Writing silent scenes
I have a question about formatting for a script I’ve been working on. The concept involves some scenes being completely silent, but with an occasional sound coming through (i.e. everything’s silent, including speech, until someone breaks a glass and the shattering is audible).
I’ve tried a couple of different methods of formatting this but I’m not sure what makes the most sense. In early drafts, I just designated the scene as “Silent” at the beginning and capitalized the sounds that broke through. My writers’ group found this to be strange so in my latest draft I tried it with “M.O.S.” attached to every action that was supposed to be silent, but they didn’t like that either.
So now I’m kind of stumped on how to translate this idea to the page. Is there a way to format it that makes sense? I want it to be as clear as possible to readers.
– Cali
Seattle
My hunch is that you are doing too much, and it’s slowing down the read. A modern screenplay isn’t a list of camera angles and sound cues. It reads more like journalistic, present-tense fiction. (Think Hemingway, not Faulkner.)
If certain scenes are going to be silent, and other ones aren’t, my inclination would be to flag them in the scene headers, the same way you call out special events like [RAINING] or [DRIVING]. So in your case…
Within scenes, putting those few audible sounds in UPPERCASE makes sense. Remember, treat your readers like audience members, and think about it from their perspective.
For example, in the second pilot Jordan Mechner and I wrote for Ops, we had an extended sequence with no natural sound. It was important to showcase why this was going to be cool:
Look at your silent scenes from your reader’s perspective, and try to read them without knowing what’s happening next. You’re not nearly as curious what is sounds like as what it feels like to have the sound missing. Write that.
25 Responses to “Writing silent scenes”
Leave a Reply
RSS feed for comments on this article.
Get a Gravatar. They're free and work on lots of different sites.
May 19th, 2008 at 9:54 am
That example vividly portrayed the scenes. I can imagine them. Thanks for this one!
May 19th, 2008 at 11:37 am
I like that you capitalized the sounds for emphasis. Makes sense. This is a little off-topic, but I’ve read some screenplays where character names and even some of their actions are capitalized in the scene descriptions. This seems very disjointed to me, not to mention tiring when every fourth or fifth word you’re hitting the caps lock. Is there a standard you follow for what you capitalize and what you don’t capitalize?
May 19th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Jesus… no wonder you make the big bucks John… that scene was AWESOME… I pictured it vividly in my mind and WOW… just WOW.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
I’d be curious to hear your take on the CAPS thing too.
That’s still tricky for me.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Brilliant. Thank you. Looking forward to hearing you at the Austin Film Festival this year.
May 19th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Very helpful (especially accompanied by that great example). Thanks John!
May 19th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
About the caps: I’ll quote the extremely helpful book “How not to write a screenplay” by Danny Martin Flinn, something EVERY new author should read. And even though many “mistakes” you find in this book have been made by the greatest screenwriters in the most brilliant plays, it’s a good start to find out what might annoy a reader.
So, from “How not to write a screenplay”:
“Reading is an old habit and CAPITALS tend to EMPHASIZE things. If you overuse ALL CAPS you will not have emphasis when you need it. You might, for example, if you really wanted to bring home a point, say –
– but if you go into the whole Tom Wolfe style of Gonzo journalism, with PINGS and WHIZZZS and CAHOOTS and STUFF!!! Then BE CAREFUL. Too many CAPITAL LETTERS tend to DRIVE the READER a little CRAZY.”
May 20th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Regarding the issue of CAPS-
Or, to sum up, use good judgment. I had the same problem in the past and have gone back and “deCAPitated” many words in my script after realizing a “car whizzing by” reads better than a “car WHIZZING by.” As always, emphasize only what is most important.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:13 am
Jason, thanks, that’s helpful. I appreciate it.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
John, Brilliant scene.
Madrugada,
A few stray thoughts on All Caps:
Generally used the first time you introduce a character.
Sometimes used when you’re going to see a closeup of the person or thing that you’re capitalizing or where the capitalized person/thing is the focal point of the scene.
Sometimes used to indicate that you’re cutting to a new angle where the person or thing capitalized is what you’re cutting to.
I recommend these last two only it if there’s a story reason for the choice. In other words, don’t put it in there just because it “could” be shot that way. Put it in there because it has to be shot that way for the meaning that you’re trying to convey to come across. Sticking to that rule will help you avoid the overuse problem. One more note on the overuse issue. Sometimes generous use of caps works just fine. A case in point is the screenplay for The Bourne Supremacy. The reason it’s appropriate in that case is because of the frenetic cutting from one visual to the next, which the liberal use of CAPS makes clear. But, again, he seems to have followed the rule of only using it when it was necessary. It’s just that, in that case, it was necessary quite a lot.
Here’s an example of the various uses of All Caps taken from the opening of The Prestige ( I think illustrates all three usages). Sorry about the formatting, but hopefully you can make sense of it.
FADE IN:
TOP HATS. Clustered in a small glade. As we SUPER TITLES,
a BLACK CAT slinks its way through them. As TITLES END-
BORDEN (V.O.)
