showing them a glimpse of the past. Some writers use this technique as a transition to a flashback, while others use it as a stand-alone way to deepen the characters and story.

"My Idea was to begin near the middle of the story with the Protag at her full powers involved in a battle with a foe, which she handily defeats..." Thomas, while you could do this, it would be more effective to show the Protag in peril to build a sense of sympathy and concern rather than showing her as unbeatable. What you're describing is a professional technique whereby the writer jumps ahead to an exciting, suspenseful moment in the story and then begins at an earlier point to fill in the details to explain how that moment came to be. Two examples of this can be found in the film 'Lolita' with Jeremy Irons and 'Megamind' with Will Ferrel. ~ When it comes to avoiding flashbacks, I believe one common opinion is to avoid them when the purpose is solely for the conveyance of information, which can make that information feel contrived. If a flashback is used to deepen a character or the plot, or to reveal something we thought happened one way but that actually happened a completely different way (this was done very well in the film, 'The Debt' with Helen Mirren), it can be quite effective.

My concept was to establish a strong and formidable character right at the beginning, proving herself, and showing the audience who she is, THEN going to flashback showing how she got that way, from a hero of another sort, to a destroyed victim, and reinventing herself as a hero once again-- Which she demonstrates at the opening sequence against a relatively minor foe. The flashback concentrates primarily on the changing psychology and the new motivations of the protag that drive her to become the new hero we first encounter.----That is why I wanted to shy away from references of the past by dialogue alone. I was not sure I could convey her past effectively that way. When the Present day resumes--we soon discover that this battle would be a minor milestone compared to what will lie ahead in the story. Sure, she is a capable hero , but will she be up to the formidable task of going up against the army that awaits her?

Maybe this will help: http://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2014/08/22

Non linear storytelling is not the same as a flashback.

Derek I'll respectfully agree to disagree and here is why. We are talking about going into a back-story with progression not a flashback from my understanding. While I could go look on the internet and incite several references we are talking about time periods and not dates. http://www.storysense.com/format/headings.htm If the story is strong and makes sense these time periods should indeed convey well to a reader, be easily understood by a reader. It may be more clever to give the visual of time period but there are many times a scene should not be able to be distinguished from 1984- 2014. Now if we go back to turn of century, even fifties or sixties yes a conveyance can be handled easier another way. Would you rather have simple conveyance as the reader knowing exactly what's going on or search and dig in action and dialogue. I'm not saying your totally wrong just that time periods do indeed have a place in some screenplays and some scene headings.

Mitchell/Michael, you're citing one source as evidence for using dates/time periods in scene headings (not sure how dated the info is -- it says the page was updated on Sept. 5, 2014 but there's no indication what was updated). One could make the argument "Well, I established the year 1929 so now I can just reference it in the scene heading when I jump back to that year." Chances are some readers won't fault you for that, and maybe it's not even worth arguing about. My understanding (after reading several books and combing over many websites) is that specific dates should be considered the same as any other specific time: you shouldn't write 10:56 a.m. in a scene heading either. Why? Because the viewer watching the movie can't see a specific time or date. You have to indicate these visually somehow. With regard to 'time periods' used to set a scene previously established, it may be permissible to include them in a scene heading. But 1929 (as cited on the Story Sense website) is NOT a time period, it's a specific year. '1920s' is a time period. ~ One other thing I will point out is this: the same website (Story Sense) that incorrectly shows how to include a time period (again, 1929 is a year, not a time period) tells the reader to use 'INSERT' to indicate a newspaper and then use 'BACK TO SCENE' and also to use (continuing) or (CONT'D) when a character has two or more consecutive lines. Both conventions, while possibly acceptable to some readers, are now considered dated and are seldom if ever used anymore, which makes me question the validity of all other information on this site (Mr. Brown's impressive credentials notwithstanding). But those writers who wish to use one website as a screenwriters bible, feel free to do so. Just know that there are MANY resources out there with more up-to-date information. Relying on the first formatting website that pops up in a Google search is often a big mistake. Always get a second, third and even a fourth opinion. ~ Royce, your comment "Non linear storytelling is not the same as a flashback" is 100% correct when referring to films like 'Pulp Fiction', '11:14' and 'Memento'. In the example 'Batman Begins', however, the story jumps all over the place (and still works brilliantly) with flash-forwards and flashbacks. This is not nonlinear storytelling, this is storytelling via flash-forward and flashback. It's just done in a much more effective and creative way. The story opens with Bruce as a child, then flashes forward to him in a Bhutanese jail. He meets Ducard/Ra's Al Ghul and then the story flashes back to Bruce's childhood. Except this time, the return to childhood is marked as (WAYNE'S MEMORY), i.e., a flashback. The writer cleverly establishes sympathy for Bruce Wayne as a child and then proceeds to show us how tough and capable he is as an adult when he brutally defeats seven attackers in the jail. The writer then fills in details of Wayne's past as we follow his journey in the present. This continues until the character development (done via flashback) is complete and we enter Act 2 proper (give or take a few pages). Readers should bear in mind that 'Batman Begins' was written by the Prince of Darkness himself, veteran screenwriter David S. Goyer, and as such it is allowed to stray from many fundamental conventions of a spec. Other conventions are now dated (the use of (CONT'D) for consecutive character lines, for example). As most aspiring screenwriters are well aware, the pros can break as many rules as they want, from style conventions to formatting to typos. If you don't believe me, read 'The Prestige' and count how many typos you spot. It will astound you. Four typos on the first page alone. http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Prestige.pdf

