Reader Question: What’s the deal with so many spelling and format mistakes in shooting scripts?

A question from Ken:

Hi Scott,

As an outsider to the industry, I have to say that I have been shocked by the frequent spelling mistakes and formatting issues in the “40 days” scripts. For example, in the script for “The Usual Suspects”, the last page has “leaks like VERBAL KINT” instead of “looks like…”, and on page 67, “Kujan grabs Verbal’s shirt…” is not properly separated from the dialogue. Was this simply a matter of sloppy transcription in that particular version of the script (it was the one linked in the main blog article, dated 05/25/94), a side effect of the means by which scripts become publicly available, or is it actually common for scripts to have those kinds of errors?

On an unrelated note — I went back to the script this morning because of a trivia topic at my local pub last night, naming the last word in a series of songs/books/movies. The correct answer for “The Usual Suspects” was “gone”, but the audio component of the final montage in which Kujan is replaying Kint’s story while scanning the bulletin board is not represented in any of the scripts I downloaded, while the visual component is clearly outlined. Where in the process would the decision have been made to add the audio and additional video flashbacks?

Ken, you raise an issue that’s actually rather a pisser for anybody who teaches screenwriting or even is in a position to advise people on the craft. We can bug writers about the importance of spelling, grammar, and format, then seemingly get undercut by poorly edited shooting scripts. If “The Usual Suspects” gets it wrong, why the hell can’t I?

The fact is that yes, many ‘professional’ scripts do have typos, misspellings, erratic grammar, bungled format issues, etc. And my first response is this: “Do as I say, not as they do.” They are professional screenwriters and are, therefore, cut some slack re spelling and grammar. Aspiring screenwriters are not. Which naturally leads to the question, “Why?” A couple of things.

* Many if not most of the mistakes in a shooting script are due to one simple issue: Time. When a movie is in production and going through daily rewrites and polishes, a writer is under enormous pressure to get pages done. Now! Spell checking, grammar, format don’t even make the list of concerns when you have a production crew of 200 people and a movie studio breathing down your neck.

* Character. Plot. Dialogue. Those are the primary concerns of the writer for a shooting script. And frankly that’s all the studio and production team care about as well. A screenplay is a blueprint to make a movie. The occasional misuse of “there” for “their” or dialogue mistakenly written in scene description is not going to derail production.

It’s a matter of simple priorities. During production, spelling, grammar, and format are not nearly as important as everything else.

That’s for a shooting script. For a selling script, different set of priorities. Your most fundamental challenge is to lure a script reader into the story universe of your creation — and keep them there. A screenplay replete with misspellings, poor grammar, and messed up formatting has precisely the opposite effect as each mistake stops the narrative flow. Believe me, this is not a small thing. I know a lot of professional script readers. Misspellings and poor grammar is a big pet peeve for them — and frankly for me as well. It also shows a lack of regard for your story if you don’t care enough about it to do a careful review of your script.

Now invariably per this subject, someone will bring up Quentin Tarantino whose scripts are strewn with misspelled words. I suspect that one layer of meaning behind his intentional spelling of the title “Inglourious Basterds” is to acknowledge his propensity for misspelling words.

But here’s the thing: Quentin Tarantino is Quentin Tarantino. Once you have a successful track record as a writer-director akin to his, then you can spell the meteorological phenomenon of “lightning” as “lightening” and an envelope as “stationary” or “stationairy” or “stashunairey” as opposed to “stationery” all you want. Until then, do what I say, not what they do: Always scrutinize your final draft per spelling, grammar, and format.

Re your second question about the ending of The Usual Suspects: I don’t know this for a fact, but my guess is that they added the audio, either in the edit process before testing the movie because someone had the bright idea to try it, or after testing the movie in order to make that narrative flashback work better for audiences. For the record, here’s the ending:

Makes me want to see the movie again!

UPDATE: In comments

James said:

Helps when John Ottman is your editor and composer.

On top of that an early collaboration between Ottman and Singer is a short called LION’S DEN where Ottman has credit as Sound Designer.

The “storytelling” of that scene was nailed in editing (post).

Ottman has an impressive set of film credits. Here’s his IMDB mini-biography:

John Ottman is a native of San Diego, California. His scores for The Usual Suspects (1995) and The Cable Guy (1996) gave him some recognition and, since then, he has created the scores for many major motion pictures, ranging from Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998) and Lake Placid (1999) to Apt Pupil (1998). He composed and conducted the score for Urban Legends: Final Cut (2000) in 2000; this film also marked his directing debut.

Other works include writing the theme for TV’s “Fantasy Island” (1998), Eight Legged Freaks (2002) and most recently X2 (2003).

His work with editing and sound is reminiscent of Walter Murch.

Comment Archive