Screenwriting : Formatting Evolution by Trey Wickwire

It seems to be de rigueur to drop FADE IN at the start and end with THE END rather than FADE OUT now. Fashions I can live with. They exist in all industries, there was a time using comic sans in Powerpoint presentations wasn't frowned upon and the coolest websites had page curls and scrolling banners. What frustrates me is the whole it's an obvious sign of an amateur and readers will put a hex on your grandmother if you do otherwise stuff. Every reader I've seen discussing the topic has made it clear they just want to read some decent stories.

Yeah, I dropped the FADE IN and OUT so long ago I forgot it was a standard.

Funny, I just watched a Michael Hauge lecture on DVD and he said SOUNDS should only be capped in a shooting script, NOT in a screenplay. So as a screenwriter you're off the hook. One can, however, use CAPS to make something important stand out (be it a sound, image or action), as long as this is done sparingly.

Totally don't get that, @Derek. Someone buys your script. You deliver the Final Draft file to them. Now what? They're going to comb through it and start capitalizing words? Maybe Hauge is talking from some sort of big-budget studio perspective? The two screenplays I sold were to indies for low budget productions. They don't have an intern on staff whose job it is to convert my deliverable to something called a "shooting script". My job was to deliver a script they could shoot. Whatever else they did with it (turning on scene numbers, tagging, importing into their budgeting/schedule software) I'm pretty sure it didn't involve adding capitalization. (I keep hearing about "spec scripts" as calling cards, or things separate from movies that actually get shot. Isn't anyone trying to write something to SELL? It's not some impossible goal.)

I've never heard of doing shooting scripts to sell. Everything I have read or been told is to NOT write a shooting script. Also, I hope to sell to the big guys, if an small indie picks up something I wrote they need to at least be able use the standard format or transfer it to a shooting script. Unless they want to pay me to do it of course.

Maybe it's been too long since I've made a movie, but what's the difference between a "shooting script" and what you're writing, other than scene numbers and revision information? After the script is written you add scene numbers and lock it for production and any subsequent revisions from that point on have a specific way of getting called out (and the software handles all that these days). But, again, I've never worked for major studios. What don't I know?

Sorry Patrick, but there are lots of rules to screenwriting.

Here's a decent explanation of a shooting script. http://www.elementsofcinema.com/directing/shooting-script.html

Interesting. Didn't know big movies still broke things down this way. I thought we were in the era of 3D storyboards and whatnot. I'm schooled.

I broke mine into Acts 1-4 Bold centered very short description under them. The Discovery, The Chase, Putting It All Together and The Decision. I think they help the flow of the screenplay for the reader and would do it no matter what anybody told me. Rules and Structure are extremely important but my instincts told me to break it into Acts because I enjoyed reading it that way, plus it helped me write. It is hard to muddle through all the B.S. you get from books. Batch common themes, stick to rules and standards of what you read and follow your instincts. It's not rocket science and you have to maintain quite a high level to be on the true "pulse of the industry". As you grow those around you will help you at appropriate levels if you are doing it right. Oh yeah the last Act is only about 10 pages of 119 but it works. Good Luck Trey.

Get Write Brother's Movie Magic 6. This program makes formatting easy. The program basically formats automatically. I wouldn't write without it.

Mitchell, I'll be honest - it may work for YOU but you're not writing for YOU. You're writing for the pros that need to read your writing and while labeling acts is normal in TV, if I saw that in a feature script, it would scream amateur to me. I still like important sounds Cap'd because it makes it pop on the page.

@Alle, right, I didn't mean to leave out filmmakers who shoot their own scripts (as I've done myself). The folks on the board who surprise me are the ones who say, "this is just a spec script", meaning they have no intention of ever seeing it produced. It's just a calling card. So they're using it to DEMONSTRATE they can write something marketable without ACTUALLY writing something marketable. I guess that has been a route in for some writers, but it seems like an unnecessarily narrow route.

