TPG Week 196: Blackenstein Was Better...

[Steven Forbes]

Welcome back to another installment of The Proving Grounds! This week, we have a new Brave One in JP Polewczak! We also have Liam Hayes in blue, I'm the guy in red, and we'll see what JP has to say about





DOCTOR SHARK #1

Learning the Smell of Success Part I

Written by J.P. Polewczak



Just a quick note before we start. This script came in at an 11 in font size... Guess how happy I am?



Before we begin, I must make a point of your format. It's nigh unreadable. All the elements are bunched together making it difficult to pick anything out. If I were an editor at a publishers, this would be in the trash already. Don't let that happen based on something as simple as a format. I'm going to have to space this out just so I can make sense of it. There are no proper page breaks either. Again, I've added them in for the sake of Steven's blood pressure.(Thanks, Liam. However, this means that there's no Flawless Victory to be had here. So, just remember why it was lost, folks. Let's forge on!)

ONE


GENERAL NOTE: David, our main character, is a professor as a university. He’s teaching Marine Sciences 212. (Pointless. Discuss your character descriptions independently of the actual script.) Setting for this series is a university lecture hall. (One setting for a whole series?) It shows stadium-style seating about 20 rows deep with large projection screen where the stage would be (A reference for this would be great. Oh, and missing full stop.)



Panel 1: Shows a large image of a dogfish (see: Google Images “Dogfish nose”) (Don't be lazy. Link it for the artist.), close-up on the nose. Call-out circle around the ampullae, a.k.a. the dark spots on the skin. (This is on a projection screen, but you didn't specify that fact.)



NARRATION (Narration should be told in Captions. This, however, is not narration. The guy speaking is just off-panel.) (DAVID): The year is 1678. Italian physician and ichthyologist--


Click here to read more.

[TonyKidd]

Originally Posted by Liam

Panel 2: Full reveal of Dr. David Lorenzini (mid-30’s male Caucasian) (Add this information to your character description page/document.)

Can you clarify what you mean here please? This sounds like a completely separate page from the actual script to reference character descriptions. Shouldn’t the character be fully described the first time they appear in the script, and then only once, unless there is a change in appearance?

Also, if you can't slip in names in a natural way thru the dialogue, would captions be appropriate when the character first appears in the script? The reader would then know right away who they are. Is this seen as too clumsy a vehicle for delivery of the information?

[crognus]

Originally Posted by TonyKidd

Can you clarify what you mean here please? This sounds like a completely separate page from the actual script to reference character descriptions. Shouldn’t the character be fully described the first time they appear in the script, and then only once, unless there is a change in appearance?

In a comic script you would be working closely with your artist and would work out character designs with him prior to him starting the sequential pages. You should put character descriptions in either a seperate document or in a seperate section prior to the actual script.

[crognus]

Originally Posted by TonyKidd

Also, if you can't slip in names in a natural way thru the dialogue, would captions be appropriate when the character first appears in the script? The reader would then know right away who they are. Is this seen as too clumsy a vehicle for delivery of the information?

That's subjective and depends on the type of story, but in this situation I would say it's lazy. I don't see how it can't be slipped in naturally. For one, a professor introduces himself at the beginning of a class.

[JPPolewczak]

Steven, Liam,

First off, I would like to thank both of you. This was the first time this script (or any script of mine) was read by someone other than myself and I see some major issues to address.

I know I'm getting reamed for the format style, and I get that, but I formatted using Fred Van Lente's format, which is based off of Steve Gerber's. I see why this became an issue. In the same vein, I'm now more conscious of exactly how important it is to stop in order to move forward.

I'm not here to make excuses. I saw the line was short and I tried to get this to a level that would work, but I can't honestly say that without some direction, the script would have been improved after 10 more weeks of staring at it. I needed to see exactly where I stood based on my own ability to proofread my work. That being said, let's take a moment to remember the ferrets that could not be here today as a result of my first draft.

(Suggested Listening: Sarah McLachlan - Angel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1GmxMTwUgs)

Okay. Beyond the technical issues and the panels (both lazy and moving), I want to get a little more into the pacing. You're not wrong that the first pages are boring and uneventful. I do understand the benefit, or necessity, of having the first pages be exciting and bring the reader into the world. The whole script for #1 was intended for character introduction and origin story. Maybe this makes more sense as a #0 issue? A story that can be brought up later after the reader has a vested interest in the character and what's happening to him. Do you agree?

