The studio was for me a great opportunity to expand my own creative practice, as I even though I’ve written a lot of fiction before, I’d never attempted to write a screenplay previously. The topics and exercises we covered in class brought up a lot of interesting points in regards to the unique affordances of screenwriting and visual storytelling. A main point that stuck out for me personally were discussions of the function of a screenplay – this being its intention to become a film – and that therefore everything in a screenplay must point toward this, like the emotions of a character must be shown audio-visually, which creates a more unique challenge when compared to writing for a novel. 

For my final project, I was drawn to the creation of a screenplay for a short animated film, because I was drawn to the affordances of animation as a medium when compared to other types of films.

One of the main decisions I struggled with was whether to include narration or not. Since I was adapting a fairytale, and narration is a standard trope in the telling of fairytales, and it was present in all of the short films I was inspired by. But I was concerned that it might lead to be too much of a narrative crutch and a shortcut instead of actually using audiovisual storytelling. Ultimately, I decided to include both narration and dialogue but in limited amounts. The narration took the form of a voiceover from the titular character, which I decided to write in a style inspired by the film noir genre, as this worked on more than one level. It created a relationship between the generally dark themes of film noir and my screenplay, so that the dark themes in my own story feel genre-appropriate. This also allowed me to play upon the genre conventions of fairy tales as well – the screenplay opens with the voice over “I suppose I should begin with “once upon a time,”” spoken by the lead character. This acknowledges right of the bat that the story is based on a fairy tale, but expresses reluctance: it is not your typical one. 

This was the first time I had ever attempted to write a screenplay, and though at first I was daunted by it, mainly because the formatting seemed so difficult to master, once I settled in to start writing I actually found it very easy and really got in the zone. I think because I am naturally a very concise writer to the style of screenwriting is well suited to me, compared to writing flowery prose. I feel that I improved a lot within this studio, which is pretty obvious when comparing an early draft of my screenplay with a later one:

Excerpt from early draft.

Excerpt from later draft.

This is the first scene of the screenplay, and I think the later draft functions much better as an opening, as it opens with action and character (the farmer walking), and foreshadows the coming violence (the rifle) is therefore much more engaging. Also, the dialogue in the early draft is not very refined – its simple exposition and I think I found ways to convey this information more subtly in the final draft.

Though I am happy with my final screenplay, one thing I think I struggled to do is really take advantage of the medium of animation. The screenplay could quite easily be adapted just as a normal short film. I tried to add descriptions that would give an animator or art director added direction, like “an exaggerated roaring fire”  and “a high-contrast scene.” Though to give more clarity, I added a note at the beginning of the screenplay that the screenplay is intended for an animation, and some notes on the style, and hopefully this will allow the reader to visualise the action as an animation specifically.

Presentation Feedback

Work in Progress Post

– Above: An animation mentioned as possible inspiration by Dylan Murphy.

Recently, I presented my work-in-progress project to the class and panelists Stayci Taylor, Smiljana Glisovic and Dylan Murphy.

Smiljana suggested that it might be interesting to look more deeply into what the affordances of animation as a medium actually would allow me to do with the screenplay, which I thought was helpful feedback.

So I decided to look into the differences between screenwriting for animation and live-action into a bit more detail to see if I can better take these points of difference and create interesting audiovisual sequences in my screenplay.

Animation is a more uniquely visual medium than live-action, for sure. To borrow an example from Jeffrey Scott, in a live-action script you can just say ‘and then the car crashes’ but in an animation script this requires more description, it needs to provide a “complete visual image” with less room for interpretation. Scott writes that the animation screenplay writer serves even more so as the director, due to this precision required. In screenwriting for feature films the writer also serves as the director in a lot of ways, by dictating tone and world and character, so I’m not sure I agree with this.

I hadn’t considered that an animation script might actually require more detail, yet I wonder if, like an director writing his own script, this detail is required as much if I am also creating the storyboards myself.

Another point I learned was that one page of an animation script is often 40 seconds of screen time rather than one minute, because of these more detailed descriptions, which is something I hadn’t considered before.

Also, generally an animation script takes much longer to complete than a live-action script, often years, and is a back and forth progress between storyboards and character designs, etc. But for this project, I will have a limited amount of time to nut out the specifics of the screenplay.

One way I could use this new knowledge, of adding more detail in the screenplay, is considering describing more carefully how the characters or objects move and exist in the fictional world. Animation is dictated by the principles of squash and stretch, and these can really enhance how the character is emoting. Exaggerating is also a good tool to use. But I want to be careful not to overdo this, as not to step away from the mature tone I want to exist in the project.

The feedback is a good reminded to make sure that I am making the most of the affordances of my chosen medium.

References:

https://www.awn.com/blog/difference-between-live-action-and-animation-writing

Throughout the studio, we’ve discussed formatting to great extent, is it or is it not important, what are the rules, who makes the rules, whether to capitalise, underline, italicise, or none of the above. But today I came across the perfectly infuriating example of what happens when formatting conventions are completely disregarded.

