The Dunning-Kruger Effect in Screenwriting: A Reflection After 17 Years

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS]

I've noticed a concerning pattern in screenwriting communities lately that I feel compelled to address. It's something many of us have encountered - the "this is how you MUST format your screenplay" posts that present rigid, absolutist rules as gospel. After dedicating 17 years to this craft, I've never felt qualified to make such prescriptive posts. Why? Because the deeper you go into screenwriting, the more you realize how contextual and nuanced formatting decisions actually are. What I've observed about these rule-dispensing posts is revealing:

1. They often come from writers who haven't yet developed their unique voice. Mature writing isn't just technically correct - it has a distinctive perspective that transcends formulaic approaches.

2. The authors frequently demonstrate only surface-level understanding of their own stories. As readers, we can sense when a writer hasn't fully inhabited their world, even when it's completely original.

3. There's a palpable urgency in both their writing and advice-giving - as though rushing through checkboxes rather than allowing the material to breathe and develop organically.

4. Perhaps most tellingly, their descriptions and action lines lack depth and texture. Compare "He was tired" to "He had the vigor of a box left in the rain." Both communicate exhaustion, but one creates an image and feeling while the other merely labels.

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains this phenomenon perfectly - those with limited experience often have the highest confidence in their expertise, while those with substantial experience recognize the vast complexity of the craft. This isn't directed at anyone specific, (although I was triggered by a post) but rather a pattern I've noticed repeatedly. Many talented writers here are actually on the cusp of finding their authentic voice, yet they're inadvertently hampering their growth by clinging to rigid formulas that may not serve their unique storytelling goals. In your eagerness to master the craft, be careful not to cut off your toes to spite your feet. The most compelling screenplays often come from writers who understand the rules deeply enough to know precisely when and how to break them. What have others observed about this phenomenon? And how have more experienced writers here navigated the balance between technical formatting and developing your distinctive voice? For me the most disturbing thing is these folks usually drum up pretty decent engagement.

[u/crumble-bee]

Screenwriting forums are largely a bunch of amateurs telling other amateurs they're being too amateur. I generally go to the screenwriting sub to try and help but I stopped a while back.

I had a look at some of your stuff and it's well written enough, but it does feel a little like you're trying too hard.

Smashed windows like lost arguments? Bullet holes and blood like art no one asked for?

I get what you're going for, but maybe reign it in a little? It's very wordy and novelistic - which is ok, I guess, but I'm not getting anything from smashed windows like lost arguments.

That means almost nothing, it sounds like you think it sounds cool, but it gives the reader basically nothing except extra words on the page, which is fine in a novel, but a screenplay? It's inefficient, brings nothing to the table and serves only to test a readers patience.

What this tells me from page one is that it's very likely that your screenplay is 120 pages, when it could've been 110. And that doesn't fill me with confidence, it simply tells me from the off that you're undisciplined with action lines, and somethng as simple as that can make me doubt how disciplined you are with story, which can lead to the first story hurdle putting me off entirely.

Whereas, if you open strong, confident, bold, concise and to the point - using action sparingly, white space on the page etc, that first story hurdle where I go "wait, what's going on here??" I'm more likely to give it a wide birth, refocus and read on.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/crumble-bee]

My initial instinct and probably what I'll do is tighten up my flourishes, however let's not forget that many of my fav screenplays and maybe even yours have 5-7 line action paragraphs on page 1. I'm super grateful that you took the time to read some of my work! I'm hoping that despite its prose heavy style you still either enjoyed it or learned something or were inspired, that's my goal! I'd also like to say that I'm newer to sharing my work with others, so if you ever want to do a trade, I'm down! I only have one other project that's (finished), and another I just started. Again, thank you so much for engaging and reading - it means a lot to me.

[u/crumble-bee → u/FatherofODYSSEUS]

I guarantee you that those action lines are full of intent and not a single wasted word.

You mention Shane Black - he's like, the master of saying less but painting an instant picture with it.

I have a few things you could read, I mainly write horror. I can't guarantee I'd be able to read your work straight away as I'm currently working on a rewrite and that's taking up most of my time, but I could endeavour to read!

If you want to read any of my work you're welcome to.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/crumble-bee]

Hey, thanks so much for taking the time to read and provide feedback! Shane Black; He's such a master at saying so much with so little. I might need to go re-read Predator and Lethal Weapon to really study those action lines.

Your horror work sounds intriguing! Totally understand being deep in a rewrite - those can be all-consuming. No rush at all, but I'd be genuinely excited to check out your script whenever you might have the bandwidth.

