Richard Ede
member since 08/10/2011 |
last login 11/21/2011
Actor and writer. Most happy when I am being creative!...
Member Participation Level:
0 1 2 3Recent Activity
Bio
Actor and writer. Most happy when I am being creative!
Submissions by Richard Ede
No submissions (yet)
Reviews by Richard Ede 2
-
A review of Things We Have Done (v2)by Richard Ede on 08/20/2011I want to start off by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed reading this and thought that it was very strong. It's the kind of thing that I would enjoy watching, so I found it engaging and interesting. By the end of the script I felt as though I had watched the film because it was easy to visualize. Good work all round. Your characterization is strong, the dialogue is excellent... I want to start off by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed reading this and thought that it was very strong. It's the kind of thing that I would enjoy watching, so I found it engaging and interesting. By the end of the script I felt as though I had watched the film because it was easy to visualize. Good work all round.
Your characterization is strong, the dialogue is excellent (I would have changed a few bits, but mostly out of personal taste rather than to "correct" anything.)
I thought that it was 90% there, but here are a few bits that I felt needed attention.
Pete's use of the word "basically" felt a little out of character on Page 7.
At the beginning I found Crafton's vocal style a bit strange - short phrases punctuated by a full-stop. I think it would feel fine if I saw it in performance, but if it's something that has been mentioned by other people then maybe it needs looking at. I understand that it is to give him a sense of urgency and an idiosyncratic voice, it just jarred a little for me.
Page 12 - "presumptuous" line - something about it felt wrong but I can't put my finger on it. Sorry - that's no help at all.
When we met Melissa and Abby on Page 14, I wondered if all the characters were too similar - weathered, coiled up springs. Wilkes helped me when he arrived - I liked him a lot. Was Abby a counselor or a trauma sufferer? Maybe if she was a stronger person it would nicely juxtapose and make Melissa seem a more traumatized character. Just a thought.
This isn't an attack, just an observation - Did you need to refer to Finn as "MELISSA FINN" in the character heading above each bit of dialogue? It might have looked a little more relaxed if you'd just used "Melissa" or "Finn". I suppose it doesn't matter, but I just looked a tad formal. There were no other Melissas to confuse her with.
Page 20 - Finn's line could have read "Why the fuck are you snapping your gum?" etc etc. I felt that the "regular spearmint" could have been dropped. I think a good actress could sell an audience the understanding of the situation without having to specify this. The fact that it ISN'T bubblegum is enough. I love that he snaps his gum though. I also liked that she steals a candy bar, echoing the dubious morals throughout. Maybe you don't even need the line about the bubblegum at all. I'd be amused by just seeing her annoyed at his habit - we'd know what she is thinking!
Page 25 - When Pete took the truck off-road I totally didn't see it coming!
Page 48 - I enjoyed the cheeky "Fugitive" reference.
Page 60 - Crafton doesn't need to mention the checkpoints on the highway. I think if he just said that they can't get back on the highway it is enough. Don't underestimate your audience - they'll remember the checkpoints because the story is clear and well constructed.
Page 61 - Pete's first line seemed a little weird - the "breaking glass near me" seems an unnatural thing to say amongst some otherwise very well observed dialogue.
Page 65 - The Caleb story was great - very moving. I wondered if the flashback was necessary, and if it wouldn't be better to watch a great actor just deliver a speech and break down into tears. Tough choice. The only part that made me uncomfortable was Crafton's line on 65 about "20 minutes of pain". For me, 20 minutes to me doesn't sound like a long time, okay - I know he's a doctor so he may know exactly how long it takes to die of blood loss, but to the average viewer - if you don't specify the time-frame, we will fill it in ourselves. Some viewers will imagine Caleb suffering for hours, some for another amount. I think that a vagueness here would be more powerful.
Page 87 - Penelope's line about "I don't know how to feel...etc" felt a bit fake to me. I fully understand the sentiment, but again I think a good actor would be able to embody Penelope's torn emotions with a few words and a look.
Page 89 - I wasn't sure about the line "sitting around here with our hands under our asses...etc" - that phrase sounded too cliched for me. Perhaps I am being a starchy Brit and too easily offended here. It's just my opinion.
Pete's sort of "Stockholm Syndrome" is nicely played out. I sympathized with Crafton myself as by that point I really felt as though he was a fully three dimensional character.
