Anonymous at 2009-08-24 17:17:39:

I strongly disagree with you here. You mention that you'd heard that joke a number of times before, I'm sure the writer had too. By extension, the character in the world of the movie probably heard it as well, and is just repeating it for a laugh. When it comes to jokes like that that people repeat over and over, I think that's acceptable, even realistic, to use in dialogue, because people do in fact repeat jokes that they hear, even if they didn't write them themselves. But when it comes to scene description, I think it's important for a writer to use his own words and not rely on the work of another. I think it's lazy, no matter how "perfect" the phrase may seem. If it is truly a perfect description, it's because the original writer made it so. I would definitely consider it plagiarism, though it's hard to say for sure without knowing the exact phrase the OP is referring to and from where it came. I hear writers all the time trying to justify using other people's thoughts and words in their own work and no matter how you slice it, it is plagiarism. The only reason I think people say that it is acceptable is because it's a screenplay and thus not really considered "real writing". How can we as screenwriters ever hope to gain any credibility in our work if we allow and even encourage this kind of behavior. As far as I'm concerned, if you didn't write the line, than you have NO RIGHT to use it. What ever happened to ethics? I know the audience won't ever see it if it's in the scene description, but that shouldn't matter. The OP seems to be looking for an excuse to steal someone else's work, and you're giving him permission to do so. If your friend says something really funny, it's not okay to steal it for your screenplay. If you really think it's so funny, you should examine what makes it funny and come up with your own version of it, something that's wholly original from your friend's remark. If you can't do that than maybe you shouldn't be a writer. Writers write, hacks steal. I really hope you reconsider your advice here, Scott. It's a slippery slope when we allow this kind of behavior to go unchecked. There are too many hacks out there, it's harmful to the profession when you encourage more people to join their ranks. Again, WRITERS WRITE. HACKS STEAL. Thanks.

Scott at 2009-08-24 18:21:33:

Anonymous, I appreciate both your sentiment and your passion. And speaking from my experience having worked in Hollywood for some time, I would not consider a line used in scene description, taking from a public source, as plagiarism -- simply because the entirety of the movie business is built on a model that reuses the same ideas and story concepts over and over again for movies. Hollywood is a business built on the "homage" (a charitable choice of words). So my response was made on the practical basis of what is the reality on the ground in Hwood.

And I must toss in this anecdote. Woody Guthrie wrote over 4,000 songs. When asked how he wrote so many tunes, Gutherie openly stated [paraphrasing], "I take a melody of a song I like, then I change it a bit here, change it a bit there, and make it a bit different."

I worked as a stand-up comic for 2 years. The line between 'inspiration' and 'copping material' was always blurry.

Movies, music, comedy -- all forms of entertainment involve 'specific inspiration,' if you will. So again, my response was from the reality on the ground.

Now you'll notice I didn't tell the questioner to do that. Nor did I say that I write like that. And I have no problem amending my comment (and will update my original post to reflect it) that we should always strive to be original in what we write, even in scene description.

So I hope you see the distinction: My answer as would this be considered plagiarism, and my response was that in Hollywood, per a 100+ year tradition of 'similar but different' -- with much of the movies being very similar -- it would not. But as I just now stated, per your point, the best course is to strive for originality.

Anonymous at 2009-08-24 18:43:55:

Scott,

I get what you're saying, but what troubled me were two comments in the OP.

"Is it plagiarism to embed a phrase taken from public domain writing in an action line? And for that matter from anything else?"

The second question there leads me to suspect he has other texts or sources he wants to lift from, not just the public domain piece he first mentions. Like I said, slippery slope.

The second problem I had was this:
"I just find a turn of phrase that I can't improve on, you know?"

He says he can't improve upon it, meaning he wants to use the exact phrase, without altering it, which would not be "similar, but different" but instead would be "similar, exactly."

Do you see what I mean?

I have no problem with the "similar, but different" theory, because you're right, there are only so many stories to tell. What I'm saying is that if I see something I want to use, it's my duty as a writer to take that thing and change it so that it is in fact different.

I just got a feeling from the question that he wasn't really interested in changing it, that he just wants to use it word for word. Inspiration is one thing, but outright copying is another.

Concepts, story ideas, etc., are recycled all the time, sure. There are only so many ideas out there. But as writers our word choices and writing styles should be unique to us. There's a broader issue here, I think. Using exact phrases that someone else wrote and passing it off as our own is something that should be frowned upon.

