What's your take on how a point of view shot heading SHOULD be formatted in a spec. script?The simple answer is don't use a POV shot, at least not in a selling script. In a shooting script as the director preps to make the movie, then POV shots can be called for. But the rule of thumb with a selling script - and I feel pretty confident this is the current thinking - avoid using director's lingo. Let the director keep PAN OVER, TILT UP, RACK FOCUS, SMASH CUT, ZOOM IN, CLOSE ON, POV and all the rest. Those are the director's words. We have our words, a treasure trove of fantastic and colorful verbs, nouns, and adjectives, so we don't need their lingo.
As per one of my reference books, "... In a POV shot, the camera is looking through the eyes of a character, which allows the audience to see from that character's point of view. It is almast always part of a larger sequence of at least three shots: 1) the shot that shows the charter looking at something; 2) the POV shot itself which shows what the character is seeing; and 3) a shot which returns to the main action of the scene."
Thus I was hoping you could provide an example of going from a master scene to a point of view shot, then back scene action again.
That said, here is an example of a POV shot from The Silence of the Lambs:
INT. HOTEL ROOM - DAY
CLARICE'S POV - MOVING - as she first sees, sitting on the edge
of a bed - a FEMALE HOSTAGE. Black, late 20's, gagged, hands
behind her back. Then, SWIVELLING... she sees a startled MALE
SUSPECT - white, mid-20's - standing by a window with a rifle
in his hands. He is turning towards her...CLARICE
drops into a combat crouch, gun extended, and shouts.
CLARICE
Freeze! FBI!
In this scene, screenwriter Ted Tally (presumably) chooses to bury the POV shot within scene description. The way I learned it is to write the POV as a Secondary Slugline:
But there's no need to write it with director's lingo:INT. HOTEL ROOM - DAY
CLARICE'S P.O.V. -- MOVING
As she first sees, sitting on the edge of the bed - a FEMALE HOSTAGE.
INT. HOTEL ROOM - DAY
Clarice moving, spots a FIGURE on the edge of a bed --
A FEMALE HOSTAGE
Black, late 20's, gagged, hands behind her back.
Then SWIVELING, Clarice spots --
A MALE SUSPECT
By the window, startled, a rifle in his hands --
By using Secondary Slugs / Shots, you are in effect 'directing' the camera. And if what you're hoping to achieve is suggest a moving (hand held) shot, then you've already got a word that achieves that function -- you know, the word moving? It makes the POV shot unnecessary.
The only time I would ever think to use a POV shot is if I absolutely, positively needed to convey the importance of Character A seeing Object or Character B, perhaps suggesting that they alone saw something.
INT. HOTEL ROOM - DAY
Clarice moving, spots a FIGURE on the edge of a bed --
A FEMALE HOSTAGE
Black, late 20's, gagged, hands behind her back. The hostage peers over Clarice's shoulder --
FEMALE HOSTAGE'S P.O.V. -- THE WINDOW
A FIGURE looms into view, pointing a RIFLE at Clarice --
THE FEMALE HOSTAGE
bites at her gag and SCREAMS --
CLARICE
whirls around and BLASTS the gunman.
But even there, I'm still not convinced you benefit from including POV.
What do the rest of you think? Do you use POV shots? If so, how do you approach them? And what are the circumstances where you think a POV shot is necessary?
Posts
5 comments:
I don't use POV shots, and there are only a few circumstances I can think of where they would be appropriate:
a) the character is somehow privy to another character's POV, like in THE EYES OF LAURA MARS
b)their vision has been impacted/enhanced somehow, like in SILENCE OF THE LAMBS with Buffalo Bill's infrared glasses, or DEJA VU with Denzel Washington's time-travel goggles, and it's an integral part of the scene
c) you show a POV shot of a character who's identity you don't want to reveal just yet - a la HALLOWEEN.
I've been using secondary shot headings to call-out where I think a POV shot should be used for some time. I wrote this post currious to see how a pro like you would weigh in on the subject. Personally, I LOVE using POV shots in my stories for the screen. It's the movies way of acting like a novel, where you can skip arround from character to character and feel their emotions. I think really add something -- IF used properly.
In your fine example the POV is gleaned by the reader in "... Clarice moving, spots a FIGURE..."
Thus in the POV breakdown Clarice moving is the camera. The figure is the subject of the shot.
I guess old habits die hard. I like a POV shot call-out better. TO ME its just clearer. To date I haven't recieved a coverage where I was repramanded from using POV secondary slug-lines, BUT if the readers of spec. matterial perfer this embedded way of calling out a POV shot, I promise you I will adapt.
Thanks for the GREAT post response, Scott. I just printed your advice out. Will DEFIANTELY consider it.
- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA
I've long since excised all POV-type references from my writing, and even in your final example Scott where the victim sees something Clarice doesn't you could write that rather than resort to a POV reference.
But, and there's always a but, I have one scene where I've struggled how to phrase it, and if you have any ideas, please lob them this way.
There is a cameraman within a crowd who films an assassination. The footage will be used often later in the story - it is the only record - so I want the assassination to be seen from the in-camera POV in the first place. We start with the cameraman hefting the camera onto his shoulder, and then I've tried fairly dry descriptions such as "The following is from an in-camera POV" etc., but settled on the dreaded "we", as in "WE ZOOM IN AND PLUNGE INTO THE VIEWFINDER, the image rocking a little as he finds his balance" etc.. It seems to flow better, but is hardly standard practice.
Any thoughts?
I don't use POV shots either.
I think my job is to convey an image and a mood.
To POV it or TILT it, then I'm in director's area as already pointed out.
Personally I think I risk loosing dimensions of the story if I from the beginning limits how it's to be filmed.
@terraling: The case you cite is a special one where it is literally a camera shot, so therefore, I think your approach works.
Post a Comment