In my very first blog post for this studio, I set out a major creative aspiration. I hoped to reclaim my writing integrity through the nature of ‘presence’ in screenwriting. I felt tired of over justifying and explaining myself in multiple facets of my life.
Writing is an outlet. It helps this.
Until it cripples you.
But then you refine.
And it helps. Eventually.
My screenplay concept came with a couple challenges (or eventual joys).
Firstly, the fact that my work is fiction, yet based on something very real. Beside the delicate subject matter of dementia’s pain, this story is based on my real experiences and memories. INCEPTION.
When referencing or adapting real life happenings, creative intuition can instinctively tell you that its good stuff, simply because you’ve lived the situations. At some process points, I couldn’t help but wonder, do I think my story’s sense is ‘good’ onscreen because of my prior experiences? That’s where external creative minds come in handy. (More on this coming up).
Secondly, I had to battle out the subtitles vs no subtitles for my Italian dialogue. With my classmates’ assurance, I finally decided to simply translate where appropriate for plot. Hannah actually raised a great point about it: that a screenplay with language foreign to the reader, is yet another outlet for audiovisual storytelling! I did subconsciously know this but didn’t properly acknowledge it. Hearing it from someone else made a real impact and encouraged me to astutely tune in on body language, gesture and sound, particularly in those dialogue instances.
My greatest revelation about my own creative practice in this studio, is that editing is my default setting. Not to say I can’t come up with ideas, but I’m super critical about them, and my mojo lies in the editing process. I honestly find it so much fun! In hindsight I should have granted myself much more editing time, (I only got my first proper top to tail draft done a week before the due date.) Nonetheless it’s all a learning process, and I am truly proud of my final screenplay and accompanying material. I feel my writing dexterity has improved a hell of a lot, and that I am more aware of action. I don’t naturally write in the passive voice so much anymore. So thanks Stayci!!
My biggest highlight of the studio has been workshopping ideas, scripts, and writing exercises. I feel that sharing your work truly brings it to life, and there is great value in opinionated classmates. Reading/hearing your writing aloud is invaluable, and truly I wish we did more of it to offer/receive more advice in the lead up to submission. (It probably would have encouraged me to get my first draft out faster too.)
I thoroughly enjoyed the experience of a table read. I liked the industry vibe and more importantly, I see how efficient it is for creative practice – it forces you to be so aware and critical of your work, as well as of the suggestions made for it by others. You learn about the boundaries and protections of your own work,and then you see why someone interpreted something that way, and if that’s better or worse than you had intended. (And that it all needs a trip back to the refining table.)
I have throughly enjoyed this studio and getting back in touch with my creative writing and critical thinking.
I was quite happy with my presentation delivery on Wednesday, and the feedback I received is extremely insightful. It has provided some clarity as well as some more things to think about…
So here’s the feedback breakdown:
Compliments:
Audio visual:
Soundtrack as memory triggers – sound cues
Could visualise with song I played
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind correlation
Content:
Younger self concept is beautiful
Referencing Alice in Wonderland?? Decide how closely, will it be obvious?
Critiques:
Audio visual:
POV management?
Content:
Balancing pathos around dementia – where the pain rests, there are 2 sides:
1. It is reality, perhaps a ‘dream sequence’ undermines it? 2. People aren’t experiencing it with her
Just kidding.
Direction & Considerations:
I am so glad that my concept was well received and that the panel (and class) properly digested my audio excerpt. I think this really got my story through to the audiovisual imagination space so everyone could Picture This! (pun so very intended). I will definitely be working with Matt’s song some more, and focusing on how it will guide the protagonist’s memory. Bouncing off the music as memory cue notion, I am considering using some Italian folk music to hone in more specifically with POV. On the visual side, I want to use micro-moments as means of symbolism and for atmosphere: just an example – the protagonist combing her hair in her youth vs present. This will be more telling (not showing).
Regarding the format I have decided less is more. As Catherine said, in short form you need to strip it down and strip it down again. The story will predominately feature the protagonist’s mind/memories, though there will be some minor setting up and closing off. (I think). In regards to referencing Alice In Wonderland, I want to use it as a style thing. I might even go with naming the protagonist Alice and for the reference to be as simple as that.
