by Rich Wilson © 2001 All Rights Reserved
This is the kind of program that most screenwriters ask about most
often. And there is a short answer to such questions: the three most dominant
programs in this category - Scriptware, Final Draft, and Screenwriter 2000 -
are all excellent programs. They differ in various ways, but they are all very
capable. All of them handle screenplay, sitcom, or stage play formats, and all
have an index card feature of some kind. All have versions for Mac and Windows
computers. So if you get any one of these as a gift, don't start worrying about
whether you should exchange it for something else. Just install it and start
writing. Meanwhile, here are some particulars.
Scriptware
Versions tested:
MacV1.22, Windows V3.13
Cinovation, Inc.
1750 30th Street, Suite
360
Boulder, CO 80301-1005
(800) 788-7090
http://www.scriptware.com
List price $299.95, all versions
(Sale price $199.95 at the time of
this writing; competitive upgrade $99)
Requires PC with Windows 3.1 and
higher; Mac OS 7.1 and higher (68030 processor or better)
DOS version also
available $179.95; call vendor for minimum PC requirements.
Scriptware does not use copy protection, and is the only dedicated scriptwriting program reviewed here that can make that claim. Copy protection has come a long way, and is not as onerous as it used to be, but it can sometimes make installation trickier, and still has the potential to cause problems during maintenance or unexpected hardware crashes. It has happened to me.
Unlike other programs I've used and tested, my Scriptware installations
have never gotten "broken" as the result of maintenance to the computer or hard
drive upgrades. In my view, Cinovation deserves credit for taking the risks
inherent in sticking to this user-friendly policy. If there are pirates out
there who have abused that policy, they deserve to see all their screenplays
shredded, torched, and never read by an agent or producer. Okay, end of
sermon.
Long ago, Scriptware pioneered the idea of reducing screenplay formatting down to simple use of the Tab and Enter keys to move from one element to the next. The success of this method can be seen in the fact that it is copied by so many other programs. The menu system allows you to do nearly every basic task without taking your hands from the keyboard. But for those who like using a mouse, Scriptware provides a task bar with speed buttons you can click to retrieve files, print, spell check, create a new script element or insert a character name. You can also customize the speedbar and decide which buttons (and commands) will appear there.
Scriptware comes with a large variety of preset script formats, which can be further modified to suit the user's tastes or needs. Feature film writers can choose either submission format or shooting script format, and both have been used by professional screenwriters for years now. Other choices include dramatic television, sitcoms, two-column A-V scripts (Windows version only), and stage plays. The stage play format, even with user modifications, does not match the "industry standard" for theatrical scripts, but it comes relatively close while preserving the easy movement inherent in Scriptware's Tab/Enter command structure. So it may be of interest for screenwriters who want to dabble in playwriting, but I would not recommend it for someone whose primary interest is writing for the stage.
Scriptware claims to import ASCII, Final Draft, Collaborator, Plots Unlimited, and StoryLine files into Scriptware, and export to ASCII, Final Draft, and Movie Magic Scheduling, but if you really plan to use it for all those many things, you could have problems. I could not get it to open a Final Draft file in its native format. But I was able to import a file that started out in Final Draft, by exporting the Final Draft file to "fcf" (file conversion format) form.
Ironically, that format is not on the list of choices offered by Scriptware during the import process - but the program does a good job of importing it anyway. Now you know. Scriptware is also rather agreeable about letting the user simply cut and paste text into it from other programs, using the Windows clipboard. However, character names end up as action elements in the process, and would have to be retyped as such if one were to do a cut-and-paste import.
Reviewers like myself are tempted to test the file importing and exporting features because we have all these programs installed. I create a few test files for every software review, and sometimes use them to test the import/export abilities of competing programs. But I don't really need to do all those file transfers. The main reason I do it is 1) the programs claim to have those features, thus inviting a test, and 2) I have the other programs available to do the tests.
But do I think it's important for you? No. The only thing that I believe is somewhat important is that a screenplay program be able to import from, and export to, plain ASCII text. The reasons to want ASCII import are obvious: it is common for a writer to begin working with a word processor, and later upgrade to a specialized program. And nearly all word processors, including older DOS programs, can save your work in plain ASCII text form, so it is the closest thing to a universal format for interchanging documents.
As for exporting to ASCII from a specialized formatter, that can be useful for sending files to a collaborator or producer who owns different software. One might also want to post scripts on the Internet (I never would, but some folks do). Some screenplay programs will create HTML files, but the fact is that you do not even need HTML just to post a text document on the web. Most web browsers will read the bare ASCII text file as is, right off the Internet, with no problems.
