|
04-10-2009, 03:46 PM
|
#91 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 162
|
Thank you very much Jase and A_N_D! I really apreciate the help!
I am doing this both for myself and for everyone who is excited about helping me with this project. As I said, I love writing and it's almost magical to see your story come to life as a movie. One of my other questions has to do with this: A lot of the books I have on screenplays says that you need a lot of action in them and not so much dialog, but when I watch the animated movies on this site and others there seems to be more dialog than action. So, when I'm making the movie should I cut out a lot of the action and if so which sort of action should I cut out? |
|
|
|
04-10-2009, 07:37 PM
|
#92 | |
|
King Leonidas is my bit--
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Right behind you, with a brick and a roll of duct tape
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
A lot of the lack of action you see in Machinima is due to the fact that there are often only so many pre-rendered animations available in each program. Oftentimes, dialogue will fill up the spaces where directors might otherwise have preferred to have major action set pieces... Personally, I couldn't possibly disagree more with the line about cutting back on dialogue in favor of action. I'm not really a mindless action flick guy - just turned down an invite to go see the new "Fast and Furious" flick about five minutes ago - and I often prefer headier, "talky" films. I write plenty of dialogue, and would argue that the best stories could be done as radio plays without any visual action. It can be a delicate balance, using dialogue to move the story forward without being entirely expository, taking care to throw in small asides and normal conversational things (for realistic flow of conversation), all while trying to avoid spoon-feeding things to the audience. So, really, there's two items to talk about here - avoiding expository dialogue and embracing the concept of "Show, don't tell". Expository dialogue is dialogue used solely to advance the plot, and actually makes experienced writers (and their audiences) cringe. Let's say that Guy A talks to Guy B at a pizza shop about his girlfriend. Guy A then works out his problems with his girlfriend. He meets with Guy B later on, and begins their conversation with a line like "So, remember those problems with my girlfriend I told you about?" Full stop - that last line fairly beats you over the head with what has already happened, insulting your intelligence to boot! Of course Guy B remembers! It happened an hour ago, and the character is only bringing this up to advance the plot. This is sloppy writing and should be avoided at all costs. Imagine, if after talking to his girlfriend, Guy A goes to meet with B once more, and Guy B has a look of anticipation on his face as if to say, "Well, how'd it go?" Right there, the audience knows what they are going to talk about. In cases like the one above, it's easy to see where eliminating dialogue is the way to go. So, what about eliminating unnecessary action? When it comes time to start cutting out action, keep in mind the concept of showing up late and getting out early. This means that if your scene involves a bank robber robbing a bank, it isn't necessary to start the scene with his waking up, turning off his alarm clock, getting up, showering, brushing his teeth, getting dressed and armed, driving to the bank... Of course this will vary depending on the tone of your film, but isn't it more interesting to start the scene with him in line at the bank, looking nervous and fingering the weapon in his pocket, just seconds before all hell breaks loose? Another example... A husband and wife have been separated. The husband and his wife are meeting for lunch to talk about their future. The wife is going to tell him she wants a divorce. Most beginners would spend a lot of time getting the husband to this lunch meeting. He might take some time deciding what he is going to wear. He might dawdle on the way, so as not to be early and appear to be anxious. He might fortify himself with a drink or two. Finally he'll be met at the restaurant by a hostess and led to the booth where his wife waits. They'll be small talk. A waiter will take an order for drinks. More small talk. A waiter will take their lunch orders. More small talk. Eventually they'll get around to talking about their marriage, at which time the wife will say she wants a divorce. Although there are dramatic contexts in which this slow development can work, in most cases this scene will be too slow. It has