Screenwriting Tip

[alexwhitmer]

I was recently asked by a script reader to change a peripheral character's name from TEEN GIRL #1 to a proper name - because, the reader said, it's standard, and easier to follow. What a bunch of BS.

Peripheral characters are those 'filler characters' that may or may not cross paths with the main and supporting characters, and are only there to deliver a line, maybe two, and/or set up a reaction by the main and supporting characters. I believe the industry refers to these characters as featured extras (?).

I mentioned something along these lines in an earlier post ...

Boyfriend and girlfriend go into a cafe. Boyfriend glances just a little too long at CUTE WAITRESS and girlfriend gives him a black eye. Boyfriend and Girlfriend would have proper names, but CUTE WAITRESS is there to set up the reactions and does not need to be named Doris or Marie or Cliticia, even if she has a line or two. 'Ready to order?'

I am of the (correct) opinion that proper names should be reserved only for main and supporting characters. Everyone else is a role title. When I do see a proper name introduced, my first thought is that they have a driving role in the story, and to keep my eye out for them in a future scene.

Take a look at IMDB credits, and as you near the bottom, you see WOMAN, MAN AT BAR, GIRL IN TREE, whatever.

To name just a few of the 'Titanic' peripherals ...

STEWARD #1 and #2
WOMAN IN CROWD
BRIDE
LITTLE BOY
CREWMAN

So, when writing a screenplay, you don't need to put a name to every face. If they are there for one short scene, or to deliver a line or two, just give them a title.

I have heard the argument that actors tend to latch on to a role better if it has a name. Anyone had that experience?

I don't know, for me personally, it is more confusing from a pure technical storytelling aspect to give GIRL IN TREE a name. Sally in tree?


On the flipside (there's always a flipside) ...

How many times have I seen MYSTERY WOMAN, MAN IN BLACK and SHADOWY FIGURE - only to have their real identity revealed many pages later.

Thee most important thing to remember is that a reading audience and a viewing audience will get this information very differently. One school of thought is to reveal these identities to the reader the same way a viewing audience discovers them. It keeps the reader engaged, and wanting to know who this character really is. The other school is to make it clear from the beginning, and let the story be about how the characters on the page learn these identities.

I use both!

There are the occasional stories where an identity is never revealed, and MYSTERY WOMAN never changes, but to date I have not seen that used very effectively. Rare at best.

a

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

if you write for yourself, write like you want, if you write for someone else who pays you, change it.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

In your CUTE WAITRESS example I agree, but in the TEEN GIRL #1 example, I might try to find something a little less bar-code... however I don't know what would work because I didn't read the pages leading up to it, or the rest to give me a sense of purpose for the whole scene. For Titanic, STEWARD #1 and #2 do sound like they would work for me because they are personnel within a large organization running the ship, which is a character in of its own. Their "serial number titles" give me a sense of that well oiled machine running the ship.

What I am trying to say is that the name is nothing but an other medium to tell the story. If you can come up with a different title for the TEEN GIRL #1 --one that works better at telling the story-- then do change it. However, if TEEN GIRL #1 delivers exactly what you need it to deliver, then don't change it.

Actors do want names. Not only does it make the characters feel more like an actual person to them for their first impression, and every time they read the name, but it also looks better on their resumes.

Just my 0.02

 

[alexwhitmer]

if you write for someone else who pays you, change it.

I'd rather go hungry - which may well explain why I have been living on rice, canned tuna and cornflakes the last 6 years.


This may sound arrogant, but for me, it's craft first. The Director can change it on the shooting script if he or she feels it's needed.


I read a lot of scripts, both short and feature, and when I see a proper name introduced, I lock it in my memory and look for it later. When it never comes up again, I go back and re-read the intro to see if I missed something. Writers new to the craft often lose sight of the peripherals, or forgot they were even there, or never play out the intended purpose. Writing a screenplay is like running a big puppet show. You have to have control of all the strings for the entire performance. If it were me, I'd color-code those strings so I know which ones to let go of.

Green gets a name, red gets a title.

 

[Emyr R. E. Pugh]

Just last week I asked a writer to change proper names to GIRL and BOY to allay potential confusion.

There are the occasional stories where an identity is never revealed, and MYSTERY WOMAN never changes, but to date I have not seen that used very effectively. Rare at best.

This made me think of The Road, in which none of the characters have proper names, just FATHER, BOY, MOTHER, and my personal favorite, WELL-FED WOMAN. Also made me think about the MYSTERY MAN in David Lynch's Lost Highway. Those aside, I couldn't think of any more off the top of my head.

 

[alexwhitmer]

Actors do want names, not only does it feel more like an actual person on their first reaction, but it also looks better on their resumes.

Just my 0.02

Completely agree in principle.

