Screenwriting : Doing the camera directions on a screenplay VS creative and imaginative freedom. What are your thoughts? by Conrad Ekeke

No camera shots unless you're directing the piece yourself. The writer's job is only sight and sound. For example "CLOSE UP on Emily's teary eyes" Instead, as the writer only, you would just write, Emily sobs. Or if you need to pinpoint it (only to drive the narrative forward) then it would be i.e "a glistening tear runs down Emily's cheek..." Say for instance, Emily's flaw within the context of the story itself is her inability to cry.

As Dan said

That's so true Mark. How about being concise? Yet what you imagine needs more detail than you can summarize... Yes, the camera directions won't detail it but they'll bring it out. Just saying. Talked also about writing and directing your own script. Why distinguish the two if creative freedom isn't hindered?

Hahah that true people. Dan says "step on director's toes" makes my kid laugh :) well, that said, do writers have limits then?

Okay. Applying by the rules is what's right to do.

What's right to do -- if you want to sell the script. Raise the money and produce it yourself and you can write it anyway you want.

If you want your cast and crew to respect your work you need to respect there's. The high creative tide lifts all boats.

Haha, true Rob'

Wow thank you Jim. Thanks a lot. This can make everything simpler to understand

Put in whatever you need to tell your story. If a camera angle is a specific element in the story add it. But don't start putting in unnecessary camera direction just because you can. Look at James Cameron's script for Aliens. It has camera direction that is vital, not waste full. Your job is to tell the story the best way you can. These "rules" are broken all the time by great writers. But unfortunately they are also very common in the writing of crap writers. Having said that, avoid camera angles doesn't fix a bad story.

I write camera direction into my scripts, but I've been a camera man on every project I did in school plus I directed my school projects. However I think film-making is collaborative so if someone else had an idea about my scripts I would always listen.

First off, Landis and Mazin make over a million dollars a movie. When you are paid this, you can write whatever the f**k you want however you want and there are no rules or guides or anything. Until that point, there are some things you just can't do if you want to be seen as professional. And here's the truth -- writing in all the cam directions and shots and transitions and music and production design is selfish. Because it's Not just about YOUR creative freedom or interpretation! You're the blueprint. Then it's about the Directors interpretation and the music supervisors and the Art Directors... They too need their own creative freedom to create what THEY do. So you saying that not including all that is stifling you, but Including it is stifling all of them! And once you sell your script, it's no longer yours. So, do YOUR job properly as the writer so that everyone else involved can do THEIR job properly.

You are writing a spec script, I presume, Conrad, not a shooting draft of the script. If you are a director on a project and also writer of the script then your shooting draft will of course have camera direction and angles describing the mechanics of the scene and the scenes will also be numbered. No spec ever (to my knowledge) has made it further than PASS when read by an executive and having camera direction in the spec script itself.

Craig, yes James Cameron writes camera angles. so does Tarantino. And many other writer/directors because they already know THEY are directing it! if you're writing a short film you are going to direct, then by all means - go for it. But if you're writing something to submit to reps, execs or contests, don't do something that's going to get your script flagged as amateurish.

Danny: yup.

Jim, that is not camera direction per se. Camera direction would be ANGLE DOWN on the so and so. or RACK FOCUS TO SEE...or CAMERA CRANES UP TO SHOW... THAT'S camera direction. what is in that scene above is just telling us what's on the screen.

I'm under the impression you should never use camera direction in a spec script, because you want it to be an entertaining read, not a technically cluttered one. The advice I've heard is when you want to play with a specific point of view just word it a different way, but make it seem natural. I'm having this issue in my screenplay. Don't know if I'm doing it right, but I do some of the following: If I want a close up: (This is a sole paragraph) The amber flickering of the campfire on a set of eyes. Now on another set of eyes. If I want to take bird's eye view: Above, the train snakes through the wilderness. I've been playing with it like that when I need that angle.

What spec scripts have been sold (written that way) and who purchased them, Jim? I would love to know if you have a link or an example?

