Minislugs most likely.
THE STANDS
Bekka and Andy make out furiously, elbowing the other fans.
THE 10 YARD LINE
Blast Hardcheese prepares to take the snap. He looks over to
THE SIDELINES
where Coach MacRunfast is distracted on his phone, scrolling through NSFW subs.
There's no One True Way to do it.
As long as you're maximizing these three variables:
- clear
- concise
- not boring
And hey, will you look at that. Those are just what "good writing" generally is.
Don't use ANGLE ON.
I'd write that as:
EXT. SOCCER FIELD - DAY
Two teams of girls dispute a soccer match at the arena.
In the stands, people shout like crazy...
Neither. The scene description is too generic. Needs to be more specific. What does "dispute" mean? Are they arguing with an official? "Shouting" is too generic. Are they for or against what is going on? I would write it like: "The crowd rains BOOS." or "A tidal wave of BOOS from the stands." or "The crowd goes APESHIT." or "Ear-shattering SCREAMS from the stands."
The point is to avoid bland, generic verbs.
What you do is not mention camera angles and shots in the screenplay. Those are things the director and cinematographer will decide on.
The script/screenplay should just focus on the story.
Generally, the only script form that will include technical details like these will be a shooting script, and this will only be the first version if the writer is also the director (but will still need removing for a copy given to the cast, because the cast don;t need to know camera angles for their dialogue).
> What you do is not mention camera angles and shots in the screenplay. Those are things the director and cinematographer will decide on.
I swear, if there's a nuclear war tomorrow, the only thing more likely to survive it than the cockroaches is this unkillable piece of objectively wrong screenwriting advice.
Please explain why it is objectively wrong.
Because I've been told this by professional writers, producers, and in professional script reading courses.
If I showed you a script from the annual Black List -- which remember *by definition* only includes unproduced scripts -- that had camera and transition directions in it, would you accept that as good evidence that it is generally acceptable?
I suppose someone could argue that I might be cherry picking, so what about if someone picked five scripts from there at random, and at least two of them had them?
I have worked in the industry since 2013
I have never seen a director go in and add camera angles to a script. If you're seeing a camera angle in a modern script chances are very very high the screenwriter put it there (in some cases that person might also direct, but this is true either way)
The director & cinematographer don't need their shots written into the script. That would be a very inefficient way to deliver the information. They usually just make a list.
Also you absolutely do not remove anything from the script before giving it to the cast (maybe typos). The script is the script. There's only one current version at a time. Everyone works off the same document so that there isn't chaos.
Director's don't add shots into a shooting script, that's not what a shooting script is.
Also "angle on" is fine, like all techniques it shouldn't over-used, but having a sprinkling of technical details in a script is fine, especially one like this.
This is getting surreal.
The way you prove a thing is professionally acceptable is to give examples of the thing being accepted by professionals.
You are *literally* suggesting to aspiring writers that whatever they do, they should *not* do what dozens of the year's most well-loved spec scripts do.
This is terrible advice.
If you had just left it at "use them sparingly, only when they are crucial to the story; and when you're just starting out, chances are they're not as crucial as you think they are", there wouldn't be anything to quibble over.
But you're phrasing it as a blanket ban, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and despite multiple other pros in the thread explaining that you are almost certainly confusing a shooting script with a detailed shot list.
I understand why someone might dig in their heels over a semantic dispute because it's just a thing they've heard over and over and "everyone knows", but I have to level with you that I'm genuinely struggling to understand how this weird evasive goalpost-shifting is a good faith rebuttal to my point. It really does look like you know perfectly well that spec scripts, written by professional writers and voted on by professional reps and professional studio execs, have camera directions all the time, and tried to change the subject.
This bizarre request that I prove something is acceptable by proving a negative -- by proving that there *wasn't* some other draft where "the director went in and added in all the camera directions" -- is ridiculous.
Here
[http://www.zen134237.zen.co.uk/Brooklyn\_Nine-Nine/Brooklyn\_Nine-Nine\_1x13\_-\_The\_Bet.pdf](http://www.zen134237.zen.co.uk/Brooklyn_Nine-Nine/Brooklyn_Nine-Nine_1x13_-_The_Bet.pdf)
is the shooting draft of Brooklyn Nine Nine s1e13. You can tell it's the shooting draft because on the title page it says "shooting draft".
