I just finished reading the first assigned screenplay, A Boy's Life by Melissa Mathison, and I must admit the whole experience was far more surprising than initially expected. To begin with, I quickly realized that this script was actually the script for the wonderful 80's classic E.T. The Extra Terrestrial, not some lame drama of a boy who is abused by his father but overcomes in the end (which is what I dreaded upon first impression of the title of the screenplay). Secondly, I had a much more enjoyable and entertaining reading experience than anticipated. Never did I feel a sense of confusion or boredom as I read through the story of young Elliott and his adventures with the lovable other worldly creature, who's only wish is to return home. I felt compelled to keep reading, to find out what mischief our heroes would stumble upon next. Also, it has been a few years since I've seen the blockbuster film, so I was surprised and thoroughly entertained throughout.
Thanks to the wonderful descriptions written by Mrs. Mathison, the world in which Elliott and his friends and family live in appeared easily in my mind. Also, Mrs. Mathison wrote her screenplay in a way that the action never seemed to drag and the action moved at a brisk full pace. Picturing the flowers dying, the trail of M&M's (even though it was Reese's Pieces in the final film) or the glowing of E.T.'s chest was easy, thanks to the vivid descriptions and the wonderful dialogue written by Mrs. Mathison.
As for screenplays being read by non-professionals? If it is strictly for entertainment purposes, then I believe non-professionals should read screenplays even more so than a novel. Screenplays are short and sweet, but that is not to say that they are not full of rich detail and character development. Plus, if you are a reader who is easily bored (myself being one said reader), a screenplay moves so swiftly that you always want to turn the page and see where it takes you.
-Juan Sanchez
Discussion Questions:
1) There are many camera directions (PAN, LONG SHOT, etc.) in the script for A Boy's Life. Do you believe writers should apply more visual/camera decisions in their scripts or should those decisions be left solely for the director to decide?
2) I think it's just me, but I believe that KEYS was a somewhat underdeveloped character. Is there any way this character could be made more believable, or would adding more detail hinder his role in the film?
2 comments:
Discussion question #1)
I like it when the writers give hints to camera movement and shot setup. Initially, they are the ones who created the worlds as presented in the text, giving them the right to indicate their interpretation of how their medium can be translated into the medium of film. In addition, I do not think the minor suggestion can hurt because ultimately, the shot setup comes down to the decisions made by the cinematographer and the director. Writers should apply as much camera directions as needed for the script is theirs to start.
Nice discussion question, Juan!
At first I felt that KEYS was very underdeveloped and we knew nothing about him also. But he was underdeveloped because our point of view on his character was always from either E.T. or Elliott's point of view. We finally see his full character during the really hectic scene with the doctors in the house and he turns out to be a good guy which I think is why his character was underdeveloped until then, to make him look like a villain.
Post a Comment