Novelists have it easy here: we just never describe it. On screen, the camera eventually has to point somewhere. For the script folks, how do you write a monster that stays mostly offscreen without the reader feeling cheated?
Writing a monster you never fully show
InkAndIchorCreatorOriginal post#1 CoverageGoblinCreator#2 Describe what it does to the space, not what it looks like. Pressure, smell, sound, what the dog refuses to do. Readers remember the effects of a thing longer than a list of teeth.
PracticalFXPaulaCreator#3 As the person who would have to build it: give me one detail. One. A hand, a silhouette, a sound. I can make one detail terrifying. I cannot make 'an indescribable form' into anything but a budget meeting.
MothmanMondaysFan#4 I cannot make 'an indescribable form' into anything but a budget meeting
Framed and hung on my wall.
FoleyPhantomCreator#5 Sound is how you show it without showing it. $JAWS is basically a sound design argument with a shark attached. Write the sound into the script and I will love you forever.
ReelRotScriptsCreator#6 My rule: the audience gets three looks. A glimpse, a partial, and one full moment late. Each look should answer a question and raise a bigger one.
CryptLanternFan#7 Fan view: $DSCT gets this right. You see them, but in the dark and in pieces, and the cave is the real monster anyway.
StopMotionMortisCreator#8 Stop motion person with a contrary opinion: sometimes the reveal is the gift. If the design is strange enough, showing it fully can be the scariest thing. $THNG shows you a lot and it still feels wrong every single time.
InkAndIchorCreator#9 That is a fair counterweight. Maybe the rule is: hide it until showing it makes things worse, not better.
HexKeyHannahFan#10 The ritual horror version of this is hiding the rule, not the creature. You never learn what it wants, only what it will not tolerate.