Spec Script/First Draft

Question

I was looking at some scripts to films on the net. I see them listed as first draft, second draft, final draft, shooting script, unproduced script, and rejected script.
Question: Are spec scripts the same as first drafts?

If I want to read scripts to films to help me learn the craft what ones should I be reading? The first draft? I should stay away from shooting scripts, right?
I also notice they like to use camera angle commands like "We zoom in" or "camera pans to the corner." Now, these type of commands are not given in spec script, correct?
Thanks

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]If I want to read scripts to films to help me learn the craft what ones should I be reading? The first draft? I should stay away from shooting scripts, right?[/nq]
Those are probably draft numbers as related to the production. You're never going to see the first thing off anybody's typewriter, even if it's labelled a "first draft."
[nq:1]I also notice they like to use camera angle commands like "We zoom in" or "camera pans to the corner." Now, these type of commands are not given in spec script, correct?[/nq]
Okay, I'm going to let you in on a dirty little secret. Before I say it, though, you need to promise to READ and UNDERSTAND all the the advice, not just the parts you want to hear. Read the secret AND the caveat.

The secret: it's fine to occasionally say "we see" or reference the camera in a script.
The caveat: 99.9% of the time, it's gratuitous. I'd say that percentage gets indistinguishable from 100% when you're dealing with first-time scripts. So YOU, Von Fourche, shouldn't do it. Never. Don't let yourself. Write around it even if it's more difficult, and, for the moment, seems awkward.
Just don't do it. Describe what the camera sees without referencing the camera, and don't reference the audience (the "we" in "we zoom in.")

In the long run, your writing will be much the better for it.

-Ron

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I was looking at some scripts to films on the net. I see them listed as first draft, second draft, final draft, shooting script, unproduced script, and rejected script. Question: Are spec scripts the same as first drafts?[/nq]
There are no hard and fast universally acccepted definitions but I'm guessing that most of what you're looking at is scripts for produced films or TV and the drafts are various stages in the development.

Most spec scripts go through drafts too but that's entirely up to the writer how you define them.
[nq:1]If I want to read scripts to films to help me learn the craft what ones should I be reading? The first draft? I should stay away from shooting scripts, right?[/nq]
You ask a lot of questions as if there re correct answers to all of them.
Read whatever you want.
[nq:1]I also notice they like to use camera angle commands like "We zoom in" or "camera pans to the corner." Now, these type of commands are not given in spec script, correct?[/nq]
For format, read The Screenwriters Bible by David Trottier. You've bought it, so read it. For content read a lot of good scripts of all types to see how it's done right and read a lot of bad scripts to see how it's done wrong.

Television has raised writing to a new low.
Samuel Goldwyn

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I was looking at some scripts to films on the net. I see them listed as first draft, second draft, final draft, shooting script, unproduced script, and rejected script. Question: Are spec scripts the same as first drafts?[/nq]
No. "First Draft," "Third Draft," "Final Polish," etc, when they appear on the cover sheet refer to official "steps" which have been contracted for that is, somebody is being paid to write them.

That's true whether it's a commissioned project or a spec script for which the writer is being paid to do additional revisions.

That is, in writing a spec script, I might personally go through two or three or four drafts before getting to a version that I'm comfortable sending out. But those would never be listed on the cover page. And if that script is bought, that final version that I sell, is considered to be the "first draft" for contractual purposes. Changes from that point on are considered to be second draft, third draft, or whatever.
[nq:1]If I want to read scripts to films to help me learn the craft what ones should I be reading? ... zoom in" or "camera pans to the corner." Now, these type of commands are not given in spec script, correct?[/nq]
There seems to be a widely held idea that the final draft the "shooting script" is in some fashion profoundly different from earlier drafts or a spec script.
Honestly, it's not. There are certain things that are done to the draft for technical reasons like numbering the scenes, making sure that every slug line that describes the same location uses exactly the same wording things like that. Things that relate to the fact that the document is moving from development to production.

Other than that, nobody is going to go through the draft prior to the shooting script and either take text out or put text in that wouldn't otherwise be there.
For instance, nobody is either going to take camera directions out or put them in by virtue of the fact that it is or isn't a shooting script.
These are things that the writer puts in to make the reader "see" the movie more clearly in his head. They don't, as a rule, have anything to do with how a particular scene is going to be shot in the real world. That has to do with the location, the blocking. There'll be a shotlist worked up by the director either more or fewer shots depending on how long a particular scene has been scheduled. There might be storyboards that will have been worked out between the director and the storyboard artist (or drawn by the director himself, if he's a good enough artist).
That is, none of those things "Pan to the Chicken" or "Zoom in on Bobby's quivering lip" have anything to do with production.

