John August

Projects

Writing what can’t be shot

Charlie, Dead Projects, QandA, Words on the page

questionmarkI was wondering what your thoughts are about occasionally adding exposition into action lines, when it can’t be explicitly shown on screen.

For example:

The room bursts out in laughter, which quickly turns into applause. A few EXECS standing at the back of the room smile to each other, and nod their heads in amusement. The publishing wunderkind, #29 on Forbes’ Top 30 under 30, has done it again! The pleased crowd begins to disperse.

Since this information isn’t actually going to be shown to the audience in the scene, is it bad form to add it in? Or is it helpful in giving the reader a quick sense of the character and making the action lines a little less dry?

— Isaac Aptaker

Your specific example probably wouldn’t be to my taste. Once you have the people in the room smile, laugh, applaud and nod, it’s hard to justify another line to underscore the point again.

But in general, yes. Used judiciously, these for-the-reader-only snippets are fine. I often find myself using them when introducing an important character for the first time.

From Charlie and the Chocolate Factory:

Mother Bucket is an ever-exhausted woman in her late 30’s, run ragged from taking care of Charlie and the four invalid grandparents. Many nights, she’s too tired to worry, and too worried to sleep.

From Barbarella:

FINNEA (29) comes up to Barbarella at the podium, and hugs her in a sisterly but somewhat obvious manner, as if trying to share her spotlight.

While Barbarella could be compared to the wildflowers she paints -- joyful, open and a bit scattered -- Finnea is like a cultivated rose. She’s very beautiful but very focused. And one suspects there are thorns to protect her.

Nothing in these descriptions is directly cinematic, but it gives the reader (and the director, and the actor) a much better idea of the intention. Just make sure that you’re never confusing these blips of exposition with real character work. Movies are about what characters do and say, not who they were before the story started.

Cut-scenes do not a videogame make

Prince of Persia, Rant, Story and Plot

Screenwriter and videogame developer Jordan Mechner, who is writing the Prince of Persia movie I’m executive-producing, has a [great opinion piece](http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.04/story.html
) in the new Wired magazine. In it, he argues that videogame-makers need to stop trying to ape Hollywood blockbusters, and instead focus on creating _playable_ stories:

In a movie, the story is what the characters do. In a game, the story is what the player does. The actions that count are the player’s. Better game storytelling doesn’t mean producing higher-quality cinematic cutscenes; it means constructing the game so that the most powerful and exciting moments of the story occur not in the cutscenes but during the gameplay itself.

You can see the whole article [here](http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.04/story.html).

How accurate is the page-per-minute rule?

Big Fish, Charlie, Charlie's Angels, Corpse Bride, Go, QandA

questionmarkEvery screenwriting book I’ve read, class I took, and
basically the first rule I learned says:

ONE PAGE OF A PROPERLY FORMATED SCRIPT = APPROX. A MINUTE OF SCREEN TIME.

I know one page of say a battle can last five minutes whereas one page of quick
dialogue my last ten seconds if the actors talk fast… So my question is,
is this rule true?

Has your 120 page script been a 2 hour movie or was it more like 90 minutes?

My main reason for asking this is I want to make my own low-budget movie.
And the best tips I get say keep the script 90 pages or shorter. And to
make it a play (dialogue heavy, one location).

However, from my short film experience and being an editor, I saw a 90 page
script of a friend be only 55 minutes when edited. And I know Kevin
Smith’s CLERKS was 164 page script, but is only a 90 min movie because of
the dialogue.

So, how can I find an accurate length of the movie before I shoot it. Or
should I have a 130-page script if I want to make my own feature? How do the
big boys figure out if there’s enough actual screen time on the pages?

— Matthew Kaplan
New York City

Your instinct is right: the one-page-per-minute rule of thumb doesn’t hold up to much scrutiny. True, most screenplays are about 120 pages, and true, most movies are around two hours. But the conversion rate between paper and celluloid is rarely one-to-one .

That’s why when a movie is in pre-production, one of the script supervisor’s first jobs is to time the script. She or he reads through the screenplay with a stopwatch, estimating how long each scene will play, then adds up the total running time. Generally, they go through the whole script twice, averaging the times.

How accurate is the script timing? Well, that depends on how well the script supervisor has factored in the director’s style. Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain featured long, contemplative shots of the heroes herding sheep, which another director might have dropped altogether. But generally, the script timing is in the right ballpark.

Although a script supervisor has more experience, you can time a script yourself. My advice would be to read the dialogue aloud, while trying to pad for non-spoken moments. It’s easier with some scripts than others.

As far as my own films:

Go was 126 pages, but came out at 103 minutes — without any major scenes left out. It wasn’t play-like, but the pacing was quick.

Big Fish was 124 pages, and 125 minutes long. To my recollection, only one significant scene was omitted, so the page-per-minute rule came close.

Both Charlie’s Angels movies went through so many drafts during production that an accurate page-count is impossible. But the first drafts were around 120 pages. The original film was 98 minutes; the sequel was 106. The pacing was obviously quick.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: 128 pages, 115 minutes.

Corpse Bride: 73 pages, 76 minutes.

Prince of Persia retrospective

Prince of Persia, Projects

[prince of persia](http://media.ubi.com/us/games/pop3/videos/POP3_retrospective_trailer.wmv)Jordan Mechner forwarded me this Ubisoft-created look back at the [Prince of Persia series](http://media.ubi.com/us/games/pop3/videos/POP3_retrospective_trailer.wmv). It’s in sucky .wmv format, but does a nice job showing the evolution of the franchise from its humble PC roots.

Anticipating your inevitable questions:

1. No, I don’t know when the movie will come out.
2. No, we haven’t cast anyone.
3. Yes, the movie is based on “The Sands of Time,” the first game in the series, which is lighter and more swashbuckling than the later games.
4. Yes, we’re aware of the fact that Babylon (games two and three) doesn’t have anything to do with Persia.
5. No, we don’t have a director yet.
6. Yes, I think it would be great to find a (relatively) unknown Persian actor to play the prince. It’s not my decision, though. Just my opinion.
7. No, don’t send headshots. Or links. I’ll delete them.
8. I’m serious. Stop.

Who am I kidding? I’ll end up having to close comments anyway. But in the meantime, you can see the promo [here](http://media.ubi.com/us/games/pop3/videos/POP3_retrospective_trailer.wmv).