A flashback will very likely diminish the tension. Is there a way to write the linear story and the scenes leading up to the actioney stuff, exciting in their own right?

I thought the flashbacks in Dexter worked well and gave his character more context. What do you think?

I agree. Dexter flashbacks work really well but even without them, the action is interesting. I think what Thomas is suggesting is to use flashbacks to enliven an otherwise boring set up. It seems like putting a bandaid on a broken leg.

Lone Ranger big flashback. Big box office failure. I knew Tonto survived. Snippets of flashback still halts action.

There is zero correlation between box office success and a narrative's use of flashbacks.

What you've described is called a Preview Flashback, as per Linda Aronsons 'The 21st Century Screenplay' which deals with this and similar subjects. An important thing to remember though that the decision to intercut the narrative is often made in the the editing room, so maybe some of the movies quoted by people here were perhaps originally linear....personally I would do it (maybe I'm biased as my last screenplay has the same structure and is should head into pre-prod next year)

I personally dislike flashbacks. It's extremely important for you the writer to know ALL of your character's backstory, but I prefer finding that so-called inciting incident that sets the main character's path, start the story there, in the first 10 pages or so. Note that it's been my experience that the inciting incident of the story is generally much later in the character's development then people usually think. Find your theme, your "A" story, know your characters completely, and let the necessary backstory come out only as needed, organically. Attitude and behavior will fuel backstory on its own. Let the audience meet your characters as they would in a real situation, without prior knowledge. Of course, this is only my opinion. I'm not a big fan of traditional screenwriting, the whole 3 act thing. I like continual rising action. I use acts, but perhaps not as definitively as tradition dictates. It depends on the story and genre.

The only problems you have with flashbacks are readers and producers who can't tell a good story from a bad one and rely on such things as voice-overs, flashbacks, etc., to make their decisions on scripts. "Memento" is a film told completely in flashback. "Forrest Gump" has a huge amount of voice-overs. Your challenge is to find a reader AND a producer with brains AND guts. The recent dust-up about "The Interview" tells you everything you need to know about LA and guts and brains.

I agree with James. Flashbacks are a tool. They can be well used or misused. If you pick up a hammer and drive a nail straight to build a house, that's great. If you don't drive the nail straight, don't blame the hammer. And if you do drive the nail straight and build the house properly, you'll probably hear from critics who don't like the design and/or wanted you to 'be modern', avoid the obvious 'beginner mistake' of using a hammer, and use a nail gun instead. Critics are everywhere because it's easy to be a critic.

A sequential story is better...if you find that you need too many flashbacks for the set up then perhaps your inciting incident isn't an inciting incident, but simply part of the back story. When the action begins to start and twists the protagonist in a totally different direction in your sequential narrative line is the inciting incident.

Well, my idea was to start the story with a single "incident" that shows the protag in "full fury" so to speak, as she leads an attack that destroys a "space Pirate" ship.---THEN, in a reverie, as she contemplates on her initial victory, have her flashback to her "origin" how she got to where she is now. About 1/3 of the way into the story, after we see her origin , inciting incident and mission, we rejoin the protag in the Present for the story to progress to further victories and conclusion. The idea being to start the story off with a "Bang" and the nature of the protag that will carry the story, before we go into her more "gradual" origins and what incites her to take the actions we see at the start.------- Or would a gradually building sequence and evolving protag to this point work better?

If you begin the screenplay with a bang inciting incident..then you can gradually work the back story in when it is necessary for the sake of clarity; the first act sets up the problem with the antagonist, lets us know there is a problem, and then by the end of act one tells us exactly what her problem is....I wouldn't use too much of screen time in flashback as the point of a screenplay is to work through the ever increasing impossible obstacles with the antagonist in act two toward the climax in act three showing whether she obtains the goal or not....solves the problem or not..... It depends upon the story too...i just had to make the same decision for my screenplay. I rewrote it with the inciting incident at the opening, but it messed up the spine of the narrative too much that i needed to proceed with the sequential story building it to the inciting incident by page 10 to the end of act one's plot point one into act two....i also deleted much of the flashbacks and rewrote it differently to get the same information across using different scenes in act one. You want to utilize information in any scene to further the narrative forward and provide information about the characters....that's it. I hope this helps...