Here's what I love about unfilmables: the writer (if done right--Clear, Concise, Creative) lets everyone--Reader, Agent, Producer, Director & Actor--see "The Movie." Correction, see the same Movie the writer sees in her/his head. Contemporary writing would probably make the unfilmables listed above more concise, but you can't deny the clear, creative visuals Goldman gives the reader.

I love Goldman's writing style. It's conversational and slick, and reminds you that you're in good hands. If I could do the same at the same level, I would. Convention be damned.

And oh yeah, 'unfilmables' can also make the script a more entertaining read!

You might have a point with Butch and Sundance, but by the time of Princess Bride, Goldman could pretty much write anything he wanted to. It's the privilege of being the top writer in Hollywood - nobody will question you (even if they should). I think it's now known as George Lucas syndrome.

Shane Black does this kind of stuff a bunch, too, and seems to have done it even in his early scripts. Makes them a joy to read, sells the tone of the film, and made him quite a success. Unfilmables are okay as long as they're good. They still have to be clear, where you can imagine exactly what the scene looks like, or the emotion of the scene. They can add to a script, but if a writer doesn't have command, they can ruin it. So I can understand why new writers are given the rule - to really make them focus on that which makes a screenplay different than a novel - but I think it's a rule that, well executed, is the easiest to forgive, because the reader is just having such a fun time reading the script.

DJ, that is the essence of what I advise writers in my classes and workshops. And the guiding light should be Narrative Voice. That is your story's invisible character: Genre + Style = Narrative Voice. That attitude you, as a writer, bring to telling the story, that distinctive perspective as expressed [largely] through scene description reflects the voice of that character. I call it 'editorializing,' commenting on the action and characters in an intimate way because that character is immersed in that story universe. We have to be judicious in what and how much we write so-called 'unfilmables,' but the simple fact is professional screenwriters use them in every script they write. A selling script is as much about entertainment as anything, and used well - as you note - editorializing can lift a script's entertainment value significantly.

I've always loved unfilmables when done well and I've known for a while that one of the biggest things working against you when you're trying to break in as a spec writer are the "unwritables" -- music and lighting. Even if you flat out type the name of a song in your description (widely regarded as another no no) it's not going to have the same impact as hearing that song. Music and lighting are hugely responsible for the tone of a movie. Unfilmables really help to create the tone of a script. So, in that respect, the unfilmables help mitigate the unwritables.

[...] Go Into The Story – Why The Princess Bride Should Not Work As a Movie: Part 3 [...]