a screenplay
by JSteedla
Long Island, June, 1942: A lonely woman finds more than just love when she encounters a mysterious and handsome... more
JSteedla
member since 03/06/2006 |
last login 07/09/2012
I just put a short that I wrote called YOU'RE FIRED up on Funny Or Die. It stars Jill Bartlett (Comedy Central's "American Body Shop") and Josh Braaten (of "Semi-Pro"). I'd love it if you take a look, and if you like...
Member Participation Level:
0 1 2 3Recent Activity
Bio
I just put a short that I wrote called YOU'RE FIRED up on Funny Or Die. It stars Jill Bartlett (Comedy Central's "American Body Shop") and Josh Braaten (of "Semi-Pro"). I'd love it if you take a look, and if you like it, vote for it as "funny", and please please pass it on to all your friends! See it at: http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f7fdce5e16/youre-fired-from-jstancari Thanks!
Submissions by JSteedla
-
-
a screenplay by JSteedlaGenres: horrorA few requests: 1) This is a horror script, so if you're not a real horror fan, please don't review this as this... more
-
a screenplay by JSteedla
PLEASE READ THE PRODUCTION NOTES PRIOR TO READING/REVIEWING! When a lonely boy discovers that imaginary friends... more
Reviews by JSteedla 178
-
A review of Victim8by JSteedla on 07/12/2009Victim8: Notes by page number: 1) FADE IN: goes in the left margin, not the right 1) no need to give Ray a name since we never meet him, giving him a name just makes me try to keep track of him, when in reality, I'll never meet him. Just call him something like MALE FRIEND 5) the computer face should be a (V.O.), since were hearing it via the speakers. Also, how does the... Victim8:
Notes by page number:
1) FADE IN: goes in the left margin, not the right
1) no need to give Ray a name since we never meet him, giving him a name just makes me try to keep track of him, when in reality, I'll never meet him. Just call him something like MALE FRIEND
5) the computer face should be a (V.O.), since were hearing it via the speakers. Also, how does the face sound? male? female? describe it.
8) do not include CREDITS in your screenplay!
8) typo: it's paces... should be its paces (not a contraction of it + is, so no apostrophe)
-) throughout: lots of various dropped commas, so proofread for those.
-) throughout: try to avoid ING words in your narrative, instead write in the active present tense.
-) throughout: careful of widows, they waste space and slow the read
18) friends face... should be friend's (possessive)
18) I kind of feel like there's too many characters...
20) numbers spoken in dialogue need to be written out as words.
23) missing word: ... he gets (a) bit carried away...
-) throughout: There's just a bit too much business in the narrative, and it's breaking up the flow of the dialogue. Leave most of this out.
-) throughout: write in master scenes (like for the Gym)
-) throughout: the bottom margins look too high, top margins look a bit too low.
28) missing period from " ...unaware he is being watched"
32) Internet should not be initial capped
-) throughout: most of the scene sluglines are incomplete, as they don't include enough basic info about where we are. They tell us the room we're in, but not where that room is, what place or building that room is located in. As we move from place to place, we need to know this.
36) missing period from Mr(.) Edwards
39) "We'll see" should not be initial capped in Harrison's line
42) Kaz makes coffees.... this reads odd, so it should be: makes coffee (not plural), or: makes them coffee
52-53) big guy should be initial capped in the narrative since he's a speaking character and that's his name
54) this INSERT should not go here, as it seems like Jimmy is seeing this on his cell phone screen. It should be placed after the INT. HARRISON'S PLACE - NIGHt slugline, since it's Harrison who sees it.
also the face should be a (V.O.)
59) careful of the use of the word BANG!, as there is a gun in the scene, but you're referring to the attacker being hit by the weight stick. The BANG suggests that the gun has been used or gone off.
60) VOICE should be (O.S.) since we don't see the speaker
62) not sure why we have the same slug line twice in a row. Also, looks like he turns on Virus's computer 2 times in a row, as well.
62) careful of multiple characters whose names start with the same letter, like Jimmy and Joe (both J's) as this can confuse the reader.
64) town car should be initial capped as it's the proper name of that car model.
66) be consistent in what you name your characters: you call the man a GOOD SAMARITAN, but you slug him as MALE VOICE, this could be confusing, suggesting two different people.
68) parentheticals in dialogue don't go in the dialogue, they get their own line
68) "Do" should not be initial capped in Jimmy's dialogue
68) teen should be initial capped in the narrative since that's his name
69) strides with aimlessly anger.... should be aimless
82) who is SOMEONE? Never be this vague.
84) "So they don't know about he's alive." Seems like a word is wrong or missing here. Also, should it end with a question mark?
88) missing period: Stewie gets up
-) a bit many montages throughout
93) it's bearings.... it's should be its
99) scripts usually end with FADE OUT.
Page Note Summary:
There are problems with apostrophes, slug lines, missing (V.O.)'s, some misc. typos, punctuation problems, bottom margins are way too high, dropped commas.
Story Notes:
There's a lot to like in this story, and some good writing and story skill behind it. There's something neat behind the core concept, and I think it could attract interest from Hollywood producers, but I also feel there are several issues that undermine the good stuff.
1) weak and unclear hero: as I started to read the script, I was unsure who the main character/hero was... at first I thought it was Jimmy, as he was the detective, and they're typically the leads in these kinds of stories - cop goes after criminal. But then Jimmy kind of falls away as a motivator when Harrison seems to drive the interrogations. Then Mel, who kind of seemed like a "main character in waiting" at the beginning, finally emerges as such.
I'd take a strong look at being very clear and definitive about who your main character is. It's either Mel (target of a killer goes after him) or Jimmy (detective goes after killer). Think of a movie like SEVEN - Detective goes after killer, or SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (young FBI agent goes after killer) and you'll see how and why this works.
As it is, there's a lack of commitment to who is driving the story, as Mel doesn't do anything to investigate or stop the bad guy, (only Jimmy and Locke seem to take real and active steps to stop Virus, and since they take actions to stop him, this suggests that one of them is the lead).
Mel later is clearly the main character, but she's only a reactive main character - as she never does anything to try and solve the mystery (who is behind this, what does it mean, how can it be stopped?), and never does anything to stop the bad guy, and his plan, and therefore save her own life. All Mel does is react - she defends herself when she's attacked, she runs when she's chased, but she never takes initiative and becomes a proactive character who takes steps and actions to stop Virus and his plan and save herself. One problem is that, since she's not a cop, she doesn't have access to their tools and info that would allow her to learn more and take active steps. This is why cops and journalists (who can investigate and get info) make such good leads - they can solve crimes.
So, either make Jimmy the lead (cop goes after internet killer, and has to save the last victim in order to stop mass killings) or make Mel someone who is going to be an active, and not a reactive, main character who take steps to find out who is trying to kill her, and why.
2) ticking clock starts too late: the 29 hour ticking clock starts on pg. 78. I feel this is too late. If we know that Mel has to die by a certain time much earlier, then this applies pressure to everyone and the story and keeps that pressure on until the end. "Frazzled Detective has XX hours to protect the last victim from a crazed serial killer... and also prevent triggering mass killings"
If Jimmy/Mel know she has to stay alive and be protected from a killer from the end of act 1, there's a great pressure that will move the story forward.
3) believable?: I can believe that one man will try to kill. I can believe that he might have a small group of followers who will do his bidding. BUT, I find it very hard to believe that what seems like hundreds of ordinary people are willing to kill strangers - it's just too much for me. I'd scale it back - if Virus is presented as an internet psycho genius with a small but intense cult following, I can buy it. But for so many everyday people to be willing to be murderers, that I can't believe.