When I first read your comments, I became flustered with a dash of anger, but what I was feeling was disappointment in myself. The comments and advice were on point and being taken to heart. I'm going to print them out and keep them next to me and make notes on them. Set the requirements i need for each panel before moving on and determine if it's even necessary. I'll redraft this issue, proofread with stricter parameters, and make it worth the time. You'll see Doctor Shark again, but I think I have stronger work that if I apply the proper attention to may actually surprise.

As for Crognus and TonyKidd joining the fray, I was trying to provide a description to the artist for the first time you see the main character. I didn't have a character descriptions page and clearly shot myself in the foot when including that info in panel descriptions.

[TonyKidd]

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

As for Crognus and TonyKidd joining the fray, I was trying to provide a description to the artist for the first time you see the main character. I didn't have a character descriptions page and clearly shot myself in the foot when including that info in panel descriptions.

I didn't know this was wrong either, but duly noted. Yet another difference between comics and a spec script. So, just to clarify: are we talking about every character that appears in every scene of the script, to include support, or just the major players? I know I've read Proving Grounds critiques where Steve has commented on vague descriptions, but this is the first time I've been aware that there should be a separate doc.

[crognus]

Originally Posted by TonyKidd

So, just to clarify: are we talking about every character that appears in every scene of the script, to include support, or just the major players?

Just the major players. You will want to include relevant, necessary information about throw-away characters.

[JPPolewczak]

My understanding is that this would provide the artist with a description of the people or things showing up most frequently.

The only part where this gets confusing for me is that in some instances it seems important to provide information for the artist in great detail, but the character summaries would be intended to limit the bulkiness of some panel descriptions, therefore providing only important details in panel descriptions.

I get when I say "refer to panel x" it's considered lazy, but if I provide a character list and simply note that the character is in the frame, is it then the artist's responsibility to cross-reference with the character sheet? This makes most sense because the panel descriptions could then be reserved for scene specific details such as emotion. What I don't want is to be accused of being lazy if I adhere to a character description document then "refer to character description" in-script.

Does this also make sense to present a location document as well? i.e. If I'm writing a story about Batman and he's in the Batcave twice or so an issue, should I describe said Batcave in its entirety for a panel description or just the intricacies features in the panel with a separate overall description?

[crognus]

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

Okay. Beyond the technical issues and the panels (both lazy and moving), I want to get a little more into the pacing. You're not wrong that the first pages are boring and uneventful. I do understand the benefit, or necessity, of having the first pages be exciting and bring the reader into the world. The whole script for #1 was intended for character introduction and origin story. Maybe this makes more sense as a #0 issue? A story that can be brought up later after the reader has a vested interest in the character and what's happening to him. Do you agree?

No, I don't think you should have an issue # 0 with those pages, not without a rewrite. They are boring and even prequel issues need to be interesting. Extended lecture room scenes (to reveal background information) need to have conflict, like in the example Steven gave with Young Frankenstein. Otherwise they should be very short, like a couple panels.

Think about Raider's of the Lost Ark. There's that scene where he is talking to a class about some background information that will play a part in the story to come. But it is very short and leads into a scene that actually moves the plot forward (two intelligence agents come in to tell him about the whole Nazi thing). Another example would be in the Spiderman movie (Toby McGuire) where they are in Oscorp. The woman talks about the abilities spiders have, but her lecture takes place in the background of a scene that establishes Peter's relationship with his class bully, Harry Osborn, and Mary Jane. Oh and it places him in a location to get bit, so it also moves the plot forward.

Anyway, the moral of the story is if you are going to use a lecture to give away background information (or any sort of info dump), keep it short, have conflict, and try to keep it in a scene that actually moves the plot along.

[JPPolewczak]

Originally Posted by crognus

Think about Raider's of the Lost Ark. There's that scene where he is talking to a class about some background information that will play a part in the story to come. But it is very short and leads into a scene that actually moves the plot forward (two intelligence agents come in to tell him about the whole Nazi thing).

I agree with you and, while not thoroughly executed, it was part of the intent of the lecture sequences. David was teaching in detail about the sensory organs found in fish. Focusing on this topic because it relates later in a sequence where he, through a 'freak accident', has them implanted in him and begins to have the same abilities as these fish.

The fluidity of this scene needs to be improved so that the conflict between him and the students (specifically the apathy of the students) leads him to a drunken stupor. Which is reinforced later on after another lecture.

In developing his character and even discussing it now, I'm starting to find better ways of presenting his past. The long and the short of it is that he loved sharks as a kid, a dedicated student, lead to appearances on TV and a meteoric rise in fame under the media-given name Doctor Shark (the cheesiness is intentional), only to abruptly end after a shark attack that left him in fear of the water brought him back to a university lab where he researched and taught, a shell of who he was.

