I'm not wild about the "owning" terminology. Owning implies attitude, which is often entirely wrong for a scene. If anybody owns the scene, it's you. The way it was put to me in Flickscribble 100: everybody enters the scene wanting something. There will be a winner and loser(s). You get to pick the winner. As soon as the audience sees who it is, end the scene.

Jeff, I see that as a difference in semantics: Owning = Winner. But if the Winner-Loser terms work for you, great! The point is the pretty same: Characters enter a scene with their respective goals. Hopefully in most cases, that is the basis for conflict. Then we've got something to work with to give the scene some heat. Someone wins. Someone owns the scene. Move onto the next scene.

Jeff, not sure what you mean by attitude. Could you elaborate? I see it more as a difference in semantics: Owning = Winner. Someone wins the scene. Someone owns the scene. But if the Winner-Loser terms work for you, great! The point is the pretty same: Characters enter a scene with their respective goals. Hopefully in most cases, that is the basis for conflict. Then we've got something to work with to give the scene some heat. Someone wins. Someone owns the scene. Move onto the next scene. Right?

Right. And yes, it's semantics. There's a growing difference between win and own. Own has become ambiguous. Among younger users of the Internerd it means¹: 1. To be unquestionably cool. 2. Being superior to someone. 3. Winning a competitive event. 4. To utterly destroy someone's morale or pride. See also pwn. As you can see, these four current definitions have nuances of attitude, (AKA 'tude) feelings of superiority or dominance. For example, a character who regards all encounters as competitive events (def. 3) is more than partial; he's obsessed. ¹ Urban Dictionary (a poor source for academic definitions but useful for following present day younger demographic usage. Use with care.)