Craig Mazin has a [good article](http://artfulwriter.com/archives/2005/04/why_pitching_is.html) on [Artful Writer](http://artfulwriter.com) today about whether screenwriters are better off pitching their ideas, or just writing the script and trying to sell it as a spec. I largely agree with his points.
Keep in mind that Artful Writer is geared towards screenwriters who are already working in the industry, so the pitch-versus-write decision wouldn’t be the same for most aspiring screenwriters.
I am from the UK and have written a script which I think
would work either side of the Atlantic. Though the theme
is generic, some minor details would not seem authentic to
an American reader as well as technical differences, such
as spelling.
Should I send an amended US version to
American agencies and a British one in the UK, or send the
original version to both?
— Paul James
via [IMDb](http://indie.imdb.com/Indie/Ask/)
I don’t think there’s a wrong answer, but here’s what I would recommend if I were in your place.
If it really wouldn’t suffer from setting it in the U.S., then go for it. Keep your UK version for British agencies and filmmakers, and do up a separate-but-equal version for the U.S. (Hint: put a “UK” down by the date on the title page, so you can easily tell which one is which.) While most Hollywood folks are clever enough to realize that a good script is a good script, there’s always a chance that a reader will see “Bristol” and think, nope.
Next, if you do set it in America, with American characters, you’re probably better off using American spellings throughout. That way, there’s no weird disconnect when Tyrell starts talking about “gang colours.” And have a native-born American whose opinion you trust do a careful reading through your script, just to make sure there’s no dangling British-isms.
Having said this, a UK writer shouldn’t worry about being too British. Or Scottish. Or whatever. There’s a long history of talented filmmakers crossing the Atlantic to work in Hollywood (and vice-versa). You shouldn’t try to sublimate your natural writing style to match some mythical American standard — which all too often resembles the lowest common denominator. But if you decide to American-ize this script, make sure you do so thoroughly.
When you want a title to appear on the screen (i.e. “Two days later” or “September 1987”) how do you write it exactly?
— A. B.
via [IMDb](http://indie.imdb.com/Indie/Ask/)
Printing words on screen works much just the way you’d think. You write TITLE OVER, like this:
INT. JOHNSON FARM – DAY
Robin pulls open the curtains, so tattered they begin to rip from the rod. Bright light floods into the dusty room.
TITLE OVER:
21 HOURS AFTER ABDUCTION
With a trained eye, she surveys the dank livingroom. Her attention focuses on a chest of drawers, which has been pulled out slightly from the wall.
Note that many times, you simply want to provide clarifying information to the reader, and have no intention of showing an on-screen title. In these cases, it’s completely acceptable to append the info to the end of a scene header.
EXT. POLISH GETTO – DAY [1945]
INT. MARGE’S KITCHEN – NIGHT [WINTER]
EXT. CENTRAL PARK – [THE NEXT] DAY
Of course, only append this bracketed information if it really is crucial to helping the reader understand the scene — for instance, if your story moves back and forth between two timelines. Otherwise, you’re just adding clutter.
Following up on an [earlier question](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2004/avoid-cut-tos-in-a-busy-sequence#comments): Maybe I’m foolish for asking this.
For location changes I have been using scene headings, so that in a phone conversation I will have:
INT. MARIA’S KITCHEN – NIGHT
Maria paces the room, phone glued to her ear.
MARIA
I can’t believe you’d do that!
INT. SEAN’S KITCHEN – NIGHT
SEAN
Do what?
INT. MARIA’S KITCHEN – NIGHT
MARIA
That!
Is it correct to assume that by using slug lines, I could avoid the scene headings? If I were to do it that way, would I use a slug line that is essentially identical to my scene headings but without the “INT.”? or “EXT.”?
— Brock
This type of scene happens all the time. Think about [24](http://imdb.com/title/tt0285331/combined). If you put in a new slugline every time you changed speakers on a phone call, the script would be 180 pages.
Behold, the magic that is “INTERCUT.” Instead of your second “INT. MARIA’S KITCHEN”, just have a slug that says INTERCUT or INTERCUT MARIA / SEAN. Then you don’t have to keep doing the location sluglines. They’re really in one scene, even though it’s split between two places. It’s much easier for the reader to follow.
Your scene would end up looking like this:
INT. MARIA’S KITCHEN – NIGHT
Maria paces the room, phone glued to her ear.
MARIA
I can’t believe you’d do that!
INT. SEAN’S KITCHEN – NIGHT
SEAN
Do what?
INTERCUT MARIA/SEAN
MARIA
Mention my genital warts at a cocktail party!
SEAN
The guy was a doctor!
MARIA
He was a Ph. D! In philosophy!
SEAN
Rhetoric, actually.
MARIA
What’s the difference!
SEAN
There’s overlap, but rhetoric is a pretty narrow specialty.
Maria SLAMS DOWN the phone. We stay on her side of the scene. A beat, then she lets loose with a long-delayed, primal SCREAM.
The dog looks up at her with big, droopy eyes.
CUT TO:
EXT. SOMEWHERE ELSE – DAY
Next scene…