A long time ago after I first read Shane's Lethal Weapon script, I became enamoured with his style of writing. Not just the breaking the 4th wall, but the complete violation of what you're told to put in a screenplay. I'm sure Shane showed his script to many people who told him it would get thrown out purely because of all his text which has nothing to do with the movie, but it makes sense. It's an action movie. Why the hell can't the script be fun? I've since adopted the same technique to varying degrees for my writing.

Tread lightly here is my advice. It was cool when Black did it because it was fresh. We all know these stories now so it will very likely feel forced/derivative and take the reader out of your story. I think in comedy scripts anything goes if it's funny. Any other genre would be a crap shoot.

Totally gonna go read his scripts now. I dig his style, maaaan.

I think you're right, Brendan, tread lightly. In the past, Scott has talked about breaking format rules if it serves the story. I think essentially, that's what Shane Black did (does?). He used a narrative device to support/enhance the story, not for self-indulgence.

Personally, I find his style tiresome, but maybe that's just me. His commentary in the exposition always takes me out of the story and, as a result, I've never finished reading any of his scripts.

So many of you are blinded by what you consider a "cool" factor without realizing he described the scene and action in very specific detail in a very minimalistic style. That's the little gem of wisdom you should take from these. Ask yourself -- Can you picture the scene? Can you write it shorter? Does the writing enhance or distract from the story? It's also not new. Check out William Goldman's stuff. Or Billy Wilder. Larry Kasdan. Any time I see this topic brought up, I always see people asking the wrong questions. "Should I do this?" "Is it still okay to do this?" -- or the terrible advice of "You shouldn't do that because it was fresh when Shane Black did it." Bullshit. The real question you should ask yourself about your work is -- "Does it work?"

What was it Mamet said was the single rule of writing: "Never be boring"?

I concur. This is one of the major reasons I recommend reading scripts, especially recent spec scripts that sell and successful movies, to track the writing styles in play by various writers. Almost always you find a balance at work in terms of 'editorializing' whereby the writer manages to make the experience of reading scene description enjoyable and entertaining, but not detract from the experience or pulling a reader OUT of the story universe.

Checking out your comments, Despina and Lisa, back to back, and we see both the upside and downside potential of breaking the 4th wall. Again for almost all writers and all stories, we need to find a balance of effectively telling the story while maximizing the entertainment experience for the reader.

James, you drive home that point I suggested in the OP: "But his [Black] scene description is equally strong, even poetic in its brevity and heightened visuality and emotion." I think of scene description more as poetry than prose: fewer words, active verbs, vivid descriptors. Black and as you note many others do that as well.

Hey Scott, great post, thanks! Do you know where I can download Billy Wilder screenplays? The only scripts I can find are transcripts... Thank you so much! Best Marian

They are difficult to come by. Have you tried simplyscripts.com?

Yes, only transcripts unfortunately. :( Thx anyway!

Double Indemnity screenplay by Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler [pdf]: http://cinephilearchive.tumblr.com/post/47778832115