Anyway, in my tests, file importing and exporting is a mixed bag with almost any program. Example: using Scriptware's ASCII import feature, I could easily open and translate an "ASCII" file that I had created some time ago with Movie Magic Screenwriter. But Scriptware had problems with an "ASCII" file created with Final Draft! Apparently, these programs have a different notion of what a plain "ASCII" file is, to yield such oddly varying results. So if you are sure that you will need file translation, test the program(s) you are interested in, with the specific files that you're thinking of importing. But I think most users should be more concerned with other features.
For instance, Script Notes can be very handy, not just for writing teams and pre-production, but also for the spec writer's own purposes. This feature is well done in Scriptware. When displayed, notes appear as boxed text across the full page. They can be categorized as general, production, director, or two other categories defined by the user. One can select notes, by category, to be hidden or displayed, and they can be printed either in place within the script, or on a separate page.
Scriptware includes numerous flexible print options, with some minor quirky exceptions: there is no menu choice for printing the current page. Of course, you can achieve that simply by putting the current page number in the "range of pages" box. Worth noting is that Scriptware only prints in one size: 12 points. Of course, a Hollywood screenplay is only ever supposed to be printed in 12 point type, so for spec screenwriters this could actually help prevent printing in the wrong size. But it might be limiting if you wanted to use the program for other markets besides Hollywood, and - for whatever reason - to use a larger or smaller type size. For the record, you can choose alternate fonts (typefaces) - you just can't print them in other sizes.
You can preview first, or go directly to print. The report choices include character lists, actors' sides, and breakdowns. The breakdowns can be sorted by script order, time of day, location, character or interior/exterior - and then sorted within those categories on a second level. Pertinent information in the script can be tagged for export to Movie Magic Scheduling (a pre-production budgeting tool) or printed out.
Although Scriptware comes in both Windows and Mac flavors, they don't use the same file format. So if you have to take a script from one platform to the other, you'll have to go through and import/export process. Again, this is likely to matter to only a tiny fraction of all users out there. Most writers should be concerned about the creation of a good, clean paper document, because for now, that is still the form in which your work is going to be trafficked in Hollywood.
Scriptware is quite capable of doing everything a spec screenwriter needs, and is also useful for writers who have already sold a script, and need to do rewrites using professional revision marking methods, right up to the first day of production. Being able to export reports to film budgeting software is another plus. It also offers page formats for writers in other genres. You may find a few features in other programs that are missing here, but only you can decide if those features matter for your needs. You will also have to deal with copy protection on any competing program - but not with Scriptware. Serious writers should give the demo a look, or you can buy the full program with a money-back guarantee from Cinovation.
Final Draft
Versions Tested:
Mac/Windows v5.02e
Final Draft, Inc.
16000 Ventura Boulevard, Suite
800
Encino, CA 91436
(818) 995-8995
http://www.finaldraft.com
List price $299, all versions
Requires PC with Windows 3.1 and higher; Mac
OS 7 and higher (68030 processor or better)
Final Draft is packaged with five main templates, which it refers to as "element files:" two variations on the feature film screenplay; sitcom; one-hour drama; or stage play. The vendor also includes 45 element files with the margin settings for popular television shows. (These and other element files can be customized by the user.)
Writers eager to write specs for any of the TV shows included will appreciate this convenience. It is a nice plus, but I do not think it is a make-or-break factor for a purchase decision. After all, you have the power to customize Final Draft - and most of the competing products - to suit the preferred page format for any TV show. So the biggest value of these prefabricated formats files is to save you the a bit of time and effort in researching the requirements of each show individually, and creating the templates yourself.
For true beginners: keep in mind that you still must know the writing style of the show, the characters' personalities, running plotlines, and so on. Don't confuse the content with the form. All these templates do is set rules for margins, line spacing, and perhaps provide a small bit of sample text to show you how it looks. (That caveat applies to TV show templates provided by any competing product as well.)
Final Draft uses a key CD copy protection scheme, requiring the program CD to be loaded whenever the program launches. To end this inconvenience, you can get a registration code from the manufacturer. That code allows you to use Final Draft on just one computer without needing the CD in the drive. The code is specific to that computer's hard drive, and can't be transferred without another call to the company. Check with FinalDraft, Inc. if you want more details.
The Final Draft interface is clean and straightforward. Relying on the Enter and Tab keys for most of the navigation required, it allows one to start writing with a minimal learning curve. Some of the less commonly used commands can be reached only via mouse. For example, Final Draft allows you to change action lines into shots, or dialogue into action, or any element swap, by placing the cursor anywhere on the line you wish to change, and clicking on the element toolbar. I would prefer to use keyboard commands for such tasks.
The program offers script notes for comments to yourself or others, attached as flags in your script. You can choose from three priority levels (important, information and suggestion) or you can create as many other labels or categories as you want. A limitation on notes is that they are displayed in a separate window, and cannot be printed within the script. They only print on a separate sheet, cross-referenced to the script by slugline and page number.