4) familiarity: parts of this feel like SEVEN (a crazed man sets about to punish a number of victims for their sins/weaknesses) with some SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (an athletic young woman deals with a crazy man) mixed in. This can be good, but it can also be bad. I feel like it is sometimes too similar in feeling to SEVEN, and this could put some people off.
5) no villain: our villain is, in theory, Virus. However, we don't meet him until page 35, and when we meet him, he's already been caught and is in police custody. So we meet him a bit late, and since he's caught, he can't do anything. Then he's not really a force in the story. The strength of the villain is the measure by which we see the strength of the hero - the villain must be greater, and this forces the hero to grow, and become better in order to win. When the villain is not present, or not an active threat, the hero suffers as they don't have a stronger counter force that they have to overcome.
6) too many characters, and some that don't really earn their place in the script: I would definitely try to shave down the cast, eliminate or combine characters. Many, like Ray, Omar, Pete, Gary, just don't do enough in the story to warrant the space they take up.
The entire Gary story line is, to me, a waste of space and a dead end, as it doesn't really tie in strong enough to the main story line: twisted computer genius creates website to rid the world of certain people. We don't even see Gary that much, and he's gone entirely from the ending. Lose him.
I'd also get rid of Yang and his subplot that's connected to the Gary subplot.
Same applies to the Omar and his family story line - it doesn't really go anywhere, and takes up space that would be better spent on Mel and Jimmy. I'd remove this bit.
Spend more time on Mel and Jimmy, our primary characters and their story.
I'd also look at Locke, as his role is too similar to Jimmy's, and his presence just dilutes Jimmy's. Combine these two and make a much stronger Jimmy.
7) the ending: I really didn't like the ending... Mel dies and the mass killings will begin. This is a real downer, as we want Mel to live, to win, and to have her save the world. But the death of Mel, and the slightly "here it comes" down ending, didn't win me over, and probably won't win over Hollywood either. I'd suggest having Mel live and win.
So, as I said, there's some good stuff here, and some obvious writing skills, but I feel there are many story concerns that need to be worked out in order to elevate the story to where it really could be and should be. Hope some of this helps! read -
A review of SAVAGESby JSteedla on 07/09/2009Savages: Notes by page: 1) Do not number page 1 1) Do not number your scenes, that's for a shooting script only. 1) Should be 2 spaces after FADE IN: 1) careful of multiple characters whose names start with the same letter, like Clara and Carmen (both C's) as this can confuse the reader as they scan the dialogue. 1) careful of dropped commas, as there's a lot of them... Savages:
Notes by page:
1) Do not number page 1
1) Do not number your scenes, that's for a shooting script only.
1) Should be 2 spaces after FADE IN:
1) careful of multiple characters whose names start with the same letter, like Clara and Carmen (both C's) as this can confuse the reader as they scan the dialogue.
1) careful of dropped commas, as there's a lot of them already.
1) try to start your sentences with the character, don't "bury" them in the middle of the sentence.
1) when introducing characters, don't just give us a physical description, but also give something "actable", something about WHO they are - give your characters some character. "Long hair" tells me nothing about the person and their personality.
1-2) why do we have the same scene slug 2x in a row? : INT HOUSE - NIGHT You only re-slug when one of the three basic slug elements has changed.
2) page numbers should have periods after them: 2.
2) page numbers should be in 12 pt courier like the rest of the script.
2) don't repeat info we know from the slug line (where we are) again in the narrative, avoid redundant writing.
2) OK should be Okay, written out as a the full word, and not the abbreviation.
2) when starting a new scene, don't use vague terms like "He", "She", etc.... be sure to name everyone who's in the scene by name when you start a new scene to establish exactly who's there.
2) typo: In Joe's dialogue, "Know" shouldn't be initial capped.
2) how do we know/see that the horse belongs to his sister? This is an unfilmable.
2) what is with the "...PAUSE" floating in the middle of the dialogue? This is not correct formatting.
3) typo: Busters house... should be: Buster's house.... with an apostrophe in Buster's since it's a possessive. Same applies to "Busters car..." Should be: "Buster's car..."
3) burst should be bursts
4) typo: Cannon should not be initial capped.
4) typo: Black Bows should have an apostrophe: Black Bow's, as it's a possessive.
4) typo: Chicken should not be initial capped.
4) typo: your crazy: should be: you're crazy... as it's a contraction of you + are
4) typo: Plants should not be initial capped.
4) missing question mark on Carmen's last line.
5) typo: roll their eyes at each other, This should end with a period, not a comma. Sentences end with periods.
5) typo: Joe is not fully capped in the second dialogue character slug
throughout) a lot of the dialogue is written without contractions, so it sounds robot, formal, stilted and unnatural, esp. considering the age and status of the characters.
6) your nuts should be you're nuts
6) odd extra blank space in the middle of a scene
6) Mother should not be initial capped.
throughout) either call Clara "Clara" or call her "mother" but only use one name per character and use it consistently.
6) (OS) should be (O.S.)
6) Mothers car should be Mother's car (possessive)
7) don't write out what were also seeing. Thins like, "Carmen enters and speaks with her mother." is something we're just about to see, so telling us what we're seeing is redundant writing.
7) again Busters car should be Buster's car (possessive)
8) god should be initial capped, as you did correctly on pg. 4
8) would a tire explode? it's filled with air, not propane.
8) extra space between "row, and threatens to start..."
9) lets get out of here lets should be let's (apostrophe for contraction)
-) I'm not sure why they're attacking the feed store - how is the feed store connected with Buster, the guy who repossessed Joe's truck? Should we know the connection before they destroy the place?
9) Sheriffs uniform - should be Sheriff's (possessive)
9) for some reason, Curtis is intro'd and fully capped twice.
10) Alice the white horse is free to just wander all over the town and area? Seems unlikely.
12) we have the same scene slug twice in a row: INT. KITCHEN - DAY
12) Curtis speaks twice in a row.
12 & 13) there are some placement errors regarding the character slugs
13) after a new scene slug, you have to have at least one line of narrative before you can start dialogue.
15) the info in the narrative about the old photo is unfilmable. How will an audience know or learn this by looking at the photo? You're giving info in the narrative that we can read, but cannot be shown.
15) once Joe sneaks out of the Sheriff's Office, we need a new slug line as we have changed locations, and have gone from an INT. to an EXT. shot.
19) odd extra space in the middle of the narrative.
19) typo: burry's should be buries
19) missing space in: INT.KITCHEN - DAY
-) throughout: avoid writing with ING words in the narrative, instead write in the active present tense.
20) wait, the horse can carry out specific delivery and pick up orders?
20) typo: ... she watches Joe grabs things... should be: Joe grab things (not grabs).
21) slug line: Neighbors Yard should be Neighbor's Yard (possessive)
21) Who is Mattie? Who is Megan? These two characters have not been introduced
21) avoid characters whose names start with the same first letter (Mattie, Megan, both "M")
I'm going to stop my page notes here.
So, that's over 50 notes/mistakes just in the first 20 pages. And I didn't even point out every single problem I saw. And considering how many of these are basic grammar, simple typos, formatting, spacing, etc... type notes and mistakes, this is extremely concerning.
The script is FULL of countless errors, mistakes, typos, grammar problems, formatting mistakes, as well as overall poor screenwriting technique and style. Any reader would be tempted to toss the script due to the massive amount of errors alone.
