THE VISITOR

[locustsofdeath!]

...but that was the advise I was given by someone who has had a lot of his work published.

I wasn't chastising you on the way you write, I was just commenting on how I do it. I don't worry how others write...and remember, Tharg took a liking to Mr. Moore, so there's no wrong way to format a script as long as the story's good!

[Pauul]

I think it's reasonable to say that there's such a thing as too much description and too little.

But I do agree with the point about the artist needing room to have their own input and even when I do put a ton of description in, I'm always open to change.

[locustsofdeath!]

But I do agree with the point about the artist needing room to have their own input and even when I do put a ton of description in, I'm always open to change.

Quite frankly - and I don't mean to offend - but I find discussions like this incredibly stupid.

Everything boils down to how good the story you're telling is. A writer won't inspire an artist by adding or subtracting description until it's just right - like he's making a porridge. A writer needs to spark the artist's imagination. Start thinking or worrying about rules and your writing becomes very clinical.

Who are any of us (amateurs, all) to tell anyone else how to write a script? As readers we can critique his story, sure, but for all we know he could be writing in the Perfect Script Format.

[Emperor]

I am no expert, mind. But I write fairly detailed descriptions - but the details are mainly to influence the strip's atmosphere and also inspire the artist to contribute to that atmosphere. The only time I write is when I have a very strong vision, and - right or wrong - I put that vision down on the paper in whatever detail I feel is needed. If that's a single sentence, that works. But if it's four paragraphs, then I'll go that route too!

Fair enough. Clearly there'd no right or wrong, different writers have their own style, methods, etc. (Alan Moore writes essays for panels for example!) I understand that for Future Shocks (not that the above strip is meant to be one of those) concise strips are more likely to be accepted.

Do you have a source for that?

Anyway as far as I'm concerned people should write whatever way best gets the story over - the dangers lie at the ends of the spectrum, If you are too skimpy you can leave the artist with little to work with and parts crucial to the story might not get done right - John Wagner can do tight scripts because he is an excellent writer and both he and the artist usually knows the character well, most people are never going to be at his level or in his position. On the other hand if you go mad and try and nail down all the details of a scene there is the chance an artist will skim through it and miss the vital details on which the story turns - Alan Moore does this because he is a) one of the best in the game and b) there is often a lot of layers and meaning in his work that needs to be exactly right c) he can do what he wants, yet Ian Gibson describes merrily going through his scripts for Halo Jones crossing stuff out he didn't need (although he didn't get the Watchmen gig - David Gibbons did and one of his skills is getting onto the page every mad detail there is in a script, however, Watchmen itself is a unique piece of work as the level of control both Alan and Dave had over the page is something that'd be very difficult to replicate, and is probably unnecessary a lot of the times).

So write for the story and, if you know who they are, write for the artist, as some of them thrive when you cut the detail back, where others flounder. The key to remember is that it isn't an artist's job to just transcribe the pictures in you head onto the page,* comics are a collaborative process and if you give artists space to play they'll bring something new and exciting to the story.

Personally, I try and give artists a feel for the story at the start (I think one script I have begins with about 4 or 5 pages describing the inspiration, the characters, the setting or "mad ramble" depending if it worked or not ) as that helps them get a feel for everything and they can then apply that to the page - if they have got under the skin of a character they'll know how they walk and stand (if needed I will, for example, describe someone's fighting style) so you don't need to go into detail on every aspect of what they are doing. You can then write the script describing what is happening and you don't always need to nail down things like camera angles, etc., etc. unless it is important for the story (and 95% of the time it isn't). Also I like to specifically flag up if anything in one panel is important for a later one, and then refer back to that first panel when I reach that point, that way the all important item or detail doesn't just suddenly appear.

So you aren't Alan Moore or John Wagner, so write how it suits you, the story and the artist but be open to feedback too - if someone liked something you do it might be an idea to keep doing that but if you are getting a lot of questions asking for clarification on certain points then you might need to write a bit more. Then again all artists are different, so what works for one might not work for another and if you don't know who the artist will be you might need to err on the side of caution and add a little more description.

