White on the page vs. page count?

J

JimS2

Member
I was told my script could use more white on the page for readers, because I wrote it so that a lot of the paragraphs don't go over 5 lines. I was advised that nowadays, the paragraphs are more spread out and that I should have a paragraph end after 3 lines tops, thus creating more white on the page, of course.

However, the script right now is 91 pages, and I wonder if I space everything out, could that make it too long, if I do that? Of course getting people to read a screenplay is tough, so I thought they would be more willing to read one of they see that it's only 91 pages, compared to one that is significantly more pages, but with more white on those pages.

So when wanting people to read your script, what is more important therefore? White on the page, or page count? Thanks for any advice on it! I really appreciate it!
 
I was told "4 lines" per character. Which can be an anti-style recommendation if your whole style purpose is to have more than four lines.

PS. I am not sure if this is "Seinfeld" related. Both Jerry and Larry David were huge Abbott and Costello fans. "Murphy Brown", which was being produced roughly over the same time frame as "Seinfeld" was at the other end, with typically 10+ lines per lead character. Both shows had scripts with a 55+ page count.

On the totally opposite end - that's the third end, if you're keeping score - was another of their contemporaries, "Married ... with Children", whose producers must have halved the number of characters per line and still came out with the high 30's to low 40's page count.
 
Don't worry about this garbage. This was advice dictated by sub literate morons who hate reading. Focus on being as clear and concise as possible with your words. Go through your writing and eliminate adverbs and qualifiers. Instead of "he ran briskly" write "he jogged". If you can condense two sentences into one, do it. Make every sentence as tight and lean as possible and the rest will sort itself out.
 
That's right, get a copy of The Elements of Style, one of my favorite books.

There is something to be said for visual appearance, and large blocks of text look daunting. But I'm talking 10-15 lines without a paragraph break.

I think there's a lot of pseudo-superstition in Hollywood, because it is so hard and so much by chance. Saying a paragraph should be no more than 3 lines (especially when your paragraphs already are no more than 5 lines) is more like a lucky rabbit's foot than science.
 
A tightly spaced, properly formatted, 90-page pile of crap is still a pile of crap and literally worthless.

A handwritten, misspelled, unformatted but riveting and entertaining story is worth its weight in gold.

If you can write a great story, do so. I can hire some kid for $30 to format it for you after the fact.

But if you don't have a great story in the first place, then all the formatting in the world is meaningless.
 
Oh okay, but even if I concentrate on telling a good story of course, should I still watch out for how many lines a paragraph should be, even with a good story, or no?
 
The most important thing is that the screenplay grabs the reader and compels them to keep reading it until the end.

Each paragraph should have as many words as necessary to make the reader see it in their mind. No more, no less.

Some paragraphs will be a single line. On occasion, maybe even a single word.

At the other extreme, I would submit that there could theoretically be an example of a brilliant screenplay consisting of nothing but 15-30 line paragraphs. But that would require a writer of almost supernaturally exceptional skill and talent in order for the story contained in the words to overcome the inevitable fatigue that the reader would be expected to feel just looking at the first page.

Personally, I shoot for a limit of 5 lines per paragraph (well, 6 max). If one happens to run over, I search for ways to trim it down to 5. If it works better split into two paragraphs, I'll do that. And if it still resists, and it looks like it still works while being longer, I leave it as is.

I think generally that multiple short paragraphs are easier to read and comprehend than a single long one. (And long and short are relative to the form; a paragraph that might be short in a novel might still be way too long in a screenplay.)

The last thing you want to do is bore the reader or make them feel like reading your screenplay is WORK.
 
JimS2 said:
Oh okay, but even if I concentrate on telling a good story of course, should I still watch out for how many lines a paragraph should be, even with a good story, or no?
Click to expand...

Ryan, stop running in circles. It’s been said, clearly, that you need to start with a good story. Full stop. All the formatting issues come in later. Just write the story, start to finish, and stop asking for more opinions on paragraph length.
 
JimS2 said:
Oh okay, but even if I concentrate on telling a good story of course, should I still watch out for how many lines a paragraph should be, even with a good story, or no?
Click to expand...

Only in the sense that there's probably a pithier way to write a 7, 8, 9+ line paragraph.

And, if I may, I've noticed, that your style, has a lot of extraneous commas, which are not only grammatically incorrect, but result in a jerky, halting read, which is the opposite of the experience, you want the reader to have. No offense intended.
 
When I was teacher in college, Microsoft Word's analysis page was the bane of my life. If you need 10,000 words, some people would write rubbish, until it got to 10,001 when they could stop. The good writers might have written 9500 decent ones. These numbers are guides on which to base something. Who cares how many lines a paragraph has, because it is as long as necessary for it's purpose. A love story would have substantially different stats to a story that is full of sci-fi technobabble. I like novels - Dan Brown, Tom Clancy and Clive Cussler. I struggle with Michael Crighton, because his stats are different. He uses padding, long winded (in my view) explanations and while his dialogue is far more detailed, audiobooks of his stuff tend to be abridged. Making these things into movies changes what was written drastically.