Final Draft has both an outline view and an index card view. The outline view displays scene headings and the first line of the action description. Scenes can be rearranged in the outline view by dragging them with the mouse. The index card view shows as much of the scene as will fit - action, character names, dialogue and so on. You can change the number of index cards displayed onscreen from one to nine across.
You will quickly discover that this decision is affected by the size and quality of your monitor, your eyesight, and other factors unrelated to writing or plot structure. Rearrangement of scenes is also possible in index card mode, as in outline mode, using the mouse to drag individual scenes/cards to new locations. You can also add new scenes in this mode, but not easily. You'll want to do any serious writing in normal screenplay view.
Final Draft imports or exports in ASCII or RTF, HTML and its own FCF format. (See the Scriptware review for comments on the vagaries of file transfers.) Using the Windows clipboard, you can also use the cut-and-paste method to move text into Final Draft, with only minor changes in the formatting.
As for the HTML file export, the company obviously aimed this feature at writers who want to post their screenplays on the Internet. Well, it does work. But the HTML documents that result include a little blurb touting Final Draft - at both the top of the document page and at the bottom. My goodness, what brass. Did Final Draft do any of the writing of that screenplay? No. But the program nevertheless inserts a credit for itself on your work. That's like having to share your Best Screenplay Oscar with the guy who drove your limo to the award ceremony.
If your biggest goal is to post your script to the Internet, I suggest that you use any program to create a basic ASCII file, and post it like that, because it will work just fine; or, learn the tiny amount of HTML needed to enclose that ASCII file in a web document; or, output your script to an Adobe Acrobat pdf file. You can do the latter either by buying Acrobat, or by buying a program that includes Acrobat output (like Screenwriter 2000) as an output option. Note that, while Acrobat files do require a reader program (free from Adobe), at least the program does not include an ad for itself on the documents it creates!
Final Draft is a solid and powerful program that grew and added features very quickly in its early versions. Now that the product has become fairly mature, the company seems to be in a gee-whiz feature war with its competitors. One such feature is the ability to "read" your script aloud in different "voices". To avoid confusion, note that these are computer-synthesized sounds, not real human voices stored by sampling or any other method of digitization. Voice synthesis technology has come a long way - but not far enough yet.
This feature can "read" the text over your computer's speakers in an intelligible, but unemotional, manner. You can choose from different starting sounds and vary them by speed and pitch. But adjust them as much as you want, they still sound like they come from a computer. So, if you are really desperate to hear your script out loud, get some friends to do it in exchange for free beer (or latte, or whatever). They might not be very good actors, but at least they'll sound human.
The program generates eight kinds of reports. It can print scripts forwards or backwards. You can specify a range of pages to print, print odd or even pages, or print only revisions. But despite all that flexibility, the program lacks an option to print just the current page (wherever the cursor is parked at the time.) It's a small convenience, perhaps, but the programmers seem to have time to add new features, so here's one to suggest for the next upgrade.
Since Final Draft originated as a Mac program - and was nearly alone in its market niche for a long time - it has a large base of Mac users. For such people, it may be a big plus that the Mac and Windows versions of Final Draft generate files that can be interchanged directly across those two platforms with no translation needed. To do so, Mac users must remember to add the correct extension when they name the file, to make sure that it will load when used on a Windows computer. In the Windows version, file extensions are automatically added to the name.
FinalDraft, Inc. has worked hard to make the program useful for writers at different levels, and I think they have generally succeeded. Beginning writers in particular will find it quite functional for the basics of writing submission draft screenplays, although it's a bit pricey for that application alone. As for the other features, you'll have to judge their value and cost-effectiveness for yourself.
Movie Magic Screenwriter
2000
Versions Tested: Mac v4
Windows
v4.01.22
Screenplay Systems, Inc.
150 East Olive Avenue, Suite
203
Burbank, CA 91502
(800) 847-8679
http://www.screenplay.com
List price $299, all versions
Requires PC with
Windows 3.1 and higher; Mac OS 7.1 and higher (68020 processor or better)
Screenplay Systems used to sell a product called Movie Magic Screenwriter, which was a licensed version of a popular and powerful formatter called ScriptThing. Finally, they bought ScriptThing completely, and renamed it Screenwriter 2000. Despite some customizing by the new owner, the program still shows its roots as the brainchild of Ken Schafer, a writer and gifted programmer who had a playful and sometimes idiosyncratic way of doing things.
For example, there is no View command on the top menu, unlike most other standard Windows programs. If you want to change the magnification of your onscreen display, the keyboard route is to start with the File menu (hardly intuitive), then Display, then Zoom. Of course, you can also set up a mouse button to perform this task on a customizable task bar.