Thanks Danny and Alle. Don't take this the wrong way but it is reassuring. I don't use fade in or fade out either. Maybe it'll cause a paradigm shift. LOL! I look at it as a reader's tool for rough draft or contest draft. Or perhaps I'm just destined to be that lost stubborn amateur that won't listen. LOL! I do so much I try different things in different areas all the time. Technical roboticism just gets so boring. He put Act labels, what the heck this just must be a bad screenplay and I'll throw it to the side or hey that's weird or different. So yeah if I were going to "pitch" to a specific producer I'd find out what they want and research the last ten they bought. For most contests we are talking about general readers as well as industry semi-professional. It was a calculated risk. Somehow Danny I thought that would be your reply. I guess part of being a screenplay consultant is predictiveness and standardization and the industry needs that as well. You are probably really good at what you do. I seriously mean that. But maybe just maybe this dumb ole amateur might be on to something.

I've seen cap'd characters and sometimes its helpful. other times super distracting. I don't really care about the FADE IN/OUT. doesn't matter. But I think Dan is right. Things are diff selling here in Hollywood then in UK or AUS. A 333 pg script - no one would ever even open the file. period. And I'm not trying to make all scripts standardized - I'm trying to make sure that amateur writers don't get tossed before page 10. here's the thing - you can't Reinvent the wheel before you've mastered the wheel. There are a million reasons for an exec to pass that is out of your control. Why give them reasons to pass that are IN your control? Using professional software is part of being a professional. If you were a doctor, you wouldn't say on your first patient - I know everyone else uses a scalpel, but I'm gonna try gardening sheers and see if that works because I feel like it and its different. there are plenty of guidelines you can break, but if you don't know which ones are actually important, you could be sheering off your own foot before you get in the door.

This thread is in danger of dumbing itself down. Do we really need another debate on if a 333pp script is going to get opened or if aspiring writers should be accustoming themselves to professional software? The topic at hand is how script formatting that may have once been common practice and still advised in literature may now be perceived as out-dated or even amateurish.

Forget the ACT breaks, forget the ZOOM IN as that's directing and should never be done in your writing -- the SOUND cues... yes, a bit old school, but it's not going to get you tossed. It's about what's on the page, but FORMAT is very important and from a writer's title page I can tell if they are a pro or amateur.

@Alle. I started out in Word and was very meticulous in getting all my formatting just perfect. I have since graduated to Final Draft for most things and Celtx for some smaller studios who request that format. The software makes it faster and easier but I'm so glad I started with Word. It gave me an understanding of the formatting I don't think I could have gotten any other way.

Hi Beth, thanks for the encouragement but I have been writing for awhile now and I have no problems with formatting. This thread is to discuss the concept of change in formatting over time rather than simply what is right or wrong at the moment. I appreciate the advice though, it matches perfectly what I'm already doing. :D

Sorry Beth but I disagree, not with the point but with the statement "Writers should focus on craft" part. If you aren't interested in the history of screenwriting that's fine but you shouldn't presume to tell others what they should or should not be interested in. Many of us do like to discuss the history of our profession and find the trends and changes interesting. Normally I would just ignore advice like this but here in a public forum there is a danger that some young screenwriter just taking up the craft might heed your advice and try to live by it. That would be a mistake.

As a writer you should understand that how you say something is as important as what you say. You started out saying "Why focus on little technical issues that may or may not happen?" This implies that the discussion about the changes in formatting over the years is pointless, not just for you but for anyone. Then you end with "Writers should focus on craft, their voice." This is a direct statement that writers should focus on what you think is important rather than the "little technical issues" being discussed in this thread. I understand that you think I am misunderstanding what you mean but all I can go by is the statements you have used. To be honest, I have to wonder why you are on the thread in the first place if you don't find the subject interesting?

I suppose I might not be interpreting Script Consultant correctly. I help others with there scripts and while I haven't charged anything I still consider what I do as consulting on a script. I notice that you pointed out the fact that I have taken classes and read books. Does that mean you missed my credits or just that mentioning the fact I have some would lessen the impact of your insult? Oh well, doesn't matter as I would prefer to return to the topic rather than derail the thread. I am hoping you feel the same.