On pg 59, it looks like Bloodstone's dialogue is written as out narrative. You do this again on pg. 76. These kinds of huge errors are just unacceptable.
At a certain point in the script, it starts to read more like a novel, with info and details and people's thoughts and other unfilmables filling up the narrative.
I strongly suggest you proofread your work, master grammar, spelling, punctuation, and also get a good screenplay format guide and learn the basic rules for formatting a screenplay.
Story Notes:
Dialogue: Dialogue is very on the nose, not very subtle. People say exactly what they mean, and what they are thinking, so there is no subtext, and no layers or complexities to the dialogue or to the characters. And the way it's written sounds robotic, formal, and unnatural. The characters do not have unique voices, as everyone speaks the same, all with the same robotic voice and canter.
Characters: All are pretty one dimensional and cliche. Marshals and the Politicians and Military are all Bad Guys, while the Indians are all Good Guys. Joe has some slight depth as the consistent fool, but no one else has any real depth. Others, like Carmen, who is supposed to be a lawyer, never came across as credible as one. And having the Governor be a pot smoker is another big stretch... unless you write this as a farce.
Story: It's a bit tricky, as it's a bit hard to believe, so it wobbles somewhere between a comedy and a farce. I think, because the opening set up, and the way the disaster occurs, is too weak to become a strong foundation for all the wackiness that happens afterwards. The crazier the overall story, the stronger the opening foundation needs to be. I'd say go the comedy route - make it a balls out comedy, ad it will work better.
Huge Cast: Waaaay too many characters here. Where ever you can, try to combine, slim down, and cut extra people.
Talky and Anti-climatic Ending: We have a story that starts out with several big explosions and action filled scenes, yet it all sadly ends with a whimper, where the Chief sits and talks and smokes pot with the Governor and everything is resolved. Snore!
Joe started all this with accidental explosions, he needs to solve it with intentional ones. He needs to take risks, go out on a limb, and be willing to blow up more stuff in an effort to undo the damage he did and put things right. Having it end with the Chief's chat with the Governor is a huge let down.
Main Character Issues:
Joe, who is supposed to be our main character, basically disappears from the story pg 50 to 73. That's over 20 pages where the person who's supposed to be the star and driving force is not in his own story.
Joe doesn't have arc. He's basically the same guy is at the beginning. He doesn't change, and he just happens to save the day because he saw a photograph.
The main character's arc is the embodiment of the movie's theme. Since Joe has no arc, the movie also has no theme - no human lesson or element. So, no matter what happens in the story, it feels hollow and meaningless.
Joe does not move the story: Joe accidentally sets the story in motion, which is fine. But, after that, he has to want to fix things, he has to have the active goal of correcting what he did, and he has to constantly take actions in an effort to do that. Problem is, Joe doesn't do that. Once he sets all this in motion, he disappears, then just becomes a passive passenger, with other characters such as Carmen and Chief Bloodstone becoming the ones who actually take action and do things in their goal to address the growing disaster. Carmen is more of a main character than Joe is.
Magic Horse: Be careful how intelligent you have Alice be, as she's coming across as a magic horse, who is able to understand and carry out detailed instructions. It's a bit hard to believe, as it's set up, and the idea of such an intelligent horse is actually more of an interesting story than the one you're telling. Don't draw attention away from your main story by introducing an element that warrants its own story.
I did like the kind of "whimsey" feel that the story had, and there was something likable about the idea, and Joe, but the considerable problems that plague the story, script and characters d the script in. read -
A review of Senseless! (rev.)by JSteedla on 02/02/2009Senseless: Notes by page #: 1: should be two spaces after FADE IN: and before the first slugline 1: slugline is missing the DAY/NIGHT time element from the first slugline. 1: the actor's lines should be (V.O.) since they are not in the theater and are heard via the movie speakers. 1: maybe slug the MAN and WOMAN as ACTOR and ACTRESS? Also, they should be properly intro's... Senseless:
Notes by page #:
1: should be two spaces after FADE IN: and before the first slugline
1: slugline is missing the DAY/NIGHT time element from the first slugline.
1: the actor's lines should be (V.O.) since they are not in the theater and are heard via the movie speakers.
1: maybe slug the MAN and WOMAN as ACTOR and ACTRESS? Also, they should be properly intro's since they are speaking characters and will need to be cast.
2: boy should be initial capped in the narrative since that's his name and he's a speaking character.
2 and throughout: OK should be "okay" in the dialogue, written out as a full word and not an abbreviation.
3: usher should be initial capped in the narrative.
3: when Vincent goes into the drug store, of the camera follows him, there should a new full slugline: INT. DRUGSTORE - DAY and then he would go into the PHONE BOOTH as a mini slug within the master scene.
4 and throughout: careful of repeating info in the narrative that we already know from the slugline, mostly the location we are in.
6: here, since we don't change location and only some time passes, you can use a LATER mini slug to denote the passage of time.
13: when we cut to the car we need a new and full slugine, INT or EXT?
13: use only one name for each location: don't call it Oakmont Motor Court and also call it Motel... one name and use it consistently.
14: when you start a new scene, you should name all the characters by their names, and not use vague terms like They, He, She, etc... Tell us specifically who is here and then you can use those terms.
14: drunk should be initial capped in the narrative.
17: here again, call it HELEN'S DINER or just DINER, but not both.
20: when we move into the CAR we need a new and full sugline
21: any characters and their voices heard from the movie should be (V.O.)
21: boy should be initial capped in the narrative
23: should Scotch be initial capped? You dont initial cap it later in the script.
26: In Melody's first line, Why should not be initial capped.
26 worker should be initial capped in the narrative. Basically, any speaking character's name should be initial capped in the narrative, even if their name is a description, ie: worker, because that's their proper name within the script.
26: we have the same Town Square slugline twice in a row.
26: the Mayor should be intro'd as MAYOR, not MAN PLAYING THE MAYOR, since his dialogue slug is MAYOR. They should always match.
27: don't need the TOWN SQUARE in TOWN SQUARE - LATER, just say LATER
28: we already have a character named BOY from the drive in movie... don't reuse a character name, even a generic one... causes havoc with casting and become confusing to the reader. And another BOY on pg 37.
31: typo: expertly picks of three moving.... should be: picks off..
34: typo: Monterrey should be Monterey (one r)
43: typo: The pass a bucket.... Should be: They pass...?
55: here, when we enter the home, we need a new INT slugline.
63: you have Stocky Man speak twice in a row
68: when we enter a tent we need a new slug: INT. TENT - DAY This note applies throughout the story as there are lots of incomplete sluglines.
75: I suspect that this point that the food from Oakmont is the true cause of the senseless syndrome... maybe the food is infected via the crop duster? Do you want to tip your hand this early?
78: number spoken in dialogue should be written out as words. This note throughout.
81: typo: hesitates. Should be initial capped.
84: Washington Man and all heard via the monitors should be indicated as (V.O.)
92: earth should be initial capped.
Summary:
- scattered typos
- slugline concerns, esp when we change locations
- (O.S.) vs (V.O.) issues
- capitalization issues, esp with speaking characters
- consistency issues with character names and locations/sluglines
Story Notes:
Overall a well written piece of work, well thought out, and showcases a lot of good writing and a good grasp of the craft.