And I wager that you will end up using that mouse command, because you'll get tired of trying to find where they hid this simple command that, in most other Windows software, is a single keystroke choice on a top-level View menu. I should point out for the record that most of the more common Windows standards are observed, like Control-S to save the file, Control-X to cut/delete, and so on.
Control-Z can be set to undo just the last command - or up to 19 other commands before it - or set to zero (I do not recommend that). I can't imagine just how much RAM is saved between 0 and 19 undo levels. I am guessing that most modern computers can handle the maximum, and that's where I prefer to work for maximum safety.
But oddly, once you make this choice, it does not remain permanently set in the program's initialization file. You can go to the program options menu and set Undo levels to 19 when you begin work on a script. It will stay there as long as the program is open. But if you close the program, the next time you open it, the undo level will be back at its default setting of 10. One more time, the program behaves idiosyncratically and not the way one would expect. I only stumbled on it by chance.
And the reason it's bad is because the user - having set the option higher one time - will surely assume that it will remain set that way forever. He/she will go back to work the next day, expecting to have a bigger safety net than the program is really providing. That means the possibility of unexpected data loss. The risk may be small, but it is real. In my opinion this feature is implemented poorly and should be fixed.
Like its predecessors, Screenwriter 2000 comes with modifiable formats for feature films, taped sitcoms, filmed sitcoms, radio, and stage plays. The program's handling of screen formats has passed scrutiny in reviews of earlier versions, and it continues to do a good job with lots of convenience and flexibility. This time I decided to take a closer look at the stage play format. It is more customizable than some competitors, and far more than early versions of ScriptThing.
However, it is a bit quirky and overbearing. For one thing, the default Stage Play format, as delivered, is incorrect and needs to be tweaked. Out of the box, it too closely resembles a screenplay. When you begin adjusting it, you'll find that the program gives you extensive - but not complete - control over every element. For instance, it insists that action elements cannot be indented in a stage play. A box pops up, saying that if you want to do that, it will arbitrarily switch your script to "novel" format! This is excessively dogmatic; it's as if the program is drinking too much coffee. Still, it seems to be a viable choice if you want to write stage plays, even though screenplays remain the program's strongest suit.
Screenwriter 2000 also has templates for "the most popular ... programs on television" according to the retail box. It does not surprise me that some of those 50+ templates are already out of date. What is surprising is how far out of date they are. Just to grab a couple of examples: I think The Larry Sanders Show and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine were both out of production at least a year before I received my copy of the software. If I were aiming at the Sci-fi market, I can't imagine why I would write a spec for ST:DS9 instead of Star Trek Voyager - for which a template is also included.
With few exceptions, people aiming at TV writing careers are usually better off filling their portfolios with spec scripts for shows still in production. The goal is not to sell the scripts - although it can happen - but to show employers that you can write for today's audiences. It used to be common for aspiring comedy writers to have a Murphy Brown spec in their portfolio, because the show was such a monster hit in the 1990s. But as time goes on, it will be harder and harder to relate that material to today's 17-34 year-old audience.
Still, there may be people who wish to practice on established, familiar shows like that. And I've said elsewhere that I don't think templates like these are a make-or-break factor for a purchase decision, anyway. So I won't say anything more about it, except to note that Screenplay Systems managed to go to the trouble of setting up a very thorough, helpful template for The Drew Carey Show - but could not be bothered to spell the star's name correctly on the template filename. The devil is in the details, folks.
A truly unique feature in the Windows version of Screenwriter 2000 is the ability to write and program "branching" scripts - the kind used in interactive multimedia. After you have laid out an event (akin to a "scene" in a normal screenplay), along with the destinations for any menu choices you've added, you can ask the program to "play back" the script. Each event/scene will appear onscreen only as determined by the branching instructions you've provided.
This feature originated with early versions of ScriptThing, and works as advertised. It is cool. I am given to understand that there are people using the program for real interactive productions. But in my own work on interactive multimedia, I find that producers often want different script layouts of their own device. And usually, they don't match the screenplay layout used by this program. More often, they are some variation of a multi-column format, with elements and features that require advanced features of a mainstream word processor to present properly.
So this feature seems largely geared toward games or other entertainment programs where the screenplay format is known and/or preferred; or projects being done by very small teams, where the writer is actually a writer-designer-programmer. A large production team will want a more universal file format, and that is likely to be some flavor of Microsoft Word. Also, they will not want the writer to be doing anything resembling programming, which these Screenwriter 2000 scripts definitely involve. Just as you specialize in handling the language well, the producer will hire somebody who handles interactive programming better than you can. So, if you are thinking about buying the program for this feature, understand that it works just fine - the only question is whether it will be suitable or acceptable for the professional interactive jobs you might find.
