Now that we’ve reached the end of the semester I feel that I’ve gained valuable insight into the process of writing a screenplay. I was excited to take this class from the beginning of the semester. I love writing and I love film so it made sense that I would enjoy Picture This! However coming into the studio I was convinced that a screenplay  was a simple step by step guide for the actors, cinematographers and director to follow. I had not even considered that sound designers would also need to use a screenplay as a reference for their own roles.  I’ve since learned that it is so much more. If a screenplay’s intention is to become a film, then it makes sense that the screenplay must trigger audio and visual images within the readers mind.

The process of writing my final piece solidified this revelation. It was more challenging than I had expected, but it was and enjoyable and rewarding experience.  I found it hard to think of an idea that I could be passionate about and stick through to the end. However as I continued writing, I found myself trapped in the story and my ability to influence imagery within the reader’s mind. The practical writing exercises that we completed in class proved to be incredibly beneficial throughout the process. I  found myself going back to those techniques, and finding where, in my screenplay, they belonged. For example, to balance out the walls of dialogue that I felt impossible to avoid, I juxtaposed them with wordless scenes. One thing in particular that I tried to keep in mind was the idea of showing what my characters feeling without explicitly saying so. It was challenging to trust my writing, and the reader’s ability to interpret what I was attempting to convey. Throughout the editing process I considered what parts were unnecessary and removed them, and found other methods to convey a character’s personality or emotions. (see  below)

In this sequence, I attempted to keep the physical description to a minimum. Relying instead on the reader’s interpretation of a woman who enters someone’s house “as though she owns it.”

All in all the studio was very rewarding. It re-sparked my interest in creative writing, and helped me create a screenplay that I am very proud of (despite the many mistake I’m sure I’ve missed). It’s something I definitely hope to try out in the future.

On Wednesday we presented our works in progress to a panel for feedback. The critique I received was very encouraging and helped me to feel more confident in my ideas for the screenplay. For the purpose of this reflection, I’ll refer to two particular pieces that I have been thinking about. The first came from Dylan who stated that he liked the idea of  the screenplay being “super down to Earth realism”. The second from came from Smiljana who agreed that it was important to consider the emotional reaction of the audience towards the piece, and make sure to not tire them out emotionally.

I was happy to hear this, after some uncertainty of where to take the writing tonally, their feedback helped me solidify my ideas. I was originally inspired to adopt realism into my screenplay by Josh Thomas’ Please Like Me (2013- 2016). Please Like Me is a drama/ comedy series that discusses topics such as sexuality and mental illness. It’s lighthearted tone provides an opening for an easy (at least, an easier) discussion of these topics, and I would like to attempt something similar in my own work.

Moodboard for screenplay.

Now that I’ve chosen the overall tone of my screenplay, the next thing I must consider is how I go about communicating this through writing. If only I could write something like “hey, this is meant to be pretty cheerful, until it’s not…” but alas, my job is not to direct. It is to tell a story through audio/ visual cues. In this case, I believe that my choice in language is especially important in conveying the tone of the narrative. I will experiment with the juxtaposition of colloquial language to communicate the more casual scenes to more direct and precise language when the tone of the piece needs to shift.

Furthermore, I must consider that the switches in tone compliment each other, rather than disrupt one another. Please Like Me does this well in the sense that the comedy does not impair the significance and realism of the issues it discusses. Instead, I think the lightheartedness off the overall tone, when led to a dramatic moment of realism, highlights the seriousness of the topic. But how is this conveyed in writing? I once again think it involves careful planning and attention to language and writing style. This is something I’m definitely interested in exploring during the process of writing.

In summary, I would like to explore more film and television shows that adopt a similar tone and aesthetic style to Please Like Me (2013- 2016) so that I can better understand how to utilise a sense of realism in my screenplay. I hope that wider research will assist me in understanding how to best convey the tone of my own writing, and discuss a serious topic without emotionally exhausting the audience.

References:

Please Like Me. 2013 [TV]. ABC.

Requiem for a Dream. (2000). [film] Directed by D. Aronofsky.