Here's a suggestion you might consider adding: As is, those who become senseless just wander about until they die. Not very threatening, are they? But if Vincent made a good old zombie movie that seemingly turns the audience into real, live flesh eating and craving "zombies", it might up the stakes and create more opportunities for action and danger. Have Vincent make a B zombie movie that turns the audience into zombies, resulting in audience members chasing after those who were unaffected. Now there's a real threat, a real horror to seeing people become zombies after seeing the movie (of course, it's caused by the powder added to the foods, as it's currently written.) This way you can really hybrid the traditional horror and the sci fi. You kind of go halfway, why not commit and go all the way. This could be the new twist on the zombie film people have been looking for.
While I thought the script was well done, for some reason, I was always emotionally detached, and I never really felt for or rooted for Vincent. I pondered this and I have some ideas as to why I might have felt this.
First is that Vincent is not deserving. You present us with a man who makes very bad movies, and his career hits the skids because of it, and then he makes another very bad movie. Problem with this is, it's a challenge for us to get behind someone who is after something they obviously don't deserve. Should a bad singer win American idol? Should a bad athlete win the Olympics? Would we ever root for a lack talent to make it big? Most likely, not. So, by having Vincent be so obviously bad and what he did, does, and wants to be a success at, it a hurdle because he doesn't deserve the success that he wants. Our main character does not deserve their goal, and by all rights, should never achieve it.
If you look at the movie Tootsie, for example (yeah, I know its old, but it's brilliant), the opening montage shows us Dustin Hoffman, an actor, as he carefully applies stage make up, acts out scenes, teaches an acting class, etc... all this is meant to show us that he knows his craft and is good at it. He's a good actor, and deserves to find success. This is vital, as it establishes him as a man deserving of his goal - to be a working actor. So we can get behind him and root for him - he SHOULD have what he wants.
But Vincent is the opposite, a bit of an Ed Wood without the cashmere sweaters. Now, I'm not saying that Vincent should be Hitchcock, He does not have to be a brilliant genius, but have him be good at what he does - when it comes to low budget B horror flicks, he's one of the best. Show me this guy, and I can get behind him and want him to get what he wants, and what he deserves.
Another thought on my own personal detachment was the Vincent character himself. He has no flaw, no inner problems that make him human. Remember, it's what's wrong with us that identifies us as human and helps us bond to each other. Vincent doesn't seem to have an issue that is the cause of his problems, one that is shared by all humantity and we can all identify with.
Referring to Tootsie again, right after we see that Dustin Hoffman is a good actor who deserves success, we then see why he doesn't have it - he's impossible to work with. We see him argue with a director over a minor point, and Dustin storms out of rehursal. Bingo! He doesn't have success because of his own issues: Dustin is his own worst enemy.
If we met a Vincent who is good at what he does, is genuinely talented, yet doesn't have success... and then we see why - he has some inner issue or problem that causes him to stifle or sabotage his own career and any chances at success, this is someone I can understand. Now I'm not just rooting for him to get the success he deserves, but to also overcome the demons that cause him to destroy his own chances. Vincent needs to be his own worst enemy. He would be a big director if he wasn't "blank."
Lastly, I think the story seems to lack a theme and Vincent seems to lack an arc - they are the same. If Vincent had some inner flaw that kept him from achieving success, then he faces that flaw and overcomes in the end, allowing him to save Earth, as well as himself, then we'd have a main character that arced, a movie that had a theme, and a guy I could really get behind. But, because of the issues I've outlined above, the story, despite its qualities, felt hollow.
Structurally, I felt like the events of and around pg. 59 should occur 10 pages earlier - people burning down theaters and Vincent seeing real senseless cases should be his midpoint low point. It all ties into what Vincent's goal or dream is: for a director after success to see first hand the horrible affect his film is having sounds like a perfect low point, a nightmare come true. This happens around pg. 59-60, it would be a perfect midpoint low point if it happened around pg. 49-50.
I know you've chosen the downbeat ending on purpose, but I suggest that it sucks the joy out of the whole experience... we go through all that, we see Vincent and humanity fight and win... just to lose? What was the point of going through it all, then? Yes, I am suggesting the Hollywood ending, because it is satisfying and it will help the salability of your script to the Hollywood machine that will want a happy ending anyway. Of course, you can leave a bit of it open to suggest the battle isn't over, but the out and out "we lose" ending doesn't serve your story or its marketability.
Overall it's good work, but I think a few more passes on the structure, ending and main character/arc/theme would help it immensely and elevate it from good to great. Good luck! read
Write a Comment
Submissions by JSteedla
-
a screenplay by JSteedla
Long Island, June, 1942: A lonely woman finds more than just love when she encounters a mysterious and handsome... more
-
a screenplay by JSteedlaGenres: horror
A few requests: 1) This is a horror script, so if you're not a real horror fan, please don't review this as this... more
-
a screenplay by JSteedla
PLEASE READ THE PRODUCTION NOTES PRIOR TO READING/REVIEWING! When a lonely boy discovers that imaginary friends... more
-
a screenplay by JSteedlaAfter a boy gains the ability to see ghosts, he enrolls in a haunted high school, where he stumbles across a deadly... more
-
a screenplay by JSteedla
Two archeologists digging in Pompeii discover and translate a 2000 year-old diary’s account of a tragic yet timeless... more
Reviews by JSteedla 178
-
A review of Victim8by JSteedla on 07/12/2009Victim8: Notes by page number: 1) FADE IN: goes in the left margin, not the right 1) no need to give Ray a name since we never meet him, giving him a name just makes me try to keep track of him, when in reality, I'll never meet him. Just call him something like MALE FRIEND 5) the computer face should be a (V.O.), since were hearing it via the speakers. Also, how does the... Victim8:
Notes by page number:
1) FADE IN: goes in the left margin, not the right
1) no need to give Ray a name since we never meet him, giving him a name just makes me try to keep track of him, when in reality, I'll never meet him. Just call him something like MALE FRIEND
5) the computer face should be a (V.O.), since were hearing it via the speakers. Also, how does the face sound? male? female? describe it.
8) do not include CREDITS in your screenplay!
8) typo: it's paces... should be its paces (not a contraction of it + is, so no apostrophe)
-) throughout: lots of various dropped commas, so proofread for those.
-) throughout: try to avoid ING words in your narrative, instead write in the active present tense.
-) throughout: careful of widows, they waste space and slow the read
18) friends face... should be friend's (possessive)
18) I kind of feel like there's too many characters...
20) numbers spoken in dialogue need to be written out as words.
23) missing word: ... he gets (a) bit carried away...
-) throughout: There's just a bit too much business in the narrative, and it's breaking up the flow of the dialogue. Leave most of this out.
-) throughout: write in master scenes (like for the Gym)
-) throughout: the bottom margins look too high, top margins look a bit too low.
28) missing period from " ...unaware he is being watched"
32) Internet should not be initial capped
-) throughout: most of the scene sluglines are incomplete, as they don't include enough basic info about where we are. They tell us the room we're in, but not where that room is, what place or building that room is located in. As we move from place to place, we need to know this.
36) missing period from Mr(.) Edwards
39) "We'll see" should not be initial capped in Harrison's line
42) Kaz makes coffees.... this reads odd, so it should be: makes coffee (not plural), or: makes them coffee
52-53) big guy should be initial capped in the narrative since he's a speaking character and that's his name
54) this INSERT should not go here, as it seems like Jimmy is seeing this on his cell phone screen. It should be placed after the INT. HARRISON'S PLACE - NIGHt slugline, since it's Harrison who sees it.
also the face should be a (V.O.)
59) careful of the use of the word BANG!, as there is a gun in the scene, but you're referring to the attacker being hit by the weight stick. The BANG suggests that the gun has been used or gone off.