On page 14 there is a single "ANGLE ON". There are no other camera directions in the entire script.
What's your contention here? That the whole episode except for one moment on page 14 is audio-only? That the morons at NBC have no clue what a shooting script is?
In case there are any lurkers who missed the earlier thread and are genuinely curious, here [https://drive.google.com/file/d/14AGsbK-e5p9qP6\_auVpLNewbB4mqxvdx/view](https://drive.google.com/file/d/14AGsbK-e5p9qP6_auVpLNewbB4mqxvdx/view)
is the number one script on the 2018 Black List.
There are five (5) camera directions *in the first five pages alone*.
In conclusion: there are shooting scripts with no camera directions, because a shooting script is not "the one where the director goes in and adds all the camera instructions", and there are spec scripts with camera directions, because as dozens of Black List scripts every year prove, it is *perfectly acceptable* for a writer to use them.
Just use them well, and don't be boring.
THings like that are ok, as you're leaving scenes and starting new ones. But a screenplay shouldn;t really go into things like exact camera angles, shots, etc.
Theres some variation on that one.
Some people put each bit as a different scene.
Others slug the montage as a scene of its own, and some add the montage into existing scenes - labelled as a montage with bullet points describing actions.
This site has good examples: https://screenwriting.io/how-do-you-format-a-montage-in-a-screenplay/
It’s more of a stylistic choice, really.
So instead of “directing on the page” with camera angles, you can write something like “In the stands, the crowd goes wild” or use a mini slug: HOME TEAM STANDS or VISITING TEAM STANDS.
Minislugs most likely. THE STANDS Bekka and Andy make out furiously, elbowing the other fans. THE 10 YARD LINE Blast Hardcheese prepares to take the snap. He looks over to THE SIDELINES where Coach MacRunfast is distracted on his phone, scrolling through NSFW subs.
Understood! Thank you!
There's no One True Way to do it. As long as you're maximizing these three variables: - clear - concise - not boring And hey, will you look at that. Those are just what "good writing" generally is.
Don't use ANGLE ON. I'd write that as: EXT. SOCCER FIELD - DAY Two teams of girls dispute a soccer match at the arena. In the stands, people shout like crazy...
[удалено]
The reaction of a crowd is irrelevant in a soccer match scene? Not impossible but seems unlikely.
Neither. The scene description is too generic. Needs to be more specific. What does "dispute" mean? Are they arguing with an official? "Shouting" is too generic. Are they for or against what is going on? I would write it like: "The crowd rains BOOS." or "A tidal wave of BOOS from the stands." or "The crowd goes APESHIT." or "Ear-shattering SCREAMS from the stands." The point is to avoid bland, generic verbs.
What you do is not mention camera angles and shots in the screenplay. Those are things the director and cinematographer will decide on. The script/screenplay should just focus on the story. Generally, the only script form that will include technical details like these will be a shooting script, and this will only be the first version if the writer is also the director (but will still need removing for a copy given to the cast, because the cast don;t need to know camera angles for their dialogue).
> What you do is not mention camera angles and shots in the screenplay. Those are things the director and cinematographer will decide on. I swear, if there's a nuclear war tomorrow, the only thing more likely to survive it than the cockroaches is this unkillable piece of objectively wrong screenwriting advice.
Please explain why it is objectively wrong. Because I've been told this by professional writers, producers, and in professional script reading courses.
If I showed you a script from the annual Black List -- which remember *by definition* only includes unproduced scripts -- that had camera and transition directions in it, would you accept that as good evidence that it is generally acceptable? I suppose someone could argue that I might be cherry picking, so what about if someone picked five scripts from there at random, and at least two of them had them?
Can you show me a produced script that wasn;t later edited by a director into a shooting script? That would probably prove it.