too much fat. What is the point of the scene? The news of divorce. A more skilled screenwriter, therefore, would open the scene just before this moment. The couple is already seated at lunch. They are eating silently. Suddenly the wife pops the news. There is a context in which the slow version is stronger than the more efficient version. Let's say that while getting ready, the husband fetches a handgun, loads it, and hides it on his person. Now where there was slow development and fat before, there is tension because we are on the edge of our seats, wondering what he is going to do with the gun. And the longer we have to wait, the more tense the story becomes. In other words, for slowly developing scenes to work, there must be an element to justify their pacing. In general, the crisper the scene, the better. What about getting out of this scene? In the first version, without the gun, beginners would have the wife pop the news and have this lead into an argument, probably the kind of argument we've heard many times before. This argument may take several pages, even though we learn nothing new from it. A more skilled screenwriter might have the wife's news be the last line in the scene. A quick look at the husband's reaction and cut: maybe to the husband having a drink in a bar, or talking with a friend, or sleeping with his mistress. Once again, the gun changes everything because it adds a dynamic new element to the dramatic mix. The wife gives the news. A beginning writer might have the husband take out the gun and shoot her. Chaos results. The husband is wrestled to the ground by customers. He barely gets away. A more skilled screenwriter would surprise us. The husband takes out the gun and points it at his temple. Would he really? The wife looks like she's about to have a heart attack. He pulls the trigger. Nothing. "I was going to shoot you but I chickened out," he says. "I took out the bullets. Have a nice life." He leaves. In short (and I say that wth the greatest awareness of its irony), what do you cut? Anything that beats you over the head with OR slows down the progression of your story. A_N_D |
|
|
|
|
|
04-10-2009, 08:48 PM
|
#93 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 162
|
Wow! I can see the difference between what a beginner would do and what an experieced screenwriter would do.
Could you help me with a decision on this part: Quick background: Sam and Sarah are thirteen year old twins. Pat and Melinda are also thirteen. Sam, Sarah, Pat, and Melinda are in the library going over spell books when Melinda announces that she's signed them up to decorate the dining hall for the Halloween party. Jump to the dining hall over breakfast. Melinda and Pat are arguing over the decorations. Pat wants a real zombie handing out treats and Melinda thinks this is disgusting. Sam and Sarah settle the matter. Jump to Dean's office as the kids hand over thier list of decorations. The Dean approves the list and dismisses all the kids except for Pat. Sam, Sarah, and Melinda wait for Pat in the hall. When he comes out he is upset and doesn't want to talk to anyone. He starts a fight with Sam and then walks off. At the Halloween party Sam tries to talk to him, only it ends in a fist fight. After the fight Sam talks to a professor and realizes that there must be something else going on with Pat. He returns to the room where Pat has been waiting to apologize and that's when Sam finds out a terrible secret that Pat has been hiding. So, is all this necessary or is there a possibility to cut some of it out? |
|
|
|
|
04-19-2009, 02:11 PM
|
#94 |
|
The Wolf & Dulci Hour
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,811
 |
If you write a story/script about your own personal experiences, do you need to get permission from the other people involved to use their likenesses?
|
|
|
|
|
04-19-2009, 07:06 PM
|
#95 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: PS: my Skype is usually online, but I don't know how to make it glow green here. But I'm usually on.
Posts: 776
|
I have a screenwriting question. Say I wanted in my script to clarify exactly who's speaking in the story. Or, in this case, if I wanted to write in the intro to an imposter, should I use their imposter name for all of their impostrous dialogue, and then reveal his true identity when it's supposed to be (e.g. when the audience would see it), or, should I do it as soon as they're introduced for the first time, using their real name all the way through (even after they're revealed of who they really are), but note that the character doesn't know who he/she is yet (like the audience would perceive )?