I need to separate the idea that the protagonist is my Nonna, out of respect and my own creativity. In reality she won’t just miraculously realise my Nonno has only ever been in love with her. Although I really like the idea of playing with temporality (the affair with her younger self), I realise I need to conclude with an interpretive ending to reiterate that dementia is real and not just a dreamscape that one can snap out of. I will still include that the affair is between her husband and younger self, but an open ending is needed to justify the condition’s reality.
Ultimately my Nonna’s dementia is inconsistent. One day it is more prominent and the next it’s not. I thought to use a dreamscape or “rabbit hole” as a way to communicate it to people who aren’t experiencing it with her. Not as a way to alleviate their pain in this, but to think about dementia in this metaphor. I spoke to my mum about it and she says she’s (my Nonna) is like a window, some days she’s open and some days she’s closed. This is perhaps a friendlier metaphor more than the dreamscape, so maybe I can include it as a means of signifying her mind state.
This entire concept is my way of expressing a personal, heart-breaking situation. It’s supposed to be unsettling. The last thing I was to do is fabricate her life or undermine her condition. I instead see my screenplay to be an homage. I want to share some of the incredible stories I’ve heard about her life using this medium, as art.
Such moments include her boat voyage from Italy to Australia, the miracle birth of her third child, her wedding, growing up with her siblings in Italy, making pasta with her grandchildren and her leg amputation.
I will balance the tough realities of pain by playing with the audience’s knowledge throughout – selection and omission will be key to keeping the space respectful, whilst also maintaining the ambiguous mood.
How does one conceive an original and compelling audio-visually stylised story idea, in the context of studio pressure…
I feel like I’ve had the most brilliant ideas in random day dreams that I’ve left behind and I wish I could just access them in my brain’s recycle bin. But alas I cannot. I am only human.
The first sprinkle of natural audio-visual inspiration occurred to me when Matt played a particular tune on guitar near the train station. It was late at night and a couple of our friends were catching up after a 21st in the city. Anyway, he played a little song he’d been writing and I immediately heard being used to convey an audiovisual story.
Perhaps because music is so close to me in all elements of my life, it has proved a great source of inspiration and audio-visual sense. This was also true with my last screenplay I wrote (in year 12).
Here is an excerpt of Matt’s piece:
Perhaps it was all the champagne from the 21st, but I soon went into crazy brainstorm mode and pictured a million different scenes. I first pictured it in a Western – in the lead up to two gang or cartel leaders facing off behind a red sunset. Then in a romantic drama scene – featuring two lovers moments after escaping odds against them, to then be confronted with a huge unravelling setback.
For me it’s tonal quality evokes a bittersweet uncertainty, curiosity, or apprehension, though it also has a spirited sense of movement/direction. I hear it as a mode of narrative traction: to introduce a new set of complications or revelations, to instigate a new journey. I hear a character discovering something new or having the penny drop moment.
So I went with the journey concept and was evoked by the notion of entering a new world, falling down the rabbit hole, or getting on a train to a random place as a means of escape.
Coincidentally, ACMI is now showing Wonderland – an exhibition on Lewis Caroll’s timeless tale. It explores how Alice in Wonderland has inspired revolutionary filmmaking – from groundbreaking special effects and animation, to evocative storytelling and technological development. So I went to the exhibition hungry for inspiration, and boy did I get fed. A fascinating savour from Wonderland was the diverse range of play scripts. How the story has been re-interpreted and adapted over and over again, yet each produce a different mood. This gets me. Intertextuality. Mmmm tasty.
N.B. How cool is this script layout?! This is from one of the first Alice in Wonderland play scripts. I might give this spin on formatting a go for my final draft.
Separate to ideas drawn by the audio, I had been thinking a lot about my Nonna and her mind’s recent deterioration. She is such a strong woman, able to fathom any physical pain and be understanding of it, but this year is different. Her mind is slipping. She has been in a nursing home for about 6 years now and every so often she will ask us to help her with the cooking or to turn the stove on. To which we reply, there isn’t one, and she will say yeah in the kitchen and gesture left, as we sit in her sterile bedroom, identical to the next person’s.