Are you watching closely?
A SECOND BLACK CAT races into frame, HISSING, SPITTING,
CHASING the first cat into the woods beyond and we-
CUT TO:
INT. CLUTTERED WORKSHOP — DAY
Moving along a row of CANARIES in CAGES.
CUTTER (V.O.)
Every magic trick consists of three
part, or acts…
Stop at a cage. Weathered HANDS envelope the canary. Hands
and voice belongs to a man in his 60’s- CUTTER.
CUTTER (V.O.) (CONT’D)
The first part is called the Pledge…
A LITTLE GIRL pershes on a chest in the workshop, watching.
CUTTER (V.O.) (CONT’D)
…the magician shows you something
ordinary-
Cutter moves to a small ORNATE CAGE resting on a prop table.
CUTTER (V.O.) (CONT’D)
A deck of cards, or a bird…
INT. SCALA THEATRE, LONDON — NIGHT
A packed house. Many hands raised. Move in on a BEARDED MAN,
his gloved hand tentatively rising into the air.
CUTTER (V.O.)
…or a man.
A GLAMOROUS ASSISTANT beckons Bearded Man from the aisle. He
shuffles along his row towards her. Embarrassed.
CUTTER (V.O.) (CONT’D)
He show you this object, and pledges
to you its utter normality…
Bearbed Man and four other VOLUNTEERS follow the Assistant
down towards the stage…
May 20th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Paula,
Very helpful, thanks. I’ve been getting in the rut of capitalizing every character name in every scene description, not to mention a lot of actions too, and I think I have to reign in both practices a bit. Your rules of thumb will come in handy. I love this blog! Thanks for your help everybody.
May 20th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Very very cool insights… really. Thanks.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Madrugada Jones says:
Jason, thanks, that’s helpful. I appreciate it.
Always like quoting from that book. Didn’t have much time to write my own opinion, so I’ll do that now.
Personally - as a former reader - I have to say I hate all kinds of caps except for the ones introducing a character. They annoy me. If a line is well written and makes sense, I’ll find out about the important stuff by myself. No need to tell me about the CAR that BULLETS past and CRASHES into the WINDOW of a CHINESE RESTAURANT, where MR. WANG YELLS, CURSES and takes out his GUN. LOADS it. AIMS. And — waiting, waiting, waiting - finally SHOOTS. BLAM!
After two of those lines I’m irritated. After four I’m annoyed. After ten my eyes hurt and after a whole page of that I hate the script. It’s that simple.
In my opinion capitals are for those five, six extremely important moments in a screenplay that turn the whole world upside down. The kid finds his BRAND NEW PORSCHE in the garage? Fine. The space ship crew gathers at the window, looking outside - finally seeing EARTH? I don’t mind. And the boxer who is suddenly PUNCHED in the face and goes DOWN - BLACKOUT! - meh, that should be okay.
But don’t capitalize every STEP the protagonist TAKES as he goes to the FRIDGE and grabs a BEER.
May 21st, 2008 at 8:38 am
Jason,
Thanks again for your great insight. I took a scene-writing workshop recently and I found myself getting annoyed at my own writing while I was in the midst of writing it because of all the capital letters I was using. I should’ve listened to that inner voice.
Can I ask one other question about scene descriptions? When writing screenplays (not that I’ve written that many) I sometimes find myself referring to a character who has few lines with a huge name like WELL-DRESSED BEARDED MAN. This may not seem problematic, but when you write the name a bunch of times in a scene, it gets annoying, especially if that character reappears in other scenes, how ever briefly, and performs a fair amount of actions. Would it be easier just to give this character a name (like, say, Steve?), even though he/she really doesn’t warrant one? I know this is a small point, but I’ve found myself in this situation multiple times. And then how do you indicate that the guy went from “WELL-DRESSED BEARDED MAN” to “Steve”? Is it enough for another character just to say his name once and then all of a sudden he becomes Steve? Or is this disorienting to the reader? I thought John did a post on this recently but I can’t find it anywhere. Thanks for any help anyone can give me on this.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:31 am
I don’t know why your writing group doesn’t like what you’ve done, but perhaps that’s why I no longer bother with writing groups. People should just read it and deal with it.
I think you’re concept is wonderful, it reminds me of some of Hitchcock’s earliest sound films, using sound specifically for effect, an art that has been lost in the past twenty years; everything has been buried under a deluge of unrealistically loud handshakes and over-loaded atmospheric noise.
May 21st, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Madrugada,
That one’s tricky. Opinions will vary. What I would probably do is introduce him as Well Dressed Bearded Man and then refer to him thereafter as Well Dressed (and that’s what I’d use as the character name). My reason for this is that it seems like this character is significant because of some thing he does that affects the story, but that you don’t really need for us to know the character (but if you do intend for us to invest, I might give him a name). My answer might also depend on how often the character recurs and the nature and significance of those recurrences. If he just recurs once, I’d probably call him Well Dressed and might include a reference that jogs the reader’s memory.