60) VOICE should be (O.S.) since we don't see the speaker
62) not sure why we have the same slug line twice in a row. Also, looks like he turns on Virus's computer 2 times in a row, as well.
62) careful of multiple characters whose names start with the same letter, like Jimmy and Joe (both J's) as this can confuse the reader.
64) town car should be initial capped as it's the proper name of that car model.
66) be consistent in what you name your characters: you call the man a GOOD SAMARITAN, but you slug him as MALE VOICE, this could be confusing, suggesting two different people.
68) parentheticals in dialogue don't go in the dialogue, they get their own line
68) "Do" should not be initial capped in Jimmy's dialogue
68) teen should be initial capped in the narrative since that's his name
69) strides with aimlessly anger.... should be aimless
82) who is SOMEONE? Never be this vague.
84) "So they don't know about he's alive." Seems like a word is wrong or missing here. Also, should it end with a question mark?
88) missing period: Stewie gets up
-) a bit many montages throughout
93) it's bearings.... it's should be its
99) scripts usually end with FADE OUT.
Page Note Summary:
There are problems with apostrophes, slug lines, missing (V.O.)'s, some misc. typos, punctuation problems, bottom margins are way too high, dropped commas.
Story Notes:
There's a lot to like in this story, and some good writing and story skill behind it. There's something neat behind the core concept, and I think it could attract interest from Hollywood producers, but I also feel there are several issues that undermine the good stuff.
1) weak and unclear hero: as I started to read the script, I was unsure who the main character/hero was... at first I thought it was Jimmy, as he was the detective, and they're typically the leads in these kinds of stories - cop goes after criminal. But then Jimmy kind of falls away as a motivator when Harrison seems to drive the interrogations. Then Mel, who kind of seemed like a "main character in waiting" at the beginning, finally emerges as such.
I'd take a strong look at being very clear and definitive about who your main character is. It's either Mel (target of a killer goes after him) or Jimmy (detective goes after killer). Think of a movie like SEVEN - Detective goes after killer, or SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (young FBI agent goes after killer) and you'll see how and why this works.
As it is, there's a lack of commitment to who is driving the story, as Mel doesn't do anything to investigate or stop the bad guy, (only Jimmy and Locke seem to take real and active steps to stop Virus, and since they take actions to stop him, this suggests that one of them is the lead).
Mel later is clearly the main character, but she's only a reactive main character - as she never does anything to try and solve the mystery (who is behind this, what does it mean, how can it be stopped?), and never does anything to stop the bad guy, and his plan, and therefore save her own life. All Mel does is react - she defends herself when she's attacked, she runs when she's chased, but she never takes initiative and becomes a proactive character who takes steps and actions to stop Virus and his plan and save herself. One problem is that, since she's not a cop, she doesn't have access to their tools and info that would allow her to learn more and take active steps. This is why cops and journalists (who can investigate and get info) make such good leads - they can solve crimes.
So, either make Jimmy the lead (cop goes after internet killer, and has to save the last victim in order to stop mass killings) or make Mel someone who is going to be an active, and not a reactive, main character who take steps to find out who is trying to kill her, and why.
2) ticking clock starts too late: the 29 hour ticking clock starts on pg. 78. I feel this is too late. If we know that Mel has to die by a certain time much earlier, then this applies pressure to everyone and the story and keeps that pressure on until the end. "Frazzled Detective has XX hours to protect the last victim from a crazed serial killer... and also prevent triggering mass killings"
If Jimmy/Mel know she has to stay alive and be protected from a killer from the end of act 1, there's a great pressure that will move the story forward.
3) believable?: I can believe that one man will try to kill. I can believe that he might have a small group of followers who will do his bidding. BUT, I find it very hard to believe that what seems like hundreds of ordinary people are willing to kill strangers - it's just too much for me. I'd scale it back - if Virus is presented as an internet psycho genius with a small but intense cult following, I can buy it. But for so many everyday people to be willing to be murderers, that I can't believe.
4) familiarity: parts of this feel like SEVEN (a crazed man sets about to punish a number of victims for their sins/weaknesses) with some SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (an athletic young woman deals with a crazy man) mixed in. This can be good, but it can also be bad. I feel like it is sometimes too similar in feeling to SEVEN, and this could put some people off.
5) no villain: our villain is, in theory, Virus. However, we don't meet him until page 35, and when we meet him, he's already been caught and is in police custody. So we meet him a bit late, and since he's caught, he can't do anything. Then he's not really a force in the story. The strength of the villain is the measure by which we see the strength of the hero - the villain must be greater, and this forces the hero to grow, and become better in order to win. When the villain is not present, or not an active threat, the hero suffers as they don't have a stronger counter force that they have to overcome.
6) too many characters, and some that don't really earn their place in the script: I would definitely try to shave down the cast, eliminate or combine characters. Many, like Ray, Omar, Pete, Gary, just don't do enough in the story to warrant the space they take up.
The entire Gary story line is, to me, a waste of space and a dead end, as it doesn't really tie in strong enough to the main story line: twisted computer genius creates website to rid the world of certain people. We don't even see Gary that much, and he's gone entirely from the ending. Lose him.
I'd also get rid of Yang and his subplot that's connected to the Gary subplot.
Same applies to the Omar and his family story line - it doesn't really go anywhere, and takes up space that would be better spent on Mel and Jimmy. I'd remove this bit.
Spend more time on Mel and Jimmy, our primary characters and their story.
I'd also look at Locke, as his role is too similar to Jimmy's, and his presence just dilutes Jimmy's. Combine these two and make a much stronger Jimmy.
7) the ending: I really didn't like the ending... Mel dies and the mass killings will begin. This is a real downer, as we want Mel to live, to win, and to have her save the world. But the death of Mel, and the slightly "here it comes" down ending, didn't win me over, and probably won't win over Hollywood either. I'd suggest having Mel live and win.
So, as I said, there's some good stuff here, and some obvious writing skills, but I feel there are many story concerns that need to be worked out in order to elevate the story to where it really could be and should be. Hope some of this helps! read -
A review of SAVAGESby JSteedla on 07/09/2009Savages: Notes by page: 1) Do not number page 1 1) Do not number your scenes, that's for a shooting script only. 1) Should be 2 spaces after FADE IN: 1) careful of multiple characters whose names start with the same letter, like Clara and Carmen (both C's) as this can confuse the reader as they scan the dialogue. 1) careful of dropped commas, as there's a lot of them... Savages:
Notes by page:
1) Do not number page 1
1) Do not number your scenes, that's for a shooting script only.
1) Should be 2 spaces after FADE IN:
1) careful of multiple characters whose names start with the same letter, like Clara and Carmen (both C's) as this can confuse the reader as they scan the dialogue.
1) careful of dropped commas, as there's a lot of them already.
1) try to start your sentences with the character, don't "bury" them in the middle of the sentence.
1) when introducing characters, don't just give us a physical description, but also give something "actable", something about WHO they are - give your characters some character. "Long hair" tells me nothing about the person and their personality.
1-2) why do we have the same scene slug 2x in a row? : INT HOUSE - NIGHT You only re-slug when one of the three basic slug elements has changed.
2) page numbers should have periods after them: 2.
2) page numbers should be in 12 pt courier like the rest of the script.
2) don't repeat info we know from the slug line (where we are) again in the narrative, avoid redundant writing.
2) OK should be Okay, written out as a the full word, and not the abbreviation.
2) when starting a new scene, don't use vague terms like "He", "She", etc.... be sure to name everyone who's in the scene by name when you start a new scene to establish exactly who's there.