Nobody really takes it as a serious indicator as to whether they should schedule a dolly track or a crane or a zoom lens. They are, for purposes of a screenplay, simply another way of emphasizing a particular thing that's intended to be seen on screen. And, as someone else has indicated, it should be used rarely if at all, like an exclamation point, for emphasis.
NMS

Usenet · Answer

BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
Hash: SHA1
[nq:1]The secret: it's fine to occasionally say "we see" or reference the camera in a script. The caveat: 99.9% of ... do it. Never. Don't let yourself. Write around it even if it's more difficult, and, for the moment, seems awkward.[/nq]
Make up your mind, either it's fine to do it occasionally (it is), or it's not. Rules do not change depending on who they are applied to. And since we're letting opinions fly here, I really don't see how telling this fella to make his script more convoluted than it has to be just to suit your preferences is going to help him at all.
[nq:1]Just don't do it. Describe what the camera sees without referencing the camera, and don't reference the audience (the "we" in "we zoom in.")[/nq]
I wouldn't put much stock in this advice, it's pure opinion. Many successful scripts are written this way. Fargo comes to mind (Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen), Tom Fontana did it in his scripts for Homicide, Life On The Street. Signs also comes to mind, which has everything in it people here will tell you not to do. If you feel comfortable writing that way, do it. If you don't, then don't write that way.
If you want good advice, concentrate on writing a good story. Story comes first and foremost. Technical things like presentation are insanely easy to fix once it's done, and bad things should stand out once you go to edit it.
**
[nq:1]Question: Are spec scripts the same as first drafts?[/nq]
No, spec means you wrote it on the speculation that it may be bought, but without any type of obligation. It's a term describing the situation under which it was written. The two terms are not related.
[nq:1]If I want to read scripts to films to help me learn the craft what ones should I be reading? The first draft? I should stay away from shooting scripts, right?[/nq]
Depends. If you want to learn how to write for television, first drafts are about all you'll find, given how little time there is from one episode to the next.
Screenplays can be a **** shoot. The first draft and second draft may be written by the same person, and you can then learn what was changed to (hopefully) make it better. Then again, that second draft may be written by another person, and changed for reasons entirely unrelated to quality.
And given that so many people write with so many different styles, you may end up not learning anything at all, no matter how many you read.

Try finding the final-most draft you can for a movie you like, and read the script while the movie is playing. See how it was written, then see how it was produced. You will learn more from that than anything else, other than your personal experience.

Stylistic differences like the ones Ron is trying to dissuade you from using can be overlooked more easily than format errors, and/or just plain bad writing. I really wouldn't worry about it right now if I were you.
[nq:1]I also notice they like to use camera angle commands like "We zoom in" or "camera pans to the corner." Now, these type of commands are not given in spec script, correct?[/nq]
No, there is no magic rule about using them in specs or not. I use em, some people don't. Using them will not get you run out of town on a rail, anymore than not using them will make your property more desirable. If used well (that is sparingly, only when they make a positive difference), nobody should even notice.
-
Paul William Tenny
http://home.earthlink.net/~pwtenny/PGP.html
BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
iQIVAwUBQ/4KwUJUpdbmcyFBAQKPSxAAh4xjknGmk0+oTLuYJmct+vkwjbHlhdsJ Y7HkM5RgRi+kqBuh2Pth8jyR5Sh9b9a437gQaO4A8eof2CpVgYDhD2plba0uwpOI lkS2f8m4AINUiUh+WIu8I406bGyHrlv0ovflr4lk+6+Fq1OKbiOHyOQmToefdd6H 8TkV0cf5bFfq0UYp/oEwtNCH2SrIARB06oGY6fP5KK0Tixcc/GOHVmnQOdVX7QBl /VlNXzwOCOTyF9YRV89T2KaPjJVPdx7P7Y2Xx8KB98aMX1mxMtIRkiKXDACjeuOa IdRyVaAStOnkkvqKeHz/dcDWHaK1eEx6AKevnMf25v4Z6zusV2nB3aHjIVWDWLWy KfOOZsrceCDOC7t7OOhz4Mxb8bxZ+OwvD4IUfob16tXvvg5BbiobGxW5toUYXEQ9 S/iunP6o+Oh2hm0GXVew576GtMf3igPaIedLj8pMlvcYGJtvRtPZMJkcVscxrQq+ /kneKjAynONgXiMxVhCxf5+wy+TKsD8FfXUZ6fBG8VyEiu5+M/lUCvbcwhOgBmFi zL8QbslU6X7+ZY0UranrP7tZocEEcpcQRXbrJqtBXb/CPKfxQUYz4ObsnqyA3L+A FS0Xv0KUXsQoi6X4bJAXQmab9joG6QwUipOVYoSAnEdbARPelAIPUcdvQsGpY1ao 3hgfBVgPiWg=
=7g40
END PGP SIGNATURE

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]The caveat: 99.9% of the time, it's gratuitous. I'd say ... if it's more difficult, and, for the moment, seems awkward.[/nq]
[nq:1]Make up your mind, either it's fine to do it occasionally (it is), or it's not. Rules do not change ... script more convoluted than it has to be just to suit your preferences is going to help him at all.[/nq]
You've missed my point, which is a pedagogical one.

