Screenplays vs. Movies

[Gerry]

I've been reading a lot of screenplays lately, prepping for trying a "Bugbots!" script. I've been struck more than once by screenplays that are more lively on the page than the finished movie.

 

For the most part I try to read scripts for movies I haven't seen so I'm not replaying it in my head while I read. Then if a script impresses me I go rent it. Of animations, I've read, then watched, "Paranorman" and "Wreck it Ralph". They were both pretty dang good on the page but for various reasons, whether animation styles, voice acting, or other less tangible things, I felt the movies were just so-so.

 

I'm not going to go into a lot of detail or movie reviews or whatnot, but I wondered if anyone else has experienced this disconnect, OR if you've seen these movies and really loved them, or hated them, and why.

[Ilidrake]

I loved wreck it ralph. A lot of heart in that film. Having written a script I can definitely see what you mean by sounding better on paper. Catching the emotion of the written word in acting is very hard to do, and is one of the biggest hurdles I am facing with my own projects.

[Gerry]

One of the live action scripts I read was one I'd never heard of and assumed had not been produced, called "Angel Heart". A crackling good script with great, believable character arcs. I mentioned it to friends and found it HAD been made back in the 90's with Jennifer Lopez. Both friends said the movie was TERRIBLE because she can't act!

 

A really exceptional script that had its shot and will never get made right. Too bad!

[Simon Edmondson]

I've been reading a lot of screenplays lately, prepping for trying a "Bugbots!" script. I've been struck more than once by screenplays that are more lively on the page than the finished movie.

 

For the most part I try to read scripts for movies I haven't seen so I'm not replaying it in my head while I read. Then if a script impresses me I go rent it. Of animations, I've read, then watched, "Paranorman" and "Wreck it Ralph". They were both pretty dang good on the page but for various reasons, whether animation styles, voice acting, or other less tangible things, I felt the movies were just so-so.

 

I'm not going to go into a lot of detail or movie reviews or whatnot, but I wondered if anyone else has experienced this disconnect, OR if you've seen these movies and really loved them, or hated them, and why.

 

Gerry

 

I wrote a script for an animation short that was picked up by the local arts region film council here in the UK. They made it as a live action film instead. It got shown as part of their presentation at Cannes that year but, on the eve of filming, the directer ( bless his cotton socks ) rewrote the script, changed the ending, even wanted to change the characters names, which were irrelevant as there was no dialogue in the film. The fund officer asked for edits in the script at one point, to remove the sound of somebody vomiting , because she personally hated that sound. Didn't matter if it was relevant to the plot or atmosphere.

Thinking it might have been me I did a 'blind' test were I sent the two scripts to 20 different people and asked them which they preferred. Only one opted for the director's. The producer dropped out because he found the director impossible to work with, the new producer froze me out completely then lied extensively at the post production debrief. It was a thoroughly unpleasant experience from beginning to end and made me want to avoid such things in the future.

 

The process you describe is a bit like the radio being best" because the pictures are better". The way your imagination and visualisation works to a given description, is very different from other Directors. It might be interesting to take a script you like, then draw out some thumbnails of what you 'see' and compare it to the final product ? My personal fave feature is "The Iron Giant". I would love to read the script for that and to have followed the developmental changes as it progressed.

regards

simon

[largento]

I think what you're experience is very similar to "having read the book first" syndrome, Gerry.

 

You're controlling pacing, intention and the design of the movie in your head. No one outside of your head is going to match your expectations.

 

Angel Heart was made into a movie in the 1980s with Mickey Roarke and Robert Deniro. It was highly controversial because Lisa Bonet played the daughter and appeared topless (concurrent with her being on the Cosby Show). Bill Cosby publicly expressed his disappointment in her choices. I haven't seen the movie since then, but I remember it being intense and interesting. Pointless to watch it if you know the ending, but if you didn't, Mickey Roarke's reaction is stellar. I remember reading that the original book was set in New York, but they moved the setting to New Orleans for the film and it gives the film alot of atmosphere. Almost like Cajun Noir. :-)

[largento]

I just looked at Rotten Tomatoes and Angel Heart has a solid 78% from both critics and audience. Ebert gave it 3.5 stars back in the day.

[Gerry]

Mark, my mistake, it was "Angel Eyes"! Sorry about that.

 

Simon, painfully interesting story. I don't have any expectations for my script beyond actually getting it started, then finished. Beyond that lies the unknown!

[largento]

Oh, nevermind then. :-)

 

I think I'm going to end up seeking out Angel Heart again, though. I just watched the trailer on YouTube and had forgotten how intense it was. It was directed by the same guy who directed The Exorcist and Chinatown.

 

There's a great documentary on Netflix streaming called "Tales from the Script," that is filled with stories like yours, Simon. I remember being shocked by these successful screenwriters talking about how many of their scripts never go anywhere and how only a fraction of them sell and only a fraction of those get made. One of them had a quote that's stuck with me about meeting with production companies. "No one's ever been fired for saying, 'no.'" He was pointing out that if they turn your script down, they can go ahead and go to lunch or take the afternoon off, whatever. If they say yes, then the ball starts rolling and it's a multi-million dollar project that is started by you saying yes.

