Stories ... or screenplays?

[Milo_Grigsby]

I am working on a novella length non-erotic adventure/romance story that is written in 3rd person, present tense. As I am crafting it I feel like it is almost like a screenplay, dominated by dialog and description of the settings and actions of the characters. This is an interesting and somewhat challenging experience for me because so much of my writing is 1st person (with varying tense) featuring the thoughts and emotions of the MC. In this story I am trying hard not to write about any of the emotions (except to describe the physical manifestations) or motivations of the characters and leave that up to the reader to infer.

What are your reactions to stories like this as a reader?

 

[MillieDynamite]

I've read screen plays, so I get it. You might think about formatting as a screen play.

 

[MillieDynamite]

As in, "The camera zooms into the living room."

 

[ElectricBlue]

In this story I am trying hard not to write about any of the emotions (except to describe the physical manifestations) or motivations of the characters and leave that up to the reader to infer.

What are your reactions to stories like this as a reader?

That's an odd thing to say. You can get just as close and intimate with emotions in third person narration as you can with first person.

What you're describing sounds flat and soulless to me. A story without emotion?

 

[Euphony]

I am trying hard not to write about any of the emotions (except to describe the physical manifestations) or motivations of the characters and leave that up to the reader to infer.

Seriously. I sounds like you are coring out much of the main responsibilities of an author telling a story. Rather than ending up some redefining molecular gastronomy, it usually ends up reading as a plate of lettuce sold as a main course salad.

Everything is a balance. Yes, physical detailing enough to put out an APB is bad form but so too is essentially the opposite, foisting on the storywork on the reader. (even if it's not laziness, but intentional genre "breaking.")

Plenty of stories obfuscate a characters main motivators but they flesh out all the little motivators that help us readers at least feel we are building some sort of idea of what's driving this individuals actions.

"Screenplay" wording also suggests there may be a confusion of how minimalist cinema still tells a compelling tale while using the powerful tools of visual media to do so.

We can only be so minimalistic in prose b/c we lack and/or have a completely different toolset than other forms.

*IF* you executed your narrative to the degree in which you are aspiring, I'd imagine there'd be a real question as to how much of a narrative there is at all.

I can imagine a ton of "Nope" outs.

What are your reactions to stories like this as a reader?

Examples would help b/c I don't know there are many stories as Spartan as you seem to be going for floating around.

Not enough I've established generalizations about how I feel when they come up.

 

[Milo_Grigsby]

Seriously. I sounds like you are coring out much of the main responsibilities of an author telling a story. Rather than ending up some redefining molecular gastronomy, it usually ends up reading as a plate of lettuce sold as a main course salad.

Everything is a balance. Yes, physical detailing enough to put out an APB is bad form but so too is essentially the opposite, foisting on the storywork on the reader. (even if it's not laziness, but intentional genre "breaking.")

Plenty of stories obfuscate a characters main motivators but they flesh out all the little motivators that help us readers at least feel we are building some sort of idea of what's driving this individuals actions.

"Screenplay" wording also suggests there may be a confusion of how minimalist cinema still tells a compelling tale while using the powerful tools of visual media to do so.

We can only be so minimalistic in prose b/c we lack and/or have a completely different toolset than other forms.

*IF* you executed your narrative to the degree in which you are aspiring, I'd imagine there'd be a real question as to how much of a narrative there is at all.

I can imagine a ton of "Nope" outs.


Examples would help b/c I don't know there are many stories as Spartan as you seem to be going for floating around.

Not enough I've established generalizations about how I feel when they come up.

Thank you so much. This is the kind of thoughtful feedback I appreciate and exactly the reason I posted the thread.

 

[XerXesXu]

I am working on a novella length non-erotic adventure/romance story that is written in 3rd person, present tense. As I am crafting it I feel like it is almost like a screenplay, dominated by dialog and description of the settings and actions of the characters. This is an interesting and somewhat challenging experience for me because so much of my writing is 1st person (with varying tense) featuring the thoughts and emotions of the MC. In this story I am trying hard not to write about any of the emotions (except to describe the physical manifestations) or motivations of the characters and leave that up to the reader to infer.

What are your reactions to stories like this as a reader?

This came up as 'Deep POV' (perhaps also 'Cinematic POV') a while ago, telling nothing, showing everything through the words and actions/reactions of the characters. I narrate in 3rd Person Omniscient and usually have a large cast of characters. It's a doable but difficult discipline. It feels like a self-denying ordinance. One sacrifices the benefits of omniscience, but for pain with no gain.

It could work in 3rd Person Close, I haven't tried.

As a reader, I'd have no problem with it provided it doesn't slow the story up. 'A picture paints a thousand words' works for cinema, in writing, a thousand words where ten would do can cause a story to drag.

