I used to write a monthly column on screenwriting that was published to a subscriber base of about 16,000 writers. The vast majority of the writers were novelists or magazine columnists with an interest in writing screenplays. Some sent me samples of their work, which always amazed me. But, I found it ironic that they couldn’t write a screenplay of any value.

Here is one example that might read better as a novel, but it died as a screenplay:

“An ominous and foreboding spirit filled the eyes of those standing over the cold body. The disheveled little boy bent down and nudged the stiff once more. He was sure the man was dead and purposely emptied his pockets in hopes of buying a doughnut at the end of the day.”

Screenplays need to be visualized for the camera or the director’s eye. Using the word “cold” in reference to the body can’t play on film, but “blue” or “deathly gray” can. The same goes for the ominous and foreboding spirit. Unless you are prepared for special effects, those words just eat up precious screenplay space and don’t belong. The same holds true for nudging something, “once more”, especially if we didn’t see the first nudge.

Depending on the screenwriting coach, some may accept words like “purposely” emptied his pockets, while others wouldn’t. Some feel its good to hint to the actor that they need to be purposeful in their action of removing the coins. Others feel that the actors are capable of determining their own motivation for reaching into the pocket of a dead person.

But, both types of teachers would agree that you can’t show, “in hopes of buying a doughnut at the end of the day.” Without dialog or a set-up scene, there is no way for the audience to suddenly think, “Oh, good, now he can buy a doughnut.”

A reader’s script might be written as follows:

The little boy’s eyes widen. His feet stand next to a corpse. He glances at his ragged clothes and rubs his belly. One of his friends nods toward the body. The boy bends down and nudges the bluish skin. Nothing moves. He puts his hand into the deceased’s pants pocket. His eyes widen as he pulls out a fist of coins. The boys cheer. The little boy steps back, turns and runs. The boys chase after him screaming for the money.

Here is the scene written for a shooting script:

CLOSE ON: A little boy’s EYES stare at:

A LIFELESS CORPSE

wearing a fine suit.

THE BOY

glances at his ragged clothes. His hand moves over his belly.

ON EYES

as they close.

A GROUP OF BOYS

watch him closely.

THE LITTLE BOY’S EYES

slowly open.

HIS FRIEND

nods toward the body.

THE LITTLE BOY

bends down and nudges the bluish skin. Nothing moves.

ANGLE ON PANTS POCKET

He runs his hand into the deceased’s pants pocket.

ON EYES

as he pulls his hand out.

ON FIST

as his hand opens revealing coins.

A GROUP OF BOYS

cheer!

ANGLE ON BOY’S FEET

stepping backwards.

ON THE BOY

as he turns and runs.

A GROUP OF BOYS

chase after him screaming for the money.

All three are the same story with varying levels of visualization. It is critical for the screenwriter to paint a picture according to the type of script he is writing. However, the more visual language used to describe the action the easier it is to translate the story from paper to the screen.

Copyright © 2012 By CJ Powers

Feature films use the three-act structure originally conceptualized by Shakespeare. It was an obvious structure, since all stories have a beginning, middle and end. The motion picture industry broke it out further due to the size of shooting and editing reels. Films quickly were divided into Act 1, Act 2A, Act 2B and Act 3.

This was further broken down into two action sequences per act. Each action sequence was 12-15 minutes in length, which would fit on a 15-minute reel. In order to fit in commercial TV breaks at the appropriate time, MOWs (Movie of the Week) used 8 acts with each one running 8-12 minutes.

Since these action sequences all have a beginning, middle and end, and clearly tell a portion of the over all story, I decided to see if I could pull a sequence from a feature and use it as a standalone short film. The idea was simple, if you could make 8 shorts and later cut them together as a feature, you could release a feature film every few years on a short film budget. But, it didn’t work.

Most story sequences work within a feature because the entire concept was developed in Act 1. The needed backstory that led to the sequence was already in the audience’s mind after the first half hour of the film, allowing the director to take short cuts in the telling of the story.

It’s therefore paramount that all short films are complete stories within themselves, including the following set-up elements:

• Attention getting device to pull audience into story.
• A shared crisis or humorous moment to bond the hero to the audience.
• A subtle moment where the hero does something to protect his heart or an inner pain from the past.
• An element of risk or unfair treatment as the hero pursues his goal.
• A moment that clarifies that the hero is not content with his circumstances.
• An inciting incident that starts the story moving.
• The hero’s call to adventure and his hesitation to respond.
• The revelation that a trap is set or negative circumstances will soon come against the hero.

The bad news is that writing a great beginning for a quality short film may take just as long as writing one for a feature film, because all films, regardless of length, require the same set-up beats to be effective for the audience. Unfortunately, many filmmakers will take shortcuts in writing their short film by using stereotypes so they don’t have to develop their characters.

While characters are more developed in a feature, most sequences do not have self-contained set-up beats and therefore can’t be used as standalone shorts. And, without the proper set-up, the audience will perceive the film differently than intended, making it a flop.

Copyright © 2012 By CJ Powers
Photo © Nubephoto – Fotolia.com

Most directors that I’ve met can quickly tell you how to direct an action sequence, but few can elaborate on developing the subtle nuances of the theme. Thankfully, 70-80% of a movie is driven by the action plot line and most writers create a theme that finds its way to the surface regardless of the director’s experience level. There is, however, a significant difference between great films and the not so great, which can be attributed to directors who strengthen their story by nurturing their themes.

I recently read about a wedding party where the host miscalculated the number of guests or the amount of wine they would drink. The party was about to see an embarrassed host, but thankfully the hero quietly arrived in the background. Once requested, he told the servants to fill the five empty ceremonial vases with water, dip a cup into it, and take it to the head server.

The head server tasted the “batch of wine” and was startled. He made a big deal of the great tasting wine because the culture always switched out the great wine for some two-buck chuck after everyone was tipsy, figuring that no one would notice. But, this host held back the best for last, which was worthy of praise. The crowd loved it and the host was held in high esteem.

Aside from the mysterious miracle performed by the hero, the story has a great subplot that carries a strong theme. It’s about a hero coming to the aid of someone in need. Not someone who lost their house in a flood, or barely survived a blood curdling car wreck, but someone who was about to be embarrassed based on their own shortsightedness. The hero had a great deal of empathy and was very diplomatic on behalf of the host.

Our hero didn’t grandstand and perform the miracle for everyone to see, which would have put him in a great place in the public eye and devastate the host who had botched up. But instead, the hero kept everything low key and allowed the host to take the credit. In other words, the hero was more concerned about the emotional well being of the host, than meeting the needs of the crowds. We learn that our hero is very personable and interested in the little things in life — A great role model.

When a director focuses on the action to the detriment of the theme, he misses some of the most important life changing moments that can give the audience a reason to contemplate the movie time and time again. By focusing on the theme, a director can bring the humanity of the film to life. Without it, the film is left only with the fun factor and visual energy of the story, which can actually get old at times.

Have you ever gone to a movie that was really well made, but it didn’t compel you to think about anything or inspire you to take some form of action? Those movies are typically helmed by directors that lose sight of their theme or allow it to be overshadowed by gimmicks and effects in order to bring in larger audiences. It’s important to note that only theme enriched films plant the seed of life changing ideas in the audiences mind, giving them food for thought and a desire to watch the movie again.

Copyright © 2012 By CJ Powers
Photo © erika8213 – Fotolia.com