My line is drawn on camera time. If they just walk on, say or do something, then walk off, a proper name isn't needed.

TEEN GIRL #1 and #2 takes place in a high school / story so as you mentioned, works in the context in which they are introduced, like the Stewards. What I have is TEEN GIRL #1, TEEN GIRL #2 and RACHEL. Rachel pops again later, and is referred to by name by the MC, so Rachel gets a name.

Yeah, agree, a bar code name sucks, but in truth I do look for that on resumes to check an actors complete background. It's nice to see a snapshot of their climb to the top. I actually like to see ...

WOMAN AT BUS STOP
RECEPTION NURSE
LADY SELLING APPLES
MARGARET
MRS. KIMBLE

Etc ...

I think this shows growth, and this actor made it out of the featured extra quagmire to be cast in a larger role. There might be a good reason for that, and I see it as a plus.

 

[alexwhitmer]

and my personal favorite, WELL-FED WOMAN.

That's hilarious. I bet casting had fun with that one!!

I can just see the casting call on Mandy.

a

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

TEEN GIRL #1 and #2 takes place in a high school, so as you mentioned, works in the context in which they are introduced, like the Stewards. What I have is TEEN GIRL #1, TEEN GIRL #2 and RACHEL. Rachel pops again later, and is referred to by name by the MC, so Rachel gets a name.

What about SENIOR/SOPHOMORE/JUNIOR/FRESHMAN GIRL #1? Cheating in a screenplay, but it does add something. Or PREPPY GIRL, NERDY GIRL, etc? PREPPY SENIOR GIRL? They may be too aggressive so if they were not accurate they could hurt more than help, but just an idea.

Long names can be annoying too, but if they only show up on dialogue and only a few times then it might not bother too much.

 

[alexwhitmer]

What about SENIOR/SOPHOMORE/JUNIOR/FRESHMAN GIRL #1? Cheating in a screenplay, but it does add something. Or PREPPY GIRL, NERDY GIRL, etc? They may be too aggressive so if they were not accurate they could hurt more than help, but just an idea.

Yes, excellent point, and certainly not cheating. SHORT COP, BALDING COP, TALL COP, etc., are good descriptions. But I think it would depend on how much interaction there is between them, like if both, or all three or four have dialogue, and there is some immediate need to tell them apart for the reader living in the abstract world of words on paper.

In Titanic we see WOMAN and WOMAN IN CROWD, which is just a casting flag, but certainly if these two were to cross paths and exchange dialogue or actions, I would want to see a more defined difference: RICH WOMAN, RAGGED WOMAN - along those lines.

Maybe I could put GUM-CHEWING TEEN. In truth though, and something I wanted to emphasize in the script, is the cookie-cutter image so many teens strive for. They walk and talk and chatter like twins and triplets. Sad, but true.

Glad you brought that up.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

I totally agree that often the last thing you want to do is draw attention to someone that would only pull the reader out of the story. However, the only way to know if a name is too descriptive or not is to at least read the whole scene, and hopefully the whole act, or whole screenplay.

I meant "cheating" because unless you actually find out that are in fact a Senior, then you would have no way of knowing that. However, if that provides information that helps understand the character in the way we need to, then it would be justified.

I think we are agreeing in all counts.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

If the actor needs a name for their role to perform the Director or an AD herding extras can randomly hand out names on set.

Cute Waitress immediately brings to mind an image in my head, KATHRINE tells me nothing. I say you're right. No need to give people superfluous names.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Aside from which may right for the script you are working on, for some actors KATHERINE (I'd prefer a male name myself gives you a human sized bucket to fill. Waiter gives you a smaller bucket. Just something to keep in mind. Of course this whole thing rests on the individual's interpretation. As Gavin points out, WAITRESS could paint a much more vivid picture, living off of tips, struggling, or not, busy, thick skinned, what have you... which brings you back to writing what you think is best, setting a tone, and veering off from it for contrast.

 

[DCC Erickson]

GROUCHY WAITER
SASSY WAITRESS
BAG LADY
HIPHOP DUDE

If they have one or two lines and disappear forever. If they stick around, they're characters with names.

The only time assigning a number, like WOMAN #1 doesn't annoy the crap out of me is when it's an action flick and I know ASSASSIN #1 and SECURITY GUARD #3 are gonna get whacked anyway. Assigning a number in a action flick is like giving the character the dreaded Star Trek "away team" red jersey. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

[Mark Allen]

I find that when readers and, even more so executives, want to like something, they forgive everything and when they want to dislike everything they rip anything apart even something as silly as a generic label for a character.

I've had the same exact script taken to the top level of a major studio that was rejected vehemently by a small production company with notes implying I didn't know how to format a script. Never had one complaint about my formating method from the major studio. Thing is, they wanted to like it, the other people didn't.

