Screenwriting : Actual Buildings by Harold Vandyke

I keep it generic simply because I'm a newer screenwriter and self producing. It's easier to ask a few bars say than a specific one (or restaurants, etc.) . Than to find something I can't afford.

I will name things for tone and mood if required, but rarely. What I think may be great may be impossible to light or shoot in, but the tone remains. However, generic can give you tone if done right.

I've referenced actual buildings and specific locations in my scripts... my feeling? Just makes the location scout's job a lot easier.

When I'm writing I usually don't consider the logistics of the production. The name of the building can be changed easily if it's not possible to shoot in and around a location I write about. As a producer I'm very aware that locations can be "cheated" - many areas of Atlanta (for example) can be used during production even though the screenplay says New York or Los Angeles. Most of CSI: (the Vegas one) was shot in Los Angeles even though the script specified Las Vegas. So if I'm writing a screenplay that takes place in Austin I'm going to mention Alamo Draft House or Allens Boots or have characters meet up at Doc's Motorworks. And if a character lives in The Austonian I'm going to mention that building. If when the script goes into production and the producer can't shoot there it's easy to cheat it or just do a simple word change in the script.

As above, don't worry about it. It's just words on a page, they can be changed to suit logistics. Anybody worth their salt in this business should realise that.

CJ, I'm with you on that -- anything can be changed -- but as easy as it is for execs to say no nowadays, one tries to find what writing parameters are most effective. S.H.A., I realize we're going to have buildings in cities that are part of the story, what I was referring to was where the story takes place inside of one or two specific, well known buildings and the writer has studied every closet, hallway, stairwell etc. to utilize in the story.

Harold, are you saying that execs will say no to an excellent script if the story takes place in one or two specific, well known buildings because it might not be possible to shoot in and around the structures?

D Marcus, I would hope not. That's why I threw the question out there -- to get other's opinions on the practicality of doing so.

My 2 cents - If it's a recognizable landmark that's integral to the story - include it. Saying that Sleepless in Seattle should end at the top of "a really tall building in New York" doesn't have the instant weight of putting it on the observation deck of the Empire State Building. Oceans 11 happening at the Bellagio gave it some fun because it was a real location rather than a generic casino. But if it's a bank building getting robbed in Wichita, I don't think you have to be that specific.

Since changing a few words of description (like the details of a specific location) is so simple and writing an excellent screenplay with compelling characters and an interesting story is difficult (and rare) I will say there isn't an exec in the business who will say no to a great script because of a location that they cannot shoot in and around.

I will say after recently seeing Birdman ( Or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) I should read it. I'd follow whatever they did descriptively for a template. I think it is a movie to take many crumbling down queue's from including description of buildings, locations, etc.. I'm going to find various drafts when I get around to reading it for a study. It really peaked my interest and sometimes I wait a while to study works instead of jumping on a contemporary bandwagon. All the good movies have things crumble down and apart from them eventually.