2) typo: In Joe's dialogue, "Know" shouldn't be initial capped.
2) how do we know/see that the horse belongs to his sister? This is an unfilmable.
2) what is with the "...PAUSE" floating in the middle of the dialogue? This is not correct formatting.
3) typo: Busters house... should be: Buster's house.... with an apostrophe in Buster's since it's a possessive. Same applies to "Busters car..." Should be: "Buster's car..."
3) burst should be bursts
4) typo: Cannon should not be initial capped.
4) typo: Black Bows should have an apostrophe: Black Bow's, as it's a possessive.
4) typo: Chicken should not be initial capped.
4) typo: your crazy: should be: you're crazy... as it's a contraction of you + are
4) typo: Plants should not be initial capped.
4) missing question mark on Carmen's last line.
5) typo: roll their eyes at each other, This should end with a period, not a comma. Sentences end with periods.
5) typo: Joe is not fully capped in the second dialogue character slug
throughout) a lot of the dialogue is written without contractions, so it sounds robot, formal, stilted and unnatural, esp. considering the age and status of the characters.
6) your nuts should be you're nuts
6) odd extra blank space in the middle of a scene
6) Mother should not be initial capped.
throughout) either call Clara "Clara" or call her "mother" but only use one name per character and use it consistently.
6) (OS) should be (O.S.)
6) Mothers car should be Mother's car (possessive)
7) don't write out what were also seeing. Thins like, "Carmen enters and speaks with her mother." is something we're just about to see, so telling us what we're seeing is redundant writing.
7) again Busters car should be Buster's car (possessive)
8) god should be initial capped, as you did correctly on pg. 4
8) would a tire explode? it's filled with air, not propane.
8) extra space between "row, and threatens to start..."
9) lets get out of here lets should be let's (apostrophe for contraction)
-) I'm not sure why they're attacking the feed store - how is the feed store connected with Buster, the guy who repossessed Joe's truck? Should we know the connection before they destroy the place?
9) Sheriffs uniform - should be Sheriff's (possessive)
9) for some reason, Curtis is intro'd and fully capped twice.
10) Alice the white horse is free to just wander all over the town and area? Seems unlikely.
12) we have the same scene slug twice in a row: INT. KITCHEN - DAY
12) Curtis speaks twice in a row.
12 & 13) there are some placement errors regarding the character slugs
13) after a new scene slug, you have to have at least one line of narrative before you can start dialogue.
15) the info in the narrative about the old photo is unfilmable. How will an audience know or learn this by looking at the photo? You're giving info in the narrative that we can read, but cannot be shown.
15) once Joe sneaks out of the Sheriff's Office, we need a new slug line as we have changed locations, and have gone from an INT. to an EXT. shot.
19) odd extra space in the middle of the narrative.
19) typo: burry's should be buries
19) missing space in: INT.KITCHEN - DAY
-) throughout: avoid writing with ING words in the narrative, instead write in the active present tense.
20) wait, the horse can carry out specific delivery and pick up orders?
20) typo: ... she watches Joe grabs things... should be: Joe grab things (not grabs).
21) slug line: Neighbors Yard should be Neighbor's Yard (possessive)
21) Who is Mattie? Who is Megan? These two characters have not been introduced
21) avoid characters whose names start with the same first letter (Mattie, Megan, both "M")
I'm going to stop my page notes here.
So, that's over 50 notes/mistakes just in the first 20 pages. And I didn't even point out every single problem I saw. And considering how many of these are basic grammar, simple typos, formatting, spacing, etc... type notes and mistakes, this is extremely concerning.
The script is FULL of countless errors, mistakes, typos, grammar problems, formatting mistakes, as well as overall poor screenwriting technique and style. Any reader would be tempted to toss the script due to the massive amount of errors alone.
On pg 59, it looks like Bloodstone's dialogue is written as out narrative. You do this again on pg. 76. These kinds of huge errors are just unacceptable.
At a certain point in the script, it starts to read more like a novel, with info and details and people's thoughts and other unfilmables filling up the narrative.
I strongly suggest you proofread your work, master grammar, spelling, punctuation, and also get a good screenplay format guide and learn the basic rules for formatting a screenplay.
Story Notes:
Dialogue: Dialogue is very on the nose, not very subtle. People say exactly what they mean, and what they are thinking, so there is no subtext, and no layers or complexities to the dialogue or to the characters. And the way it's written sounds robotic, formal, and unnatural. The characters do not have unique voices, as everyone speaks the same, all with the same robotic voice and canter.
Characters: All are pretty one dimensional and cliche. Marshals and the Politicians and Military are all Bad Guys, while the Indians are all Good Guys. Joe has some slight depth as the consistent fool, but no one else has any real depth. Others, like Carmen, who is supposed to be a lawyer, never came across as credible as one. And having the Governor be a pot smoker is another big stretch... unless you write this as a farce.
Story: It's a bit tricky, as it's a bit hard to believe, so it wobbles somewhere between a comedy and a farce. I think, because the opening set up, and the way the disaster occurs, is too weak to become a strong foundation for all the wackiness that happens afterwards. The crazier the overall story, the stronger the opening foundation needs to be. I'd say go the comedy route - make it a balls out comedy, ad it will work better.
Huge Cast: Waaaay too many characters here. Where ever you can, try to combine, slim down, and cut extra people.
Talky and Anti-climatic Ending: We have a story that starts out with several big explosions and action filled scenes, yet it all sadly ends with a whimper, where the Chief sits and talks and smokes pot with the Governor and everything is resolved. Snore!
Joe started all this with accidental explosions, he needs to solve it with intentional ones. He needs to take risks, go out on a limb, and be willing to blow up more stuff in an effort to undo the damage he did and put things right. Having it end with the Chief's chat with the Governor is a huge let down.
Main Character Issues:
Joe, who is supposed to be our main character, basically disappears from the story pg 50 to 73. That's over 20 pages where the person who's supposed to be the star and driving force is not in his own story.
Joe doesn't have arc. He's basically the same guy is at the beginning. He doesn't change, and he just happens to save the day because he saw a photograph.
The main character's arc is the embodiment of the movie's theme. Since Joe has no arc, the movie also has no theme - no human lesson or element. So, no matter what happens in the story, it feels hollow and meaningless.
Joe does not move the story: Joe accidentally sets the story in motion, which is fine. But, after that, he has to want to fix things, he has to have the active goal of correcting what he did, and he has to constantly take actions in an effort to do that. Problem is, Joe doesn't do that. Once he sets all this in motion, he disappears, then just becomes a passive passenger, with other characters such as Carmen and Chief Bloodstone becoming the ones who actually take action and do things in their goal to address the growing disaster. Carmen is more of a main character than Joe is.
Magic Horse: Be careful how intelligent you have Alice be, as she's coming across as a magic horse, who is able to understand and carry out detailed instructions. It's a bit hard to believe, as it's set up, and the idea of such an intelligent horse is actually more of an interesting story than the one you're telling. Don't draw attention away from your main story by introducing an element that warrants its own story.
I did like the kind of "whimsey" feel that the story had, and there was something likable about the idea, and Joe, but the considerable problems that plague the story, script and characters d the script in. read -
A review of Senseless! (rev.)by JSteedla on 02/02/2009Senseless: Notes by page #: 1: should be two spaces after FADE IN: and before the first slugline 1: slugline is missing the DAY/NIGHT time element from the first slugline. 1: the actor's lines should be (V.O.) since they are not in the theater and are heard via the movie speakers. 1: maybe slug the MAN and WOMAN as ACTOR and ACTRESS? Also, they should be properly intro's... Senseless:
Notes by page #:
1: should be two spaces after FADE IN: and before the first slugline
1: slugline is missing the DAY/NIGHT time element from the first slugline.