For example: Ephraim talks to "Billy Bob", who isn't the real NSA director that he thinks he's talking to. ephraim jotham Sir, what's the executive decision? Douche bag You have the go ahead. Would that be the correct way to go about it? Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
04-22-2009, 12:58 AM
|
#96 | |
|
King Leonidas is my bit--
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Right behind you, with a brick and a roll of duct tape
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
First things first - my sincere apologies for dropping off the map in the middle of your question. I actually have written long responses to your post twice and managed to delete them by going to bed, leaving the computer on, and having Windows updates restart my computer. Not tonight. Squirrely, your post begs more questions than it breeds answers. Whether or not any particular facet of what you've outlined above is invaluable or irrelevant depends entirely on the overall context of your story. In a nutshell, what you've told me so far is: Around Halloween, a group of teenaged magic school students discover that their dear friend is hiding a terrible secret. Based on that alone, anything that doesn't clarify or move your story forward that conclusion could be considered "expendable". But wait, it's deeper than that, isn't it? Some of the actions and interactions between the teens may be very relevant to the story - but it's hard to tell from your brief synposis. There's very little context in relation to the greater story, so it's hard to say what you can cut. Is the library scene necessary, seeing the students studying? Do we already know they are students at a magic school? The announcement of being volunteered to decorate. It might be rendered unnecessary if we start the scene late (see my previous post - get in late, get out early) and just plain show the students assisting with decorations. The "real zombie" argument. Is it necessary? If so, why? Are you showing character traits of the teens? Do Melinda and Pat have issues or animosities that matter to the story? Is the "real zombie" question a veiled reference to bigotry or xenophobia? Does this matter to the film's overall story arc? Sam and Sarah acting as peacemakers. Again, do we already know this about them, or is this scene to show this about them? Is knowing this about them necessary to their character arcs? Pat being held aside at the Dean's office and all of the other kids seeing it. Is it necessary for all of the other kids to see this? What kind of impact would it make on the audience to see Pat getting called into the Dean's office and later being upset? Since you haven't shown us what Pat is told by the Dean, the audience has to guess anyway, and because it's often very interesting for the audience to know something that the other characters don't (that the Dean pulled Pat aside and this is part of the reason he's upset)... I hesitate to speculate too much, but since I don't know what the Dean says (and neither does the audience), I'm not sure how this scene should play... Pat seeing his friends again after the Dean's visit and being so upset that he would fight with one of them. Wow. Why? This sure feels important and "uncuttable", but I'm not sure why! Later, at the party, the fight escalates to a physcial confrontation. Does the audience know why yet? The Professor enlightening Sam that "something else must be wrong". Something besides what? I"m not sure what the fight was about yet. Something is obviously very wrong, and I would think Sam would have already come to this conclusion. Do we need to see someone telling him there's a deep issue? Does Sam need to have this explained to him by another character when his friend has already taken a swing at him? Would he perhaps just plain confront his friend about the obvious problem? The big, secret reveal stays, without question. So, Squirrely, you see, I have more questions than answers. I'm not sure what you can leave on the cutting room floor because of a lack of context for the events in your synopsis. I know you could show the above scenes in a matter of minutes, editing them very cleanly, but I'm not sure what's invaluable. Maybe a little more info? If you don't want to give away too much plot here, feel free to PM. Don't want you to tell your whole film here - I want others to see the finished product! Again, apologies for the delay in responding. Look forward to hearing from you again. A_N_D A_N_D Last edited by A_N_D; 04-22-2009 at 01:21 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
04-22-2009, 01:20 AM
|
#97 | |
|
King Leonidas is my bit--
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Right behind you, with a brick and a roll of duct tape
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
You can protect yourself by making sure your characters (even if they are real people) cannot be mistaken for real people. Give characters unusual names that no living individual would have. Check the phone book to see if any people with your character's name reside at the location portrayed in your story. If there is a person in that community with the same name or a similar one, consider changing the locale or setting the story in a fictional locale. Add a disclaimer at the beginning of the film stating that any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental. A writer's imagination necessarily draws upon one's life experiences and people the writer has met. A writer can freely borrow ideas, historical facts, personality traits of characters and themes from other copyrighted work without liability. These items are not copyrightable. And in some circumstances you may have the right to portray real-life individuals without their permission, especially if those persons are public