Sometimes I think the problem truly lies on the tremendous amount of format books in circulation, I just bought FD9 and it can never do it all, you still have to know what info to give it to correctly format, sure the action, dialogue, scene heading ect. are in order but the industry is so stringent that you have to know what is current as not to turn off a reader and have them look at you like your an amateur and you didn't even try. Yes we are trying, sure it is great to know the old ways and why they have evolved, but most important is what is current in todays industry. We can wait and see what will be next but it is the here and now phase that we must deal with. With every new script I write I find new situations that I have to research and there are too many conflicting answers and they all think they are right, My head is swimming with this. My question is what is the most current and on the money format book out there today? I will buy it in a flash. Right now I am working with "The Complete Screenwriter's Manual" by Steven E. Bowles, Ronald Mangravite and Peter A. Zorn Jr. it is pretty good but sometimes a bit conflicting for today's notes, as it has a publishing date of 2006. and everybody play nice or you all get a spanking.

houses have many different structures but certain things can never change when it comes to building a house, things like the house must have windows, doors, the roof.etc... same applies to writing, there are many structures and formats but in the end, you are the god of your project, tell your story in such a way that no one can ever tell it better, but things like windows, doors, the roof must not be left out.

Nicely said Jorum. Maybe a discussion on what parts of formatting and structure are foundation and what parts are cosmetic are in order. Some might even say the difference in format and structure are the same as the difference in foundation and cosmetic. Not sure I would agree with that but some might see it so. Anyway, it is the cosmetic that changes with the seasons. One interesting thing in examining the changes in the cosmetic aspect of screenwriting is it shows the evolution of our industry. Things that were needed early on are now assumed and so have been cast off. It might be interesting to try and write a short script in the old style to see what it would be like. Anybody else like practice projects like that?

Ok Patrick, first I was like what the hell, but then it made sense. Nice one.

The old adage "Know the rules well so you can break them effectively" applies in screenwriting. CUT TO's have been out for a long time now. If you are still using them your script could look dated/old. Other than that, as a producer, I expect to see CAPS for sounds and if I option your script I will have you cap the sounds before sending it to directors to read/consider. I'd also add, if you want to look like an aspiring screenwriter do what the gurus say. If you want to look like a professional screenwriter do what the professionals do [read their scripts online for formatting] just don't include scene numbers. Reps and buyers are looking for original voices with an ironic story. If you know how to use CLOSE ONs and POV and SUPER and other camera terms effectively include them sparingly, as it adds another visual layer. If you don't, don't. And I never understood why anyone bought screenwriting software. You just need to know where the tabs go.

So let me get this straight. You believe all big companies use readers [not factual] and that they will pass on a great script because it has camera direction or CAPS? I don't buy it. Sorry. I send scripts to studios, directors, bigger producers and production companies and have never been told to tell the writer to remove or take it easy on CAPS or camera direction. They would only do this if the camera direction was ridiculous and not professional executed.

I actually think Dan G. is probably right. Producers are one thing and contests are another. Honestly if you research where and whoever you are sending to I don't think it can hurt to try and adapt to the actual reader whoever they may be. It may take a little work and research to adapt your screenplay to a specific or sect of reader but my belief is that it is worth the effort. Maybe I'm right maybe I'm wrong but it sure can't hurt. Personally I'll never abandon that try everything approach especially when exploring different, many or unchartered areas.

Dan, If it's working for you great. I am a WGA Signatory producer, have been in the business for 20 years. A shooting script has been rewritten/edited by the director and includes scene numbers and HIS camera direction inserted in to the script, typically. This doesn't mean an emerging screenwriter shouldn't include his/her own style of visually writing the script using camera direction and CAPs for sounds that are not made by an actor. Bottom line is, you should write the best damn story you can the best darn way you know how and not cater to anyone [ie readers]. The story is going to get you in the door, on the screen. If the story lacks the essentials - 1. wow factor 2. irony 3. a problem the hero cannot walk away from without suffering serious consequences - then removing camera direction and CAPs is not going to get you anywhere. Better to concentrate on removing typos. That's my two cents for what's it worth.