[robcat2075]

I have trouble reading screenplays. The format is always saying "hey, look, I'm a screenplay" so i never get lost in the story.

[Simon Edmondson]

Oh, nevermind then. :-)

 

I think I'm going to end up seeking out Angel Heart again, though. I just watched the trailer on YouTube and had forgotten how intense it was. It was directed by the same guy who directed The Exorcist and Chinatown.

 

There's a great documentary on Netflix streaming called "Tales from the Script," that is filled with stories like yours, Simon. I remember being shocked by these successful screenwriters talking about how many of their scripts never go anywhere and how only a fraction of them sell and only a fraction of those get made. One of them had a quote that's stuck with me about meeting with production companies. "No one's ever been fired for saying, 'no.'" He was pointing out that if they turn your script down, they can go ahead and go to lunch or take the afternoon off, whatever. If they say yes, then the ball starts rolling and it's a multi-million dollar project that is started by you saying yes.

 

Mark

I don't want to sound like a movie nerd but, I think Angel Heart was directed by Alan Parker ( Bugsy Malone, Birdy, The Commitments... ), The Exorcist by William Friedkin (?) who also did The French Connection I and II, and China Town was directed by Roman Polanski ( Rosemary's Baby... ). I would like to see Angel Heart again as I remember it as being very good indeed when I saw it in about 1988. De Niro in particular was very strong, with very long nails and a penchant for hard boiled eggs?

 

I don't really regard myself as a writer, I do it to have something to do visually, but the more you read about it, and hear about other peoples experiences the more depressing it can be. A surprise to me came with the writers strike in Hollywood a few years back when it became apparent just how low they were ranked in the process. From what I gather, John Lasseter has started a policy at Disney of never buying in scripts,only working with ones generated in house.

 

My first ever animated short was based on a Richard Brautigan story called " The Scarlatti Tilt" which is all of two sentences long.

regards

simon

[largento]

My oops. I just watched the trailer and it starts with "The Exorcist" and "Chinatown" and I just assumed it was referring to the director. Turns out it was one of those old "in the tradition of..." kind of things. I just double-checked and I can't find any connection between the producers or anybody that links them to those films.

[Gerry]

I have trouble reading screenplays. The format is always saying "hey, look, I'm a screenplay" so i never get lost in the story.

Back years ago I would have the same reaction to reading stage plays. But I must say I'm really enjoying reading the screenplays. Maybe it's my newfound sense of maturity!

[Darkwing]

That's intentional though. A screenplay is written such that its ultimately the director, cast etc that define and create the descriptions. The point o the screenplay is simply so that people know what to say and when, there's not supposed to be much for description or immersion in that regard. That being said, I've never agreed with that. When I wrote screenplays, they're actually very descriptive because I write like a director. I see the story unfolding in my head an that's what I'd want to show the world is that image in my head. I personally have a tendency to enjoy movies more if a the director was the same person who wrote the screenplay. It's their vision through ad through. At least on average. Like anything I'm sure there's bad examples of people who wrote and directed their movies. My personal thoughts have always been that the story and visuals of the movie should be that of the director. So even if the director doesn't directly write the screenplay, they were involved in its creation. Similarly, I'm of the belief the director should be the one to shoot the whole movie instead of having b unit and stuff because then its not really the directors vision an a film can lack coherency and themes because its different people's ideas on a film.

[fae_alba]

That's intentional though. A screenplay is written such that its ultimately the director, cast etc that define and create the descriptions. The point o the screenplay is simply so that people know what to say and when, there's not supposed to be much for description or immersion in that regard. That being said, I've never agreed with that. When I wrote screenplays, they're actually very descriptive because I write like a director. I see the story unfolding in my head an that's what I'd want to show the world is that image in my head. I personally have a tendency to enjoy movies more if a the director was the same person who wrote the screenplay. It's their vision through ad through. At least on average. Like anything I'm sure there's bad examples of people who wrote and directed their movies. My personal thoughts have always been that the story and visuals of the movie should be that of the director. So even if the director doesn't directly write the screenplay, they were involved in its creation. Similarly, I'm of the belief the director should be the one to shoot the whole movie instead of having b unit and stuff because then its not really the directors vision an a film can lack coherency and themes because its different people's ideas on a film.

 

Unless you are going for a "written and produced" by credit, then being descriptive in a screenplay will get the script rejected pretty much outright. It is expected that the director will set the tone of the movie, not the writer. Get a good director, then even a mediocre script will be a success. Get a lousy director and even the best script will tank.

[largento]

Well-written dialogue doesn't need much in the way of description, Chris. It's a crutch. You should be able to convey the emotional beats without having to point to them with arrows and tag them. If you think the reader isn't going to get that, rewrite it so they will.