Screenwriter 2000 uses a key CD copy protection scheme similar to the one Final Draft uses. Screenplay Systems will issue a registration code from its website, that lets you use the program without the CD in the computer's drive. If you uninstall and re-install the program, you'll need to obtain a new code to turn off the key CD copy protection, because the code is not reusable.
I have had problems with earlier versions of Screenplay Systems software - and ScriptThing - getting trashed during hard disk upgrades and similar procedures. However, my current installation of Screenwriter 2000 survived a standard defragmentation of my hard disk recently, so perhaps there is hope that their copy protection technology may be less fragile than before.
Screenwriter 2000 uses the Tab and Enter keys for basic movement around the script, like most script formatting programs do. It also offers task bars with speed buttons to get to other commands, along with some keyboard shortcuts, and a system of drop-down menus. As noted earlier, the menus aren't always intuitive and don't necessarily lead you where you expect, but when you look around, you'll find scads of features tucked away in them.
Script notes can be hidden or displayed, categorized using up to 25 colors, and can be printed within the script or on separate pages. A text "alias" feature allows you to save keystrokes by expanding user-defined abbreviations. For instance, if you are writing a lot of Law and Order specs, you could set the program to expand the one word "Miranda" to "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you..." and so on.
Screenplay Systems felt the need to keep up with the competition, and added a text-to-speech feature, similar to the one in Final Draft. It's just as useless, in my opinion. It's a novelty. Now, if you're just dabbling, and you aren't serious about writing or getting your work produced, the computer may be as close as you get to hearing your script performed. If so, knock yourself out. This feature turns your computer into one big, overpriced toy.
But I don't see its value to serious writers. You can't get any sense of timing, interaction, or anything useful. Screenplay Systems has a "feature comparison" chart on the program's retail box and has this feature with a checkmark next to it. Pay no attention to it. This feature will not make the writing process faster or more convenient, will not make your writing better, and will not make your script more marketable. It is an embarrassment in an otherwise powerful product.
By now you may be getting the impression that this program is highly-powered and feature-rich. You would be correct. The index card tool is very capable and extremely flexible. Personally, I'm still hoping for a similar tool that allows the cards to be scattered on the screen in a more freeform manner, rather than locked into a grid, and I still prefer simple outlining when it comes to plotting and structural tasks. But for those who want such a feature, this is probably the best card system built into a dedicated formatter at present.
Screenwriter 2000 has the standard numbering and revision features that one wants for post-spec screenwriting work - and more. Among them are tools to meet the needs of animation writers. Animation scripts use the asterisk character to track revisions. The first day's revisions have a single asterisk (*), the second day's revisions have two asterisks (**) and so on. Screenwriter 2000 will automatically increment the revision levels as you work. Animation recording scripts - just dialogue, sequentially numbered - can also be printed from Screenwriter 2000.
Did I say "feature rich?" You can also link your script to storyboards created in Power Production's Storyboard Quick or Artist program. (This only works with the Windows version of Screenwriter 2000.) If you want to send Screenwriter 2000 files to somebody who does not own the program, you don't have to export the file. You get a small utility program, that you can e-mail along with the script file, that will let anyone view and print Screenwriter files. (Of course, if the recipient is going to read your script on a computer screen, it would be more considerate and Internet-friendly to send them a plain ASCII version, compressed in a zip file.)
Alternatively, you can even save the script as an Adobe Acrobat "pdf" file. This is a handy feature, and the company should be commended for including it. For now, it adds value to the program. However, some users (like this reviewer) who already own the full Adobe Acrobat program can create pdf files with nearly any standard Windows program - including competing formatting software. I have successfully output pdf files from Scriptware and Final Draft, for example. But if you don't own the full Acrobat program, Screenwriter 2000 is the only script formatting program that can do it now.
The program also has a feature claiming to aid collaboration with a writing partner over the Internet in real time. That one has not been tested for a number of reasons. One is the difficulty of setting it up while maintaining security against hackers; the other is that I can't imagine ever wanting to use it. My gut feeling is that this is one of those features that some people think they need, but which don't really help them in practice. On the other hand, times are changing. Others may see more value in this than I do, so I'll wait to see if it catches on, and more importantly, if any writing teams sell screenplays written with this feature. I know of none so far.
The printing and file options are numerous. You can preview or print the script in any part, or in whole. You can also print character lists, dialogue, unique locations, actors' sides, film breakdown reports, and television breakdown reports. The program imports files from Dramatica, Final Draft, Scriptware, or Scriptor, as well as generic ASCII or RTF. It saves in ASCII, RTF, ScriptThing for DOS, Scriptware, HTML or pdf (Adobe Acrobat) file formats. The Windows version will also import Movie Master, Word, Word Perfect, and Wordstar files.