* In the future there will be a machine that will do this (they are getting closer to producing images from brain activity each year) and what that will finally do is prove that we really do need the artists

[TordelBack]

Building on Emperor's post, I don't know if folk have looked at Moore's partially-published scripts for From Hell (if not, do) - they are as insanely, microscopically detailed as advertised.

However, Eddie Campbell reports that he greatly enjoyed reading them, and then largely ignored them and produced the panel or page which he felt got their content across in drawn form.  He was, after all, the artist. I suspect this sort of dialogue is at the heart of all good collaborative comics, but it probably requires the bull-headed confidence and vast experience of someone like Eddie to wade into a Moore-style script with a flamethrower and emerge with something greater than the sum of its parts. 

I'd imagine that starting-out scripters would not be afforded the same degree of courtesy, particularly if they lacked the self-depreciating wit and erudition of Alan Moore to offset the time required to get through a the script for a single page...

[locustsofdeath!]

Emperor is spot on, and said much more eloquently what I was getting on at, and Tordel followed up nicely. Again, I'm no pro...but I have been published quite often in the small press (not so often as dear Emps, however).

Anyway, here are a few panel description from my latest venture, El Bigote. You can compare what I wrote to the panels that resulted here (be aware these are in order of the preview, not in order of the script's proper sequence): http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php/topic,34633.msg634387.html#msg634387.


[1]   Mexico: the night sky is layered with black clouds; eerie corpse-faces stares from their swirling bowels. A full moon shines down on a Mexican village; the crumbling adobe buildings appear almost like tombstones in a graveyard. This is a squalid place, a haven for outlaws and thieves, guttersnipes and gunslingers – but this night it is silent and still. The streets are empty, the windows dark.

Emerging from the night, seen only in silhouette, a rider travels towards the village on an undead ostrich (yes, that's right – an undead ostrich). This is El Bigote, a dead man returned from the grave; he is dressed in bandito gunfighter attire; a gigantic mustache akin to a porcupine bristles on his upper lip; the mustache-quills are deadly weapons, razor-sharp projectiles.

1 Caption:
IN HAUNTED MEXICO, EL DIA DE LOS MUERTOS NEVER ENDS!

2 Title/Credits:
EL BIGOTE: A TEQUILA-DRENCHED RECKONING


[2]   Close on Cráneo's palm, in which he holds several wooden bullets with crosses carved onto their surfaces.

1 Cráneo:
BALAS DE EXORCISMO...


[3]   Push out a little as Cráneo loads the wooden bullets into his revolver.

1 Cráneo:
THE ONLY SUREFIRE WAY TO KILL A CORPSE.


[4]   Push out a little to focus on Cráneo as he flips the loaded chamber into place.

1 Cráneo:
DON'T SHOOT UNTIL YOU SEE THE YELLOWS OF HIS EYES.


[5]   With blinding speed, Cráneo draws his pistol and fires, blowing a huge hole clean through the bandito's midsection; the bandito's guts splatter onto the table – and the Tequila Worm goes flying. This happens so fast that the Bandito is frozen with a quizzical look on his face as if he's not quite sure if he's (un)dead or not. He still holds the neck of the tequila bottle in his hand; the lower half of the bottle, however, is broken by the gunshot. The alcohol drips onto the blood-soaked table. Any of the saloon's patrons visible in the panel turn to stare at the carnage.

1 Cráneo:
OYE CHINGADOR DE CADÁVER!

2 Old West Gunshot FX:
BLANG


[6]   Close on El Bigote. His eyes are narrowed – vengeance blazes within them.

1 El Bigote:
I F'ONE RECKONS S'HIGH TIME FOR A RECKONIN'.



I go back and forth, detailed and sparse. The first few panel descriptions always tend to be more detailed because they set up: characters, world, atmosphere. After that, I can be more concise because everything is established and only important details (or specific reactions by the characters to specific events).

[Mardroid]

...but that was the advise I was given by someone who has had a lot of his work published.