This information is referenced later in this issue, but if the first 6 pages didn't hook you (no pun intended) then you never get to the thick of it. It's that priority that I understand makes establishing a good pace critical to focus on the early pages.

I also agree with you that the re-write is needed even for a #0 issue. Slapping the #0 to the title won't make this better, just focusing on the themes in this issue focusing on origin rather than what actually happens to David following this all could read better as a #0.

[crognus]

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

I agree with you and, while not thoroughly executed, it was part of the intent of the lecture sequences. David was teaching in detail about the sensory organs found in fish. Focusing on this topic because it relates later in a sequence where he, through a 'freak accident', has them implanted in him and begins to have the same abilities as these fish. .

Trust me, we have read a bunch of comic origin stories and consumed a heck-ton of stories. The obvious foreshadowing was not lost. We all understood him talking about fish is going to lead into him getting fish abilities. It doesn't change the fact the scene is long and boring. Hide this sort of foreshadowing in a more interesting scene.

Improperly hiding an info dump is one of the easiest pitfalls to make as a writer. We all think our origin and background stories are the bees knees and cat's pajamas, although they probably aren't. There's a lot of scenes I wish I could rewrite in my last work that have this problem. The vast majority of the last dozen scripts in TPG have this problem. Try not to do it.

We only care about a character's origin once we already care about the character.

[Steven Forbes]

Originally Posted by TonyKidd

Can you clarify what you mean here please? This sounds like a completely separate page from the actual script to reference character descriptions. Shouldn’t the character be fully described the first time they appear in the script, and then only once, unless there is a change in appearance?

Also, if you can't slip in names in a natural way thru the dialogue, would captions be appropriate when the character first appears in the script? The reader would then know right away who they are. Is this seen as too clumsy a vehicle for delivery of the information?

Josh (crognus) explained this pretty well. Personally, I hate having major characters being described in a script, because it's a waste of time. Cut all that out into a separate document, because the artist is going to need to do the characters first before they ever put pencil to paper to start drawing. The same thing goes for secondary characters. Throwaway characters, though, need to be described as a general sketch, not as very deep. (Male, 20's, long hair, glasses, an obese IT person.)

When it comes to dialogue and names, if you can't slip a name in organically, then one of two things has happened: either you haven't worked hard enough, or you have a team of people and you want to get them labeled as soon as possible. Always go for organic dialogue. A way can always be found to introduce character names organically, unless you have a team. Here? You haven't worked hard enough.

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

Steven, Liam,

First off, I would like to thank both of you. This was the first time this script (or any script of mine) was read by someone other than myself and I see some major issues to address.

Lots of issues, to be honest.

Did anyone click the links I put in?

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

I know I'm getting reamed for the format style, and I get that, but I formatted using Fred Van Lente's format, which is based off of Steve Gerber's. I see why this became an issue. In the same vein, I'm now more conscious of exactly how important it is to stop in order to move forward.

I don't care where you got it. If you don't understand it and why things are done the way they are, then you aren't doing yourself or your team any good.

Format is there for ease of reading, keeping things together, so everyone is on the same page. More studying is needed. Luckily, I talk about scripting, format, terms, and why things are done in my Bolts & Nuts articles. Go read.

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

I'm not here to make excuses. I saw the line was short and I tried to get this to a level that would work, but I can't honestly say that without some direction, the script would have been improved after 10 more weeks of staring at it. I needed to see exactly where I stood based on my own ability to proofread my work. That being said, let's take a moment to remember the ferrets that could not be here today as a result of my first draft.

(Suggested Listening: Sarah McLachlan - Angel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1GmxMTwUgs)

Short lines notwithstanding...you still need a lot of work. Again, go read. Also, go read the vast archive of TPG's that are here. There's a fuck-ton of information in there. I honestly wish more people took advantage of it. That's why it's there.

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

Okay. Beyond the technical issues and the panels (both lazy and moving), I want to get a little more into the pacing. You're not wrong that the first pages are boring and uneventful. I do understand the benefit, or necessity, of having the first pages be exciting and bring the reader into the world. The whole script for #1 was intended for character introduction and origin story. Maybe this makes more sense as a #0 issue? A story that can be brought up later after the reader has a vested interest in the character and what's happening to him. Do you agree?

No. I don't agree, and again, Josh answered it nicely.

Information badly presented and just repackaged is nothing more than a waste of time. Rewriting means exactly that: rewriting. There isn't a panel here that's actually worth saving, and especially not in the first five pages.