 

[Milo_Grigsby]

This came up as 'Deep POV' (perhaps also 'Cinematic POV') a while ago, telling nothing, showing everything through the words and actions/reactions of the characters. I narrate in 3rd Person Omniscient and usually have a large cast of characters. It's a doable but difficult discipline. It feels like a self-denying ordinance. One sacrifices the benefits of omniscience, but for pain with no gain.

It could work in 3rd Person Close, I haven't tried.

As a reader, I'd have no problem with it provided it doesn't slow the story up. 'A picture paints a thousand words' works for cinema, in writing, a thousand words where ten would do can cause a story to drag.

Thank you very much. I am going to look into 3rd Person Close and possibly rework a chapter or two to see how it feels. I love the feedback I am getting on this post.

 

[Euphony]

Thank you so much. This is the kind of thoughtful feedback I appreciate and exactly the reason I posted the thread.

It's just thoughts. I'm hardly the end all opinion on it.

If you feel it, you should try it.

Thinking on it a little, if I were to try it, key to my strategy would be to know the audience I'm going for and write towards them.
Think of it like fine dining versus family restaurant.

Fine diners likely won't come in starving, will prioritize the experience, and will notice the minutia like plating and complementary lighting.

Fams are desperate to get their kids stuffed and not have to do much thinking for a change, outside of gratuity on the bill.

Know your reading clientele.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Thank you very much. I am going to look into 3rd Person Close and possibly rework a chapter or two to see how it feels. I love the feedback I am getting on this post.

Yep, third person close can get you onto the same pillow as first person, without the limitations of a first person narrative. I find it the most powerful pov, and use it a lot.

 

[MillieDynamite]

So long as you pick a few characters for the point of view and don't head jump.

Yep, third person close can get you onto the same pillow as first person, without the limitations of a first person narrative. I find it the most powerful pov, and use it a lot.

Head Jump, sounds like a cool new game show. Not that game shows are every cool.

 

[ElectricBlue]

So long as you pick a few characters for the point of view and don't head jump.

Head Jump, sounds like a cool new game show. Not that game shows are every cool.

Yes, you've got to stay alongside one character for long time. I wouldn't use it for more than three leading roles.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I am working on a novella length non-erotic adventure/romance story that is written in 3rd person, present tense. As I am crafting it I feel like it is almost like a screenplay, dominated by dialog and description of the settings and actions of the characters. This is an interesting and somewhat challenging experience for me because so much of my writing is 1st person (with varying tense) featuring the thoughts and emotions of the MC. In this story I am trying hard not to write about any of the emotions (except to describe the physical manifestations) or motivations of the characters and leave that up to the reader to infer.

What are your reactions to stories like this as a reader?

Try looking at a real script. This is the "initial schooting script" of the 1999 version of The Haunting. Yeah, it was a dreadful, bloated film. In any case, the final movie is somewhat different from what was actually filmed. Somewhere there is a transcript of the final dialogue.

https://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/the-haunting_production.html

In any case, does this look like something you'd want to do? The scenes in most movies are relatively short. The whole movie is often less than two hours. And the script itself is little more than a framework. The director, cinematographer, production designer, and a whole lot of other people will fill in the actual events and appearance of everything.

Scripts can be amusing to fool around with, although when I've tried it I broke every screenwriting rule in the book.

 

[MillieDynamite]

One page of script generally equals one minute of film.

Try looking at a real script. This is the "initial schooting script" of the 1999 version of The Haunting. Yeah, it was a dreadful, bloated film. In any case, the final movie is somewhat different from what was actually filmed. Somewhere there is a transcript of the final dialogue.

https://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/the-haunting_production.html

In any case, does this look like something you'd want to do? The scenes in most movies are relatively short. The whole movie is often less than two hours. And the script itself is little more than a framework. The director, cinematographer, production designer, and a whole lot of other people will fill in the actual events and appearance of everything.

Scripts can be amusing to fool around with, although when I've tried it I broke every screenwriting rule in the book.

 

[Euphony]

Not that game shows are every cool.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Thank you for proving my point. Is the muscle guy the Hulk? Lou Ferrigno?

View attachment 2282016

 

[Euphony]

Thank you for proving my point. Is the muscle guy the Hulk? Lou Ferrigno?

Nope. Just a family. Bonding.

The uncoolest.

 

[Euphony]

Thank you for proving my point. Is the muscle guy the Hulk? Lou Ferrigno?

Chris-a-might, it IS.

And Weird Al.

TIL.

 

[darkride]

I always used to write prose... Then I developed a story that I realised was really a tv show, so I moved across the country and studied film/tv at university, in the hope of gaining the tools to learn how to make it a reality. That was half a lifetime ago now... but for a good decade or more, whenever I wrote, it tended to be in script form.

A bunch of fanfics that I wrote in this form have been published elsewhere, and whilst some people hate that format, I still had plenty of love for the story, still had plenty say how I made them very emotional about the subject matter.

A good script doesn't just contain dialogue and direct the characters around on stage - it has to still impart to the reader (ie the director and actors) what is going on emotionally, it needs to convey motives and everything else that a good story contains.