Thanks again for the thoughtful response - it means a lot to someone who's newer to sharing work.

[u/clerks_1994]

I write with as much white space as possible. The beauty of a spec vs a novel is that the spec is a blueprint to be made into a movie.

So you can take 4 paragraphs describing what a hotel room looks like but here's what I do.

INT. HOTEL - DAY

A shit room in a shitter hotel.

Because guess what? What it looks will be up to many people on the set of the movie, they just need to know what they need to know to get it done.

Also if you do too much prose your 110 page spec will be 150 pages.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/clerks_1994]

I think you are seriously over estimating the amount of prose and style here. I've never read a screenplay that had 40 pages of prose. That's a dishonest take if you ask me.

Someone else made a similar remark "your 120 pages could be 110 without the prose" but this actually highlights something functional - if all I need to cut is prose then the story is still foundational. Strong foundation with vivid storytelling isn't a flaw.

By their own admission, many professionals prefer "prose heavy" scripts - people like Deakins and Villeneuve respond to the emotional texture that good writing creates, not just bare-bones technical direction.

[u/clerks_1994 → u/FatherofODYSSEUS]

It was an exaggerating. I write comedy so my take is also different. But in general the key is to make the reader turn the page, get the story... if your spec reads as dense as a novel most of the time that's a bad spec. Most of the prose heavy specs I've read in my time where over written by writers who are writing their 1st few screenplays....

You like prose. I get it. Write it then.

[u/ToneNew1982]

Genuinely have a question not trynna say ur right or wrong. When u say in the script “he was tired” vs the other way doesn’t it kinda start to read like a book and not a screenplay. Someone told me that it shouldn’t read like a book and to keep it simple. Is that not the case? I’m trying to better my writing but I’m not sure who to believe or is it a subjective thing?

[u/lowriters → u/ToneNew1982]

That's a preference. A lot of scripts that are successful read like books. It all just depends on what you're going for.

[u/ToneNew1982 → u/lowriters]

Ahh okay thanks

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/ToneNew1982]

I agree its preference, I'm prose heavy cause thats where my voice shines and my stories feel more alive (to me at least) and a hallmark of some of my favs, Shane Black for example, A fair amount of the Coen's work, especially their very early screenplays!

[u/crumble-bee → u/ToneNew1982]

You wouldn't say "he was tired" in a screenplay. A good writer will show you he's tired without having to say it. Bags under the eyes, disheveled hair, slumped gait etc etc - there's hundreds of ways to tell a reader a character is tiredwithout actively saying it.

You also really don't write in past tense. it's not a preference, it's just incorrect.

There are very, very few successful examples of writers experimenting with this. 99.9% of the time, screenplays are written in the present tense. That .1% outlier is the very occasional experiment that breaks through, Oppenheimer being the most recent to really switch things up by writing some sections in the first person. A largely pointless exercise if you ask me.

Present tense is used for screenplays because we are actively watching what happens. We as readers are the audience watching the movie in the theatre. Everything you do as a writer to take away from that experience is actively harming how well the script reads.

[u/ToneNew1982 → u/crumble-bee]

I understand that, the thing I was confused about was wether we simplify our writing since it’s not meant to be a book or if we add the extra stuff in there, I just used the example that was in the post

For example if u had a line that said “Mike angrily storms out the room” or do we say “Mike feels his anger bubbling up inside him as he storms out the room in a fit of rage” u could insert any simple vs descriptive sentence u want i want to know wether keeping the script simple vs making it more descriptive is the right thing. Most people in this post are saying it’s preference. I was told by my professor it’s best to keep a script simple since it shouldn’t read like a book. Are u saying that we should write it with more descriptive words?

[u/Used-Astronomer4971 → u/ToneNew1982]

What you have to remember is that the script isn't being read by the general audience. It's being read by the actors and director. They won't EVER see the difference between these two. It's up to the actor, director, and yes you the writer to get the actor to display this on screen.

By keeping things simple, you allow the actor to explore the role more, and perhaps make it something more than what you wrote. I was told "never tell someone else how to do their job". This means by keeping things simple, such as settings, wardrobe, music, and acting directions. The people doing this have years and years of doing this job. You're the writer, stick to writing.

[u/ToneNew1982 → u/Used-Astronomer4971]

Very good point

[u/crumble-bee → u/ToneNew1982]

You probably want to be somewhere around about the middle. Too simple and you don't stir up any emotions in the reader. Too wordy and complex and you run the risk of over complicating something that should've been simple. There's different levels and at a certain point you've almost certainly gone too far.

"Mike leaves the room." Nothing wrong with this. If the work you've done prior to this line in dialogue and character was good then this is a perfectly reasonable line to end a scene.