Also, (and this may sound silly) I liked your descriptions. They were succinct and helped the reader feel as though the action was speeding along. I think that will stand you in good stead when showing your script to prospective producers. Just on a technical point, is there meant to be a double space after a full-stop? I read that this was industry standard but perhaps it's not the fashion any more. The rest of the screenplay seems in keeping with the Cole-Haag style. If anybody reads this review and has more info - please feel free to comment on my account! Oh yeah - "A tired waitress with a smoker's voice" - f*cking poetry my friend.
Your writing style is excellent and you should really think about sending off to people like CSI and that ilk. I totally believed Melissa and Wilkes were real people who I could easily imagine and visualize. It's easy to say "you should write to blah blah" but if I were you I would seriously research into contacts for those shows. Do they have teams of writers? I don't know. Anyway, your script struck me as rather "televisual" rather than cinematic. Don't take that the wrong way - I thought the piece was excellent, but in my head it played out like a TV show. It was cinematic too, and reminded me of "Salt", "The Fugitive" and "Reservoir Dogs", but didn't tread on their toes at all. I just think that the way you write would appeal to those employers. You should really look in to it, if you have any contacts in the business - use them! Perhaps you could write a "dummy episode" or something.
Overall, I thought that the screenplay was excellent. I REALLY enjoyed reading it and could easily see it being made into a movie. I would be interested to know about the future of this piece or any others you may have because it would be great to script doctor this one at a deeper level. I don't think it needs much more work, but you should get some actors together for a read-through - I think that hearing it "out-loud" would help you to make the dialogue even more realistic. Don't be too precious over the material, and be prepared to lose or change some of it. Well done, though.
Richard Ede. read -
A review of IRONMAIDENby Richard Ede on 08/16/2011First of all I want to say WELL DONE. It's hard to write a screenplay, and even harder to share it online, opening yourself up to criticism or attack. I'll begin with structure. I really enjoyed the way you put the screenplay together, and it kept me reading, and genuinely wanting to know what happened next. The medieval opening wasn't too long, and I enjoyed the "tricks"... First of all I want to say WELL DONE. It's hard to write a screenplay, and even harder to share it
online, opening yourself up to criticism or attack.
I'll begin with structure. I really enjoyed the way you put the screenplay together, and it kept me reading, and genuinely wanting to know what happened next. The medieval opening wasn't too long, and I enjoyed the "tricks" you employed (like calling the nightclub "The Dungeon") to tie the two worlds together. I liked the inter-cutting between Andrew and Garth and Hecate and Ann, it nicely mixed plot exposition and action. The action sequences were exciting - the sewer fight was easy to envisage as I read. The action was constantly inventive and very imaginative. The John and Carl interchange in the gun shop was very good - in my mind the best dialogue in the screenplay - I understood their motivations and it immediately revealed their personalities in a way that didn't feel contrived. I like movies that question the worthiness of mankind as a creature, so I also enjoyed the stuff on page 58.
Careful with your spelling and grammar. Mine isn't perfect, but I noticed quite a few mistakes. Get somebody to proof-read your script. Even if they're not an English language major, they may still spot some mistakes that you don't. Spell check is great, but it misses things like "their" and "there", or "to" and "too" used in the wrong context.
I thought that some of the dialogue was a little clunky, but it is a difficult genre to allow for naturalism. I thought some lines were great though! I loved "Better a good sky than a bad husband" and "They're going to give me a fair trial then burn me" for example. As a Brit myself - just go easy on the "British Dialogue" - we don't all speak like Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins y'know guv'nor! I mentioned earlier though - the gun shop scene dialogue was very nice.
The piece occasionally felt a little bit like an "80's" movie. That is neither a criticism nor a compliment. I always try to be honest, so I just feel that I need to say it. There is currently a revival in "80's" fashion, so perhaps it is a bonus. It is an observation that I would also make about some recent Hollywood movies ("Season of the Witch" for example) so perhaps people are making films that remind us of
that era.
My major worry was cost! I think that as a writing exercise, few people could deny that "Ironmaiden" is a very creative piece. However, the producer in me just kept thinking "How much would this cost to film!?!?!" I have no experience in movie budgeting, but I would hazard a guess that this wouldn't be cheap to make - Attack Helicopters, flaming Police cars and giant slugs on the Statue of Liberty come at a heavy SFX price. I would also guess that studios may not be so keen to spend big money on new writers. I'm not saying that we should all write small ideas, but I suppose that it is something that must be considered. I feel bad saying that, and I would never want to quash creativity in anyone, but I hope you still consider it as a valid point.