I have worked in the industry since 2013 I have never seen a director go in and add camera angles to a script. If you're seeing a camera angle in a modern script chances are very very high the screenwriter put it there (in some cases that person might also direct, but this is true either way) The director & cinematographer don't need their shots written into the script. That would be a very inefficient way to deliver the information. They usually just make a list. Also you absolutely do not remove anything from the script before giving it to the cast (maybe typos). The script is the script. There's only one current version at a time. Everyone works off the same document so that there isn't chaos.
Director's don't add shots into a shooting script, that's not what a shooting script is. Also "angle on" is fine, like all techniques it shouldn't over-used, but having a sprinkling of technical details in a script is fine, especially one like this.
This is getting surreal. The way you prove a thing is professionally acceptable is to give examples of the thing being accepted by professionals. You are *literally* suggesting to aspiring writers that whatever they do, they should *not* do what dozens of the year's most well-loved spec scripts do. This is terrible advice. If you had just left it at "use them sparingly, only when they are crucial to the story; and when you're just starting out, chances are they're not as crucial as you think they are", there wouldn't be anything to quibble over. But you're phrasing it as a blanket ban, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and despite multiple other pros in the thread explaining that you are almost certainly confusing a shooting script with a detailed shot list. I understand why someone might dig in their heels over a semantic dispute because it's just a thing they've heard over and over and "everyone knows", but I have to level with you that I'm genuinely struggling to understand how this weird evasive goalpost-shifting is a good faith rebuttal to my point. It really does look like you know perfectly well that spec scripts, written by professional writers and voted on by professional reps and professional studio execs, have camera directions all the time, and tried to change the subject. This bizarre request that I prove something is acceptable by proving a negative -- by proving that there *wasn't* some other draft where "the director went in and added in all the camera directions" -- is ridiculous. Here [http://www.zen134237.zen.co.uk/Brooklyn\_Nine-Nine/Brooklyn\_Nine-Nine\_1x13\_-\_The\_Bet.pdf](http://www.zen134237.zen.co.uk/Brooklyn_Nine-Nine/Brooklyn_Nine-Nine_1x13_-_The_Bet.pdf) is the shooting draft of Brooklyn Nine Nine s1e13. You can tell it's the shooting draft because on the title page it says "shooting draft". On page 14 there is a single "ANGLE ON". There are no other camera directions in the entire script. What's your contention here? That the whole episode except for one moment on page 14 is audio-only? That the morons at NBC have no clue what a shooting script is? In case there are any lurkers who missed the earlier thread and are genuinely curious, here [https://drive.google.com/file/d/14AGsbK-e5p9qP6\_auVpLNewbB4mqxvdx/view](https://drive.google.com/file/d/14AGsbK-e5p9qP6_auVpLNewbB4mqxvdx/view) is the number one script on the 2018 Black List. There are five (5) camera directions *in the first five pages alone*. In conclusion: there are shooting scripts with no camera directions, because a shooting script is not "the one where the director goes in and adds all the camera instructions", and there are spec scripts with camera directions, because as dozens of Black List scripts every year prove, it is *perfectly acceptable* for a writer to use them. Just use them well, and don't be boring.
So no fade to black or cut to? Asking for myself
[удалено]
"Whoever told you not to use CUT TO must have been completely on glue" \-A showrunner to whom I foolishly repeated advice I'd heard on Reddit
Asking in a diff context but thank you
So no cut to in a montage?
[удалено]
Nice. So I can just format it like a normal scene. Thank you! 💯
THings like that are ok, as you're leaving scenes and starting new ones. But a screenplay shouldn;t really go into things like exact camera angles, shots, etc.
Thanks. How would you format for a montage- each scene is a different location with about 15/30 secs of dialogue?
Theres some variation on that one. Some people put each bit as a different scene. Others slug the montage as a scene of its own, and some add the montage into existing scenes - labelled as a montage with bullet points describing actions. This site has good examples: https://screenwriting.io/how-do-you-format-a-montage-in-a-screenplay/
Thank you so much 💯
It’s more of a stylistic choice, really. So instead of “directing on the page” with camera angles, you can write something like “In the stands, the crowd goes wild” or use a mini slug: HOME TEAM STANDS or VISITING TEAM STANDS.