Shameless. 2011 [TV]. Showtime

Upon the first week of Picture This! I learned that a screenplay could be much more than a set of directions for filmmakers to follow. I learned that directive words that suggest when a shot should be close, wide, medium, the camera panned, tracked or zoomed were unnecessary and unhelpful as they pull the reader out of the visualisation of the film. Ann Ingelstrom’s ‘Narrating Voices in the Screenplay Text: How the Writer can Direct the Reader’s Visualisations of the Potential Film‘ (2014) is a reading that influenced my thinking on my own screenwriting work. Ingelstrom not only challenges the aforementioned method of screenwriting, she also reinforces the method as she investigates the multiple voices that can be adopted in order to trigger the visualisation of a film in the screenplay’s reader.

Ingelstrom asserts that while screenplays can be a form of entertainment, their over reigning purpose is to become a film. Therefore importance is not emphasised on the story being told, in fact it is placed on how the story is told. The idea is that a screenplay is a form of communication between the writer and director, it allows the screenwriter to convey their vision of the film to the filmmaker and thus allows the screenplay to fulfil it’s purpose. I was surprised to find that Ingelstrom didn’t suggest the removal of direction to be the only (or at least, the correct) screenwriting method. In fact I was surprised to see that she she establishes other types of ‘narrative voices’ that are used to communicate the screenwriter’s vision to the filmmaker.

The first is the extrafictional voice which addresses the reader directly outside of the fictional universe of the narrative. It appears to be what I had originally thought a screenplay was expected to contain, directions for camera movements and performers. I can’t say that I necessarily agree with this method of screenwriting. Although it communicates the writer’s vision without any doubt of their intentions for the film, it seems restricting, leaving no room for the interpretation of the filmmakers. However Ingelstrom’s assurance that the extrafictional voice most often occurs as an edit during the process of making the film, assists me to understand that the use of directions can be beneficial in the wider context of the filming process. I can see myself temporarily utilising a version of this method during the drafting of my own work, where I find myself unable to communicate my ideas in the following method.

The second narrative voice is coined as the fictional voice and represents what I had understood a screenplay to be during the first week of the studio. It eliminates the extrafictional voice, relying instead on the description of scenes and objects to communicate how they should be represented on screen, while offering the filmmakers a chance to interpret the scene themselves.

Of the two I am most inspired by the fictional narrative voice. When it comes to storytelling I enjoy a challenge and the ability to communicate my vision for a film through thoughtful and tactful description, rather than definitive direction, is one I can get behind. While I’m not opposed to experimenting with different methods of screenwriting, using a fictional narrative voice is what I currently favour, and aim to use in my work in the future.

A screenplay is more than a piece of writing. It’s purpose is specifically to become a film and as such it relies on language that solidifies, without a doubt, what is happening on screen and how the characters are feeling and why. To put the idea into practise we were given three prompts to rewrite into short screenplays.

The first prompt focuses on Kate’s annoyance towards her ignorant and old fashioned aunt.

My goal was to communicate Kate’s annoyance through the slamming of the dishwasher, her stamping foot and other aggravated actions. I believe my use of words such as ‘whips’, ‘tearing’, and ‘crashing’ effectively portray Kate’s physical irritation at being forced to do the chore. However looking back on the work I do see some weaknesses. The first is “Molly frowns. Eyes stern”. I believe that to make this stronger I should show what ‘stern eyes’ look like. “Eyes narrowed, brows pointed”. I also aimed to establish the old fashioned ways of Kate’s aunt through dialogue as she insists on Kate washing the dishes in the sink rather than a piece. Looking back I’m unsure of whether I have done this well or not. On one hand providing information through dialogue can be sloppy and unnatural. However I’m unsure if that is considered here, since the information from the dialogue is left to the interpretation of the reader as Molly doesn’t outwardly state that she is old fashioned in her ways. Another way I could have communicated this is through action, or description of the room. Perhaps Molly does not even own a dishwasher for Kate to slam?

The second prompt  focuses on Conny, who is indecisive about his feelings on resigning while on his way to his goodbye party.

It has been a while since I revisited this, but I believe it communicates Conny’s indecision. His agitated movements, the bag slipping from one hand to the other portray his nerves while the hesitating hand convey’s his doubt. However I’m unable to imagine how this would appear on screen. The order of actions does not seem to make sense. A mid shot of his legs on the pavement? Perhaps only the sound is heard? Then cut to a close up of Conny to see his concern before another shot of one hand taking the bag from the other and back again. In my mind, the order of shots do not make sense and will cause this particular sequence to appear rigid and unhinged.

The third (and final) prompt focuses on Rinaldo who can’t stand his children’s bickering. He’s angry and annoyed at himself for his impatience.