Why should I, Tracking Board didn´t post here, you did, right? I´m asking you since you claim to have the facts about the issue.

Wow! Love this topic! I stay away from telling the reader things like CLOSE UP and "we see". However, sometimes (for pacing or whatever) I might write the word that describes an object, part of the room or character in BOLD letters and separate from the bulk of text, suggesting emphasis (possibly a shot, I would have to confess if brutally interrogated). I'm a bit unsure, though. Is this clandestine camera directions? For instance, in the following hypothetical fragment of script, which would be more appropriate for a spec? a) John is almost at the door, when -- ZOMBIE DROID sneaks up behind him and grabs him by the throat. b) John is almost at the door, when Zombie Droid sneaks up behind him and grabs him by the throat. or some other variant like: John almost at the door. Zombie Droid sneaks up behind him. Grabs him by the throat. Input appreciated! =)

Pablo - I don't think that a) is really a camera direction and it is certainly the more powerful a read! I think Jordan's point of the script being an entertaining read is well taken. I think if you can entertain the reader your chance of a spec sale will greatly increase.

Thanks, Robert for your view! That's my feeling too and I agree with Jordan on that note as well. I also get what Danny says about not stepping on people's toes. I guess it's a balance. Nobody writing spec should believe they're James Cameron or Tarantino and running the show, but I have a hard time believing that if your script kicks serious and I mean serious ass, a reader will go -- No, no, no, he has one "we see" and two camera directions. But it never hurts to be reminded of this stuff. Good topic!

Jim, I read what you wrote, but was mostly thanking and replying to a question I made on this thread, which maybe you missed or not. I do not care. Can we manage our differences whatever they may be without sarcasm?

Thank you Jim. This is a great comment - "Maybe... juuuuuuuust maybe... people with careers aren't "getting away" with anything. Maaaaaaaaaybe they have careers because of the way they write screenplays?" Amateurish would be to do whatever other unpublish/unproduced writer does. Sentences you will never hear? From a director "Oh hell, I would make this but I can't change the camera shots the screenwriter called out". From a producer "This is the greatest story I have ever ready... but it has camera shots and music mentioned, what a shame". What you may hear is "this script has tone....bucket loads of tone" and one way to "perhaps" set tone is to describe what the person reading it may see. The problem is, like I said. This is also used by bad writers. Think of it as a bell curve. The top 5% of writers use non-standard methods when needed to get a story told. The bottom 5% use non-standard methods because they are bad writers. This is also something to consider. If only the top 5% get produced, the middle and the bottom suffer the same fate. So you can beat the personality out of your writing and remain in the huge centre of the bell curve. Or you can chance greatness and write what you believe the story needs. You may even learn from the experience. Tarantino was always Tarantino. No one came to him and said "okay you're famous now.... go ahead and break the rules...".

I agree that if the writing kicks ass, it doesn't matter that the guy breaks the rules. I pretty much stated that up above. And no, I DON'T mind if anyone missed it. I feel like this is one of those discussions where we all pretty much agree, but we need to disagree so that it generates more conflict. I appreciate everyone's input. I'm outta here.

Hey guys, Thanks for your comments - some were loud, lol

Certain ideas contradict though. Nonetheless, it's best to apply by the rules and play our roles respectively. Thanks guys.

First of all Owen, thanks a lot for the advice and I won't fail to do just that. "studying the craft and using applied logic". You know, I wouldn't know what writing level I'm at but if I understand you right, my humble answer is, I'm a beginner who has learned and applied a lot, in screenwriting techniques. What I really don't master is how to do the loglines. Most times I get feedbacks for poorly written loglines and I've to work on that too. Hope that made sense :)

Use camera directions when you have a clear vision as to how something should play out to tell the story. Don't use them for every scene and shot. Directors will figure that out. You want to implant your vision of the story on them. Once they have it, theoretically, they can expand and add/subtract to make it work.

It does tend to get loud in here

Loving this debate :D No camera angles! Camera angles don't make your script interesting, your dialogue and your characters and your pwersonal writing voice make your script interesting. A director who "gets" your script just from that will bring his own creative voice to interpret your script. You have yours (the script). He has his (the camera).