She believes my Nonno, her husband, is having an affair. Let me just highlight that they have been married for over 60 years and this is completely untrue. In all the time she has been at the nursing home – which is five minutes down the road from home, my Nonno visits her at least thrice a day. Sometimes she believes he hasn’t come at all. She can’t recall. Sometimes she will make snide comments like “I know she cooked this” – referring to food my Nonno has cooked and brought her, or, “you always take his side, and I’m alone here while he’s in my house with her“.
Her rapid deterioration has broken our hearts, though strangely I find it so intriguing how her mind shifts day to day. One day she is perfectly accepting of her life, and the next she is confused and asks us to get food out of her non-existent fridge.
I then concocted my ideas into one big soup, relating Nonna’s inconsistent mind to falling down the rabbit hole and BOOM. I have a story.
I could use Matt’s song as an audio commentary/story drive and base a character around my Nonna, adapting some of her memories and constructed realities to create a story. the soundtrack will lead the story’s beats and there will be very little dialogue. I then also connected a train as the visual conveyer – the sequence could function as a fantastical train journey: the protagonist would stop at different platforms and reflect on her life, mimicking an extended highlights reel. I imagine the protagonist getting on a train and each stop is a different memory/constructed reality.
With this seed planted I moved into the writing frame of mind. Reflecting on Catherine McMullen’s advice about short form and the writing process has been super helpful. (See all week #8 notes here.)
Most relevant for me now were her points on getting out the story’s ‘groundwork’. She recommended a way to do this (but advised not to follow so strictly) called Save The Cat. I found this version adjusted to short form:
I started framing the main story beats, realising that there’s a larger story around my sequence/montage idea. I need to decide if my screenplay will function as a detailed sequence, or be encased in a contextual narrative. Is my entire story the “fun and games”? or shall I encase that in an exposition shell?
I looked for more writing inspiration though my favourite director, Tarantino, and Catherine’s mention of him got my thinking about his style. He is the king of intertextuality (which is something I’m toying with). I was curious about his process…
Tarantino has a certain “commitment to the prose”, he believes a screenplay itself is a “literary narrator”, that a screenplay is a novel to be adapted to screen. I love this attitude. (Sorry McKee).
“In the first draft, I didn’t want to know any more than a viewer… I didn’t want to know any more than the other characters did about the characters”
– Tarantino.
I love this! I believe I need to put myself in the scene to write out of it. You have an idea where you’re going, but you need to LIVE in that moment. You know you’re doing this when you’re writing because you feel a buzz – that you are experiencing your own creation. I think this is what writing is all about, particularly in writing an audio-visual narrative.
Tarantino’s talk ignited reflection on my own writing process:
I know music provides a great stimulus for my creativity (audio-visual imagination)
I know I use real life experiences as a mode of expression
I know I like adapting other stories in doing so
I know that I need to have my rough plot points before I can start writing
I know that I will be inclined to draft over and over once I have gotten out my first.
I know that once I have an idea seed, I nourish in my mind daily and it must naturally evolve, I can’t just force it. This is where I’m at now.
On Monday we had Catherine McMullen come in as a guest speaker and she was incredible. She offered heaps of useful insight and advice about writing and industry.
Here are some notes I took:
INDUSTRY:
Freelancers website – should do resume like that
Political things in a writer’s room, a person will be there one day and not the next, need to be a valuable contributor to stay.
Contributing writer – $1000 a day
In America they can spend 10 weeks alone on research, can spend 5-6 months for full show
In Australia, can give 4 weeks to write the whole thing!
VR SCREENPLAYS:
Script form is still evolving
Written in second person – you
Closest to doing a play than a film – full takes required
Sound plays more of an important role than in film – key for triggering interaction
One camera perspective needs to be considered: quadrant format invented
Can write to the camera – direction
WRITING:
Need to earn rule bending – writing to camera etc.
Need feeling over description, put it in if needed
Spirit of character is most important
Conscious casting – open different storylines, with specificity, race informs character
Draw the READER’s attention, can use – NB eg in The Other Lamb
Action needs to be evocative, not boring!!!