Whilst researching for my final project, I was looking for the screenplay for A Monster Calls, and the first result I found was an absolute mess: random capitalisation, pages only half filled, or even a few lines to a page. It so annoying to read, having to constantly scroll down to read the scenes, I skimmed over most of it and gave up after a few minutes. But I thought surely a screenplay so poorly formatted couldn’t possibly have been used in an actually produced film, so I did some further browsing and found a different version buried in the 2013 Blacklist, which besides some rampant underlining (shock! horror!) was more conventionally structured – and it was a much more compelling read.

It appears that the first version I found most likely wasn’t intentionally structured like that but instead was improperly exported or something along those lines. But it is a good example of why screenwriting has such a well-honed and utilised structure, which you especially miss when it’s gone.

For the short screenplay I’m developing, I am drawn towards exploring modes of visual storytelling when it comes to creating an animated short film. We’ve discussed in workshops how screenplays for animated films may be governed by different rules and concerns. Things like a longer production process, character designs not being completed, the need for having the screenplay ready before the final look of the animation is finalised. As in the screenplay for Toy Story, Andy is described simply as a 6-year-old boy:

The character descriptions are not detailed as they might be in a screenplay for a different type of feature film.

I also think that an animation provides a different type of screenwriting challenge compared to writing a screenplay for a live-action film. An animation is not bound to the restrictions of reality or logistics – the setting could be anything, the characters could be anything, any size, have any amount of legs or whatever.

I’ve been inspired by the animated sequences in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and A Monster Calls. For one, the sequences are really beautifully animated and explore visual storytelling in a unique way.

Deathly Hallows animation. Source.

Storyboards for A Monster Calls. Source.

In terms of story, I am thinking of adapting a Grimm brothers fairytale – they are interesting to me because they are often quite dark in nature, and have sort of poeticism to them, like the sequences in Deathly Hallows and A Monster Calls. I’ve chosen a story called Old Sultan which can be found here.

There are a few existing adaptations of this story. One of these I’ve linked below: it’s also an animation, which couldn’t possibly be more reliant on dialogue to deliver the story.

This animation really pushed the characterisation of the animals, especially that of the three legged cat, to make the story more light hearted and appealing to children. It also changes the ‘sabre’ from the original tale into a rifle. Which brings to the attention an important point of the construction of the visual storytelling – the farmer is shown polishing his rifle in the beginning of the film so it seems logical that the dog would get his hands on one.

Another retelling of the story is here:

This version is even more simplified and targeted to children.

Both these versions are quite lighthearted adaptations of the original story. The moral of the tale is made quite clear in both of them, actually voiced by the narrator in the latter instance: “loyalty pays off”, “Sometimes for friendships to last, friends shouldn’t take each other too seriously”.

I want to explore idea of “transformation is essential” (as advocated by Blake Snyder (2007) ) but focus on change in character of the dog. First he is morally righteous, but he has to compromise this to survive. He loses his friend the wolf, as the price of this. Now he is alive, but morally changed. The wolf, just wanting to help a friend in need, gains nothing, and is banished. Thus I’ll bring back the ambiguity of the original fairytale, and target the screenplay for an older audience. 

I attempted to start writing a bit of the screenplay to see if I could set the tone.

But I encountered a problem I hadn’t considered: would I use dialogue or narration, or both? The sequences that inspired me used narration almost exclusively, but the adaptations I found in my research used a mix of both. I think that the best way to explore audio-visual storytelling would be to use both to a minimal extent, but focus on trying to create meaning and exposition through audio-visual ways as much as I can, like through colour, shape, sound, or action.

My next few steps in the development of this project will be to create detailed outline, and rough storyboards. I think the storyboards will be especially helpful in getting me to think more about how I can visually show the story – especially important because it is an animation – and then it will be easier to draft the screenplay from there.

References:

Grimm’s Fairytale classics Old Sutan, Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucX0sb97baU.

Making of A Monster Calls, Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/204207639.

Old Sultan cartoon for kids, Youtube: link.

Toy Story, 1995, Joss Whedon.

FXGuide, Deathly Hallows Animation, https://www.fxguide.com/featured/framestore_deathly_hallows_animation/

Snyder, B. (2007). Save the cat! goes to the movies : The screenwriter’s guide to every story ever told / [eReserve]. Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions. pp. xi-xxi

“Save the Cat” comes up fairly frequently in discussions about screenplay structure. So I decided to look into what this mysterious phrase actually means.

It comes from the Save the Cat trilogy of books by Blake Snyder. ‘Save the Cat’ references the moment the protagonist does something nice, like, for example, saving a cat, that makes them likeable to the audience.

Blake Snyder provides a pretty strict template for screenwriters, advocating genre and structure as the “basic requirements for a winning screenplay.” Whereas Robert McKee (1999) in Story doesn’t really advocate a strict structure, Snyder has this structure down pat – literally, down to the page numbers. Snyder gives 15 ‘beats’, or events, that should happen in a successful screenplay, as in the image below:

Snyder Beat Sheet

He claims that this structure is what audiences and moviegoers want, which seems pretty true, because best-selling blockbusters follow this structure pretty closely. And like cult/art films that don’t aren’t easily successful, maybe because this structure is what makes a film satisfying to watch.