I agree whole heartedly with Dan, Patricia and Vanessa. CLOSE UP ON ROBERT We see Robert smile as he contemplates his next line. INSERT ON COMPUTER MONITOR The characters flow across the screen. A writer's job is to tell a story. Camera and acting direction takes the reader out of the moment. It reminds her she is reading a script instead of being caught up in the story. Nobody likes reading scripts. People love being caught up in stories. BACK ON ROBERT He reads his words and laughs ironically. INSERT COMPUTER MONITOR The cursor floats lightly across the backlit screen resting gently over the pale green 'Post Comment' button. CLICK!

Now, what happens when we all start thinking aloud and saying what's really limiting, in as much as creative skills play a role in the writing we inspire, with the money to finance a project, a writer might well go ahead and produce his own stuff... Which brings us to whether it is profitable for a screenwriter to learn the art of directing...? Understanding we have what already limits us. It's important to note here. Should we always run behind directors etc... If we can do it like them? Let's see how this turns us. Noise please!!!

I recall Patricia. These ideas... In the end of it, you'll be surprised at the things you'd be willing to do. Directors etc... They sometimes make this hard for a writer but I guess if a writer devotes some time in directing, he/she can be overall good. If we go back and forth on some of these posts, some of us might find our ideas confusing... ;) however, the rules are stated and I don't think anyone's new to formats, the dos & don'ts in SW. We mustn't ignore those...

Conrad, come on man..... If you´re an electrician, do you really want to tell a contractor and a landscaper how to do his/her job building a house and arranging a property around the house??? NO. Like Mr. Mowatt said, you do your job. And if you really want to be a screenwriter, you respect what the Craft is about and you write. I mean, respectfully, have you even started writing? You sure post a lot here, asking pretty much the same questions while questioning pretty mych everything you´re told. That does not seem like a willingness to learn and discuss relevant craft issues??? Anyway, don´t listen to me, I am a nobody in this business but I have written screenplays for a long time now. But, please, listen to Mr. Guardino for example. And do it the way it´s supposed to be done on your end. End of story, it´s that simple.

True Owen. Novice... What do you mean novice? My understanding of it is that of one who literally is starting, new etc... If thats what you meant, I'm not new to SW. Not being known doesn't make anyone a novice unless it's different here. Your idea to this is great though. Dan, one phrase - change is what made us jot up to 57 comments on the same laws/clauses about SW we all know. Now, I realize most comments are meant to shudder the topic or prove something on who is posting what but 57 comments don't tell me that it's just about constancy. If you might have noticed, I always - always fall back to the rules. Stick to the rules no doubt and I ain't trying to change this tradition, relax. Just curious how writers feel about their rugged paths...

Correct again Dan.

That's the point Zlatan. Rules are set for a tight path....

In many of the examples given throughout this thread some verbiage or "direction" is not necessary to bring a reader's attention to what would be seen "on screen." For example: "We see Beth frown" would just be "Beth frowns"—which I am doing right now. "Beth frowns" clearly indicates that what we see on screen is a frowning Beth. So instead of considering "no camera directions" as some omnipresent "rule" perhaps think of it more in terms of overwriting, redundancy and being self-indulgent. Do you really need all that extra jargon on the page? Probably not. Is the scene crystal clear without further "directing?" Can you write it better and leaner? More often—YES!—so leave it out. Is this one, important plot relevant scene tricky to understand exactly what's happening on screen? If yes, then utilize camera direction—but do it well! As Jim previously posted quotes from Mr. Mazin who said, "...IF USED WELL, they like them"—and there's the main issue: most new writers don't!!! As Dan and others have voiced much experienced caution: it's also venturing into other areas and overstepping professional boundaries. Filmmaking is a team effort. Nonetheless, do learn camera direction; should you carry the spec script into development and thus work on the shooting script you'll need to know it and know it well.

If I could like your post a million times, I would, Beth!