No, this reviewer has not tested every single one of those claimed file transfer abilities. Case in point - I have not had a copy of Wordstar installed on any PC of mine for about 10 years now! But there is one thing I have tested, by accident really, which does not work correctly.
In MS-DOS and Windows, directory names can be in an eight-dot-three configuration, just like MS-DOS filenames. I have a directory on my computer in this format; let's pretend that it's called MYMOVIES.NEW, and I use it to consolidate all my recent film-related material. Within that directory I place several other subdirectories, to store files from outliners, word processors, other screenplay software - and Screenwriter 2000. None of those other programs has a problem finding its files or subdirectories within that main directory, or reading them or writing them.
But when Screenwriter opens, it flashes an error message that it can't find "MYMOVIES.NEW" - as if that were the name of a script. Let's say that my full path to the test file for this review is [ MYMOVIES.NEW/SW2000/TEST.SCW ]. The program sees the first dot, and mistakenly assumes that it is reading a file name, not a directory name. It stops parsing the pathname, and never gets to the slashes, the directory name, or the file name that follow. Instead it throws the error message up on my screen. But then - it proceeds to open the file normally. What?
This bug is a holdover from ScriptThing. Today it is just cosmetic, but when I first found it years ago, the program was indeed writing the directory name over and over, instead of the filenames I thought I was specifying. I ended up with one copy of MYMOVIES.NEW and nothing else - which means the program had destroyed data. That's a major no-no.
Well, the ScriptThing folks did fix it. One can now save files anywhere, with any name. But they did not bother cleaning up after making the fix, so the error message still appears at bootup - even though there is not really any error occurring. Also, despite Screenplay Systems' claims of having superior quality control compared to ScriptThing, they never caught or fixed the bug either. It's annoying, and another reminder of ScriptThing's occasional disregard for Windows programming standards. I'm sure that very few people use directory names in that 8-dot-3 configuration, but it is a "legal" directory name and it should be fully supported.
I've also run into oddities in the menu displays, since I have a high-resolution screen and do not use the default Windows font settings. Once again, this problem is specific to Screenwriter 2000. Text bleeds out the sides of menu boxes, and I have to expand the boxes to read them. No other program I use has this sort of difficulty displaying itself on my screen, so once again, I think it is a case where the program is not playing by Microsoft's rules. The user has to make adjustments to make the program work - and this flies in the face of one of my rules for good software. It is the software that should always accommodate the user, not vice-versa.
Still - after years of debugging and maturing, Screenwriter 2000 manages to get away with various cosmetic bugs like this without causing crashes or other catastrophic problems. It has a few worthless doo-dads like "Voice Readback," which make it seem like a toy, and that's not what it is. Screenwriter 2000 has a wide range of valuable features appropriate for professional use, from the spec script, through the sale, and into the rewrite process. Depending on your hardware and other factors, if you give it a trial run on your system you may not even find any of the cosmetic issues that I've described. So if you are in the market for a high-end screenwriting program, this one is certainly worth a good, long look.
Page 2 Stage
Version tested:
Windows v1.02.055
Windward Studios
1127 Barberry Court
Boulder, CO
80303
(303) 499-2544
http://www.page2stage.com
List price
$79.95
PC only, requires Windows 95 and higher
David Thielen, the author of Page 2 Stage, has a history as a computer engineer/developer for Microsoft, where he developed an intimate knowledge of Windows operating systems, among other things. When he set his mind on inventing a new product for this software niche, he did it in a fairly rapid fashion and created a stable program that adheres tightly to familiar Windows standards. In its current incarnation, it can do the basic work of formatting a screenplay on your computer for a rather low price of ownership. In my view, however, it shows its youth by being somewhat more awkward to use than its older competitors.
There is no retail version of the program. You obtain it by downloading from the Windward website, with the option of trying it as a limited demo version first, and deciding whether to register (pay) later; or going right ahead with a purchase, and being able to use all its features immediately. Once you become a paying customer, and the program is fully functional, it protects itself against unlicensed copying with a registration code system. This system requires a password the first the program is run, and allows installation on multiple computers.
Windward astutely recognized that it was entering a competitive market when it created this program, and looked for ways to differentiate it. One way it did this was to seek out translators from around the world, with the goal of offering one program that can be used in 30 languages. I think it's an interesting idea, although I can't help wondering if the producers in other countries are nearly as picky about page format as the typical Hollywood reader or story analyst might be.
In any case, the fact that people did volunteer to help in that effort suggests that at least a few writers in those far-flung markets thought the program could benefit them. And as a result, Page 2 Stage achieved a distinctive feature not available in its competitors.
Another distinctive feature is the outliner, which displays more of the script contents than the "outline" mode in other programs; one can collapse or expand scenes much like the outline features in some word processors. Page 2 Stage includes icons to indicate the type of element represented by each item in an outline, which to my eyes makes for a very busy screen, rather like a page from the Sunday comics. There is definitely a place for a tool like this in a screenwriting program, but I'd like to see a cleaner implementation. Your mileage may vary, as they say, so if you are interested you should look at the demo.