1: the actor's lines should be (V.O.) since they are not in the theater and are heard via the movie speakers.
1: maybe slug the MAN and WOMAN as ACTOR and ACTRESS? Also, they should be properly intro's since they are speaking characters and will need to be cast.
2: boy should be initial capped in the narrative since that's his name and he's a speaking character.
2 and throughout: OK should be "okay" in the dialogue, written out as a full word and not an abbreviation.
3: usher should be initial capped in the narrative.
3: when Vincent goes into the drug store, of the camera follows him, there should a new full slugline: INT. DRUGSTORE - DAY and then he would go into the PHONE BOOTH as a mini slug within the master scene.
4 and throughout: careful of repeating info in the narrative that we already know from the slugline, mostly the location we are in.
6: here, since we don't change location and only some time passes, you can use a LATER mini slug to denote the passage of time.
13: when we cut to the car we need a new and full slugine, INT or EXT?
13: use only one name for each location: don't call it Oakmont Motor Court and also call it Motel... one name and use it consistently.
14: when you start a new scene, you should name all the characters by their names, and not use vague terms like They, He, She, etc... Tell us specifically who is here and then you can use those terms.
14: drunk should be initial capped in the narrative.
17: here again, call it HELEN'S DINER or just DINER, but not both.
20: when we move into the CAR we need a new and full sugline
21: any characters and their voices heard from the movie should be (V.O.)
21: boy should be initial capped in the narrative
23: should Scotch be initial capped? You dont initial cap it later in the script.
26: In Melody's first line, Why should not be initial capped.
26 worker should be initial capped in the narrative. Basically, any speaking character's name should be initial capped in the narrative, even if their name is a description, ie: worker, because that's their proper name within the script.
26: we have the same Town Square slugline twice in a row.
26: the Mayor should be intro'd as MAYOR, not MAN PLAYING THE MAYOR, since his dialogue slug is MAYOR. They should always match.
27: don't need the TOWN SQUARE in TOWN SQUARE - LATER, just say LATER
28: we already have a character named BOY from the drive in movie... don't reuse a character name, even a generic one... causes havoc with casting and become confusing to the reader. And another BOY on pg 37.
31: typo: expertly picks of three moving.... should be: picks off..
34: typo: Monterrey should be Monterey (one r)
43: typo: The pass a bucket.... Should be: They pass...?
55: here, when we enter the home, we need a new INT slugline.
63: you have Stocky Man speak twice in a row
68: when we enter a tent we need a new slug: INT. TENT - DAY This note applies throughout the story as there are lots of incomplete sluglines.
75: I suspect that this point that the food from Oakmont is the true cause of the senseless syndrome... maybe the food is infected via the crop duster? Do you want to tip your hand this early?
78: number spoken in dialogue should be written out as words. This note throughout.
81: typo: hesitates. Should be initial capped.
84: Washington Man and all heard via the monitors should be indicated as (V.O.)
92: earth should be initial capped.
Summary:
- scattered typos
- slugline concerns, esp when we change locations
- (O.S.) vs (V.O.) issues
- capitalization issues, esp with speaking characters
- consistency issues with character names and locations/sluglines
Story Notes:
Overall a well written piece of work, well thought out, and showcases a lot of good writing and a good grasp of the craft.
Here's a suggestion you might consider adding: As is, those who become senseless just wander about until they die. Not very threatening, are they? But if Vincent made a good old zombie movie that seemingly turns the audience into real, live flesh eating and craving "zombies", it might up the stakes and create more opportunities for action and danger. Have Vincent make a B zombie movie that turns the audience into zombies, resulting in audience members chasing after those who were unaffected. Now there's a real threat, a real horror to seeing people become zombies after seeing the movie (of course, it's caused by the powder added to the foods, as it's currently written.) This way you can really hybrid the traditional horror and the sci fi. You kind of go halfway, why not commit and go all the way. This could be the new twist on the zombie film people have been looking for.
While I thought the script was well done, for some reason, I was always emotionally detached, and I never really felt for or rooted for Vincent. I pondered this and I have some ideas as to why I might have felt this.
First is that Vincent is not deserving. You present us with a man who makes very bad movies, and his career hits the skids because of it, and then he makes another very bad movie. Problem with this is, it's a challenge for us to get behind someone who is after something they obviously don't deserve. Should a bad singer win American idol? Should a bad athlete win the Olympics? Would we ever root for a lack talent to make it big? Most likely, not. So, by having Vincent be so obviously bad and what he did, does, and wants to be a success at, it a hurdle because he doesn't deserve the success that he wants. Our main character does not deserve their goal, and by all rights, should never achieve it.
If you look at the movie Tootsie, for example (yeah, I know its old, but it's brilliant), the opening montage shows us Dustin Hoffman, an actor, as he carefully applies stage make up, acts out scenes, teaches an acting class, etc... all this is meant to show us that he knows his craft and is good at it. He's a good actor, and deserves to find success. This is vital, as it establishes him as a man deserving of his goal - to be a working actor. So we can get behind him and root for him - he SHOULD have what he wants.
But Vincent is the opposite, a bit of an Ed Wood without the cashmere sweaters. Now, I'm not saying that Vincent should be Hitchcock, He does not have to be a brilliant genius, but have him be good at what he does - when it comes to low budget B horror flicks, he's one of the best. Show me this guy, and I can get behind him and want him to get what he wants, and what he deserves.
Another thought on my own personal detachment was the Vincent character himself. He has no flaw, no inner problems that make him human. Remember, it's what's wrong with us that identifies us as human and helps us bond to each other. Vincent doesn't seem to have an issue that is the cause of his problems, one that is shared by all humantity and we can all identify with.
Referring to Tootsie again, right after we see that Dustin Hoffman is a good actor who deserves success, we then see why he doesn't have it - he's impossible to work with. We see him argue with a director over a minor point, and Dustin storms out of rehursal. Bingo! He doesn't have success because of his own issues: Dustin is his own worst enemy.
If we met a Vincent who is good at what he does, is genuinely talented, yet doesn't have success... and then we see why - he has some inner issue or problem that causes him to stifle or sabotage his own career and any chances at success, this is someone I can understand. Now I'm not just rooting for him to get the success he deserves, but to also overcome the demons that cause him to destroy his own chances. Vincent needs to be his own worst enemy. He would be a big director if he wasn't "blank."
Lastly, I think the story seems to lack a theme and Vincent seems to lack an arc - they are the same. If Vincent had some inner flaw that kept him from achieving success, then he faces that flaw and overcomes in the end, allowing him to save Earth, as well as himself, then we'd have a main character that arced, a movie that had a theme, and a guy I could really get behind. But, because of the issues I've outlined above, the story, despite its qualities, felt hollow.
Structurally, I felt like the events of and around pg. 59 should occur 10 pages earlier - people burning down theaters and Vincent seeing real senseless cases should be his midpoint low point. It all ties into what Vincent's goal or dream is: for a director after success to see first hand the horrible affect his film is having sounds like a perfect low point, a nightmare come true. This happens around pg. 59-60, it would be a perfect midpoint low point if it happened around pg. 49-50.