A few technical points to end with. I too am unsure of the "perfect" way to set out a screenplay, but occasionally your sluglines got a bit lazy - no time-frame attached etc. Just keep an eye on that - if producers think that you can't be bothered, they may ignore your script. I know some of them were following on but I believe that it's good form to use CONTINUOUS in the slugline instead DAY or whatever - though I could be wrong. Also, I think 'parenthesis' like (angrily) are meant to go in a separate line above the dialogue. I'm probably being pedantic here.
Overall, I was impressed with the imaginative ideas and exciting action sequences - and I genuinely wanted to know what would happen to the characters. On the flip-side, I thought some of the dialogue could have been stronger, and my constant fear that this felt a bit like a low-budget movie with an enormous budget worried me a lot.
However - this is just the opinion of one man! Keep writing - keep creating, and be true to yourself!
Hope this was helpful.
Richard Ede. read
Write a Comment
Submissions by Richard Ede
No submissions (yet)
Reviews by Richard Ede 2
-
A review of Things We Have Done (v2)by Richard Ede on 08/20/2011I want to start off by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed reading this and thought that it was very strong. It's the kind of thing that I would enjoy watching, so I found it engaging and interesting. By the end of the script I felt as though I had watched the film because it was easy to visualize. Good work all round. Your characterization is strong, the dialogue is excellent... I want to start off by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed reading this and thought that it was very strong. It's the kind of thing that I would enjoy watching, so I found it engaging and interesting. By the end of the script I felt as though I had watched the film because it was easy to visualize. Good work all round.
Your characterization is strong, the dialogue is excellent (I would have changed a few bits, but mostly out of personal taste rather than to "correct" anything.)
I thought that it was 90% there, but here are a few bits that I felt needed attention.
Pete's use of the word "basically" felt a little out of character on Page 7.
At the beginning I found Crafton's vocal style a bit strange - short phrases punctuated by a full-stop. I think it would feel fine if I saw it in performance, but if it's something that has been mentioned by other people then maybe it needs looking at. I understand that it is to give him a sense of urgency and an idiosyncratic voice, it just jarred a little for me.
Page 12 - "presumptuous" line - something about it felt wrong but I can't put my finger on it. Sorry - that's no help at all.
When we met Melissa and Abby on Page 14, I wondered if all the characters were too similar - weathered, coiled up springs. Wilkes helped me when he arrived - I liked him a lot. Was Abby a counselor or a trauma sufferer? Maybe if she was a stronger person it would nicely juxtapose and make Melissa seem a more traumatized character. Just a thought.
This isn't an attack, just an observation - Did you need to refer to Finn as "MELISSA FINN" in the character heading above each bit of dialogue? It might have looked a little more relaxed if you'd just used "Melissa" or "Finn". I suppose it doesn't matter, but I just looked a tad formal. There were no other Melissas to confuse her with.
Page 20 - Finn's line could have read "Why the fuck are you snapping your gum?" etc etc. I felt that the "regular spearmint" could have been dropped. I think a good actress could sell an audience the understanding of the situation without having to specify this. The fact that it ISN'T bubblegum is enough. I love that he snaps his gum though. I also liked that she steals a candy bar, echoing the dubious morals throughout. Maybe you don't even need the line about the bubblegum at all. I'd be amused by just seeing her annoyed at his habit - we'd know what she is thinking!
Page 25 - When Pete took the truck off-road I totally didn't see it coming!
Page 48 - I enjoyed the cheeky "Fugitive" reference.
Page 60 - Crafton doesn't need to mention the checkpoints on the highway. I think if he just said that they can't get back on the highway it is enough. Don't underestimate your audience - they'll remember the checkpoints because the story is clear and well constructed.
Page 61 - Pete's first line seemed a little weird - the "breaking glass near me" seems an unnatural thing to say amongst some otherwise very well observed dialogue.
Page 65 - The Caleb story was great - very moving. I wondered if the flashback was necessary, and if it wouldn't be better to watch a great actor just deliver a speech and break down into tears. Tough choice. The only part that made me uncomfortable was Crafton's line on 65 about "20 minutes of pain". For me, 20 minutes to me doesn't sound like a long time, okay - I know he's a doctor so he may know exactly how long it takes to die of blood loss, but to the average viewer - if you don't specify the time-frame, we will fill it in ourselves. Some viewers will imagine Caleb suffering for hours, some for another amount. I think that a vagueness here would be more powerful.