Also distinctive, but less meaningful in my opinion, is an elapsed time feature, showing how long your movie has taken to reach any given page or scene, based on the page count. To begin with, the traditional minute-per-page guideline is purely a rough estimation tool to start with. Codifying it into software, with all the math involved, seems silly. Different writers will have a different "density" in their action descriptions, and different dialogue-heavy scenes should play more slowly than others depending on the emotional content and other issues. The program can't possibly evaluate those issues - and estimate their timing - as well as you can.
But more than that, I am concerned that a beginning writer may assume that a feature like this is necessary or valid, simply because it is available. And I don't think it is valid. Having it appear onscreen suggests that the writer must race against some sort of clock, by which one's story progress is measured. This harkens back to the advice given by Syd Field and other screenplay gurus that one should (some said "must") place certain events in a story at specific pages (i.e. at specific durations of time).
Years ago, writers complained that some story analysts ("readers") were being very dogmatic about seeking plot points at specific page locations when evaluating spec screenplays. Others were reputed to reject any screenplay under or over certain target lengths. But really, I think most readers let the script speak for itself. If it is compelling from the first page to the last, and satisfies at the end, that matters most of all.
Since there is no universal agreement about page counts and plot points, the value of a time-measuring tool depends on your believing that the bare number can actually evaluate the pacing of your script better than you can just by reading it. Below, you will read about basic issues I wish the author had put more effort into, instead of working to add unnecessary and potentially distracting features like this.
The program has a fairly good feature set for its price, including dual-column dialogue, thesaurus, highly configurable script notes, and so on. The index card view is similar in concept to other programs. There are various reports and graphs that calculate - again, on a purely mathematical basis - the relative weights of action and dialogue, the appearance of specific characters, whether scenes are interiors or exteriors, and so on.
The file import and export options are more limited than most competitors, but the one method I tested worked very well. I imported an RTF file, and Page 2 Stage launched a very detailed "Wizard" that ensured a fully successful import, with all elements ending up in their proper places. Of course, this requires that you can get your target document in RTF format to start with; but most major word processors and screenplay programs offer it as an option. If you want to do an ASCII file import, you are out of luck; and clipboard cut-and-paste imports require doctoring after the fact.
The limited range of file import/export options does not trouble me a lot, since I do not believe many writers actually need to use them very often. The feature set, though fairly large, is clearly oriented toward submission drafts. One can not lock pages, or create the kind of revision history used in the pre-production phases of a Hollywood type of production.
Page 2 Stage is flexible enough to be used for writing and formatting feature films, sitcoms (taped and filmed) and stage plays. The user can also modify any of these formats, up to a point, to suit his/her tastes or needs. That's a good thing for playwrights, since the "Stage" format that comes with the program is really just a slightly modified offshoot of the feature film format. (That is true of all the competitors as well.)
After I tinkered extensively with the "Edit Script Style" command, I was pleasantly surprised at what it could do. As far as I can tell, this program comes closer than any competitor to allowing users to format a real stage play. The name can be placed flush left, and the dialogue can appear on the same line with the name. Stage directions can be italicized, and one has full control over the margins. I have tried this with most of the other programs on the market, and could not get exactly the layout I wanted.
The dark cloud around this silver lining is that a playwright still has to punch through excess keystrokes to do the writing. For example, you can't avoid cycling through scene headings (sluglines), which aren't used in stage plays. Also, the only easy way to add parenthetical directions within dialogue is with a mouse and the "Insert" toolbar. This should be easier to do within the normal Tab/Enter command structure.
I would love to see this - or any - program go all the way in this direction. People who want to write for the stage, in a proper play format, need a command mode that skips sluglines, for instance. They also need the program to come with a correct stage play format built in, without requiring the kinds of modifications that I had to do for this test. Screenwriter 2000 is close, and is easier to use, but it also needs a few tweaks.
Put it another way - the amount of effort required to get any of these programs set up was about what I might have spent throwing together a few simple stage-play macros for a word processor. And if I were going to write a stage play today, that's exactly what I would do, rather than buying any new software.
But since this review is primarily for screenwriters, how well does this program work for them? I think it needs some work. It uses the Tab and Enter keys for most movement between elements, as many other programs do. But the way they are implemented is not as convenient or foolproof as most others. I believe it is too easy to find oneself in the wrong element, with no easy way to get to the element that one wants.
For example, when I am typing an action description and press the Tab key, it doesn't move the cursor to the next logical position, i.e., a character name. Instead, it converts the entire action description into a character name element. I can't see any way that this makes sense.
