So-Called Screenwriting ‘Rules’: Part 9

There are conventions. There are expectations. There are patterns. But the simple fact is… THERE ARE NO SCREENWRITING RULES!

Awhile back, I posted this about an occurrence that happens with irritating regularity in the online screenwriting universe: The contentious specter of so-called screenwriting ‘rules’. More below.

What happens is pretty much this:

• Somebody posts something about how there is a rule against doing this or that.
• That circulates as people bat around the idea.
• Professional writers catch wind of it, then lambaste the shit out of the thesis in question.
• The ‘debate’ fades away…
• Until the next time it arises.
• Again…
• And again…

So it occurred to me, why not just deal with it once and for all! Get every single supposed screenwriting rule out on the table, then go through them, one by one, to see if we can take all the heat that typically gets generated when one of these online snits breaks out and collectively create some actual light.

In other words, let’s make this a real learning experience and hopefully in the process, put some of this nonsense to bed for good.

I asked for your help in aggregating these ‘rules’ and as always, the GITS community responded. I’ve gone through them all, thought about it, and here is my plan: Do a 3-week series on “So-Called Screenwriting ‘Rules’”.

Week 1: As long as we’re going to take the time to go through this stuff, I figured we might as well put it all into some perspective: historical, theoretical, and practical. I’m going to start that process today:

Part 1: The Organic Nature of the Screenplay
Part 2: The Emergence of the Selling Script
Part 3: The Evolution of Screenplay Format and Style
Part 4: There are no screenwriting ‘rules’
Part 5: There are expectations

Week 2: I’ve sorted out five real nuts-and-bolts items which I will analyze and discuss one per day in our second week:

Part 6: We See / We Hear
Part 7: Unfilmables
Part 8: Action Paragraphs — 3 Lines Max
Part 9: CUT TO (Transitions)
Part 10: Parentheticals

Week 3: Readers made several suggestions that are about larger narrative choices, so let’s take those on as well:

Part 11: Flashbacks
Part 12: Voiceover Narration
Part 13: Sympathetic Protagonist
Part 14: Protagonist and Shifting Goals
Part 15: Certain Events By Certain Pages

Before we jump into this, a caveat: Everything I post in this series is my opinion. I think it’s safe to say it’s a pretty well-informed take seeing as I’ve been writing scripts since 1986 and teaching since 2002. But again, I’m simply expressing my perspective. It’s incumbent upon you to sort out your own approach to screenwriting style and the single best thing you can do in that regard is read scripts, especially screenplays written within the last 5 years as they represent the latest trends.

With that, forward into the breach!

Part 9: CUT TO (Transitions)

Here again we run smack dab into the history of screenplay format, where the formalized approach of the studio system era in which scripts were treated primarily as a blueprint to make a movie, versus a more literary style present in selling scripts. As discussed, the latter — generally speaking — has moved away from camera shots, directing lingo, and ‘scripty’ language.

One vestige of the older era is CUT TO and its cousin DISSOLVE TO. In script language, these are known as transitions. Screenwriter William Goldman is famous for using them as evidenced by this excerpt from his script for the movie Misery:

LODGE - DAY

PAUL--exiting his cabin. He stops, makes a snowball,
throws it, hitting a sign.

PAUL
Still got it.

He throws a suitcase into the trunk of his '65
MUSTANG and, holding his leather case, he hops into
the car and drives away.

CUT TO:

A SIGN that reads "Silver Creek Lodge." Behind the
sign is the hotel itself--old, desolate. Now the '65
Mustang comes out of the garage, guns ahead toward
the sign. As "Shotgun" by Jr. Walker and the Allstars
starts, he heads off into the mountains.

CUT TO:

THE SKY. Gun-metal grey. The clouds seem pregnant
with snow. CUT TO:

PAUL, driving the Mustang, the battered briefcase on
the seat beside him.

CUT TO:

THE ROAD AHEAD. Little dainty flakes of snow are
suddenly visible.

CUT TO:

THE CAR, going into a curve and CUT TO:

PAUL, driving, and as he comes out of the curve, a
stunned look hits his face as we CUT TO:

THE ROAD AHEAD--and here it comes--a mountain storm;
it's as if the top has been pulled off the sky and
with no warning whatsoever, we're into a blizzard and CUT TO: THE MUSTANG, slowing, driving deeper into the
mountains.

Whereas most writers would think of a transition being between scenes, Goldman has always extended the meaning to include between camera shots.