On a side note, though this isn’t really a new concept I liked Snyder’s reminded that “all stories are about transformation” – a change, usually in the protagonist. This is enhanced through his structure, where the final image is the opposite to the closing image, thus signifying that a change has taken place.

This structure has had some pretty harsh criticism though. Like Christopher Keelty on Youtube:

He says that every film in Hollywood is pretty much written by the same person.

I think that’s a pretty unfair criticism, though, considering that similar ideas on story structure go way back. Thinking of Joseph Campbell’s Hero’s Journey, for example. But as we’ve discussed before, it is useful to be aware of the tools available to a screenwriter and when to break them.

Possible further research:

Screenplay, Syd Field.

How to Write A Screenplay in 21 days, Viki King.

Reference List:

McKee, Robert. (1999) Story.

Snyder, B. (2007). Save the cat! goes to the movies : The screenwriter’s guide to every story ever told / [eReserve]. Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions. pp. xi-xxi

Keelty, Christopher. On Story Structure (and how Save the Cat Ruined Hollywood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4UiUckSmLE, Accessed 23/4/18.

Sergei Eisenstein. Source.

Claudia Sternberg in Written for the Screen: The American Motion-Picture Screenplay as Text raises some interesting ideas regarding to the role and function of screenplays that I had not encountered previously. In this post, I’ll be talking specifically in regard to the ideas discussed in chapter 8: The Stylistic Paradigm. As the title of the chapter suggests, it focuses on style, and opens with a quote from Sergei Eisenstein, the famous Soviet filmmaker and film theorist:

“And so the scriptwriter is right to present it [the script] in his own language. Because the more fully his intention his expressed, the more complete will be the semantic designation.” –  (quoted in Sternberg, p.80)

I think is quote very adequately expresses the thoughts I’ve raised about screenplay style in previous posts. In an earlier post, I questioned why it was that screenplays were written the way they were, what it was that dictated the dominant screenplay style – the Typewriter font, scene headings, etc. Why it was that some people, like McKee would say don’t use cinematic language like cut to, pan in on, and others would advocate it as a useful tool?

Therefore I like Eisenstein’s stance. He appears to be advocating that the writer use the tools that suit him best, or as he puts it, their ‘own language.’ Because, he suggests, that thereby they will be able to better express their intention and thus the adaptation of the film will be more complete, more accurate.

Maybe I just like this approach because I don’t like rules. Or maybe because there appears to be so much debate on the proper conventions and formats of screenplays that it seems nobody really agrees, so therefore someone who basically says, do whatever you want, appears to be a sorely needed voice of reason. This doesn’t mean that I plan to throw all the rules out of the window in my future practice, however. But it is something good to keep in mind, what tools are there available to use, and should they be used at all? Maybe a sledgehammer is the best tool for the job, sometimes.

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Critique time! The brief for this piece of writing was:

Conny’s on his way to his leaving party at work. He has mixed feelings about it – the work is boring but he likes his colleagues. He’s not sure if he’s made the right decision.

The task was to rewrite this using visual storytelling techniques, like evocative action verbs. Below is what I wrote:

Firstly, I think the piece works pretty well to communicate the brief. I think it’s clear that Conny is hesitant about entering the party, stalling by being on his phone instead. Also, I think it’s pretty act-able, as it mainly consists of actions instead of ‘Conny looks sad’ or ‘Conny looks hesitant.’  Perhaps the only thing that might be more difficult to act out would be ‘he puts on a fake smile.’ But then it’s also good to give the actor some room for interpretation.

On what doesn’t work, I think that the act of him scrolling past photos is probably a little heavy handed. There are definitely more subtle ways of depicting this, like one of the other students had Conny staring up at the lights of office building party to show his hesitation, which I think is more subtle, and also has the metaphor of the building looming over him, intimidating him, just like the prospect of entering the party is intimidating him.

Also, the dialogue in the scene is not really necessary. Possibly the piece could end before the dialogue begins and still convey the same message, or cut it out and just go straight to him glancing at his phone, the bar, and then pocketing the phone. But the dialogue is still okay in the sense that it indicates that his colleague were waiting for him and they like him.

To come back to the earlier example, I think that the setting of an office building also indicates better that it is a workplace party. The setting of just the bar is a little unclear, it could be any type of party – but of course, Conny’s workplace could also be the bar. This is why the brief was a little imprecise, to allow room for interpretation.

The use of the phone also brings into question how this same scene could be represented if the screenplay was set during a time where mobile phones didn’t exist. Perhaps Conny could be looking at letters or cards given by his colleagues as ‘going away’ presents?

Nonetheless, I still found it a useful exercise, especially because it was one of the first time I’d actually tried to write a screenplay using layout conventions, and it was good to hear how the rest of the class had interpreted the exercise.