A good script is just un-put-down-able as a good book. A bad script is firewood.

 

[EroticCupcake]

Most of my failed writing attempts are screenplays. My non-expert opinion.

1) Writing can be done solo. Making movies cannot. Barrier to entry on screen writing should be much higher than writing. You can self publish on Amazon and grind out some kind of audience.

2) The strength of writing as a medium is describing the interior lives of people. I think of it as "I want to be a good chef, but only concentrate on how the food looks and not how it tastes." Taste is a pretty big part of food. Maybe you should be a painter instead?

3) Certain types of stories work better or worse in different mediums. Lightsaber fighting in Star Wars works really well in a visual medium. The Force is mysterious and vague, and that's A-OK in a movie. If I was trying to create "Star Wars" in a novel, I would flesh out the mechanics of the Force in terms of emotional and intellectual component. Sword fighting can't carry a novel the way it can carry a movie.

 

[LittleLilyCanWrite]

Soooo, I'll go ahead and be the one to say I prefer writing that doesn't directly spoon feed me the characters' emotions. Maybe it's because I'm a psych nerd, and I get a big kick out of deciphering people's inner states on the basis of their outer ones, but I firmly believe there's plenty to be said for writers like Hemingway, Plath, or Salinger, who often write whole stories devoid of feeling-words and yet that still vibrate with emotion.

Gosh, I can't remember where I first learned this one piece of advice, or who wrote it. It was many, many all-nighters ago. But the gist of it was this: If, say, you want readers to feel sad for a character, and to really feel sadness, then instead of holding a magnifying lens to the poor thing's emotions, go the opposite direction completely. Distance your narration, write coldly and remotely. Maybe even reach for humor.

This is sort of analogous to playing happy, upbeat, tonally inappropriate music during a horror movie. While this may not be a technique you'll see in most modern (cheap, jump-scare-filled, dumb) horror movies, the reason for this is because weaker or more risk-averse writing/directing needs a creepy score almost like a laugh track to help cue the audience when to feel what and how severely.

I'm new enough not to be sure how dissenting opinions will be received. Please be nice. I'm a well-meaning nerd who freely admits she has NO clue how to write erotica. Yet.

 

[madelinemasoch]

I think if you want to write a script, write it as if you would direct it yourself. Don't be afraid to include notes that a director would come up with instead of a writer. Do as much of that as you feel need to. Then, don't sell it out to anyone, just hold onto it until you can do it yourself, the way you wanted. In that medium, you have to be both things to get the idea across the way you would in narrative prose.

 

[darkride]

I think if you want to write a script, write it as if you would direct it yourself. Don't be afraid to include notes that a director would come up with instead of a writer. Do as much of that as you feel need to. Then, don't sell it out to anyone, just hold onto it until you can do it yourself, the way you wanted. In that medium, you have to be both things to get the idea across the way you would in narrative prose.

As per above... when I was at film school, I wrote a script that we then made into a short film. The biggest learning moment for me in the whole film school process was what happened next.

I sat down with the guy who was going to direct, and we went through my script. He had a whole bunch of ideas, and a couple of them - full credit to him - elevated my script and took it to whole new level. BUT, he wanted to make all these other changes too, such as adding back story etc etc etc - to a 5-10 minute short. I explained to him that we just wouldn't have time to achieve his goals, and for a short film, I didn't want to make it too complicated by throwing in all this extra stuff that wasn't needed.

I thought that it had been settled... We cast some actors, we did a read through of the new amended script, and everything seemed fine. Then... we're filming, and on Day 1 he spent forever trying to get a particularly long panning, focus pull shot.... which I will admit ended up looking amazing... but then we get to the pivotal moment of the whole film, and he's directing the actors, and I realise - He doesn't understand the scene! He was drawing the attention away from where it needed to be, and it's not going to work! (The first rough-draft edit of the films I worked on always took place in my head while we were filming.)

I took him into another room away from the cast/crew, and tried to explain... but ultimately he still couldn't "see" my point, and time was getting away. So I let him film it his way, and then I stepped forward and said let's do one more take, but do X Y Z. So at least I knew I had the footage in the can for what was needed.

Then I had a death in the family... and when I came back, found out he'd got one of the actors back to do a bunch of extra dialogue to bring in his back story stuff, and cut the film to his very long vision rather than the agreed shooting script. We were marked down for going way over time, and the end piece was very avant-garde, not the nice "simple" story with a big twist that I'd intended.

I put both versions on YouTube years ago, after editing the movie myself, and my one got a lot better views and likes

Point being.... As a writer for film/tv, you either need to also be the director/producer in order to hopefully get that script onto the screen as the vision that you have dreamed about. Otherwise, you just need to be able to write a script, and then basically hand it over and be prepared for it to be totally changed. (But....... That collaborative effort DID improve my script.... so yeah...)