"doing the camera angles and directing a script that's not a shooting script is terribly annoying to most readers." Tons of scripts have camera angles in them.

Hahahah yeah Owen. By that summation, that makes us all = novice. Lol. Now I get it. If at all I drew conclusions, novice ones, they were inspired by novice responses.

Love that, Beth.

Thanks Jim, that's great tool.

Conrad, please forgive me if I am overstepping, but if one considers these practices of screenwriting to be "limiting" then perhaps reconsider your perception. The only person limiting you is yourself. You seem to consider these things from a place of negativity—"rules." These tools (not rules), and how to use them, aren't necessarily "hard lines" that cannot be crossed; these aren't black and white issues, one way or the other, but rather a sea of gray. Every script and situation has to be considered and measured on its own terms. There are always exceptions to everything. I know in forums it's hard to do that, we talk in generalizations—and that's often the reason for lots of commentary. Many of us wish to be clear to help new writers with these issues. :)

But should posts be a criteria to classify a writer? Thought we talked about this and I have the feeling I'm getting it the wrong way. All conversations can't be "superb". Many people don't understand many things and I feel delighted to bring it to them through you. What I'm saying is thank you on their behalf. :)

I have a question to y'all. This with regards to the general idea on how best a screenplay should look like VS the "obvious" SW tradition... Is this tradition static? I mean without change. Well, I noticed there have been changes to this effect and while we act like pros and say "hey, this is the right way to do this", did those who brought about these changes not think some others might still change it? I'm just asking.

Ever read DON QUIXOTE, Conrad?

Conrad, you seem to be overconcerned with superficial things like formatting—"...how best a screenplay should look like?"—huh? Perhaps first consider how to tell and construct a story. Screenwriting isn't simplistic; it's multilayered. You seem to have not read many scripts or studied the craft? I'm guessing? I'm self-taught and I can say from my experience: you must learn for yourself. One cannot just follow. :)

True Patricia, very true. Zlatan, what did he write? Have read a lot of things. :)

It´s a title of the book, written by Miguel Cervantes. You should read it.

Hi Conrad, I don't use camera directions on the official script. I do make notes on the shooting script. When I am writing my script, I too visualize the action in my hear like a movie. I can also rewind if the script is taking me to a dead end. I will then take another path and keep visualizing and I then know I have a good flow which makes sense. I like to storyboard also. That's where I place my camera angles. WHen directing, this is what I refer to for camera shots and angles so I have taken into account all coverage shots. I spend a great deal of time with my editor and I have learned that if you come up short in coverage, you may not get the effect you want in the scene. This is critical because you are probably shooting scenes out of sequence because a location is not always available when you want it to be. I don't find my imagination to be limited; being an independent filmmaker with a little to no budget, you may not have the means for complicated FX, stunts or exotic locations. I try to make the best from what I do have. To me a good story is the key. Ron

I really wanna thank everyone, everyone except my African folks as I really don't feel them anywhere except when they're applying for jobs etc... My observations though. I appreciate you and you, most of all for your marvelous contributions. Thank you.

Seeing how mankind orginated in East Africa, aren't we all Africans?

Camera directions in a script is a director's script. It's not intended for general reading.

I have Owen, I've read a script or two, and I would definitely read more as you advise. Oh, yesterday, today... I won't tomorrow... I promise you. You've said a lot even with a few words and I totally agree it's likely but I won't. I'm grateful to you and hahahah that sun issue still resonates in your head. Lol! Well, I'm gonna make that happen one day, I pray and thanks to you I'm on that path. "big things come out of small things".

Hey Ron, thanks for the advice and that's key to becoming a better writer. Avoid camera directions is key for good Scripts.

Owen - I think 'head explodes' would be classified as SFX and therefore should be all caps! LMAO!!!

Bill, I know of the middle East - garden of Eden.... We might all come from Africa from varied POVs but political boundaries have made us who we are, where we are. If we apply logic in statements, I'd say in my opinion, we can just write without rules and defend my point logically but from 90 something comments, we can agree there are standards and rules that limit certain freedoms. We're not all Africans. Some sons of Noah moved to Africa after the flood... They came from some place else.