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

When I first read your comments, I became flustered with a dash of anger, but what I was feeling was disappointment in myself. The comments and advice were on point and being taken to heart. I'm going to print them out and keep them next to me and make notes on them. Set the requirements i need for each panel before moving on and determine if it's even necessary. I'll redraft this issue, proofread with stricter parameters, and make it worth the time. You'll see Doctor Shark again, but I think I have stronger work that if I apply the proper attention to may actually surprise.

Congratulations! You're one of the few that have actually been honest about feeling anger at what was done to your script, and then coming through it to see what it actually was. That deserves something. Email me. We'll see if we can figure something out.

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

The only part where this gets confusing for me is that in some instances it seems important to provide information for the artist in great detail, but the character summaries would be intended to limit the bulkiness of some panel descriptions, therefore providing only important details in panel descriptions.

I get when I say "refer to panel x" it's considered lazy, but if I provide a character list and simply note that the character is in the frame, is it then the artist's responsibility to cross-reference with the character sheet? This makes most sense because the panel descriptions could then be reserved for scene specific details such as emotion. What I don't want is to be accused of being lazy if I adhere to a character description document then "refer to character description" in-script.

Know what a good artist will do?

They'll design the characters, and make a small file for the characters that are being used. Some may even print them out, if they don't remember each and every facet. They have their own way of working, and you don't have to worry overmuch about how they work. Your job is to provide the adequate amount of information for them.

"Refer to panel x" is the epitome of laziness, and can lead to confusion. Don't confuse the artist, or the inker, or the colorist. Learn your job so you can do your job.

Originally Posted by JPPolewczak

Does this also make sense to present a location document as well? i.e. If I'm writing a story about Batman and he's in the Batcave twice or so an issue, should I describe said Batcave in its entirety for a panel description or just the intricacies features in the panel with a separate overall description?

I wouldn't, unless you're creating something out of whole cloth. The Batcave? We all have an idea of what that looks like. The Kresh? No one knows what that looks like, and you're going to have to give the artist an idea of what it looks like. Or, if it's basically a blank room, like the Danger Room, then you'd write they're in the Danger Room, it's blank, and then start describing the threats that are coming at the character in the particular panels.

Does that help any?

[TonyKidd]

Originally Posted by Steven Forbes

Josh (crognus) explained this pretty well. Personally, I hate having major characters being described in a script, because it's a waste of time. Cut all that out into a separate document, because the artist is going to need to do the characters first before they ever put pencil to paper to start drawing. The same thing goes for secondary characters. Throwaway characters, though, need to be described as a general sketch, not as very deep. (Male, 20's, long hair, glasses, an obese IT person.)

So physical description in a separate document. Got it. What about clothing or trappings in the actual script. For example, if the characters in this scene were wearing bio-organic carapace armor, it would have a whole different feel than if they were wearing Victorian era garb. Does the poster include this document when they submit their 6-8 pages for critique here?

I've read what you have on scripting in Bolts & Nuts. Did I completely miss this, or is it not mentioned there?

[Steven Forbes]

Originally Posted by TonyKidd

So physical description in a separate document. Got it. What about clothing or trappings in the actual script. For example, if the characters in this scene were wearing bio-organic carapace armor, it would have a whole different feel than if they were wearing Victorian era garb. Does the poster include this document when they submit their 6-8 pages for critique here?

I've read what you have on scripting in Bolts & Nuts. Did I completely miss this, or is it not mentioned there?

Methinks you're thinking too hard about it.

This will answer your own question.

Describe the following characters:

Peter Parker
Iron Man
Captain America
Bruce Wayne
Batman

Go!

[Steven Forbes]

Originally Posted by TonyKidd

So physical description in a separate document. Got it. What about clothing or trappings in the actual script. For example, if the characters in this scene were wearing bio-organic carapace armor, it would have a whole different feel than if they were wearing Victorian era garb. Does the poster include this document when they submit their 6-8 pages for critique here?

I've read what you have on scripting in Bolts & Nuts. Did I completely miss this, or is it not mentioned there?

Oh, as for whether or not I want to see the document for a TPG entry (I think that's part of what you were getting at): no. I don't. I don't care about it. It isn't going to help me. The document is for you (the writer) as well as the artist. All I want is the script.

If you send me the document, I won't read it (because I don't care about it). If you put it at the beginning or end of a script, I'm going to cut it out from what gets posted, because I don't care about it.

For my edification, it is not. I'd be happy you did it for yourself and the team, but I don't need it here at TPG.