Converting elements into other elements is an essential ability to have in the program. But it is not the most likely thing that a person will want to do while in the middle of writing a script. Therefore, the command to make it happen should not be tied to a commonly-used key, nor should it be so easily invoked while in the middle of text entry and editing. That is a fundamental tenet of interface design. The point of reducing all main commands to two keys is to simplify and speed up the work. That requires that, wherever you are when you press one of these two keys, that keystroke should result in an action that you are likely to want at that point.
Look at a screenplay. At the end of any given bit of dialogue, what usually comes next? The most common answers: a character name or an action description. Dialogue is very often part of a conversation among multiple characters; it may also occasionally be interrupted by an action direction of some kind. Unfortunately, Page 2 Stage only gets this half right.
If you type in some dialogue, and then press Enter, you are presented with a menu of previously-used character names, with the option of typing in a new one. This is fine so far. Pressing Enter after the character name takes you to dialogue. Perfect. But what if you don't want to go from dialogue to dialogue, but instead want the next most likely choice - an action element?
Starting with the cursor in dialogue, you must press Enter, to get to the character name menu, then Tab, to get to a slugline, then Tab again, to switch from slugline to action. Three keystrokes required, for one of the most common moves a screenwriter would want to make.
For contrast, look at Scriptware, for example. You can set the program so that the Enter key takes you to either of the two most likely choices from within dialogue - either to a character name (for more exchanges of dialogue) or to action. One keystroke. If you are in action, the Tab key takes you to character name. One keystroke.
Now, Page 2 Stage also offers other ways to navigate through the screenplay. One is the mouse-based Insert bar, which works just fine. But I don't know why one would want to add so much extra motion to one's work. Actually easier, in my view, is the main menu. Press Alt-I, followed by P, and you can enter a parenthetical command, for instance. Unfortunately, there is no error-trapping to prevent you from putting parentheticals in erroneous locations. When I did my test, my cursor was parked in the middle of an action element. The program broke the action element, inserted the parentheses on a fresh line, and parked the cursor inside them, ready to write.
Good news: the command worked great. Bad news: it should not have. I was nowhere near a character's dialogue, which is where parentheticals are used. (Not to be confused with the character name extensions like O.S. or CONT'D, which may also be enclosed in parentheses.) In other words, the program makes it to easy to insert extraneous elements out of place, which will have to be cleaned up later. Most of the competitors trap such errors, and prevent them from happening to begin with.
In other words: you can't count on the program to keep you out of trouble, which is one of the main reasons to buy such a program. I don't want to have to look down to find the mouse, or waste time moving a cursor around a menu bar. Yes, one should always proofread, no matter what one uses to do the writing. But when one is in the middle of an intense writing session, one should not have to think so hard about positioning the cursor correctly before entering a command, and so on. That's the software's job.
When I'm writing, I don't want to have to take my mind off the scene, or the characters, or the emotional moment that they may be in. It is too easy to lose a train of thought. I want to concentrate on the content, not the process of getting it onscreen. When I review software, that's the kind of writing environment I hope to find.
Script formatting software has no purpose for existence except to the extent that it can improve on a regular word processor in terms of speed, and in terms of facilitating the creative process. Page 2 Stage has taken strides toward those goals, especially in delivering a flexible product to writers in other languages. But for serious writers, I feel it needs to mature before it can match the major players. Readers attracted primarily by the low price should try the demo, and decide whether they feel it meets their needs sufficiently.
Each program has its pluses and minuses, many of which come down to personal taste and budget. The first three are more mature and full-featured products, while also being more expensive. The first three listed here generally compete in roughly the same price range, depending on when and where you buy them.
Scriptware is easy to use, and has all the features needed for writing spec drafts or professional Hollywood-style revisions and production reports. It has a long history and good reputation, good vendor support, and no copy protection.
Final Draft has a clean interface, strong outline and index card features, and a big following in the Macintosh world. It is slightly weaker in production-oriented features, but catching up.
Screenwriter 2000 is powerful and has more features than its competitors, although not all those features are of interest to all writers. Some, like variable Undo levels, are implemented carelessly. It has a good index card feature, and tremendous flexibility for page length "cheating." Its unique abilities for interactive multimedia scripts are impressive, although of use only for writers in specific situations. It also has extensive production capabilities for writers who go beyond writing spec scripts. The vendor is well-established in the industry, and support should be good.
Page 2 Stage is by far less expensive than the others, but works only on newer Windows platforms, has limited file transfer abilities, and a somewhat keystroke-intensive command structure. On the other hand, it allows extensive customization, and may be useful for playwrights and others who can cope with its somewhat tricky user interface.
Go to the beginning section: Introduction.
Go to the previous section: Add-on tools for Word Processors.
Use the navigation buttons below to return to the main software page or other locations.