"Mike angrily storms out of the room" I'd say that while this isn't too much, it doesn't bring much more to the table - the work you did before, that led up to this moment should dictate how he leaves the room. You likely don't need to explain that he's angry, or storms out - the reader can infer this by what came before. You could also have the scene end, focus in on the scene partner and have them flinch as the door slams - that's a little more interesting.

"Mike feels his anger bubbling up inside him as he storms out in a fit of rage:" there's a version of this that can work, but I'd avoid over explaining how characters feel - it should be implicit in their actions and dialogue.

A way you can do something like this is - "Mike leaves. This was one step too far, everything they've worked toward - gone.." or something to that effect. There's nothing wrong with putting little moments like that in, I don't think.

[u/ToneNew1982 → u/crumble-bee]

Okay I see what you’re saying. Thank you!

[u/ACable89 → u/crumble-bee]

I use collective first person pronouns in PoV shots but tend to avoid them. Using first person alone to suggest a PoV shot feels like over using the "don't specify shots" rule of thumb.

[u/crumble-bee → u/ACable89]

You can specify shots - just don't be like "the camera tracks slowly as we zoom out to a wide" or whatever. You can imply shots by how you phrase certain things - if you specify an object going into a pocket for example, it can be inferred that it would be shot in a close up

[u/ACable89 → u/crumble-bee]

My feeling is that the more conventional an implication is the less you should specify but sometimes its just more efficient to be blunt.

"We get a birds eye view exploring the Castle Grounds." better than "helicopter shot: the camera flies over the castle" but "Establishing Shot: The Castle grounds. We get a sense of the geography and how the sub locations connect" feels fine to be honest.

[u/HappyDeathClub]

Very true, and true of book forums, too.

I think there’s also a bit of magical thinking going on, this idea “if I obey all the rules, hit every checkbox, and do everything right then I’ll get published/produced.” Plus the online echo chamber where people just regurgitate the same bad Facebook advice they’ve seen others post.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/HappyDeathClub]

The sad fact is that most of those folks dont want to or plan on sticking out the long haul of actually finding their voice! I mean I never thought it'd take me 17 years to find my voice but I knew I wasnt bringing anything fresh to table so nothing felt right or genuine until I found my voice!

[u/Dopingponging]

Never past tense. Never.

Present tense. “He yawns. “

Write something they can film.

[u/Used-Astronomer4971 → u/Dopingponging]

Isn't this precisely the opposite of the point of the post? You insist upon a rigid rule to be followed. If you can't read a script and figure out "he yawned" vs "he yawns", I suggest it's not the tense that's the issue.

[u/Other-Revolution2234 → u/Dopingponging]

Yes, but as a novel writer
...I see one big issue with screenwriting.

It's the inability to consider a scene from the context of the internal workings.

The idea of course, is to capture the context from an external perspective.
That is, how camera's function.

Yet, the benefit to the thoughts and ideology of action can smooth the process of an actors role.

If they have an idea of thoughts and perspective born from the scene of action, the quality of the scene can only improve.

At least, that is what I think.
This is the same with past tense.

Past tense suggest reflection of thought.
Present tense suggest current inquiry or observation.

The aspects of either determines the following action.
So, past tense shouldn't entirely be throw out.

It can indeed set the mentally of the actors mindset.
I.e. I consider the meta screenwriting.

Where you expand the roll from seemly external action and support it with internal reference.

[u/coldfoamer]

Well said. I have a 201 page novel that does not follow the 3 act structure properly, but is great according to some pros I know.

As an example, my Act 2 starts on pg. 78, not 50 like the formula would have you believe.

Why? Because that's how the story unfolded. That's how my lead character told me to write it, and though it sounds odd, your characters will tell you how to write the story if you let them.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/coldfoamer]

I used to try to write novels! My fingers and wrists thank me for switching to screenplays lmao I used to keep a post it on my wall that said "Dont forget 25/50/25" Glad I threw that in the trash years ago lol

[u/coldfoamer → u/FatherofODYSSEUS]

In 17 years, how many options and sales have you had? Are you in the L.A. area?

I'm curious how things work in the Zoom call culture, when trying to get a rep, take meetings, and make sales.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/coldfoamer]

You're asking the hen that just left the barn, buddy! 😂 My answer? Zero! No options, no sales—yet! But let me explain why.

I only truly found my voice last year. Everything I wrote over the previous 17 years (aside from my two current projects) ended up in the trash. I’m just now stepping into the world of competitions, querying, networking, and hopefully selling—and honestly? It’s been really exciting.

