I won't copy the article here without your permission, so people
will have to check it out in order to know what I'm talking about.

An interesting point of view, Curtis. I take exception to all of
your absolutes. Never say never.

Since you've never seen a horror movie where the male character
admits to being scared, I suggest you broaden your experience
with horror movies. When you base a principle on your lack of
knowledge, it makes me suspect everything else. Just because
you've never seen one, doesn't mean they don't exist.

Your list of words to eliminate seem absurd to me.

Why strive to eliminate "this"? I can see that many times not
using "yes" or "no" can be effective and it's worth looking at
your script to see if they can be eliminated, but "remember" and
"hello"? Can you elaborate a little here, why you feel these
words should be eliminated from a script?

You are a professional script analyst, I find it unbelievable that
you suggest characters never introduce themselves or someone
else.

"Hiya, Sam."
"My name's Deborah"
"That's why I called you Sam. You don't look like a Deborah"

"This is Chewbacca. He's first-mate on a ship that might suit our
needs."

"Well, you were asking about Rick and here he is. Mademoiselle, may I present..."
"Hello, Ilsa."
"Hello, Rick"

And in that example the introductions go on - introducing by
name characters we (the audience) already know.

My point being that characters introducing themselves or others
can have a great impact. To suggest to writers they never do it
seems restrictive. Why is this a "never"?

It's an interesting article.
----------------------
A little game - you all know the last two bits of dialogue I quoted,
who knows the first one?

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

Thanks for the great comments and I mean that sincerely. I know we have plenty of new writers on here and I am trying to hammer home some great habits. Never say never is exactly right. The reason I use the absolutes is because I want people to use every last bit of brainstorming...every ounce of thought they have to prevent writing in that manner. If I say it's okay then we have a scene with a group of people walking into a bar and six minutes of greetings and we have lost the reader. I will always say...find another way to do it and if you come back having scratched your hair out then I might say...good job you exhausted every opportunity and this one is okay. There is always a way!

The word "this"...if you say "this" then we the audience are obviously looking at the object you are calling out. Find another way. Get away from what 99% of the writers are using. Using "hello"...and introducing names...find a smarter way to introduce people. I'm not a fan of "remember" because it's a cheap way of bringing up something...that the other character will most likely remember...so why use the word? Bring it up in a more creative and dramatic or comedic way. I'll have to add in the word "like" as well. Find the greatness in your writing.

So are my absolutes absolute? Only once you have truly busted your brain will I give in. I'm using these more for shock value to get people thinking and realize they have to write great material. With over 40,000 scripts being written each year it takes great material to get noticed. Readers pound through 20-30 scripts each weekend. Writers have to grab their attention instantly and never let go of them...as soon as they start seeing repetition...they are onto the next script.

Keep the comments coming.

I disagree with your article on a couple of points.

How someone does an introduction can tell a lot about a character. Does Joe Smith introduce himself as Joseph Quinton Smith the Third (pretentious) or Smith, Joe Smith (Bond fan), or does he go by Joey (unassuming or immature) or perhaps Dr Smith (Lost in Space fan or is he an actual doctor) or Joe Jr (still under dad's shadow maybe). Each says something different about the character in minimal lines.

That same Joe Smith might introduce himself to different people in different ways. Perhaps trying to impress different people at a party he tries every variation depending his perception of that person. We've now got Joe the chameleon. Watch the Wedding Crashers trailor and I believe they have a slightly different riff on this.

And we've also got subtext. Now I'm talking about the "This" regarding an object. This can be used for misdirection. Imagine Joe Smith is showing off a cheap pot that resembles a Ming Vase and he's talking about how it looks good but it's rotten underneath. Over his shoulder is his pretentious girlfriend, the real source of the conversation. The "This" gives the character deniability to trash talk and adds a whole layer to the discussion. It also works well if someone is discussing multiple objects. The word helps the screenplay separate out one from another, minimalist verbal blocking.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

I think in Wedding Crashers they introduce themselves as someone else each time. I don't believe they ever introduce their real names...it is the whole gag of that film. I may be wrong. Check on that. I think we know John's name by the name on his office door or desk...which is a much better way to give the audience the name.

Find the more creative ways to do it.

I agree they were giving false names, but they were still introductions and their lies told you more about what the movie was gonna be about than almost anything else. The names they chose were ethnic or bland or whatever, it shows they were going to every wedding and trying hard to fit in rather than just going as themselves, so they are clearly scammers.

So my John Smith from before introduces himself as Ivan Smithski to the Slavic looking hottie. That says something about him. If he's Fred Jones to the ugly girl that says even more, he doesn't want to be tracked down.

My point is info is transfered in an introduction. True or false or shaded there is info and an introduction can be very useful if it's not just a verbal way of distributing name tags. Heck a name tag would be better than most intros, I agree with your article on that point. I'm mostly pointing out the absolute is incorrect. I can imagine an interesting story (probably a short though) based on this whole idea as a theme.

I guess to bottom line it, it helps if the info is additional, that the audience knows *more* prior to the intro.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

It's too bad you weren't as clear in your article as you are here.
With this post I don't disagree at all.

I covered scripts professionally for several years - for some
major producers and prodCo's - and have always found the
absolutes disturbing. But advising writers to challenge their
word usage is important. This post makes your point much better.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

You are both pointing out flaws in the article and I will make some corrections to simplify it. The discussion has been great. I'll repost it as "The New Dialog Article"

I've enjoyed the discussion as well, and despite the nit-picky nature of the whole discussion I think we all agree on the basics and that your article was well done.

RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA

I don't have any problems with any of the comments. Nit-picky is what writing is all about. That's the hard part for most of us...getting down to the fine details that can really make the difference. One reason I put it on here was to hear back from everybody...and you two always provide great feedback. I want people to write great material so we can all enjoy their films.

The New Dialogue Article is up. I hope this helps improve your writing. www.filmschoolnow.com/dialog

Comments are always welcome.

I like that one much better. It's more encouraging and less dogmatic.

Which makes me curious: When you analyze scripts do you write the
first way - with absolutes and "never" do this and that?

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

LOL! No...but I do let them know that I will be looking for those specifics and I provide ideas for changing the script...I give them examples and let them decide. I nit-pick in a very positive way. I challenge writers because I know what people are truly capable of and I don't want them selling themselves short. Most of us don't even know how successfull we can be.