Character in disguise (how to refer to?)

Randall_Oelerich

Randall_Oelerich

Veteran
If I have a screenplay with characters A (e.g. Chelsey) and B (e.g. Zoe), but during the story character B disguises herself as character C (e.g. a masked Captor / Kidnapper), how should C be referred to in the screenplay action and also in dialog?:huh:
 
One common method to delineate multiple roles would be to write both names separated by a /.

CHARACTER NAME/ALIAS
Dialog dialog dialog...

or

PETER/SPIDERMAN
You'll never get away with this Doc Ock! blah blah blah

-Jeff

EDIT: However, if you're trying to initially conceal the true identity of the disguised character, you would not use the character's "real" name until the identity was revealed.

MASKED TERROR
I can't believe you caught me! My plan was perfect!

SHERIFF BARNES
Let's see who you really are...
​

Sheriff Barnes pulls away the mask, revealing...

SHERIFF BARNES (Cont.)
It's Dave McGlinsky!

MCGLINSKY/MASKED TERROR
I couldn't help myself. The mask just makes me feel evil!
​
 
Last edited:
Thank you Jeff. Related to this-- for a screenplay, obviously different from a novel, is it even desired or necessary to keep the 'mystery' of a disguised character a mystery from the reader, or in a screenplay can the 'MASKED TERROR' be initially referrred to as 'MASKED TERROR / Sean in disguise'? On the one hand, a screenwriter wants to give a good read to the reader contemplating buying the script; on the hand a screenplay is a blueprint for a movie, not a novel, and is it perhaps better or more kosher to just make it know who the Masked Terror is from the beginning? I know in Dialog somehow the Masked Terror needs to be made clear which actor is playing the part, for scheduling or actors, etc. I guess The Mask with Jim Carrey is a good example, I will have to think of others, (Zorro? Superman?), look at such screenplays.
 
randall I would try to keep it a secret if even for a short time. Twists and turns to keep the audience on its toes are always good.

But only keep the masked man secret if it is not obvious that they want to kidnap the person prior to the event
 
I would have to agree with odetotud. If the story has suspense, it isn't going to be suspenseful to the reader if you give up all the twists right off. Leave them in the dark, as if they were watching the movie, not just a script.
 
If it is a spec script, you may want to keep it hidden from the reader(s) for awhile to build suspense and/or set up a hook. Common knowledge...If someone actually LOL's while reading a scene, there is more than a good chance that (when produced and shown in a theatre) the same scene will bring down the house. The same could happen with a twist. If the reader has a Sixth-Sense-Eque "Oh shi*" moment, then the potential to take the eventual audience by surprise grows very high.

Otherwise, if you want to produce/shoot it yourself, just say poo poo it and spell it out up front. You, know...use the script as the technical guide it is at that point.
 
This is one of the first rules of screen writing... the reader should ONLY know what the audience viewing the film would know. You never really want to include any information in the text that will not show up on the screen. Plot twists (and disguised characters) are definitely part of this, but it also includes things like what a character is thinking (unless you do a v.o. or something so the audience knows, too) or background info that would not be obvious on the screen.

Here's an example:

OFFICER MURPHY steps slowly through the gaping hallways of the drug lord's mansion, gun held up in front of him. His grip on the pistol's handle is tight, white knuckled, and sweaty. Murphy's sister was killed by a crack dealer four years ago, so for him this is not just a job, it's sweet revenge.

What of this would the audience know?

First sentence: Obviously they can see him walking, and we'll assume at this point in the story the audience has been told the mansion belongs to a drug lord. So this one's ok.

Second sentence: This one is a visual cue to the character's emotions. His "sweaty, white knuckled grip" shows he's feeling tense. Also ok.

Third sentence: Unless this was covered earlier and you're just reminding the reader of an earlier scene (which is also unnecessary), there's no way for the audience to see a cop walking through a house and know anything about the cop's sister or the character's history with drug dealers. Avoid stuff like this like a plague, it screams amateur.

Bottom line, the script is a blueprint for the story; the reader should only know what the audience would know from watching it, no more, and no less!

-Jeff
 
I'm trying to remember exactly what David Trottier said at a screenwriters meeting I attended. If I recall correctly, he does NOT agree with hiding a characters identity in the script. And since he wrote the bible I'll have to go with his beliefs.
 
Having read Trottier and Field and the rest of the standards (more of a fan of Trottier than Field, btw), I'm not sure you're right.

It's been a few years since I've read Trottier's bible, I'll admit, but just like you remember him saying not to hide a character's identity, I remember him saying don't give any information that the audience wouldn't have. I know I've seen that from other "authorities" as well.

Personally, it just makes sense to me. Reading a script, from a story perspective, should be as identical to watching the final film as you can get it. I've read hundreds of scripts for movies I saw before I read them, and it's pretty consistent. The images may be in your head instead of on the screen, but the story flows almost exactly the same way. If you have a killer, and the killer's identity isn't revealed until the end of the film, it won't be revealed until the end of the script, either.

Stories are journeys, and to me, if you want someone to enjoy the journey you're writing, you make them walk the whole path without giving anything away until the right moment - the same moment that the final film's audience would be let in.

Back to my previous post for a moment, one of the places I see new writers adding too much info is with minor characters. They have a character that only appears in one or two scenes, so they try to write the character's backstory into the script to explain to the reader motivations that the audience wouldn't know and attempt to flesh out the character. Unless you can incorporate it in a way that will appear on the screen, that back story belongs in the character description, not the script.

For example, say you have a character who appears for one scene. That character is a heavy tweaker type and you have all these ideas for what his life has been like for the past few years, but that life isn't important to the protagonist's journey and is not in the script. Rather than say he's been doing drugs for years and prostitutes himself and blah blah, just say things the audience can see, like he talks fast and is constantly looking over his shoulder, paranoid, etc. They'll get the point without getting bogged down in details that have nothing to do with the main story you're telling.
 
In a specific screenplay I have written, I have a character (Abigail) who is the antagonist. She murders someone named Mary and assumes Mary's identity. No disguise of course except for the identity theft. At least in dialog I would have to refer to 'Mary' when it is actually the actress playing Mary, and 'Abigail' whether Abigail plays her story character or the assumed identity character-- otherwise that would create confusion on Call sheets for what actor shows up when on set. But I think this would be okay, right, because in the action I can of course make it clear when Abigail is pretending to be Mary. The reader/audience knows nothing more than is presented in the script. Basically in my case Mary is a nanny hired by a family, murdered en route by Abigail, so Abigail shows up pretending to be Mary; the family assumes Abigail is Mary, no disguise needed, since the family has not met Mary in person yet.
 
I would do one of two things, either put the murder/ identity theft towards the end of the movie as a flashback, or refer to her as Abigail/Mary when she is assuming the role. This would keep the suspense, and clarify who she is.
 
I try to keep to the rule of using one and only one name for a character.

But good suggestion to use name/name convention as prevents the reader from getting confused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top