Conrad, you must read more than one or two scripts... You must read A LOT OF SCREENPLAYS! That's just the truth. And avoiding camera direction is not a key component for writing great scripts; it's but a small, superficial consideration—one of many. Perhaps consider emerging yourself in studying the craft. I'm sure many could offer book, blog, podcast or other resource recommendations. With all that is available online you have much access. Best to you!

I don't know when the conversation became specifically about spec scripts? If one is writing a spec script wouldn't you copy the format and style of the previously produced scripts? Easy- On 'original' scripts, it may be important to the 'story' to specify "close-up" or some other 'shot'.

Ugh! (slaps forehead) ...Well, I'm out if this is going way off topic. I have a script to work on. Cheers.

Al, because most of us are writing spec screenplays, which is a different thing with different considerations. And most script pdfs you find online are of produced films and thus they are shooting scripts. So, no, it's not that simple. It's best to read all kinds of scripts to see how they are crafted and their differences. Read them all: shooting, spec, professional and amateur scripts. :)

Oh, and lastly, it's good to also take into consideration if the screenwriter of the script you are reading is also the director and/or producer—that would have affected how that script was constructed. If someone doesn't have to go through readers (for example) it changes things. If they are writing a script for themselves or writing on assignment many things are already in place; decisions have already been made, etc—that all informs the script you are reading/studying. So do some research and know what's what beforehand.

Since Conrad's question about Camera Directions has sparked what I believe has been an interesting debate about the rules and how risky it is to break them as a spec screenwriter, I was wondering if we could actually discuss a real script. Here is one I believe many would agree is pretty damn well-written: TRAINING DAY by David Ayer, which he says he wrote on spec. http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Training_Day.pdf So here is my QUESTION: Does anyone KNOW (not suspect or assume) if this version of the script is in fact his spec version or a more beefed up production version? Either way, he does things that are pretty cool in terms of narrative, that I think make it very engaging as a spec script -- but yeah.. there are some camera angles in there.

The story starts in the writer's mind. I agree with all three of you. I was just saying that it might be necessary for the 'story' to have a few camera directions in the script. And, I realize there are different types and phases of a script. The first writers script is better off not having camera angles etc. They can always change it if they want. ha ha

Pablo, perhaps start a new thread post with your question. :)

Roger that, Beth!

Couldn't have picked a better script to prove my point- I counted in just scrolling through at least 15-20 camera directions. Which really isn't very many in a script that long.

Thanks, Beth, Dan and Al. I will create a separate post for TRAINING DAY guys. Just have dinner in the oven, so it's a question of priorities. -- After all, "The sh*t's chess. It ain't checkers." -- Be back! ;)

Training Day was released in October of 2001 : The script you listed is April 2001 Draft "FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY" The script draft was AFTER the film was shot. That's not a spec script, it's a draft to sell at the gift shop.

Thanks Robert.

Good suggestions and Owen, READ MAN!!! READ THE BIBLE.... or other related books that tell the story of the flood. Never heard or read that some of Noah's sons moved to the north pole to fight bears... Read. And Beth, I've read a lot of scripts and know those things about the craft. Don't just mind me. ;)

Thanks everyone. It was good putting great minds together like this, talking on a preliminary thing on SW. Nevertheless, my opinion on this, to close it all is, those of us who don't know yet, it's best to avoid camera directions as much as possible, tell a concise story and limit yourself on the slugs... Use Final Draft, Ctlx, Drama Queen etc... Oh, who doesn't know about them anyways... But thank you if you knew all this and wanted to argue. So what's next? Moving forward... Pilot script's next. Hope to hear your expertise ;-)

What's the bible got to do with this?

Well, that's okay. Cherie, it was in response to what I said about Africans and Bill was like, we're all from Africa and I was like, no it middle east etc... Guess we'ere just talking since we've been saying practically the same things in many different ways - you might have noticed.