With the advent of the modern word processor to replace the beloved chattery typewriter, pretty much anything is possible on a page. Images, colors, hyperlinks, different font sizes etc. You name it and more than likely it can be placed, formatted and printed.
Obviously, none of the above belong anywhere near a screenplay, (and if you're using any font other than a member of the Courier family then give yourself a good slap in the face) but on a far simpler scale, one of the age-old screenwriting debates is whether or not to use bold, italic or underline in your script, and I'm going to tell you why you shouldn't.
If you're new to screenwriting then you've more than likely started your script in Microsoft Word. Nearly everyone has Word installed and so it will come as no surprise that it's the most popular tool in the world for writing screenplays. Not the best by a long shot, but the most popular none the less.
As an established user of Word (or equivalent) you will be familiar with applying bold, italic and underline lavishly throughout the pages of things you write about without any consideration. You may then assume that you can do the same thing in a screenplay and no one will bat an eye lid, but you'd be wrong.
Emphasis is usually found in the Action element of a screenplay and goes something like this:
EXT. THE PARK - CONTINUOUS
Josh trips on a stone and falls to the ground with a splat! Right into a pile of doggy doo.
Now, remembering that this is a screenplay, how long would the above lines actually take on screen? Well, according to Movie Draft SE's SceneTime™, it's 5 seconds. That's a pretty short scene. We've emphasised the result of what happened to Josh tripping over the stone but not described it.
So here's a rule: Describe, not emphasise.
Let's rewrite the above without the use of emphasis and instead with the use of words describing what you would see on screen, or in real life if you actually did see Josh trip over that stone. Remember that the time it takes for Josh to fall must relay into screen time - you can even extend the actual time it would take for him to fall by this equation:
Gravity + Artistic Licence = Takes A Long time To Fall
EXT. THE PARK - CONTINUOUS
Josh trips on a stone.
IN SLOW MOTION
His arms reach out like a poor excuse for superman. The bottom of his long, thick-looking coat flutters upwards like a matching cape.
Josh sees that in front of him on the floor - where his face will eventually be - is a great big pile of doggy doo. It looks fresh.
His eyes widen. He inhales quickly. His mouth opens. He looks like he's about to say something. His face scrunches up as he lifts his hands up towards his face.
JOSH
Shhhhhhiiii...
The ground is close. Josh closes his eyes and turns his head.
NORMAL SPEED
Josh hits the ground, his head seemingly cushioned by the freshly left dog present.
He sighs.
He takes a long deep breath.
JOSH
...t.
All of a sudden, our 5 second emphasised scene is now 38 seconds when written as you'd see it on screen, and not a single bold, italic or underline to be seen anywhere.
Describe, not emphasise.
The other big no-no is emphasising dialog. When you emphasis dialog, what you're basically doing is putting in the pauses and beats of how you yourself hear them. For example:
JOSH
What does she want this time?
is different to:
JOSH
What does she want this time?
...and you may think that's ok to do. Most people would say it is, but you're not the actor and the actor has been paid a generous amount of money to get into the "head" of your character, to think like they think, react how they react, and most importantly of all, to talk how they talk.
Let the actor decide how to say their lines. If needed, as above, describe, not emphasise:
Josh sees Lauren through the window. His shoulders fall as he shakes his head gently from side to side.
JOSH
What does she want this time?
That way the mood is conveyed visually - as you would see it on screen, so once again: Describe, not emphasise.
Now, where was I? Oh yes, boldly going...
I agree that bold and italics don't belong. I think underling (and CAPS) is okay in certain circumstances when you absolutely need to call attention to something.
ReplyDeleteCAPS are definitely a must for things that are non visual, i.e., audio cues: BANG, CRASH, THUNDER, EXPLOSION etc. But I'm betting that you can rewrite pretty much anything to remove emphasis and it result in a better flowing screenplay. After all, you can't see emphasis. :-)
ReplyDeleteBut you also need to draw a line as to how descriptive to be. Otherwise your screenplay becomes needlessly lengthy and studio readers will toss them out. "White space" and as much as possible is preferred. After all the screenplay is merely a blueprint for a motion picture, it's the director's job to add the "fluff." Using your example with taking artistic license, the writer is assuming that's how the director would want to frame the scene. If you're a writer/director it's a non-issue, but new writers submitting spec scripts and studio writers should stay away from telling the director how to make the movie, or how the actors should say the lines.
ReplyDeleteOh absolutely. Couldn't agree more. :-) It's all a balancing act between density and white space.
ReplyDeleteI use underline for emphasis all the time, and less occasionally bold. These are must-haves.
ReplyDeleteI disagree.
ReplyDeleteThe point of any writing: script, play or otherwise is to be concise.
More words do not equal a better scene; just one that is more exhaustive to read.
I appreciate your dedication to pure screenwriting techniques. Still, Let me be the judge of how I write my scenes best.
Please implement underlines, bolds and italics in your next version.
I have to say that this goes against a lot of what I've read about writing screenplays in terms of keeping this concise. I'm a rookie, but if it flows it flows right?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFor well over a year I was a reader in the story department at Universal, and I can assure you that I and my fellow sufferers appreciated all the help that writers would give us in quickly reading and understanding material -- and that included bold, italic, sometimes even over- or under-sized text to clarify scenes.
ReplyDeleteThe occasional colored text was appreciated too, quirky as it seemed, if it aided our understanding of scenes.
Now I'm in production, and I can assure you that there are live scripts in the field -- including material that originated in production offices -- that use bold text to clarify ambiguous lines. There are also sketches and diagrams inserted in some scripts, without which complex scenes would make no sense.
I must say, there seems to be a serious disconnect between the Industry and the teachers.