THE OTHER LAMB SCRIPT:
Short story to screenplay – done the world work in short
Can evolve new endings, new characters, changed by a third to a half
Tone of short story is there
Specific songs are not good – needs versatility
Narrators are cheats – untrustworthy narrator more interesting
Don’t write camera angles – ways to get around it – ‘we see’ rather than close up on hand!
Lyrical rather than dictative action
Use personality to express/direct characters/actors
Big difference between director scripts and writer’s script
Action beats – has to be a good read
SHORT FORM:
Cut is down and cut it down again
Budget to consider – locations – limited to 3?
Simpler story: 4 part structure
Outline should take more time, basic structure needs to be there
Write what you know
TOOL: Save the cat – when things need to happen for a feature, write treatment – fits roughly, use big beats, general structure
Week 7 has been about critiquing screenplays and audiovisual storytelling.
Unfortunately I was absent on Monday because I was a sicky 🙁
I had a go at the set homework: read the student scripts, make some notes/revisions and bring in work for the final project.
On Wednesday we looked at the notion of visual cliches as a mode of getting out our crappy ideas.
In groups we went out and filmed our own visual cliches and then presented them to the class.
We then looked at the chapter reading ‘Death by Visual Cliche’ by Peterson and Nicolosi titled Notes to Screenwriters: Advancing Your Story, Screenplay, and Career with Whatever Hollywood Throws at You Michael Weise Productions, Studio City.
We didn’t find any overlapping cliche examples between the text’s and ours. Ultimately, visual cliches can be used as shortcuts to convey/infer inner thought. They often save exposition time and are quick way to get from A to B. We disagreed with some of the examples in the reading like: a character stares at (anything).
We then relooked at the student scripts with the no dialogue brief from Monday. An important note from script #1 was taken from the mime urine scene – character knows, does the reader know, is this the same? Stayci said: Unless it is something the audience needs to know, the audience can find out with the characters. Who knows, who needs to know? When is the best time to reveal?
This is a super gold nugget for my ideas around my own screenplay as there will be some reveal content that will need to be delivered at the right time.
This week was all about cracking down to the core of audiovisual stories, well, trying to anyway. We started summing up all our findings and observations we’ve accumulated so far, and also began thinking about ideas for our very own audiovisual screenplays.
On Monday we were commissioned another open minded writing exercise, whereby the person to the left is to supply a random word. From here we go down a rabbit hole of 15 related words and then pluck out one of those, then from there another rabbit hole and another 10 related words. Of these, 3 are to be plucked out to use in a 500 word story with a beginning, middle and end.
here’s me giving it a red hot go:
1st word: Hound
15 related words:
Dog
Puppy
Elvis
Paws
Wild
Animal
Fur
Collar
Walk
Park
Fetch
Grass
Cute
Spotty
Lazy
2nd word: Wild
10 related words:
Untamed
Crazy
Jungle
Forest
Amazon
Animal
Heathcliff
Uno
Beast
Dream
3 CHOSEN WORDS:
Beast
Jungle
Heathcliff
Here is my jungle warped unfinished Wuthering Heights spinoff:
The jungle lay still. The trees did not breath a whisper of wind and sunlight danced in the gaps between branches. Heathcliff peeks out from behind a tall tree trunk. The beast roars and the leaves vibrate subtlety. He is distant. Heathcliff grabs Cathy and pushes her into the cobwebbed hollow tree trunk. ‘Be quiet, its safest here in plain sight’. He buries himself in the foliage debris, he is dirty enough to chameleon into the forest floor. The beast’s feet pound the ground, becoming louder and louder as he approaches/gets closer. Each step is as slow and heavy as the last. Cathy inhales deeply and audibly preparing for his passing. measuring her breath carefully to his thump step. The beast …
To finish off we watched an excerpt from Better Call Saul demonstrating a solo moment whereby the character’s personal/individual moments are telling a visual story, hence what we see/hear of their reactions contribute to story greatly.
On Wednesday we toyed with this idea in crafting our own solo scene, but first, we speed dated!! I ran through many different ideas but still cannot settle on the one.
