In 2019, scientists from the university of California and San Francisco (UCSF) developed a decoder allowing our brain activity to be translated into speech (The Guardian- 24 Apr 2019) and in 2018 MIT presented a bizarre headset that lets users communicate without speaking (mit.edu 4 April 2018). Setting aside the truly valorous benefits of this technology for sufferers of conditions like Parkinson's or ALS there is, of course, a flip side with terrifying implications for the privacy of our thoughts and as it is inevitably snapped up by surveillance capitalism giants like Facebook (who are already funding their own projects) and Google, there are fears that this technology may soon (or may be already) incorporated onto our ubiquitous and omniscient handsets.
Yet there may be creative applications for this monster that literally make drams come true. Indeed, daydreamers might soon be able to plug themselves in, hit record, imagine an entire film and play the whole recording at a pitch meeting in Hollywood.
While contemplating the possibility of this revolution, I was reminded of an interview for British TV in the late 1980s where Woody Allen spoke of how the ideas for his films, first came to him at night in a flawless vision and how, as soon as he began writing them down, that perfection began to deteriorate. I was, undoubtedly, very young when I saw this program but the words stayed with me and I have often experienced the same creative problem. How would it be if we could bypass our pesky forebrain and let these sublime experiences flow directly from our dreamlike subconscious imaginings into an audiovisual format? It would certainly change the way we write our scripts.
Not surprisingly, technology has already altered how we format our scripts. Indeed, it is more down to the constraints of technical, rather than artistic requirements, that we find so many of the conventions we use today. This necessity to promptly communicate a vast array of information to so many players has led to the adoption of a clear and repeatable format which allows cast and crew to quickly identify relevant features and prepare for shooting. Within this rigid format, if used to its potential, lies enough leeway to leave nothing up to a director's imagination. Yet, technology is changing fast; digital cameras, gimbals, drones, wireless audio systems, editing apps with luts and colour correction, crowd CGI generation and endless other evolutions now mean that, not only has the cost of shooting come down but the number of professionals who need to be orchestrated has also been reduced drastically. This may somehow translate into a new approach to modern filmmaking and may mark a return to a freer more improvised method which was not always possible due to cost constraints. This may be reflected in the scripting process. In Price’s ‘Screenwriting Today and Tomorrow’, the author mentions filmmakers such as Cassavetes and Angelopolous who used their scripts merely as a loose template constantly modifying it on the fly, while others like Wong Kar- Wai turn up to shoot with little more than a storyboard or shot list.
And though cost is a predominating factor it not the only problem with improvisation in filmmaking, there are often upwards of 500 professionals who need to know what they are doing and a script serves to provide this information. Not allowing a sound man to prepare the right microphones, a DOP the right ISO or an art department their props will often mean that the end result looks, feels and sounds less than optimal. It also presupposes that an actor is capable of coming up with dialogue that is equal to or more incisive, clever, enthralling and propelling to the plot than what a professional writer could do over a long period of writes and rewrites.
We may not be seeing a transition towards this freer form of filmmaking so soon after all nor is it perhaps, the kind of film people are longing to experience.Certainly, the standard format, though ignored by some filmmakers, is nonetheless maximised for its potential to communicate the story as imagined in the mind of the creator. We should, perhaps, also be asking ourselves as writers whether we really want the responsibility and extra work that comes with preparing the shot lists, art direction, sound design and many other areas that could be added in hypertext or other forms as Price seems to suggest.
Comments