I'm not trying to jump all over the OP, but this is something I've come across a lot with screenwriters in particular. The implied question they ask being, is it okay to steal if no one knows? To which I would say, No, it's not okay.

When someone's reading my work and they're struck by a particular phrase they find to be especially eloquent, they'll think, wow this guy's a good writer. But what if I stole that phrase from someone else? It's dishonest and just isn't proper.

Peter the OP at 2009-08-24 20:13:16:

Take it easy Anonymous, I'm a sincere hard worker that wasn't looking for an excuse to copy. The "same but different" gets a bit murky sometimes. I've been reading a lot of screenplays (bought and made ones) and noticing the same kinds of phrases used. I wanted to hear an insider's opinion on this and if it was discussed among peers at all. I am not cut and copying but I just wondered where the line is.

We can all point to a million movies that are basically the same with different names. How many times have we heard, "Is that all you got?"

Anonymous, I thank you for your comments though, because this is exactly the debate I wondered about. Where do you draw the line? Your assumption that I was asking if it "was okay to steal if no one knows" wasn't my question and perhaps I could have phrased it better. I think Scott received it with the proper intent.

Anonymous, should no one ever write:

Darkness. Silence.

or two or three words:

"smoldering blackness"

"flashes a beguiling smile" written a ton

"her cheeks flushed from laughing"

"enunciating with elaborate preciseness", "his eyes flutter", "sexy without trying too hard", you get the idea...where is the line?

I don't think it is that creative to move the order of words around. Would you think it is better to write "an indigo sky" if I've read "the sky turned indigo"? I mean, what color is better than indigo for the sky?!

It could be argued that you can't write anything you haven't read or heard elsewhere because language is learned. I guess it is the same as the music industry, which I am more familiar. Lawsuits happen all the time when artists feel their melodies have been stolen. They then learn in court that their "phrase of original music" has been heard dozens of times if not more dating back to Gregorian chant, always funny! I might be willing to bet that phrase that you wrote and thought you came up with Anonymous, has been written before...(I'm just saying we all have a subconscious)

Thanks for the debate and I appreciate this site.

Anonymous at 2009-08-24 21:36:08:

Peter,

Like I said, I didn't mean to jump on you and said that I didn't know for sure the specifics. I didn't in any way mean to attack you, I was trying to get at a larger issue in writing and screenwriting in particular which I think is important to discuss, that being, what is okay and what isn't, when it comes to using the words of others. So, totally sorry if I offended you, I didn't mean to, I was just using it as an example for the point. Given your response, I think now that you probably weren't thinking what I was thinking. I was thinking you were going to use something longer than just a couple of words, so sorry about that. But there is still something to discuss here.

The examples you supplied, I probably wouldn't take issue with. Though, there is something to be said for actively trying to avoid cliches. I mean, here and there it's probably fine, if that's how the words come to you as you're writing. What I was getting at was that some writers (scott used the example of stand up comedy, which is apt) will intentionally poach the work of others to bolster their own, which I have a problem with. Now that I've read your response, I don't think that's what you're doing. So sorry again.

Anyway, I'm not saying that you can't use a common phrase. But I do think it's always better to try to come up with something you haven't heard before. When you look at it through the perspective of a script reader, when they see these same phrases used again and again, across the board, it probably becomes rather irksome. People are more apt to respond positively when they're confronted with something that's both an accurate description while also being phrased in a way that they haven't read or thought of before. Something evocative, arresting. I think Scott's discussed screenwriting as poetry before, which is a nice way to think about it. Every word matters and should be chosen with careful precision.

In writing a script there's always the desire to want to breeze through it, just to get it all down on paper. But in revising, we should always be looking for ways to eliminate those commonly written phrases, or to punch them up in a way that makes them stand out. I didn't mean to suggest that just reordering the words would suffice, I meant to say to look at the phrase a little deeper, and ask why that phrase sticks out, what about it is so enticing, and to try to use that information to craft your own image of the same thing.

As far as what I've written in these comments and how wholly original they are or are not, doesn't really matter, because this isn't a script, it's just a discussion.

I really didn't mean to offend you or tear you down in any way, I was just using your question as a springboard for this sort of discussion.

Good luck and all the best wishes. Sorry for the misunderstanding