I wasn't chastising you on the way you write, I was just commenting on how I do it. I don't worry how others write...and remember, Tharg took a liking to Mr. Moore, so there's no wrong way to format a script as long as the story's good!

It's okay, I didn't take it that way.

[Emperor]

Building on Emperor's post, I don't know if folk have looked at Moore's partially-published scripts for From Hell (if not, do) - they are as insanely, microscopically detailed as advertised.

However, Eddie Campbell reports that he greatly enjoyed reading them, and then largely ignored them and produced the panel or page which he felt got their content across in drawn form.  He was, after all, the artist. I suspect this sort of dialogue is at the heart of all good collaborative comics, but it probably requires the bull-headed confidence and vast experience of someone like Eddie to wade into a Moore-style script with a flamethrower and emerge with something greater than the sum of its parts. 

I'd imagine that starting-out scripters would not be afforded the same degree of courtesy, particularly if they lacked the self-depreciating wit and erudition of Alan Moore to offset the time required to get through a the script for a single page...

And it helps that a) Moore is one of the best in the business, so has his pick of artists* and b) he seems not to mind that much if artists ignore the mass of script he has dumped on them.

Anyway some quotes from Thrill-Power Overload:

John Higgins TPO page 76:

John Higgins drew more than half a dozen of Moore's Future Shocks and Time Twisters. 'I learnt a lot from his scripts. He was such a consumate storyteller, he gave you the format for telling quite a sophisticated story, even if I didn't necessarily understand it as clearly as he did in those days. I certainly learned how to avoid putting all the bloody detail in that he'd written! I discovered so much on those stories, because Alan made such demands on artsts.'

Ian Gibson on Halo Jones (TPO page 102):

Gibson says he used Moore's intensely detailed and demanding scripts as a jumping off point for drawing each episode. 'I had already got into the habit of deconstructing a script and putting it back together in a way that would be visually more effective. I tended to take Alan's verbose ramblings with a pinch of salt and do it my own way!'

Then again Alan Moore from TPO 95-96:

'I think that "Chronocops" marks the first time I realised that Dave Gibbons was prepared to draw whatever absurd amount of detail I could ask for, however, ludicrous and impractical. This is a fact which has served me well in later life' The pair would soon collaborate on the acclaimed maxi-series Watchmen for DC.

And Ian Gibson goes along with that (TPO page 110):

I worked hard to make the pictures more subtle than they were in Alan's descriptions. You can be swamped by Alan, because he is so verbose. I get the impression Dave Gibbons follower Alan's directions on Watchmen letter for letter. I tend to take the essence and throw away the bits I disagree with. After all he's the writer and I'm the artist. He's in charge of the words and ideas, and I'm in charge of the visual presentation. If he was a great artist, he'd be drawing it himself. It's my job to visualise it. I don't think I've offended too many people doing that. I know I've bent a few American noses out of shape, but that's beside the point. Halo Jones still worked out very well, a good collaboration. I think we did a good job on it.'

* I think what was interesting was that even in the early days artists were interested in working with him - all his early Warrior work came about because different artists recommended him and/or wanted to work with him, even Halo Jones seems to have come about because Ian Gibson said he wanted to work with Alan Moore on a story with a female lead (TPO page 99), which led to Halo Jones. So there were a lot of artist-instigated (or editor-instigated in Skinn's case) stories that he then picked up the ball and ran with.** Something that might also lead to point b) - despite the size of the scripts he is clearly a good collaborator on a comic and is not going to get his panties in a bunch if every last mad detail isn't included. It is interesting to read that Gibson stayed with Moore for a few days getting stoned and designing everything together (TPO page 101, which has a lot more detail about the back and forth, like it was Gibson's idea to ground the story before going off into space).

** Nice to see Al Ewing following this route with Zombo and Zaucer of Zilk.

[Mardroid]

Do you have a source for that?

Gordon Rennie was the droid who advised me to follow the Wagner rather than Moore model.


As for a source on this site backing this up (as far as Future Shocks are concerned)'
There you go.

It's quite long but the bit that probably covers this is at the end:

Avoid overly verbose panel descriptions.

