FINAL DRAFT VERSION 7.0 USER REVIEW
By Dixon Galvez-Searle

For writers familiar with screenplay format, Final Draft’s Version 7.0 provides a streamlined and much simpler alternative to word processing programs such as Microsoft Word. The rigid demands of screenplay format are nearly impossible to program into a template in a word processing program, and there are similar difficulties involved in negotiating margins and page breaks within a standard document.

Final Draft, on the other hand, is unusually adept at taking care of all of the formatting requirements of a standard screenplay. This applies to everything from knowing that slug lines need to be capitalized to automatically inserting “(CONT’D)” where it’s needed. There’s also the handy SmartType feature that memorizes character names and gives writers the option of automatically filling them in after typing the first letter.

The ease of work flow can also have a surprising impact on creativity. Previously on Word, I found I could spend weeks on a story that was exceptionally thin without even noticing it, because my time was spent in formatting. On Final Draft, the content takes precedence, so holes in the story should be more immediately noticeable.

There’s also the immeasurable ease with which Final Draft handles revisions. Rewriting is a daunting enough task for many writers, but on Word, the reformatting of page breaks makes it an absolute nightmare. Final Draft eliminates those obstacles, taking the excuses out of the rewriting process. I personally find the ease of use to be more of a creative watershed than “Ask the Expert,” an interactive feature that’s designed like a website and offers advice on plot, character and structure.

The flip side of a program like Final Draft is that it can have a lulling effect. Some features, like a registry of names and a text-to-speech feature that can be used to assign “actors” to certain parts, seem designed to offer more creative options to users. The danger is that Final Draft operates so seamlessly that writers may ignore any creative possibilities that lie outside of its formatted path. Therefore, novice users are strongly encouraged to familiarize themselves with the customizable options or, even better, to try their hand at writing a script in Word.

One interesting feature in Version 7.0 is the updated panels system, which allows multiple views of the script, and of which Final Draft vice president of product development Frank Colin says, “People have been asking about it for a long time.” The panels system is particularly handy in split screen mode, which is easily accessible from the toolbar. Especially useful is the vertical split screen with script on one side and the navigator view on the other. This allows writers to double click on any vertically listed scene and jump directly to it.

Final Draft offers plenty of options for annotating the complete script, such as ScriptNotes, but unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to have a useful outline feature. The plain text option looks like the best bet. The markup options are handy but may end up providing too much clutter. If a writer has an idea for a change, it might be better to make it then and there, as long as the program is open. Otherwise, these options could invite someone to get bogged down in note taking.

In addition to the standard features that most writers will take advantage of, Final Draft has also included some advanced options in Version 7.0. Tagger, for instance, is a separate application that breaks down scripts and allows users to export elements into scheduling software. Colin notes that the majority of Final Draft users would have no reason to use Tagger. The application does, however, broaden the scope of the software beyond screenwriters.

Final Draft also allows users to export to XML, a unique feature that Colin calls “the most important development in Final Draft to date.” Before starting, most users should probably increase the levels of undo, which is preset at 5. This can be corrected under Edit/Preferences. Writers should also keep in mind that bold, underline and italics can only be used on highlighted text, which seems unchangeable. The program also seems to lag a little behind on Mac OS9, with the cursor leaving its mark behind every now and again.

In addition, there is an online Script Registry for WGA West, but none for WGA East, which won’t do much good for most SCREEN readers. Hopefully, some of this will be fixed with the upcoming patch from Final Draft, which Colin says corrects some 30 or so glitches in the program.