Filmmaking / Directing : This screenwriter want to know... by Kawan Glover

Great question, Kawan Glover! Glad to see you thinking in this way. My thought would be don't write anything that can't be visually represented on screen somehow how - whether visually or dialogue. Anything that has to do with thoughts, feelings, explanations of motivation in scene description that cannot be shot is largely a hindrance.

Now before the other writers start throwing rotten fruit at me - there is room for a little of this certainly and no rule is absolute. But generally, if you can say on the page, "and here is how we see this on screen" a director is going to have a tougher time

To add to what Jason Mirch said, I've also always been told too much visual description can also get in the way of the director's imagination. The example an editor of mine used was "Don't say a 'white room with white furniture and white floors' just say 'sterile' and let the director visualize what 'sterile' means to him."

Best!

Jason Mirch Great advice! Coming from writing novels, writing thoughts/feelings was my biggest weakness!

Renee N. Meland I have to get over the fact that this is not a solo project and leave space for others.

As a Director, the very first thing I do is to skim through the script and eliminate EVERY camera or staging instruction. Only then will I actually read the script for its story - I tend to delete all/nearly all parentheticals. My job is to creatively convey the story to the screen while making sure the actors look their best.

Doug Nelson That's eye-opening. Would you say parentheticals are simply a wasted line or is that how you get to the story?

When looking for the story and developing my vision - I have no use for the Director parentheticals that the writer inserts and nearly of the experienced Actors that I know feel that it's not up to the writer to tell them how to deliver the lines. That's their job.

I agree with Doug. And be collaborative...and not be afraid to explain things. Some times what's in our heads is different, not better, just different. Let us know what you see and we can learn from you. That said, don't be disgruntled if we go in a different direction.

Great insight Doug Nelson Thank you so much!

Rachel Klein You going a different direction is part of the beauty of filmmaking to me!

Kawan Glover I echo what Doug Nelson says. Generally, camera angles and parenthetical directions are useless and possibly even a negative, especially since they interrupt the narrative. By definition, they do not advance your plot or story and so should be avoided. Directions to actors should be avoided as your emotional arc should be implied in the dialog and action - if you feel you have to put in a performance direction, that's a pretty strong clue that something important in the script is lacking. I don't mind visual description so long as it's related to character, theme or story symbolism (thus not irrelevant). The issue with crossing over into a director's or producer's lane is sometimes one of degree, so there are grey areas. Consider that if it doesn't actually matter to your basic story - it's likely better left out.

Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg This is excellent insight. It will help tremendously as I churn out my drafts. As a writer, it's difficult not to want to explain everything, and we often forget how collaborative the whole process is. Thank you, my friend!

Kawan Glover When I first started writing, I tried to capture the very rich tapestry of writers I admired. I did a lot of terribly over-written work and then went back to see what those writers did right. Surprise - it was what they didn't write that was the most effective part. I found that my mind had built up their worlds in amazing detail which wasn't necessarily described. So don't worry about being basic - leave lots of room for the reader's own imagination and they will fill in details without thinking of it.

Less is more, write it as you see it, but economically too. All you can strive to do is write a compelling story, and the Director will find their own way. Ideally, especially for the stories most dear to our heart as writers, a Director will be on the team that shares your vision as writer and that of the Producer.

Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg The story is in what they didn't write. Wow. What a great new perspective!

@Karen Economical writing. That's the second time I've heard this today. Must be a sign.

@Kawan I second general opinion from these seasoned artists to leave unnecessary extras out of the script. However never censor yourself to the extent that if you feel a visual is organically crucial to a character you are forced not to write it. An exact visual maybe necessary to get inside the head of a key driver of the plot. Of course directors “feel” dialogue/theme but there’s a difference between overkill and gilding the lily in script.

PS. Example in one film school exam directors were given script of conversation between 2 characters but not told where, who, when. No description of any kind but just three words. “Dysfunctional fan blows.” A minor yet crucial description made me “FEEL.” Nobody would have a cranky fan unless off grid in a place where bad shit happens, even my neighbours on benefits have nice appliances delivered. Every graduate made a horror. Don't get me wrong, I immediately feel from each and every script I read as to the dynamics of the characters but the above case highlights a point that a couple of succinct words can set a genre.

Debbie Croysdale Thank you so much for this!

Thank you for this thread... now I'm beginning to understand what "allow the director to breathe" means.

@kyle yep I totally get it!

Hmmmm. Think I'd better think it out again.... I might have too much detail in my screenplay. When describing a room, I have 'a rustic wood table and two chairs and an old matress on the floor' (but I haven't described the furniture in further detail), wonder if I should just put... 'a sparce room'.

That might work @Rosalind

I'm sure you can trim it a little. If we know we're in a wilderness cabin already, then the INT. can read "Sparse, rustic table and chairs. Mattress on floor." 'Wood' & 'two' are redundant. I wouldn't use 'the' & 'and', but that's just my staccato style to save valuable script page space.