Page 87 - Penelope's line about "I don't know how to feel...etc" felt a bit fake to me. I fully understand the sentiment, but again I think a good actor would be able to embody Penelope's torn emotions with a few words and a look.
Page 89 - I wasn't sure about the line "sitting around here with our hands under our asses...etc" - that phrase sounded too cliched for me. Perhaps I am being a starchy Brit and too easily offended here. It's just my opinion.
Pete's sort of "Stockholm Syndrome" is nicely played out. I sympathized with Crafton myself as by that point I really felt as though he was a fully three dimensional character.
Also, (and this may sound silly) I liked your descriptions. They were succinct and helped the reader feel as though the action was speeding along. I think that will stand you in good stead when showing your script to prospective producers. Just on a technical point, is there meant to be a double space after a full-stop? I read that this was industry standard but perhaps it's not the fashion any more. The rest of the screenplay seems in keeping with the Cole-Haag style. If anybody reads this review and has more info - please feel free to comment on my account! Oh yeah - "A tired waitress with a smoker's voice" - f*cking poetry my friend.
Your writing style is excellent and you should really think about sending off to people like CSI and that ilk. I totally believed Melissa and Wilkes were real people who I could easily imagine and visualize. It's easy to say "you should write to blah blah" but if I were you I would seriously research into contacts for those shows. Do they have teams of writers? I don't know. Anyway, your script struck me as rather "televisual" rather than cinematic. Don't take that the wrong way - I thought the piece was excellent, but in my head it played out like a TV show. It was cinematic too, and reminded me of "Salt", "The Fugitive" and "Reservoir Dogs", but didn't tread on their toes at all. I just think that the way you write would appeal to those employers. You should really look in to it, if you have any contacts in the business - use them! Perhaps you could write a "dummy episode" or something.
Overall, I thought that the screenplay was excellent. I REALLY enjoyed reading it and could easily see it being made into a movie. I would be interested to know about the future of this piece or any others you may have because it would be great to script doctor this one at a deeper level. I don't think it needs much more work, but you should get some actors together for a read-through - I think that hearing it "out-loud" would help you to make the dialogue even more realistic. Don't be too precious over the material, and be prepared to lose or change some of it. Well done, though.
Richard Ede. read -
A review of IRONMAIDENby Richard Ede on 08/16/2011First of all I want to say WELL DONE. It's hard to write a screenplay, and even harder to share it online, opening yourself up to criticism or attack. I'll begin with structure. I really enjoyed the way you put the screenplay together, and it kept me reading, and genuinely wanting to know what happened next. The medieval opening wasn't too long, and I enjoyed the "tricks"... First of all I want to say WELL DONE. It's hard to write a screenplay, and even harder to share it
online, opening yourself up to criticism or attack.
I'll begin with structure. I really enjoyed the way you put the screenplay together, and it kept me reading, and genuinely wanting to know what happened next. The medieval opening wasn't too long, and I enjoyed the "tricks" you employed (like calling the nightclub "The Dungeon") to tie the two worlds together. I liked the inter-cutting between Andrew and Garth and Hecate and Ann, it nicely mixed plot exposition and action. The action sequences were exciting - the sewer fight was easy to envisage as I read. The action was constantly inventive and very imaginative. The John and Carl interchange in the gun shop was very good - in my mind the best dialogue in the screenplay - I understood their motivations and it immediately revealed their personalities in a way that didn't feel contrived. I like movies that question the worthiness of mankind as a creature, so I also enjoyed the stuff on page 58.
Careful with your spelling and grammar. Mine isn't perfect, but I noticed quite a few mistakes. Get somebody to proof-read your script. Even if they're not an English language major, they may still spot some mistakes that you don't. Spell check is great, but it misses things like "their" and "there", or "to" and "too" used in the wrong context.
I thought that some of the dialogue was a little clunky, but it is a difficult genre to allow for naturalism. I thought some lines were great though! I loved "Better a good sky than a bad husband" and "They're going to give me a fair trial then burn me" for example. As a Brit myself - just go easy on the "British Dialogue" - we don't all speak like Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins y'know guv'nor! I mentioned earlier though - the gun shop scene dialogue was very nice.