To this day my favorite rejection letter was from a then agent who simply wrote back to me "It wasn't for me." That is the most honest criticism I ever had. Not necessarily constructive, but he probably wasn't the one to give constructive criticism. (He ended up becoming a major studio exec years later.)

 

[DCC Erickson]

I find that when readers and, even more so executives, want to like something, they forgive everything and when they want to dislike everything they rip anything apart even something as silly as a generic label for a character.

I've had the same exact script taken to the top level of a major studio that was rejected vehemently by a small production company with notes implying I didn't know how to format a script. Never had one complaint about my formating method from the major studio. Thing is, they wanted to like it, the other people didn't.

To this day my favorite rejection letter was from a then agent who simply wrote back to me "It wasn't for me." That is the most honest criticism I ever had. Not necessarily constructive, but he probably wasn't the one to give constructive criticism. (He ended up becoming a major studio exec years later.)

I think the smart ones simply say, "wasn't for me" or "not what we're looking for" because if you get into the details they really need to send you a release form and that gets complicated. And if they're really not interested, why get into it? If they really like it but don't want it, "what else have you got?" or "can you fix this other script for us?"

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Even so I have over half a dozen Scripts in progress along with Books, I don't yet consider my self a seasoned Writer, since I didn't sold any, but since the reason I din't sale any, is because I had refused offers, I guess I am a writer, well any way, my point is that each Artist has a different way of interpreting the Art, bee it Filming, Painting, Photographing, or Writing and so I do Agree with Alex, on the I rather not sale then change what I fill and become the standard.

For me this has been the reason of not having yet done a movie, sale, I don't sale, I don't write Specs, and I don't write for my self either, I write to make Movies, but will make them only my way or no way, so off course I agree with Alex's opinion of not wanting to change something just because She is getting paid for it, okay then since I'm getting paid for it, just let me write some of the same stuff that goes around Hollywood, and off course now you got paid, but you sure have no personality as you have just become a standard, NO THANKS!!

I firmly suport the Art and not the continuity of Standard, I am not the Standard, will I be a successful Artist? and Appreciated one? Well, I don't know, I sure work hard to become one, but I applaud ALex for Standing Ground on the believe for the craft.

I too do not use NAMES for extras, in fact in "Chronicles of Perseverance" even so the Role of my Stepfather is an important one in the opening and establishing of the Story, I do not use a NAME for him, is just "STEPFATHER" form the beginning to the end of his participation on the Story, mainly to make a point of detachment form His character, as He is a BAD person, and didn't want to glorify it with a NAME, despite of what the actors might think.

 

[alexwhitmer]

I too do not use NAMES for extras, in fact in "Chronicles of Perseverance" even so the Role of my Stepfather is an important one in the opening and establishing of the Story, I do not use a NAME for him, is just "STEPFATHER" form the beginning to the end of his participation on the Story, mainly to make a point of detachment form His character, as He is a BAD person, and didn't want to glorify it with a NAME, despite of what the actors might think.

This is a great point.

When an actor is reading the part, and getting into character, all the nuances that go with being a detached stepfather - or whatever - can be built into the script. The actor never gets the luxury of a name, or a sense of belonging, and hopefully that translates in the performance, and the directing of that performance.

Hopefully. As mentioned, on set changes can be made if somehow it isn't working out as planned. Certainly pre-production can throw up red flags as well. Every script will go through it at some point or another.

 

[Steve Das]

Cute Waitress immediately brings to mind an image in my head, KATHRINE tells me nothing.

Correct..it is better to avoid names for side characters. Reader
who told you otherwise is no good if that's all they could come up with.
Teen Girl #1 infact paints a better picture in the reader's mind...it
is a shorthand that allows for a faster and more visual read.

Teen Girl #1 = anonymous..non-thoughtful..ponytail wearing..gum-
chewing..i-pod wearing..bmw driving..$$$ spending..fashionista type..etc.

uh-oh...sounds like my ex-wife...:laugh:

 

[Joe G.]

Well, it's a gray area as all the comments suggest.

A principle should be kept in mind, however. You have precious few keystrokes to say anything at all about these minor characters. You should exploit the name to give as much as possible, so that it isn't a blah, generic world you're creating.

TEEN GIRL #1 also says very little.

BITCHY PRINCESS (16) says more.

Carry on...

 

[Sid Idris]

i just put the crawl together for our feature and couple of the titles included...

girlfight #1
girlfight #2

well because they have a couple of lines and get into a fight...and the director did it as an hommage to the movie Girlfight...

ironically we have a 3 on a card title credit for "Danny" a character who has no lines and barely makes it in the final cut, because the guy who played him was our production attorney who did contracts for close to nothing.

Credits can be a powerful tool for the indie producer trying to make a film because in the end it's oftentimes the only thing we have to offer.