Von Fourche should not be writing stuff like "we see" until he's comfortable writing scripts without it. In my experience, when inexperienced writers write stuff like "We see" it is INVARIABLY used badly.
But as writers gain experience, and gain more critical understanding of their own work, they begin to understand what the difference is between the completely gratuitous uses which tend to yank people out of the movie-in-their-head and the useful, powerful applications of the same tool.
So my advice is very simple. For your first several scripts, you shouldn't do it. And then, when you've done that, and you KNOW how to write without doing it, if you still feel limited by it, then go ahead.

Von Forsch isn't going to sell this script, and he's not going to sell the next one. And he's not going to sell the one after that, probably, either. My advice was tailored specifically to him, to somebody who's asking so many of the obvious newbie questions that I'm sure some people think he's trolling by now.
What he has to do is bear down and work on his craft. It's not about suiting my preferences - it's about learning what he has to learn.

Yes, quite frankly, the rules are different. A working pro's work is judged differently from a newbie's first script. Fair? No. Reality? Yes.
-Ron

Usenet · Answer

BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
Hash: SHA1
[nq:1]You've missed my point, which is a pedagogical one.[/nq]
No, I do understand your point, I just disagree.
[nq:1]Von Fourche should not be writing stuff like "we see" until he's comfortable writing scripts without it. In my experience, when inexperienced writers write stuff like "We see" it is INVARIABLY used badly.[/nq]
A fair point, but I disagree as I'll explain below.
[nq:1]Von Forsch isn't going to sell this script, and he's not going to sell the next one. And he's not ... somebody who's asking so many of the obvious newbie questions that I'm sure some people think he's trolling by now.[/nq]
That's a terrible attitude. You have no clue how good his work is, none of us do. And until you've seen it, that's a very rude assumption to make, no matter how likely you think it is.
[nq:1]What he has to do is bear down and work on his craft. It's not about suiting my preferences - it's about learning what he has to learn.[/nq]
It is about your preferences, as I've stated previously, the opinion that using "we this" and "we that" is a bad thing for new writers is not universal, and you should stop presenting it as such. For every book someone can cite that says not to do it, there's another that says it's fine. It's not a shut case.
Your point of view has merit, but there are other views, and you are helping no one by dismissing them.
-
Paul William Tenny
http://home.earthlink.net/~pwtenny/PGP.html
BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
iQIVAwUBQ/+ShUJUpdbmcyFBAQIB4w//ZdxzNwLUr8IgF6p76mHLGofvdeQ71fCp bBh3vl1gcUHwbJ47N/LLSjrK7AxEE07ERs6hjJhBNTvaRofQOfHBV6jq8z0BkJBJ 5z0Ol/wgTM+y8z7OtFKvSWJEfE7RCp/ahULFXEVH5lYqEskdyGdwArwppbe3fE0B qzo09A0JF1mSOAeqpv2Xhu3k72v3O2114IpyvdeJMYh7zES53zAXz/kiY386yUAk afck21AJzhi9Un5yW2JDVUG3LTD57/wPsiUZcEQWrka2dVAsqVlGOetl594c2c3R 7t43lhPEQIlzHxvgexBr2xxHquUnA72sbAkhOj31yNU4RZW3lyMt+PqrVJpS5+S6 YcvygCIG22E2yI2XR2cT6jzYxtuWmPj+LZXTZiWtu7nquRM3YAGKWGUvp8boZ6Hw 126SHVgSzDN5C8q4J4WvXKOzVDrAsViRxUEsuLcj3v7UgtIIFclem8MEHcVns8Qx fd3RCQ6r9L2O/zcN7o+7lBrNw1GxL9XishY1jYuYCOjjQbqSRKrDTgfhECbZTOx8 dPBHm2TvgV1hRHpJqcB5Eg2O0cqcJHHy3TyOgv1sNjs4a+rfm/G3J5t7mjCe0lMN 6raXsYtdPyT226LqtWzWJY24qrmXXMK66uWtEIR5Zf1ufNtzEUC9BhsIZ4FT+YiI 5SWTfjq22xs=
=IBMh
END PGP SIGNATURE

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]That's a terrible attitude. You have no clue how good his work is, none of us do. And until you've seen it, that's a very rude assumption to make, no matter how likely you think it is.[/nq]
I don't think it's a terrible attitude. I think it's a realistic one.

I think the terrible attitude is indulging people in their unrealistic fantasies. Hey, look, fantasies are fun, we all do them, but you don't plan your career around them.
VF is a very raw newbie, and one who's - aparrently - intimidated by the hard work of becoming a writer (how else should we interpret that "do you have to be a real writer?" question.) A dose of realism is a good thing.
-Ron

Spec Script/First Draft

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions