Monday we looked at an excerpt from the Orci & Kurtzman screenplay for Star Trek, focusing on how the scene description reflected the fact that it is an action / sci-fi movie.
Yesterday we checked out a scene from the Lucas & Moore screenplay The Hangover, tracking how the writers used humor in how they approached scene description to amp up the comedy.
Today let’s consider the narrative voice of a drama: Inglourious Basterds, written and directed by Quentin Tarantino.
This excerpt comes at the end of the opening sequence where German Colonel Landa has calmly and coolly scared the crap out of French farmer Perrier, who as the pair have been having their ‘cordial’ conversation knows he’s standing directly above the Dreyfus family, Jews hidden beneath the farm house floor. Note: All misspellings are present in the actual script.
The Farmer, pipe in mouth, stares across the table at his German opponent. COL LANDA You are sheltering enemies of the state, are you not? PERRIER Yes. COL LANDA Your sheltering them underneath your floorboards aren't you? PERRIER Yes. COL LANDA Point out to me the area's where their hiding. The Farmer points out the area's on the floor with the Dreyfusis are underneath. COL LANDA Since I haven't heard any disturbance, I assume that while their listening, they don't speak english? PERRIER Yes. COL LANDA I'm going to switch back to french now, and I want you to follow my masquerade - is that clear? PERRIER Yes. Colonel Landa stands up from the table, and switching to FRENCH says SUBTITLED IN ENGLISH: COL LANDA Monsiuer LaPadite, I thank you for your milk, and your hospitality. I do believe our business here is done. The Nazi Officer opens the front door, and silently motions for his men to approach the house. COL LANDA Mademoiselle LaPadite, I thank you for your time, we shant be bothering your family any longer. Yet the LaPadite women watch the Nazi soldiers, machine guns at ready, approach the house. The Soldiers enter the doorway, Col Landa, silently points out area of the floor the jews are hiding under. COL LANDA So, Monsieur and Madam LaPadite I bid you adieu. He motions to the Soldiers with his index finger. They TEAR UP the wood floor with MACHINE GUN FIRE. The little farm house is filled with SMOKE, DUST, SPLINTERS, SCREAMS, BULLET CASINGS, and even alittle BLOOD. With a hand motion from the Colonel, the Soldiers cut off their gunfire. The Colonel keeps his finger in the air to indicate silence. UNDERNEATH THE FLOORBOARDS The entire Dreyfus family lay dead. Except for sixteen year old SHOSANNA, who miraculously escaped being struck by the nazi's bullets. With her dead family surrounding her, the young girl goes for freedom (represented by wire mesh vent). COL LANDA hears movement underneath the floor, looks down and see's a SHAPE moving forward between the planks in the floor. COL LANDA It's the girl. Nobody move! VENT is KICKED OPEN, the girl SPRINGS out. COL LANDA as he crosses the floor, he see's the young girl RUNNING towards the cover of the woods. He unlatches the window, and opens it. Shoshanna is perfectly FRAMED in the window sill. SHOSANNA RUNNING towards woods. Farm house and Col in the window in B.G. FILTHY BAREFEET SLAPPING against wet grass. CU SHOSANNA'S FACE same as a animal being chased by a predator FLIGHT - PANIC - FEAR SHOSANNA'S POV the safety of tree's, getting closer. COL LANDA Framed by the window, takes his LUGAR, and straight arm aims at the fleeing Jew, cocking back the hammer with his thumb. COL LANDA POV of the fleeing Shosanna. CU COL LANDA SLOW ZOOM into his eyes as he aims. PROFILE CU SHOSANNA mad dash for life. COL LANDA changes his mind. He yells to the rat fleeing the trap, heading for the safety of the wood pile, in FRENCH SUBTITLED IN ENGLISH: COL LANDA Au revoir, Shosanna! Till we meet again! SHOSANNA makes it to the woods, and is gone. The S.S. Colonel closes the window.