I believe this is my strongest adaption thus far. It establishes the ambiance of the room, and I’m able to imagine each shot and exactly how it will appear on screen. I’m unsure if it’s only me, but I imagine that the tension created by the silence, amplifies the guilt that Rinaldo experiences after yelling at his children.

This exercise taught me thats it’s a lot more difficult than it seems to write a screenplay. You must consider what can be seen, describe how the character feels by describing their actions and facial expressions in order to effectively allow the piece to translate on screen.

“screenplays should be experienced […] as a form of cinema itself” whereby “both, although via opposite polarities, are audio-visual (the screenplay cueing the images and sounds in our mind)” (2009, p. 109)

I enjoy reading and watching films at an equal level. When I read a good book I find myself in the shoes of the narrator. I’m able to visualise the characters, their actions and environments. I find myself mirroring their emotions and struggle to pull myself away. When I watch a good film, I fall into the universe. I grow attached to the characters, and lose myself in the narrative. Although it is most likely a flawed way of thinking, I base the quality of either medium on how well I’m captivated in the world of the narrative.

Before Picture This! I believed that a screenplay was a glorified shot list that simply told the filmmakers what happens, when it happens and who it happens to. Over the last few weeks however, I’ve begun to understand that the screenplay can be a sweet combination of the two (and I don’t mean in the sense of a book being adapted into a film). In my last reflective post,  I discussed how I realised that a screenplay can (and should be) an entertaining piece of writing that tells the story of a film in a way that allows the reader to imagine the film playing on a screen in their minds. It makes sense to me. If a screenplay isn’t enjoyable to read, how can one be certain that it will be just as enjoyable to watch. Despite the idea that a screenplay’s soul purpose is not only to be enjoyed as an independent writing form, in the same way that a good film or movie draws me into the world of narrative and allows me to envision the elements of that world, a good screenplay should allow me to visualise the sounds and imagery that it is attempting to communicate.

Ingelstrom (2014) states that the sole purpose of a screenplay is to become a film. If the reader is unable to visualise the film then “the screenplay has failed to fulfil it’s objective” (2014, p. 31). I’ve come to understand that for this to happen, language is an important thing to consider. Using direction words such as cut, close up, track etc. distracts readers from visualising the film in their minds. Instead, a screen writer should leave the technical aspects of the film to the interpretation of the director through a variety of techniques whether thats in the description of the actions, through the strategic use of paragraphs, or both. In doing this, the piece becomes more than just the ‘glorified shot list’ I once thought it to be and becomes a necessary catalyst for a film.

Dzialo, C 2009, ‘“Frustrated Time” narration: the screenplays of Charlie Kaufman’, in W Buckland (ed.), Puzzle films: complex storytelling in contemporary cinema, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, pp. 107-28.

I learned something in the studio that highlighted my previous experience with screenwriting. Granted that experience is extremely limited, my eyes have nonetheless already been opened. I previously believed that screenplays were simply a list of directions for the camera operators, actors and sound editors, that there didn’t have to be any sort of entertainment to be had from reading the screenplay itself. The first week of Picture This! has changed my thinking. A screenplay can and should be an interesting and entertaining piece of writing. In fact, this week we learned the mechanics of making it so.

In Putting a Film in the Readers Head, McGee mentions the Master Scene Technique which suggests that the directions for camera angles should only be mentioned when absolutely necessary. Otherwise directions should not come from writing CLOSE UP, LONG SHOT etc. Instead, the reader should be able to visualise the shot by the way it is described. Drawing on McGee’s advice I have adapted a excerpt from a screenplay I wrote in year 12, almost three years ago.

“We pan across the room. Alison is in bed tossing and turning. We see areas of her life before the headaches, certificates, awards and photographs.” It’s cluttered and difficult to visualise on a screen.

Instead I would now write.

“Framed certificates and medals scatter the walls. Among them, photographs of a child grinning widely with her loved ones.

Under the blankets on her bed, Alison tosses her body facing one way to the other and back.

She squeezes her eyes shut. Mouth open. Teeth clenched. Sweat glistens on her face.”

Of course the edited version is still far from perfect. However I believe it highlights McGee’s point that the scene will already be visualised and how exactly the filmmaker decides to portray this their own ‘creative task’.

I’m excited to try this on my own writing throughout the semester. It seems like a fun challenge to tell a story in such a way that the reader can easily visualise it.