"Bottom line is, you should write the best damn story you can the best darn way you know how and not cater to anyone [ie readers]" - Audrey Kelly Wise words. This is the same message I keep seeing from people who've broken in. And I suspect it's the key reason they have broken in. We need to shed the fear we can't satisfy everybody and embrace the passion to delight the few that matter. There are bad readers just as there are bad writers. If someone baulks at our writing because our formatting isn't chic then they are the ones failing, not us. On the topic of formatting evolution, it seems sites like Scriptnotes are trendsetters. There seems to have been a few times John August and Craig Mazin have had to ask people to dial back on trends they've inadvertently started. One example was their advice on suggestive character descriptions leading to a lot of superfluous imitation. I saw that Craig had to make a post on DDPRo requesting people re-think the advice given and dial back the excess detail.

Dan, I disagree. Breaking in as a producer requires a great piece of material - same as a screenwriter. A producer just starting out must also get past readers [who are typically USC & UCLA film students or graduates btw] who even their contacts may give material to before considering reading themselves. I wish more screenwriters would not worry so much about whether to CAP a sound not made by a character or to insert a few camera directions [again it's when you go crazy that they balk] and spend more time detailing their script in order to stand out. By detailing I mean instead of "He gets in his car" write "He gets in his 1969 Camaro," instead of "She orders a drink," write "She orders a Stoli gimlet straight up," instead of writing "Two men walk in wearing suits," write "Two intimidating men in Armani storm the room."

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!! This is a necessary discussion. I have had readers and contest responses that spent more time on my formatting then the material itself. It is extremely frustrating because you end up spending more time concentrating on getting the exact parenthetical method (caps/no caps), the inclusion of camera shots (yes/no), or whether you use the terminology they like (O.C./O.S.). There are so many different books, courses, and online manuals that provide you with a plethora of options and none of them is proper if you don't get it to the right person, in the right place, at the right time. I wish that readers would just look at the content and action itself without judging the quality of the material based on whether the script is submitted in Courier 12 point or not.

This is not a discussion about major formatting issues like a failure to get the typeface correct. If a writer can't manage to put together a script in 12pt Courier then they should only be using a keyboard under adult supervision.

Well there is the discussion between Courier and New Courier. At first they look the same but after a few years now I've noticed that New Courier looks wrong for some reason. I know that the difference is small, New Courier being a bit spindly. You wouldn't think the eye would notice something so insignificant.

I'm a writer, embarrassing is my natural state of being.

Script format rules? I began screenwriting many years ago and I had all sorts of questions about the “proper format.” I’ve diligently searched for the rule book – haven’t found it yet – I’ll keep looking. In the meantime, I use FD and I pretty much follow Trotter’s book (The Screenwriter’s Bible) and/or The Hollywood Standard. I try not to do the director’s or audio engineer’s job if I can avoid it (if they’re getting paid – they can do their own job.) When I’m the writer, producer and the director; I write my scripts any way I feel like. But my advice to writers who wish to sell their scripts is to generally follow the traditional script format. Selling a script is hard enough without having to struggle with formatting issues too. Is the script format evolving? Perhaps, but like all evolution – very slowly.

I have read the no caps for sound rule also, but everything else as far as I can tell still sticks. Use FD its the standard it pretty much takes the guess work out.

I rather go with my instincts. I'm an independent thinker. I'd love the pride and glory of being a pioneer and introducing my own way of conveying what needs to in order to create that atmosphere, character or pull at emotions. i always consider I've got one chance to make my first impression with each story I bring to life. If it doesn't fly, I'd rather go down on my own terms. It's easy to tell a story that's about the only thing for sure. Lol. I do believe if you throw enough mud at the wall, somes going to stick. Next...

Formatting your script properly and staying current with industry standards is just part of doing your homework. If you were applying for a new position, you would do your homework about the industry you are applying to. That's all this is. It shows respect and due diligence. Do it because it shows you give a shit.

To my way of thinking, if you break a rule – you will be penalized. If I drive too fast (break a law) – I pay a fine. Should I deviate from the script format rules – my script will be passed over. But there are NO RULES and there is no RULE BOOK. There is however, a traditional set of customary standards that have evolved as the norm. Minor deviations here and there fit within those standards and within those standards; each writer is free to apply an individual writing style. A word to the wise: If you expect me or any other reader to read your script – comply with those well worn traditions. Over and out.