Another angle… If it’s a Keyser Soze (Usual Suspects) type character, I’d give him a name since part of the point is that there’s mysterious person named Keyser Soze.
Hope that contributes something…
May 21st, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Paula and Sean,
Yes that helps, thanks so much. I appreciate the insight.
May 21st, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Madruga,
readers often meet characters named “WOMAN WITH FUNNY HAT” or “HOT BLACK BUSTY SUPERMODEL”. As you say - it’s okay when they have a single line, but once they become an essential part of a scene readability suffers significantly.
Try to look for the combination of short character names and precise, efficient character description. It makes things much easier - so instead of introducing your character like this:
•••
Suddenly a WELL DRESSED BEARDED MAN enters the room.
WELL DRESSED BEARDED MAN
So, what’s going on here?
JAMES
Well, just talking about screenplays.
WELL DRESSED BEARDED MAN sits down.
WELL DRESSED BEARDED MAN
Beer for all.
•••
try another approach: short name + description + clear distinction of characters
•••
Suddenly a BEARDED MAN (40s) enters the room. He’s exceptionally well dressed.
BEARDED MAN
So, what’s going on here?
JAMES
Well, just talking about screenplays.
The man sits down. To the barkeeper —
BEARDED MAN
Beer for all.
•••
Let some non-writer/reader analyse your scene. If he can determine who is who in the action - the professional reader will understand it as well. Don’t be afraid to simply abbreviate the GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING to the ‘girl’ when giving her some action to do - only a lack of clarity can cause trouble, and that (again) is something that your first observing non-professional reader should be able to tell you.
May 21st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Apologies - that’s “Madrugada” of course.
May 21st, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Jason,
No worries on my name. Thanks for your perspective on this, I especially like how you truncated WELL DRESSED BEARDED MAN to “BEARDED MAN” who is “exceptionally well dressed.” I take your point and will definitely try to use it next time. Brevity is not my strong suit.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Madrugada,
I hope nobody accuses me of surreptitious advertising, but I can once again only recommend “How Not to Write a Screenplay: 101 Common Mistakes Most Screenwriters Make” by Denny Martin Flinn. The guy hasn’t written anything worth a dime, but he has worked as a reader for years - and as such he offers a very interesting and new perspective on the art of screenwriting.
Why? Because basically by following his advice and pleasing the reader you strip down your screenplay to the very bottom of its content. When you find out that readers hate dialogue that has certain punchwords underlined (just like David Mamet does it), you automatically check your dialogue and polish it. When Flinn tells you to stay away from camera, acting and directing instructions you’ll find yourself concentrating on the story instead of the images. And when the book reveals that proposing a music track isn’t going to do you any good if the reader doesn’t know the song and doesn’t give a damned, you’ll see why thousands of bad screenplays have countless “SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL by the ROLLING STONES is heard” lines: because the action and the dialogue lack the emotion that song is supposed to trigger. The list goes on.
Like I said: many of the “No-no-nos” the author talks about are made by established, distinguished and even brilliant writers. Mamet underlines dialogue punchwords, Alan Ball LOVES to CAPITALIZE, hot shot Zach Helm refers to music tracks and the LOST authors squeeze snappy prose into a screenplay template instead of writing traditionally. As such these mistakes aren’t mistakes per se, but they’re tools an unexperienced screenwriter uses to distract from writing he secretly knows to be flawed.
Go get this book. It will help you, I’m sure.
Greetings (a day off today) - Jason
May 23rd, 2008 at 5:51 am
Thanks again, Jason. I appreciate the info. I haven’t read a screenplay book in forever (the last one I read was by Syd Field who, as I recall, has never written a screenplay for a movie I’ve even heard of).
May 26th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Awesome example. Always helpful to see in context. Thanks John.
May 28th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Good infromation. I had the same question and I love it when a post like this occurs.
Ryan
lessons in brevity: http://www.mofata.com
June 11th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Although I vaguely recall a couple of movies with silent scenes such as Cali mentioned and John gave a brillinat example of, I must confess that while writing (not that I have written a lot), this idea of silent scenes has seldom popped up in my head.
Silent scenes, as John’s example above shows, can prove to be extremely powerful and effective. But I have certain questions regarding them:
During the planning stage of directing a movie (I am just a handful of short films old), one does think of a particular camera style for the movie: whether it is a predominantly still camera, or whether the camera would be moving as if propelled by its own will; would it be always objective or turn subjective for a character; would there be a lens plot and so on..Whatever style one chooses, it is generally considered a good practice to introduce that style pretty early in the movie, so that it doesnt come across as a jerk - suddenly something - when it finally does occur.
Closer home, same thing can be said about voice overs as far as writing is concerned. If there is going to be voice over, generally we would bring it in pretty early (and modestly give it to ONE charcter), rather than floating it up out of nowhere in the middle of the film.
Now onto my other two questions:
Are silent scenes also a statement of style? Especially, since every natural sound is absent save a few aubile ones.
And if they are a style, would they too need to be ‘introduced’?
My hunch for this last question is a big NO, as repitition would mar the effect.
Thanks in advance for any help and insight