A useful rule of thumb for script-writing is to have no more than 25 words per speech balloon, and no more than 3 balloons/captions per panel.

Average 5-7 panels per page.

Never use two words (or panels) where one will do. Condense it down, keep it moving. Keep the reader intrigued, surprised, and wondering what's going to happen next. Less is more. Boil your barrel of weak beer down into a shot-glass full of rocket fuel!

Incidentally I didn't really see Locust's script above necessarily breaking those rules. Sure there are very descriptive panels but in context it makes sense (establishing scenes and action, etc) but they don't go beyond 2 paragraphs and there's plenty of succinct stuff too.

I might have left out the bit about the guts splattering the table, and leave it up to the artist to decide whether or not to draw that level of detail, but I don't intend that as a criticism, just an example where things might be streamlined a bit. Particularly if you're submitting a Future Shock...

[locustsofdeath!]

I might have left out the bit about the guts splattering the table, and leave it up to the artist to decide whether or not to draw that level of detail, but that's just me.

The guts splattering is actually very important to what happens next in the script  .

"Overly verbose" is much, much different than "details that are needed". It's possible to be very detailed and descriptive yet concise at the same time! Mr. Ewing forwarded me several of his Damnation Station (haven't read any Zombos...maybe I should ask!) scripts and he works this way - he can be very detailed, but the script is still very tight. I think the main thing to remember - is too not go all Walking Dead and have our characters vomit word balloons all over the page. That seems to bother Thargie a great deal.

Anyway, I wish we'd have put all of this in a separate post! Poor Mrs. Tu wanted opinions on his story and we've massively hijacked this thread!

[Emperor]

Do you have a source for that?

Gordon Rennie was the droid who advised me to follow the Wagner rather than Moore model.


As for a source on this site backing this up (as far as Future Shocks are concerned)'
There you go.

It's quite long but the bit that probably covers this is at the end:

Avoid overly verbose panel descriptions.

A useful rule of thumb for script-writing is to have no more than 25 words per speech balloon, and no more than 3 balloons/captions per panel.

Average 5-7 panels per page.

Never use two words (or panels) where one will do. Condense it down, keep it moving. Keep the reader intrigued, surprised, and wondering what's going to happen next. Less is more. Boil your barrel of weak beer down into a shot-glass full of rocket fuel!

There is a difference between avoiding overly verbose panel descriptions and the bare bones Wagnerian way.

[Emperor]

Anyway, I wish we'd have put all of this in a separate post! Poor Mrs. Tu wanted opinions on his story and we've massively hijacked this thread!

I can always split it, if there is an easy divergence point in there somewhere and folks are up for that.

[Mardroid]

The guts splattering is actually very important to what happens next in the script  .

Fair enough, you sick puppy you.

"Overly verbose" is much, much different than "details that are needed". It's possible to be very detailed and descriptive yet concise at the same time! Mr. Ewing forwarded me several of his Damnation Station (haven't read any Zombos...maybe I should ask!) scripts and he works this way - he can be very detailed, but the script is still very tight.

I'd agree with that.

Anyway, I wish we'd have put all of this in a separate post! Poor Mrs. Tu wanted opinions on his story and we've massively hijacked this thread!

Are we being overly verbose? 

Incidentally, I hope I'm not coming across argumentative here! (That wasn't my intention) I'm very new to this scripting malarkey, and I appreciate the advice too.

[locustsofdeath!]

Incidentally, I hope I'm not coming across argumentative here! (That wasn't my intention) I'm very new to this scripting malarkey, and I appreciate the advice too.

Not at all, Mardroid (and I hope the same, that I'm not sounding like a jerk).

I meant that it's too bad this wasn't in a separate post - it's informative in parts, could be a good resource. however, not many writers may find the info on this thread.

[Mardroid]

I meant that it's too bad this wasn't in a separate post - it's informative in parts, could be a good resource. however, not many writers may find the info on this thread.

Not at all, I knew what you meant there and I agree. I was just feeling a bit paranoid how I was coming across throughout the thread.