If it's better to show something visually rather than say it...

[c.g._eads]

If it's better to show something visually rather than say it, then how come I'm always more interested to get to the dialogue when reading a script?

I'll wade through blocks of narration only to find myself getting more and more excited to get to that dialogue. Doesn't this go against conventional thinking? We're always supposed to choose a visual course of storytelling over a dialogue-driven one.

 

[J.R. Hudson]

I think reading versus seeing are two different animals

Reading a screenplay is much different than seeing the final result. Reading the dialogue isn't

.02

 

[c.g._eads]

Yeah, that's what sucks. In order for your screenplay to get to the screen, you have to go through all the people reading it. It's an inherent problem in screenplays that I come up against a lot. I will avoid writing a scene that I know will be great onscreen, because it reads clunky or takes too much effort for the reader to visualize. Readers want a nice clean script they can whiz through. They don't want to be challenged.

 

[Lawsuit_Boy]

It all depends on the writer's ability to spell out his vision in as concise a manner as possible. Solid description and solid dialogue are the two most important components of a screenplay. Though, a writer would probably want to keep them paced/divided well. It's best to nix a paragraph of description if the writer can express the vision more appropriately with less words. It's all about searching for the right "feeling" for me. You've also got to remember that shots/scenes should be set up very well in the script so they transcribe to the screen well.

But yeah, dialogue is so important, but great description is what really helps build a strong screenplay in my opinion.

 

[c.g._eads]

This is all true, but you have to be realistic. We don't live in an ideal world. The truth of the matter is that lowly interns with no idea how a story is structured are the initial gatekeepers to the guys with the green light ability. After having been worked to death all week, they're given a dozen screenplays to read over the weekend, and they just want to get through them. To say that there are things that work equally well on the page as onscreen - even if you write them perfectly - isn't realistic. If you're on that tenth script at 10pm Sunday night, and you have to make a decision between a script that's heavy with description or heavy with dialogue, which one are you going to choose? It's an extreme example but it proves a point. There *is* a difference. And sometimes you have to take that difference into consideration when writing a script - even if it means that the scene/sequence in question won't be as good onscreen.

Of course (and I've heard that writers do this) the ideal situation is you put the "easy to read" version in the script, then change it when it comes time to shoot. But if you're only involved in the writing, you might not have a chance to do that.