The piece occasionally felt a little bit like an "80's" movie. That is neither a criticism nor a compliment. I always try to be honest, so I just feel that I need to say it. There is currently a revival in "80's" fashion, so perhaps it is a bonus. It is an observation that I would also make about some recent Hollywood movies ("Season of the Witch" for example) so perhaps people are making films that remind us of
that era.
My major worry was cost! I think that as a writing exercise, few people could deny that "Ironmaiden" is a very creative piece. However, the producer in me just kept thinking "How much would this cost to film!?!?!" I have no experience in movie budgeting, but I would hazard a guess that this wouldn't be cheap to make - Attack Helicopters, flaming Police cars and giant slugs on the Statue of Liberty come at a heavy SFX price. I would also guess that studios may not be so keen to spend big money on new writers. I'm not saying that we should all write small ideas, but I suppose that it is something that must be considered. I feel bad saying that, and I would never want to quash creativity in anyone, but I hope you still consider it as a valid point.
A few technical points to end with. I too am unsure of the "perfect" way to set out a screenplay, but occasionally your sluglines got a bit lazy - no time-frame attached etc. Just keep an eye on that - if producers think that you can't be bothered, they may ignore your script. I know some of them were following on but I believe that it's good form to use CONTINUOUS in the slugline instead DAY or whatever - though I could be wrong. Also, I think 'parenthesis' like (angrily) are meant to go in a separate line above the dialogue. I'm probably being pedantic here.
Overall, I was impressed with the imaginative ideas and exciting action sequences - and I genuinely wanted to know what would happen to the characters. On the flip-side, I thought some of the dialogue could have been stronger, and my constant fear that this felt a bit like a low-budget movie with an enormous budget worried me a lot.
However - this is just the opinion of one man! Keep writing - keep creating, and be true to yourself!
Hope this was helpful.
Richard Ede. read
Comments About Richard Ede 6
-
love32 on 09/07/2011
Hi, My name is Mary, sincere,friendly and open minded girl,seeking for a serious and honest relationship, good relationships are based on trust and honesty, I am interested in you for honest relationship. Please contact me on my private e-mail address.(mary.dokie@yahoo.com)so that i will tell you more about myself and my pictures also. Remember the distance,age or color does not matter, but love matters a lot in life.I believe we can move from here! -
Bennett Rea on 08/21/2011
Yeah, I hope you're able to remedy that eligibility test so you get credit for the review! -
Bennett Rea on 08/20/2011
As a side note, if that is indeed your picture, you look remarkably like Ryan Gosling. Thanks again for the sterling review! -
Bennett Rea on 08/20/2011
Thanks very much for your review of Things We Have Done v2 - very glad you enjoyed it! Your comments were helpful and constructive, and it's really great to hear what worked for you. I like the idea you had with Abby and also changing Melissa Finn to just Finn for the character's dialogue. Your other smaller points were spot-on, too. I had similar feelings about certain lines and I'm glad someone confirmed them. Again, your review was much appreciated. Cheers! -
Gary Mark Lee on 08/16/2011
Thank you Richard for your thoughtful comments on my script “IRONMAIDEN”, they were mature and made very good points about the story and ways to improve it, I will take them into consideration if and when I do a rewrite. I wish you all the best on your projects, thanks again..
-
love45 on 08/12/2011
hello my neme is hope i will like you to reply my mail box here hopemabiza@yahoo.com so that i will send you my photo and tell you more abaut me pls dont forget write my mail box hopemabiza@yahoo.com
Write a Comment
Browse:
Copyright © 2001-2013 Trigger Street Labs. All Rights Reserved.
Comments About Richard Ede 6
-
Quote
Hi, My name is Mary, sincere,friendly and open minded girl,seeking for a serious and honest relationship, good relationships are based on trust and honesty, I am interested in you for honest relationship. Please contact me on my private e-mail address.(mary.dokie@yahoo.com)so that i will tell you more about myself and my pictures also. Remember the distance,age or color does not matter, but love matters a lot in life.I believe we can move from here!
-
Quote
Yeah, I hope you're able to remedy that eligibility test so you get credit for the review!
-
Quote
As a side note, if that is indeed your picture, you look remarkably like Ryan Gosling. Thanks again for the sterling review!
+ more commentslove32 on 09/07/2011
Bennett Rea on 08/21/2011
Bennett Rea on 08/20/2011