We then began manifesting our list of audiovisual principles, guidelines, elements, considerations, practical applications, tools, conventions, contexts, etc. and how this plays out on screen and on the page.
This week we dived into Sternberg’s perspectives on screenplay writing and then did some writing ourselves!
On Monday we discussed some revelations and confusions evoked from Claudia Sternberg’s Written For the Screen (1997), which we followed up with some related examples from screenplays.
Sternberg epitomises the different ways screenwriters can interject their style or voice. Sternberg details style into two streams; The Stylistic Paradigm (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 80-87) refers to a screenwriter’s practice through devices, genre and ideas, and the Imagery and Language of Images (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 87-91) refers strictly to linguistic tools, such as simile and metaphor. In the first section, Sternberg outlines that the screenwriter’s choices in syntagmatic requirements of the text-type (scenic structure, character action and dialogue, time and place of specification) form the stylistic paradigm of the text-type. (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 80). In the second section, Sternberg emphasises that action and henceforth screenplay imagery, can be greatly assisted by via “decodable constructions”. (Sternberg, 1997, p. 87). This refers to metaphor, simile, comparisons, descriptions. She argues that these methods are more telling than action descriptions as screenwriters can “substantiate moods and emotions”. (Sternberg, 1997, p. 87).
The very opening passage is a quote by Sergei Eisenstein which introduces the style notion:
“And the scriptwriter is right to present it [the script] in his own language. Because the more fully his intention is expressed, the more complete will be the semantic designation. Consequently, the more specific it will be in literary terms.”
(1925: 35 cited in Sternberg 1997, p. 80) .
I particularly enjoyed Sternberg’s Written For the Screen (1997) reading as it introduces screenwriting in a similar light to that of a literary piece or film. It focuses on the creativity and art of the screenwriting craft, rather than regurgitating classic screenwriting formula and conventions. This fresher perspective shattered our assumptions of fixed format, such as in Mckee’s Description reference. Stayci advised that opinions about style and description are firm and often opposing in the screenwriting world – as evidenced in the contrasts between Mckee and Sternberg because the screenplay is such a collaborative document.
There were some fuzzy question marks about terminology which served as a good glossary/screenwriting vocab bank when we discussed them as a class:
Master scene technique: the way the action is set out on the page with paragraph breaks.
Scene text: everything that’s not dialogue.
Big print: ACTION describing what is happening on the screen, written in present tense.
When asked to source examples my group focussed on the screenplay Thelma and Louise. (reference!) My group found an example of screenplay language reflecting genre as aforementioned by Sternberg (1997, pp. 82-3)
Thelma and Louise’s description of a character as a “ladykiller” exhibits the screenplay’s language reflecting the ‘world’, and also serves as being ‘stylistically reminiscent of diction’ (Sternberg 1997 p. 83). Another example of this kind is when Louise is described as a “waitress in a coffee shop… too old to be doing this” (p. 1)
On Wednesday we looked at THE scene from Up and were asked to plug a segment of it into screenplay form, as a group. I collaborated with Ben, Eve and Jasmijn in a google doc and we were happy with our screenplay on the first 30 secs. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rifKcYHhzvcI1A9OVjqUtwkSF8tQZpszDqKrMLYYYbc/edit?ts=5abb0475
We then read another group’s version of the same scene and gave them feedback:
Question: Considering Sternberg’s reading from Monday, do you feel you were able to make stylistic choices for this exercise?
Improvement: At times we felt it was too poetic, too brief and not specific enough. There are some minor corrections that could be made such as the irrelevance of the word ‘brightly’ after the word flashes because the first implies the second. There are some spelling errors.
Compliment: Good opening and specifically the use of the word ‘Launches.’ Even when brief, there is a really great jumping off point for elaboration. The initial descriptions are spot on for each scene. Molto Bene
We received this feedback on our screenplay:
Question: Do you feel that everything included was necessary to the audio-visual storytelling?
Suggestion: To condense your descriptions so as to create more succinct sentences
Example of an effective piece of writing: “On the half rotten fence stands a sign: SOLD”
We then made revisions accordingly, cutting back on some superfluous descriptions and simplifying actions.