If the story is good, and you are eager for what comes next - surely you cannot even think of editing the length of the paragraphs, or for me, even checking them. Remember, you are constantly writing rules for your rule book, but other people do NOT do this, so you cannot compare yours to theirs. When I write, I use, I guess, some kind of mental rule to decide when I start a new paragraph. I say "I guess" because I don't think about it, it just happens. You are breaking everything down into ingredients, and assuming if they are all correct, the final thing will be right. That doesn't work. Your spurt of new topics here asks questions that you should have got sorted ten years ago. I t think you know the answers to your questions, but before you do anything you MUST get positive responses from 47 people, or it's not validated? That's how it seems.

If you have a good idea - go with your gut, using the ten years + worth off experience you have collected. If you have not developed this yet, I fear it may now be too late. I did not realise you were in your thirties, I assumed early 20's, fresh out of college/university. If you haven't got it by your 30s, after such a long development period, sadly, I think it's time to ask yourself if the journey is sensible. After all - you cannot remain a beginner for ever. I was frankly shocked to read the old Ironpony posts to see no progression whatsoever. Your posts from a long time ago ask exactly the same questions. You are stagnating, not developing. I've tried so hard in the past to help you, thinking you were new to this, but you aren't.

Move on and up, or sideways and out. This is the only sensible advice I'm afraid. Years ago now I asked you if you had done a skills audit? A really honest, personal recording and analysis of your strengths and weaknesses and you never did it that I'm aware - we have no idea what level we should talk to you on - beginner, enthusiast or professional because it's just unclear. You use professional vocabulary but seem to have a beginners understanding. It's very confusing. People on the internet will help but you must be honest with us. You seem to be the classic eternal student - asking loads of questions, but unable to make the leap to actually doing things.
 
One of my favorite MWC episodes, the "Computer Show".

http://www.albundy.net/marriedaniac/ate/script/0319t.html

Having run it through the word counter, 3,823 words; 20,934 characters; reading level 9th-10th grade; reading time 13.54; speaking time 21.14

https://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheContest.htm

Seinfeld, "The Contest" - 4,671 words, 26,178 characters, reading level 9th-10th grade; reading time 16.59; speaking time 25.57.

https://wordcounter.net/

I couldn't find even a transcribed "Murphy Brown".

PS. The word count is total, dialog is only a portion of it and the direction is often added on by the transcribers and not the same as in the original script. (MWC appears to be the exact copy of the actual shooting script though).
 
Last edited:
Oh okay thanks. That was insightful.

Another question I have about screenwriting is combining scenes, for reasons such as less locations, etc... On the books I read on screenwriting they say to combine scenes, and I can see the reasoning. but I wonder if readers notice when it's done, and notice in a bad way.

For example, in one scene, the two main characters find out a new development in the plot. They then get in the car and drive to the next location. The scene ends with them driving away. The next scene is them arriving at the next location and the two characters then start talking about the new plot turn that happened in the previous scene. But would the reader think to themselves, why are they only talking about this now, rather than on the way here, in the car, which would have been a 20 minute drive at least?

Well the answer is, to cut out the driving scene, and combine the conversation with the next scene, when they arrive at the next location. But do readers notice when scenes are combined like that, or not really, most of the time?
 
Your question got a little confusing for me at the end.

I do think to myself sometimes "wouldn't they have discussed this earlier? What were they talking about this whole time?" Or if we cut in or pan over to someone in the middle of a conversation, sometimes I think, "this is an odd place to be at in the middle of this conversation. Wouldn't they have covered this point in the beginning of their conversation? Now we're coming in in the middle. And it seems like they're talking in a way to help frame the conversation for me, the viewer."

But even when I have such reactions, it rarely takes me out of the story.

As a general rule (concerning removing scenes), I think it pays to ask yourself if your movie could work without the scene in question. If the answer is yes, then maybe you don't need it.

Combining scenes, dialogue, characters can be great for narrative economy. But I think you need to have your head in the pace and feeling of what's happening and make a decision based on the viewer's experience. If you combine a lot of stuff, it can get cluttered right? Maybe you want room for things to breathe, for the audience to think about what they just witnessed, or to build some suspense.

Just some thoughts. There's no definitive answer to your question.
 
Oh okay thanks. It's mainly combining scenes, where I think if the reader will question why didn't they have this conversation earlier type thing, but as long as they are not taken out by it, than I can do it, and see what the readers think, or if they pick on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top