No hyperbolic bold letters or underlining ala Star Trek. Not only unnecessary, but inappropriate for the tone of this scene. In the preceding pages, Tarantino has slowly built the tension as Col Landa winds his way through seemingly casual conversation to zeroing in on the truth – that the Farmer is hiding a Jewish family. In other words, the tone of the scene (and therefore the approach to scene description) is dictated by Col Landa’s character: He goes about his business with an air of dignity and cool, which underscores the cruelty of the moment, rather like a simple business transaction than a decision about the fate of human lives. All of that is reflected in the restrained, almost documentary-style approach to the scene’s initial description:
The Farmer, pipe in mouth, stares across the table at his German opponent.
The Farmer points out the area’s on the floor with the Dreyfusis are underneath.
Colonel Landa stands up from the table, and switching to FRENCH says SUBTITLED IN ENGLISH:
The Nazi Officer opens the front door, and silently motions for his men to approach the house.
Four simple lines of scene description which lead the reader to an awful conclusion: The Dreyfus family is as good as dead. And for that moment, Tarantino ramps up the imagery:
He motions to the Soldiers with his index finger.
They TEAR UP the wood floor with MACHINE GUN FIRE.
The little farm house is filled with SMOKE, DUST, SPLINTERS, SCREAMS, BULLET CASINGS, and even alittle BLOOD.
And then the scene tops itself: Shosanna miraculously survives the fusillade and she tries to escape. Again Tarantino ratchets up the visuals, using a series of secondary slugs to pivot the action from one point of focus to another:
SHOSANNA
FILTHY BAREFEET
CU SHOSANNA’S FACE
SHOSANNA’S POV
COL LANDA
COL LANDA’S POV
CU COL LANDA
PROFILE CU SHOSANNA
COL LANDA
SHOSANNA
And catch the imagery and building drama of the moment in the scene description:
…is KICKED OPEN, the girl SPRINGS out.
…as he crosses the floor, he see’s the young girl RUNNING towards the cover of the woods. He unlatches the window, and opens it. Shoshanna is perfectly FRAMED in the window sill.
…RUNNING towards woods. Farm house and Col in the window in B.G.
…SLAPPING against wet grass.
…same as a animal being chased by a predator FLIGHT – PANIC – FEAR
…the safety of tree’s, getting closer.
…Framed by the window, takes his LUGAR, and straight arm aims at the fleeing Jew, cocking back the hammer with his thumb.
…of the fleeing Shosanna.
…SLOW ZOOM into his eyes as he aims.
…mad dash for life.
… changes his mind. He yells to the rat fleeing the trap, heading for the safety of the wood pile…
As I say, pure drama.
Now a few points about style. Observant eyes will notice the use of camera shots (i.e., CU, POV, PROFILE, SLOW ZOOM). And yet haven’t I stated on this very site that there has been a definite shift away from using directing lingo in contemporary screenplays?
Two things. First, remember the distinction between a selling script and a shooting script. This is a shooting script, so it is written with production specifically in mind. A selling script, which is what almost all of us here are concerned with writing is not focused on production, but rather ‘selling’ the story to a reader in the hopes that a script reader will give it good coverage, a producer will think they could set up the script, a studio exec will feel like the script could turn into a hit movie, an actor will fall in love with their character, a director will connect with the material so much they’re willing to commit 12 months of their life to making the film. For a selling script, we’re trying to pull readers into our story and keep them there, not remind them with every CU, SMASH CUT TO, POV, and ANGLE ON that we’re talking about a movie.
Second, this is Quentin Tarantino we’re talking about. He is a writer-director. Therefore he can put down whatever he wants in the script — including specific camera shots — because he’s going to direct it.
So again, do not use camera shots / directing lingo in your scene description.
The final thing is all the misspellings – and there are a ton in this script. I’ve read Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. I don’t remember those scripts being strewn with misspellings. So I’m wondering if that is something that Tarantino did intentionally in this script. Hell, he misspells both words in the movie’s title: Inglourious Basterds.
I don’t have time to go back through his other scripts, but if anybody does or has recently, what are your thoughts about the misspellings? Is that a reflection of Tarantino’s spelling acumen (or lack thereof) or is he playing around with that conceit in the script? And if so, why?
Come back tomorrow for a different take on scene description.