We then compared our screenplay to Pixar’s and made some interesting comparisons/discoveries:
Specificity – noun that only applies to that sector of society, as in Carl’s family
Remove all seems to be, seemingly appears etc. (there are of course exceptions – ie creating suspense)
Claudia Sternberg’s Written For the Screen (1997), evoked major revelations about the craft of screenwriting for me. It spoke to me as both a creative screenwriter and analytical viewer. I found her ideas inspiring and refreshing, and most importantly adaptable for my own practice.
Sternberg epitomises the different ways screenwriters can interject their style or voice. Such style is detailed into two streams; The Stylistic Paradigm (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 80-87) refers to a screenwriter’s practice through devices, genre and ideas, and the Imagery and Language of Images (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 87-91) refers strictly to linguistic tools, such as simile and metaphor. In the first section, Sternberg outlines that the screenwriter’s choices in syntagmatic requirements of the text-type (scenic structure, character action and dialogue, time and place of specification) form the stylistic paradigm of the text-type. (Sternberg, 1997, pp. 80). In the latter section, Sternberg emphasises that action and henceforth screenplay imagery, can be greatly assisted by via “decodable constructions”. (Sternberg, 1997, p. 87). This refers to metaphor, simile, comparisons, descriptions. She argues that these methods are more telling than action descriptions as screenwriters can “substantiate moods and emotions”. (Sternberg, 1997, p. 87).
I particularly enjoyed Sternberg’s Written For the Screen (1997) reading as it introduces screenwriting in a similar light to that of a literary piece or film. It focuses on the creativity and art of the screenwriting craft, rather than regurgitating classic screenwriting formula and conventions. This more liberating opinion shattered my previous assumptions of classic or fixed screenwriting format, such as in Mckee’s positioning on description (Mckee, 1999, pp.394-400). In class Stayci advised us that opinions about style and description are firm and often opposing in the screenwriting world – as evidenced in the contrasts between Mckee and Sternberg, because the screenplay is such a collaborative document.
I found the examples referenced throughout not only interesting, but useful. Typically being a very analytical reader and viewer, writing can make me feel trapped. I really enjoy editing but first getting that idea out there is the big challenge. Sternberg’s positioning between the two realms, the way she explains the impact of examples makes me want to get drafting. Her observations make me feel more confident to stylise my own writing. I know I can get stuck in the passive voice, I can over describe and complicate the simplest action, I can not give enough spatial awareness for a scene, but Sternberg’s observations point me out of these pitfalls – ie I can utilise genre devices or metaphors that will better communicate an idea.
Sternberg’s opening passage is a quote by Sergei Eisenstein which introduces the style notion:
(1925: 35 cited in Sternberg 1997, p. 80)
This quote is significant to me as I recently did an assignment on Eisenstein’s theory of montage for my Histories of Film Theories subject. Sergei Eisenstein, Marxist and former engineering student, is renowned a “revolutionary Russian director” and influential Soviet Montage filmmaker (Vassilieva 2017). He had a lifelong fascination with how audience responses can be aroused in the theatre and in film. (Shaw 2004). His filmic ideals and methods of montage are extremely pivotal to visual storytelling and he contended that style is the greatest form of impact. (Shaw 2004).
(His style was mainly the propaganda sort, but style nonetheless!)
When asked to source examples of Sternberg’s mentioned styles, my group focussed on the screenplay Thelma and Louise (Khouri, 1990). Identifying these examples further established tool presets in my mind as to what I can use in my very own writing. We found examples of screenplay language reflecting genre as aforementioned by Sternberg (1997, pp. 82-3). The description of a character as a “real ladykiller” (Khouri, 1990, p. 2) exhibits the screenplay’s language reflecting the ‘world’, and also serves as being ‘stylistically reminiscent of diction’ (Sternberg 1997 p. 83). Another example of this kind is when Louise is described as a “waitress in a coffee shop… too old to be doing this” (Khouri, 1990, p. 1).
REFERENCES:
Mckee, R 1999, ‘The Text’ in STORY:Substance, structure, style, and the principles of screenwriting, Harper Collins, London, pp. 394-400.