figures or public officials. If a fictional character is loosely based on a real-life individual, and the public cannot identify the real-life individual from the context in which the fictional character is portrayed, there is little risk of liability. On the other hand, suppose you wrote a novel about the widow of a former American president assassinated in Dallas, and the widow character later marries a Greek shipping tycoon. Although you have labeled the book a "novel," have said that this is a work of fiction, and have given the characters fictitious names, readers may nevertheless believe you are writing about Jackie Kennedy. If you defame her, or otherwise invade her rights, she may have a good cause of action against you. You can be liable for defaming an individual even if you do not name them. The most likely grounds upon which one can be sued for an unauthorized portrayal of individuals who are neither public figures nor celebrities are defamation or invasion of privacy. DEFAMATION Defamation is a communication that harms the reputation of another so as to lower him in the opinion of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him. The most important privilege, from a filmmaker's point of view, is truth. If your remarks hurt someone's reputation, but your remarks are true, you are absolutely privileged. So even if you maliciously defame another person, you will be privileged if the statement is true. Truth is an absolute privilege because our society values truth more than a person's reputation. Keep in mind that while truth is an absolute defense, the burden of proving the truth may sometimes fall on you. So if you make a defamatory statement, you should be prepared to prove that it is true -- which may not be an easy task. RIGHT OF PRIVACY The right of privacy has been defined as the right to live one's life in seclusion, without being subjected to unwarranted and undesired publicity. In other words, it is the right to be left the hell alone. Like defamation, the right of privacy is subject to constitutional restrictions. The news media, for example, is not liable for newsworthy statements that portray another in a false light unless the statements are made with actual malice. Unlike defamation, a cause of action for invasion of privacy does not require an injury to one's reputation. Many defenses to defamation also apply to invasion of privacy. Truth, however, is not a defense. Likewise, revealing matters of public record cannot be the basis for an invasion of privacy action. Express and implied consent are valid defenses. If you voluntarily reveal private facts to others you cannot recover for invasion of your privacy. If you make public a matter concerning the private life of another, you can be subject to liability for invasion of privacy if the matter publicized is of a kind that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and if the matter is not of legitimate concern to the public, i.e., if the information is not newsworthy. This type of invasion of privacy occurs, for example, where someone digs up some dirt on another person and publicizes it, but the information is not of legitimate interest to the public. Publicity that places a plaintiff in a false light will be actionable if the portrayal is highly offensive. This type of invasion of privacy is similar to defamation, but harm to reputation is not required. For example, false light invasion of privacy could entail a political dirty trick such as placing the name of a prominent Republican on a list of Democratic contributors. Although this person's reputation may not be harmed, he has been shown in a false light. DEFENSES Here are some guidelines you can follow to avoid liability from subjects portrayed in your script or film. 1) OBTAIN RELEASES: Obtain releases whenever possible. It never hurts to have a release even if it is not legally required. Do not forget to get releases from the immediate family and friends of a subject if those people appear in the story. 2) FICTIONALIZE THE STORY: Change the identity of the individuals, the names of the characters and the location so that the public will not be able to identify any characters with any living individuals. 3) ADD A DISCLAIMER: If your characters are fictional, add an express disclaimer to that effect so viewers will not be confused. 4) PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS: Be especially careful about portraying living individuals who are not public officials or figures. Remember that deceased individuals cannot sue for defamation or invasion of privacy, and that public figures and officials have to prove actual malice in order to recover. Thus, a filmmaker is most vulnerable when portraying living private individuals. 5) ASSEMBLE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE TRUTH: Make sure you can prove that any defamatory statements you make are true. Annotate your script with the sources of your information so that you can document its truth and show that you acted carefully and without actual malice. 6) CLEAR THE SCRIPT: Have an attorney closely review your script for potential liability before production. If you can change the names of subjects and the setting without detracting from the dramatic value of the story, do so. 7) OBTAIN INSURANCE: Make sure the production company obtains an Errors and Omissions (E & O) insurance policy and that it includes you as a named insured. A_N_D |
|
|
|
|
|
04-22-2009, 10:18 AM
|
#98 |
|
The Wolf & Dulci Hour
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,811
|
Thanks - food for thought and certainly not an issue I had considered at all until the Industry 101 show this past Sunday. Thanks for the further clarification.
__________________
|
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