Even as many scripts from decades ago used CUT TO or DISSOLVE TO as an indication that one scene was ending followed by a new scene, there are plenty of examples in which the writers did not use these type of transitions. Here is an excerpt from the 1962 draft of The Birds, written by Evan Hunter:

FADE IN:FULL SHOT - GRANT STREET - SAN FRANCISCO - DAYIt is mid-afternoon, and there is a tempo and pace to the
people walking, the doorman HOOTING for taxicabs, the
policemen directing traffic.PAN SHOT - PEDESTRIANSwaiting at street corner for light to change.CLOSE SHOT - MANat the end of line of pedestrians. He is looking up at the
sky.TWO SHOT - MAN AND WOMAN NEXT TO HIMas she follows his gaze upward.LONG SHOT - THE SKYwith hundreds of gulls in it, wheeling.MED. SHOT - THE STREET CORNERas the light changes and people begin to cross. In the crowd
walking the other way, a man turns to look up at the wheeling
gulls in the sky overhead. The CAMERA LOCATES:MED. SHOT - MELANIE DANIELSin the crowd of pedestrians, approaching Davidson's Pet Shop.
She is a young woman in her mid-twenties, sleekly groomed,
exquisitely dressed, though hatless. She walks with the quick
sureness of the city dweller, a purposefulness in her stride,
a mischievous grin on her face. She continues toward the
front door of a pet shop and enters.INT. BIRD SHOP - MED. SHOTMelanie opens the door and comes through, still looking back
toward the street and skywards. The proprietor, a MRS.
MacGRUDER, comes toward her. MELANIE
Hello, Mrs. MacGruder, have you ever
seen so many gulls? MRS. MACGRUDER
Hello, Miss Daniels. MELANIE
What do you suppose it is?MED. SHOTMrs. MacGruder takes a look out at the sky. A puppy is
BARKING, o.s. MRS. MACGRUDER
(shaking her head)
There must be a storm at sea. That
can drive them inland, you know.

In this approach, it is the slug line, either primary or secondary, which signifies the transition, either a new camera shot or scene.

And this is the path that has led us to the 'rule' that we should avoid using CUT TO, DISSOLVE TO and similar transitions. When contemporary writers wish to indicate a new scene, simply write a primary slug line (scene heading).

For this post, I scanned nearly two dozen movie scripts from the last 5 years, and I could not find one example in which the writers used CUT TO.

Does that mean this is an actual rule: Do not use CUT TO!

I refuse to yield on this point: There are no screenwriting rules.

Yes, CUT TO feels anachronistic. It comes across as 'scripty'. Worse, it uses up 2 line spaces which for most writers is a travesty because we're always fighting for pages. If your script has 75 scenes and you used CUT TO between each scene, that's 150 lines which comes out to about 3 pages. Raise your hand if you'd prefer to have those 3 pages to write something important and not add to the script's overall page count.

Finally, readers have been trained to recognize a transition through the use of primary slug lines.

And yet, there may be times when you want or need to use a CUT TO, for example to make perfectly clear to a reader you have made a time jump or shifted the location from one planet to another. Maybe such a transition is so important, you may feel like you really should insert a CUT TO in order to convey that shift in no uncertain terms to a reader.

But if you look at the mother of all transition scripts written in the last few years Cloud Atlas, which cuts back and forth dozens and dozens of times between six parallel storylines spanning hundreds of years, the writers did not use CUT TO, rather indicating scene changes with bold slug lines:

EXT. VILLAGE - NIGHT - YEAR 2346EXT. CHATHAM ISLANDS BEACH - DAY - YEAR 1846INT. VOLKSWAGEN BEETLE - DAY - YEAR 1974INT. INTERROGATION ROOM - DAY - YEAR 2144

Once again, think: Tools, not rules. Instead of don't use CUT TO, look at this way: We have the tool of primary slug lines [scene headings] to signify a scene transition. We can even bold them. Or as I've seen in some scripts, bold and underline them.

Whatever works for you. Whatever works for your story.

Just be aware that most script readers nowadays have been trained to think of a script that uses CUT TOs as transitions as being amateurish.

That and saving pages are good reasons not to use CUT TO.

But not because it's a rule... because it isn't.

If you have any questions or observations, please head to comments. Again, as long as we are taking such a comprehensive approach to this content, let’s do it to the max. I want to hear your thoughts and am glad to make this an extended conversation with a goal of putting this subject into a more helpful perspective.

Next: Parentheticals.