 

I'm not terribly fond of reading the script before seeing the movie, since the movie loses its ability to tell you the story. Before the internet made it so pervasive, I remember my sister tossing me a script she'd borrowed from a guy at work who'd just returned from a Star Trek convention. It was a draft of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. I debated two seconds and then read it cover-to-cover. Went to the local copy shop and made copies for me and my friends, too. When the movie finally came out, I remember it being more about watching the process than enjoying the film. Why did they cut this or that line? Wouldn't it help for the audience to realize the assassin is wearing a mask and was that guy we saw earlier?

 

Despite that, I fell into the same trap when the script for Star Trek: Generations popped up on the newsgroups. There was a huge outcry about copyright violation, but it was genie-out-of-the-bottle time. Once the text file appeared, it was everywhere, but I've only caved once or twice since then.

 

Film is a collaborative effort and it makes sense that the script should evolve over the course of a production. Some of those changes might be for bad reasons, but I suspect many of them are out of necessity for production. (ie can't shoot where you want to shoot, availability of cast, etc.), and some make it better. I've long believed that dealing with not being able to do exactly what you want challenges you to come up with a new (and often better idea). That's one of the things I think we've lost in the digital fx age. Now, nobody says "you can't do that."

 

I go through this process when I right a script for Greyhawk. Despite the fact that I write a full script, McCrary's interpretation of it never matches exactly with what I had in mind. If you're egotistical, then you can become frustrated by this, but if you're a collaborator, you take what he adds to it and shape the script to fit the art. The final product is not the same as the script, but we're not delivering a script, we're delivering a comic book and I think it's better when the story and art both work together.

[Darkwing]

Here's my counter (and mind you this is purely personal). Film is a visual medium, it's all about show instead of tell. That said, I'm of the thought that a film that's based mostly on its dialogue is the crutch. I like to describe events and actions, things that are to be shown because as I said, I'm seeing it unfold in my head and part of it is that I don't want to forget it plus if you're describing the actions then a person would theoretically be less inclined to describe it all through the dialogue. I personally hate a lot of movies dialogue simply because the characters are explaining to us whys going on or telling us important things to remember because they'll only make sense when's a later event happens (except now you can tell that event will happen because the character has described to you these clues so its not really a surprise when it happens. An example of this is Star Trek the final frontier. In that's movie, Scotty is basically just telling us what's happening in the movie and also tellin us things that give away how Kirk will escape later on and stuff. Granted its a bad movie in general but it is also a good example of what I mean. Now of course I've never written a script for anybody other than myself. I'm the writer and director of whatever failed projects I attempt to do. I also have terrible memory so I like to describe what's happening around the characters and stuff so I can remember later. I also find it jps me keep the dialogue minimalist and more organic because then I'm not falling into the trap of using the characters dialogue to describe the movie.

 

Edit: holy crap I hate typing with my phone. Apologies for any non sensical things my phone puts in.

[Gerry]

Of the scripts I've read of movies I've seen, the most interesting was an early draft for "Alien". The websites where you can download the screenplays often have various versions, sometimes either numbered or dated. The draft of "Alien" had some themes, ideas and even some characters who didn't make it to the final version.

[largento]

You misunderstand. You need to describe action. You do not need to describe performance. I only work in visual mediums. I know what needs to be shown and what needs to be dialogue.

[higginsdj]

I have a collegue at work who writes great short stories (well I like them anyway) and I attempted to make an animated short about one of them a couple of years ago when I took 7 months off work. The story played out great in my head and I tried to write a 'screenplay' from the story and do an animatic. But alas - I do not possess that skill (of telling stories) so the project fell through.

 

I have to say that telling the story appears to be the Directors job (moulding together the talents of the writer, cinematographer etc) and it is a rare skill.

 

Cheers

[robcat2075]

When TWO played at a film festival in Lousiana all the other features there were live action, lo-budget writer/director efforts and none of them were BAD, several were decent looking, well-shot, well-paced entertainments. They got a lot done with not much to do it with.

 

I think job one for the successful director is understanding his resources and knowing how to use the language of film to get a useful result out of what you have.

 

A writer can imagine anything on screen. A "writer/director" can fashion something he knows can get done but a "director" has to take a potentially infinite script and figure out how to get it on screen with finite resources. Each has a different co-existence with "the screenplay".

[Darkwing]

You misunderstand. You need to describe action. You do not need to describe performance. I only work in visual mediums. I know what needs to be shown and what needs to be dialogue.

 

Oh yeah, we're pretty much on the same page then. I only describe a characters action if its like a really important action (ie they yell their line or its important they jump when they say it or something). Well at least usually anyways. There are times when I sometimes catch myself describing the character too much

[Gerry]

That's just it, that you can see how economical the shot descriptions can be, what works, and what's used to set the mood, like music or ambient sound, that can't be shown visually, but the writer can suggest with a few words.

[Darkwing]

All of this talk of screenplays makes me realize I haven't written anything in a couple of years! Now I want to write something...

[fae_alba]

this site lays out what is "expected" in a screenplay.

 

Screen Writing Info

[Gerry]

Hey Paul, that's a great resource. I'll definitely be using it!