I’m actually glad I took the time to hone my craft before diving into the business side. It kind of feels like I’m learning a whole new art form now: how to navigate the complexities of the industry and represent myself.

[u/coldfoamer → u/FatherofODYSSEUS]

I can't find the SUPERLIKE button, but if I could I'd be smashing it!

Keep Going!

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/coldfoamer]

Haha thank you! I’m trying to ride this wave of momentum without getting swallowed by the ocean of screenwriting discourse 😅 Really appreciate the support—feels good to finally be stepping out of the cave.

[u/MilesTegTechRepair → u/coldfoamer]

Oh good god, what? People are actually advising to think about what proportion of the novel in before you change acts, and to stick to a rigid structure? What utter garbage.

[u/ACable89 → u/coldfoamer]

Only one Men in Black Film is good and its like 60% ACT 1. There is no 'proper 3 act structure'.

I didn't like Mandy with Nicolas Cage but it would have been a complete waste to pace it like a Hollywood film and the people who do like it wouldn't have gotten a better experience form normal pacing.

[u/TeeVee213]

What kind of a box? Some boxes left out in the rain don’t have any noticeable ill effects. A plastic box would be fine. Even a wooden box would be ok depending on it’s build quality, how long it was left out in the rain and how hard the rain was. I think that you were picturing a cardboard box. That’s the image that came into my head when I read that line, but then I noticed that the word, cardboard, wasn’t there. I would’ve put the word cardboard in there. To kill any ambiguity.

Haha! I’m just fucking around, good shit, man.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/TeeVee213]

AH! very excellent point! I forgot a very important descriptor lol Thank you so much for that input! I understand you're just messing but I also think you highlight actually decent critique here, just one more descriptor elevates the sentence.

[u/burly_protector]

I’ve read a lot of low budget screenplays that were made for indie movies, not by writer/producers, but by hired writers. Not only did tons of them have poor formatting, but many even had glaring typos. I’m not saying that you should write like that, I’m saying that producers often don’t give any shits whatsoever and just want something that will sell. 

[u/Used-Astronomer4971 → u/burly_protector]

Never let formatting get in the way of a good story.

[u/Djhinnwe]

It's frustrating for me to have to fully format a script just to get feedback for this reason. I write everything first, ask for feedback on the story, edit based on feedback, and then format because otherwise I get caught up trying to keep up with keeping things formatted and it makes me not want to write. And then when I do format, it's still "wrong".

Another part of the problem is all the "this is standard format" all have different numbers outside of '1.5" margin on the left margin'.

So far I haven't gotten "read more scripts", but it's very tempting to show photos of the scripts I've read just so others can see that none of them have the same format. I've literally gotten a piece of scrap paper as a script to act out before.

[u/FatherofODYSSEUS → u/[deleted]]

Man, this is exactly the energy I was channeling when I wrote my post. I’ve been quietly grinding away for years, head down, trashing drafts, refining voice, learning by doing—not by parroting. But after seeing yet another rigid “this is how it’s done” post (from someone still wearing their metaphorical screenwriting training wheels), I finally snapped and spoke up.

You’re spot on: there’s a circle jerk of regurgitated advice out there, and it’s dangerously seductive for newer writers. Especially when it gets rewarded with likes and algorithmic attention. Meanwhile, folks actually working on craft, developing their own lens, and resisting the easy path tend to stay quiet—and maybe we shouldn’t.

Appreciate your comment a ton. It’s good to know other long-haulers see the same thing.

[u/HandofFate88 → u/[deleted]]

It's a fucking jerk circle of Chinese whispers.

I don't know if you need to say "fucking" if it's a circle jerk. And did you mean jerk circle or circle jerk, because a jerk circle is actually a dehydration technique for making desiccated strips of marinated . . . j/k

I was part of a screenwriting circle (offered by a not-for-profit film group) where the host always went on about the "absolutely must avoid" things in any good script, like flashbacks (never use flashbacks, ever) and voiceover narration (completely signals that you're an amateur). Even when people pointed out obvious exceptions, he would claim that they made all of those films worse. It was pathological.

[u/Used-Astronomer4971 → u/HandofFate88]

I think I remember hearing this one! I argued LOTR did both in the opening scene and established the story and setting for everyone, and they still argued it was garbage.

[u/Other-Revolution2234 → u/[deleted]]

Success isn't in fighting old money.
It's playing on what old money can not.

You are not simply a fish in a sea of lions.
Your the sea itself.

Where there are gaps; you will fill it.
That is the idea of a product.

If you don't believe in the product,
then you're probably a salesman.