Funny re: the misspellings. I read–or started reading–a scanned copy of this script a few months ago, and was quickly convinced that it was a fake, at worst, and a transcription of some kind at best.
It does make me wonder…can he really be that bad at it?
AWESOME scene, Scott. Thanks for posting on it. Currently I'm working on outlining a shoot 'em up scene á la Shane Black OR Quintin Tarantino so ANY gunfight scenes are appreciated.
Gotcha on the not calling out shots in a spec script, BUT I learned something via the shot Quintin called out in this scene.
By use of my American Standard Dictionary I learned that "profile" refers to a side view of an object or structure especially the head.
Why call out a PROFILE CU? (CU = closeup shot — if you didn't know) Is there a PROFILE MED. SHOT? A PROFILE LONG SHOT? Just currious. I have a reference book that discusses shots, but the "PROFILE" shot isn't listed in that book.
Thanks,
- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA
I think it's fascinating, the number of critics who called the movie 'boring', 'verbose' and 'glacially paced'. It's as if they;re so used to Paul Greengrass sound-bite MTV chopped salad film making that an actual scene, with the rhythm and pace of actual drama, has become unrecognizable to them. Tarantino cranks the tension and cranks it tighter, and then even tighter … it's like watching a pitcher at the bottom of the ninth inning, his team ahead by one run, gradually load up the bases until the count is 3 and 2 and the slugger at the plate blows one past the right field wall.
An even better example of this incremental intensity is the underground cafe scene, which finally explodes in a shocking burst of Reservoir Dogs-like violence.
There's a lot to learn from writing like this.
Gotta agree with Steve here.
It's sad, really, that many critics have become so immersed with what he calls "chopped salad film making" that they can no longer appreciate or even recognize a traditionally paced scene.
I find it interesting, too that "Basterds" was a certified hit at the box office, despite its pacing and QT's love of dialogue. "Taken," which faced similar criticisms, was undeniably successful, as well.
What I think all this means is the trend away from dialogue in films is an industry-driven trend, not an audience-driven one.
Write good dialogue and people will pay to hear it. That's why the best films are almost always the most quotable ones.
Gotta agree with Steve here.
It's sad, really, that many critics have become so immersed with what he calls "chopped salad film making" that they can no longer appreciate or even recognize a traditionally paced scene.
I find it interesting, too that "Basterds" was a certified hit at the box office, despite its pacing and QT's love of dialogue. "Taken," which faced similar criticisms, was undeniably successful, as well.
What I think all this means is the trend away from dialogue in films is an industry-driven trend, not an audience-driven one.
Write good dialogue and people will pay to hear it. That's why the best films are almost always the most quotable ones.
In my opinion, no one builds dramatic tension in a scene, like Tarantino. Col. Landa is an awesome character, I am a huge fan of this movie.
–and don't forget the subtitles! When was the last big Hollywood hit spoken in so many different languages and clearly devised for literate people only (Most people don;t go to the movies to read)?
I just read this script last week – haven't actually seen the film, so it was all new to me. I LOVE that a film of this length is basically made up of 5 major, long scenes. Coincidentally enough I read the Casablanca script a couple weeks ago and marvelled at the opening scene playing for 35+ pages. Wonderful!
Tarantino said in an interview (it might have been Fresh Air) that whenever he feels like he's on top of his craft, he'll be humbled by PT Anderson. Reading the There Will Be Blood script, you'll notice the "unconventional" formatting, such as all lower case sentences in quiet scenes and all CAPITALIZED dialog in the big set pieces. I wonder whether QT hasn't picked up this "lazy" way of writing. It's obviously a choice, to have a script go out that is rough, full of spelling errors, etc. Does this choice mimic some of the rough and ready direction techniques these guys are using on screen? There's definitely a reason why these master film makers are putting out scripts that break these fundamental rules.
So I guess we can now expect a generation of writers who'll turn off their spell checkers because "Tarantino" does it…
The other option might be that these guys are writing on typewriters? They're definitely low-fi enough to do so.
the typos were incredibly annoying to me. i thought the first, second and last chapters of the film were terrific, but the middle two went absolutely nowhere. a good, not great film, in my opinion.