Based on an earlier Three Page Challenge entry — and with the blessing of writer Andrew McDonald — I’ve posted a new video in which I revise a scene in real time. Along the way, I discuss how small choices on the page can help (or hurt) a reader’s ability to understand where characters are and what’s happening.
You may want to take a look at the original version of the scene, and the writer’s revision.
And as a fun bonus, Andrew has also filmed a demo version of his vision.
Don Donahue writes:
How would you format two transitions in a row?
I’m experimenting with a transition where a drone gets shot down in Alaska. Right now I have…
CUT TO STATIC:
FADE TO BLIZZARD:
Is this acceptable? Is there a better way to do this?
This looks awkward. It feels like there’s something omitted between the two transitions. After all, the point of a transition is that you’re transitioning to something. That something is missing here.
It’s important to understand that by “transition” screenwriters are really talking about two distinct things:
The first kind of transition happens on the right-hand margin, uppercase, often with a colon at the end. It’s unique to screenplay grammar.
In your example, FADE TO BLIZZARD is an example of this kind of transition. It’s strictly cinematic. You’re telling us what we’d see on screen, and giving specific instructions to an imaginary editor.
The second kind of transition happens in all kinds of writing. You see it novels, plays, non-fiction and journalism. I’d argue that at least half of the craft of writing is transitioning smoothly to the next thing.
In your example, CUT TO STATIC is describing what we’re seeing and hearing, but it’s the kind of thing the characters in the scene are probably experiencing firsthand. So I’d leave it in scene description.
Obviously, I don’t know exactly what’s happening in your scene, but let’s imagine it something like this:
Malcolm leans close, pointing to a dark smudge on the screen.
MALCOLM
There! What do you think that is?
DAHLIA
A bunker? Something’s moving inside.
CLOSE ON SCREEN, a FLASH. Something flies straight for the lens. Bright. Hot.
MALCOLM (O.S.)
Shit! A rocket!
Impact! The screen cuts to STATIC.
CROSS-FADE TO BLIZZARD.
EXT. ARCTIC STATION – NIGHT
HOWLING WINDS. The domes of the compound are just barely visible. Yellow work lights wobble.
Fade? Cross-fade? Your call. To me, FADE generally implies that we’re going to black or white.
You’ll notice I put a period after BLIZZARD rather than a colon. Blizzard is the thing we’re cross-fading to, so it feels like a complete thought. I’d give it a period.
The colon makes sense when the object of the transition is in the next line, like this:
DA’VONNE
I know where he’d hide it.
CUT TO:
INT. TRUCK GARAGE – NIGHT
With flashlights, Da’Vonne and Sarah make their way amid the massive semis and trailers.
Here, the CUT TO: is doing the work of both a cinematic transition (a blunt cut to the next place) and a narrative transition (answering the question “Where does Da’Vonne think it’s hidden?”).
Uppercased transitions are a useful tool for screenwriters, particularly when they can do this double-duty. But you’ll read many screenplays that hardly use them at all, and that’s fine too. They’re never strictly necessary.
I recorded this video to illustrate the different ways screenwriters can indicate dialogue is being interrupted. It’s a situation that happens quite often in most screenplays. The choice of how you show it can impact the read.
There aren’t hard-and-fast rules, but there are definitely conventions, and in this video I cover most of them.
For the third Arlo Finch book, I was considering having one character use bear spray on a non-bear adversary. Since the books take place in the mountains of Colorado, it was very believable that the character would have it handy.
I also assumed that bear spray is stronger than conventional self-defense pepper sprays because, well, bears.
But it turns out, I was wrong:
Although pepper spray and bear spray contain the same active chemical, they are not the same thing. Bear spray has a much lower concentration of oleoresin capsicum, and should only be used as a bear deterrent.
Pepper spray is a self defense weapon intended to incapacitate human threats, and it is very effective at doing this due to its higher concentration of oleoresin capsicum. If you are serious about self defense, go purchase some pepper spray. If you are a hiker or camper in bear country, buy some bear spray.
What’s more, bear spray is designed to put out a wide cloud, filling the air with droplets, discouraging the bear from attacking. On the other hand, pepper spray is a targeted stream designed to incapacitate a person close to you.1
Bear spray isn’t designed to fend off humans, but one reason you might see people carrying it for self defense (in real life and in fiction) is that it’s legal in places where pepper spray isn’t. It just isn’t as effective.
You’ll have to wait until book three to see if and when oleoresin capsicum gets used.