• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

QandA

Observations on the evolution of screenwriting based upon reading one script from 1974

December 19, 2011 Formatting, Words on the page

Last week, I needed to read a screenplay written in the early 1970s. I think it’s the earliest-dated script I’ve read that wasn’t reprinted in a book.

It had clearly been typed. As in actually typed on a typewriter. Corrections had been made with a pen. I couldn’t smell cigarette smoke on it — this was a photocopy — but I definitely got the sense that an ashtray had sat beside the typewriter as it was written.

On the page, it looked largely like current screenplays — elements had roughly the same margins — but there were some noticeable differences:

* ANGLES (especially POVs) were called out and given their own scene numbers in ways we never would today.

* Locations got much less writer attention. In this script, a kitchen is a kitchen. In today’s scripts, every location gets at least a color line (“stainless steel and subway tiles, with an $8000 convection oven that’s never been used.”)

* There were a lot of “AD LIBBED goodbyes” and such scattered throughout the script. You don’t see that much today, even in projects that use ad-libbing. If a character has a speaking part, you write the lines.

By “evolution,” I don’t mean that screenwriting has gotten better, by the way. It’s just gotten different, the way fashions change. Modern screenplays work very hard — too hard? — trying to make everything a fun read.

This script, at least, seemed much more interested in just getting it done:

Tom looks Barbara square in the eye. Barbara looks to Norman. After a beat, Norman stands and leaves.

PAN BACK to Barbara. She returns to her knitting.

It’s not thrilling, but you know what you’re going to see. There’s a lot to be said for that.

Intercutting within a musical sequence

December 16, 2011 Formatting, QandA

questionmarkI’m adapting (or rather adopting) a fairly well-known Broadway musical. I’m starting to use a similar convention in a number of the songs. For example, in one song the action takes place in four locations: an apartment living room, an apartment bedroom, a boxing ring and a wedding altar. I have specific bits of action for each time we change location in the screenplay.

I’m sure when it’s shot and cut together those specifics will be thrown out of the window, as they are just a blueprint.

Question: How do I format for this without making the song twice as long as it should be? Can I set the locations with an initial slug line / scene heading and then use just a simple line of action to state when we return to that location?

Bigger question: The majority of the story takes place within this one apartment. Do I need a slug line/scene heading for each room or part of the apartment as the scene shifts from one to another? If not, the core of the screenplay will be one extremely long scene.

— Cory

Musical numbers are a lot like action sequences: you’re trying to convey how it’s going to feel in the final movie, not beat out every little moment.

The first time you cut to a new location during the song, use a full scene header to establish it. After that, call in your best friend INTERCUT. You may also find yourself using straight cuts to sell the shifts:

GLEE KIDS

And we hope you’ll sing along!

INTERCUT BOXING RING

HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMP

I ain’t singing.

COACH

Script says you gotta!

HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMP

Nope.

A long pause. Music STALLS. Finally...

CUT TO:

EXT. RODEO ARENA – DAY

MUSIC RESUMES as COWBOYS dance with lassos.

For your second question: Yes, break up the apartment into smaller areas for the sake of the script — and the sanity of everyone reading it.

In plays (and musicals), readers are accustomed to staying in one scene for countless pages. For screenplays, readers get antsy if any scene goes on longer than three pages. Even if it ultimately plays as one long sequence in the movie, let us experience it as smaller moments in the script.

Try to keep characters moving, and use scene headers to show when they’re in a new space — even if it’s a corner of the room just slightly offset from the other characters.

Thirteen questions about one thing

Episode - 16

Go to Archive

December 13, 2011 QandA, Scriptnotes

Craig and John plug a book by their very first sponsor and discuss elective brain surgery, before tackling an exhaustive but illuminating list of questions from listener Daniel Barkeley.

They’re residual questions about residuals, which seems very meta:

* Do TV show creators get compensated for every rerun?
* How do residuals differ from profit participations and foreign levies?
* And where does new media fall in all of this?

Thirteen conversations about a few things, on episode sixteen of Scriptnotes.

LINKS:

* [Dark Men](http://www.amazon.com/dp/1605982717/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) by Derek Haas on Amazon
* [Popcorn Fiction](http://www.mulhollandbooks.com/popcornfiction/previous.html) short stories by screenwriters
* [UltraViolet](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UltraViolet_(system)) the studios’ digital locker platform
* [Follies (New Broadway Cast Recording)](http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/follies-new-broadway-cast/id481773992) on iTunes
* Jane Epenson’s [Husbands](http://husbandstheseries.com/)
* Lisa Kudrow’s [Web Therapy](http://www.lstudio.com/web-therapy/)
* INTRO: [Riptide main theme](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMq59GCaIfw)
* OUTRO: [What More Can I Say](http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/what-more-can-i-say/id3566075?i=3566051) by Jay-Z

You can download the episode here: [AAC](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_16.m4a).

UPDATE 12-15-11: The transcript of this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2011/scriptnotes-ep-16-thirteen-questions-by-daniel-barkeley-transcript).

More on Archer’s odd pre-laps

December 6, 2011 Follow Up, Television, Words on the page

Having seen my post about [Archer’s semi-pre-laps](http://johnaugust.com/2011/archers-semi-pre-laps), the good folks at FX sent over a copy of Adam Reed’s actual script for the Skytanic episode I cited. (FX seems awesome. Let’s all write shows for them.)

I’d been working off a transcript, so it’s interesting to see how those scenes [actually looked on the page](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/archer_excerpt.pdf). (Complete scripts of Archer are available in the Writers Guild library, FYI.)

Some differences worth noting:

1) On the page, we see Malory’s dialogue as a true pre-lap, occurring before the cut.

LANA

Cyril! It’s not what it looks like!

MALORY (O.S.)

Well then what is it?!

INT. MALORY’S STATEROOM -- CONTINUOUS

Malory, arms akimbo, surveys the room. Signs of a struggle. Pam stands nervously over by the bed, wringing her hands. Cheryl/Carol lies face down on the bed, nude and lifeless.

To me, what’s most interesting about Archer’s technique is not exactly where the cut is falling, but the implied line that sets up the next scene. Both Lana and Pam apparently said, “It’s not what it looks like!” Malory’s line seems to answer both questions.

In other cases, the cut repeats the last thing said, but changes the context. Earlier in the episode:

LANA

Psh! Cyril?! With another woman?!

(gestures at herself)

Malory, seriously: look at me.

INT. MALORY’S STATEROOM -- CONTINUOUS

CLOSE ON Cheryl/Carol, looking up at us, eyes slightly bulged, as a man’s hands squeeze tightly around her shapely throat.

CHERYL/CAROL

Look at me! Look at and choke me!

In both cases, the writer is calling attention to the cut. It’s like a literary star-wipe. The technique works great in a heavily-stylized show like Archer, but would feel very wrong in more realistic shows.

2) In Archer scripts, vocal noises without true dialogue are written in brackets rather than parentheses:

LANA

[mortified gasp]

3) A recurring joke in the show is that Malory’s secretary keeps changing her name. I love that they call her Cheryl/Carol in the script, despite the extra typing that requires.

4) Look at what Singh is wearing:

And there is Lana, stripped back down to her bra/panties/stockings, with Singh in the background, stripped down to his Spreefs, rubbing scented OIL on his belly.

Spreefs! It’s funny and just right. Even though the viewer will never see that great word, it makes the script read better.

Scene description matters. It’s a little gift the writer gives the reader.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (73)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (490)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (237)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.