I know you've chosen the downbeat ending on purpose, but I suggest that it sucks the joy out of the whole experience... we go through all that, we see Vincent and humanity fight and win... just to lose? What was the point of going through it all, then? Yes, I am suggesting the Hollywood ending, because it is satisfying and it will help the salability of your script to the Hollywood machine that will want a happy ending anyway. Of course, you can leave a bit of it open to suggest the battle isn't over, but the out and out "we lose" ending doesn't serve your story or its marketability.
Overall it's good work, but I think a few more passes on the structure, ending and main character/arc/theme would help it immensely and elevate it from good to great. Good luck! read -
A review of Speakeasyby JSteedla on 01/31/2009Speakeasy: Misc. Notes: - How old is Susan? How old is Cliff? And Hurley? Missing age info on these characters and some others. - Careful of multiple names that start with the same letter, like Susan and Sheryl, and then Skip, as this can confuse readers as they scan the character slugs. - might want to write using master scenes, like inside the tavern when we move to the... Speakeasy:
Misc. Notes:
- How old is Susan? How old is Cliff? And Hurley? Missing age info on these characters and some others.
- Careful of multiple names that start with the same letter, like Susan and Sheryl, and then Skip, as this can confuse readers as they scan the character slugs.
- might want to write using master scenes, like inside the tavern when we move to the bathroom, and again later in Wyatt's house, etc...
- careful of widows throughout as they waste space and slow the read.
- 15, 16: judge should be initial capped in the narrative as he's a speaking character and that's his name.
- throughout: not sure if liquor names (Scotch, Gin, Vodka...) should be initial capped.... I don't think so. Only brand names and proper names should be initial capped.
19: typo: let's you down here.... let's should be lets, no apostrophe.
20: typo: Wyatt glances down at Wyatt's feet. Should this be, Ryan's feet?
25: no need to initial cap Limo
26: lackey should be initial capped in the narrative.
26: Cop in "...Cop car..." should not be initial capped.
26: Ryan's father should be properly introduced and fully capped here.
30-33: the sluglines here need some work. They're kind of overdone and confusing.
34: if Wyatt actually says capital when he sounds it out, it should be written as dialogue.
37: missing words?: "Ryan a disk down a shuffleboard."
38: all the int. bar scenes could be written using master scenes, might make it flow better.
throughout: abbreviations spoken in the dialogue, (like Magnum, PI) should have periods (Magnum, P.I.) unless they are spoken as words (like SWAT).
41: missing space before the (FLASHBACK) element
41: eggnog should not be initial capped
43: missing time element from Wyatt's Home slugline?
47: Army and Latte shouldn't be initial capped.
48: typo? "Kips cheek"? No Kip here. You mean Trevis?
49: Channels should not be initial capped.
56: the Radio should be indicated as a (V.O.), and maybe name it something other than Radio... the radio is not talking, some kind of officer or dispatcher is talking.
64: no need to initial cap High School. (you do the first time, but then don't on the following line)
64: space missing before (FLASHBACK)
68 & 69: should there be some kind of possessive apostrophe in Angels and Dodgers, re: their ERA? And ERA should be E.R.A.
70: no need to initial cap Donkey. (later on you don't do this).
76: when we move from EXT of the house to INT we need a new and full slugline.
77: the police scanner should be a (V.O.), and maybe slug it as a person and not a machine.
88: Little League, Police Station, should not be initial capped.
90 and throughout: try to end your scenes cleanly, don't let the last line or two stray on to the following page. Have clean breaks.
- why don't you just give Brandy's Dad and Ryan's Dad and Lackey proper names?
91: here you slug him as MAYOR, but earlier he was MAYOR JOHNSON... be consistent.
93: careful about referring to other movies in your movie... you want your reader only thinking about your film and not other ones.
94: typo: may here... should be: may hear...
94: Brandy's dad.... should Brandy's Dad in the narrative
94: Blacks should not be initial capped.
101: don't need the comma after Skip in: Skip, takes out the set of fake teeth...
103: Marquee should not be initial capped.
Summary:
- lots of areas where there's concerns with capitalization: words capped when they shouldn't be, and character names not capped when they should be.
- some scattered typos
- minor slugline issues (ie: master scenes, confusing, excessive sluglines with the scenes around the park)
Story Notes:
Kind of a "The Dukes of Hazzard" meets a very low-brow college frat comedy, but not on a college campus. In fact, I was thinking this had a Dukes of Hazzard feel just a few pages before you actually had the van toot the General Lee theme.
Here's the areas I think could use some work:
Comedy: Comedy's a very subjective thing, but I felt it could really use a lot more humor. There are some funny zingers and one liners, but not a lot of really funny stuff HAPPENED. It needs more visual comedy: comedic, insane and wacky events and actions, and not just rely on the dialogue. Where are the big funny set pieces? The wild, outrageous actions and moments that end up in the trailer and the commercials? While there are some funny lines, they aren't funny enough, there aren't enough of them, and there is a lacking of very funny "cinematic" moments and scenes.
Main character and Goal: I'm not sure who the main character is, either Ryan or Wyatt. I'm assuming it's Ryan cause he's the "straight man" of the pair, but it's not a definite. And what do they really want, what are they really after?
As it's written, Ryan and Wyatt's main goals are booze and the bar. The girls are their secondary goals. They need the booze and bars in order to get the girls. If the bars didn't close, their life would continue on as it has. So, on Pg 16 when they are ordered not to drink and to stay in town (meaning, no chance of crossing state lines to Danville for booze), this seems to be plot point one: the guys cant go to a bar and are not to drink. So, their goal seems to be to get booze (not to get the girls).
Problem is, two pages later, Johnny shows up and gives them cases of booze. The guys have their booze. Goal achieved! Movie over!
I feel the story is very weak because there is not a clear main character, and he/they don't have a clear goal. Ryan does not seem to be really in love with or really after Brandy. He's kind of after her, he seems to want booze, but he gets it, so what is he after?
Extra characters: Whatever happened to Susan? There are a smattering of small characters who don't seem to earn their keep. Susan has like 3 lines but gets a name, Brandy's Dad is a major character but never gets a name, and Lackey is seen over and over, but has no name. Huh?
The story line with Ryan and his Dad is weak, and doesn't really serve the story. I'd consider deleting it.
Structure: We seems to have a clear plot pojnt 1 on pg. 16 with the judge and Ryan and Wyatt, pg 25 they decide to open a speakeasy, and pg 37 they open....but after that, the structure slowly disintegrates. If you were to look at the midpoint (pg 52-53), there's no low point for Ryan or Wyatt... There should be a major pivot point/turning point here, but there isn't. I think this has to do with a vague decision as to who the main character is, and a weak commitment to what his goal is. The weaknesses regarding main character and goal have lead to a weak structure.
The Town Banishing Booze: I just didn't buy any of this part from the beginning, and how Ryan and Wyatt were given house arrest and ordered not to drink or leave town. It was just too weak and flimsy, and not at all grounded in any kind of reality. If there's no reality in the beginning, it's harder for me to buy into any of the story that follows as real. Give me some real reasons for booze or bars to be banned! I also don't know how a judge could order someone not to drink. Can this be done? Maybe they have to attend AA meetings, see a counselor, be subject to random breathalyzer tests?? Seeing Wyatt at a AA meeting could be funny.
Bad Guys?: We don't really have a strong "villain" here. Trevis is the villain's goon, but the Mayor is not in the story enough, or have any kind of evil plan or motive, to actually work as a villain. So we have a villain's goon, but no villain. Where's our evil Mayor out to destroy the town for his own benefit? We need this guy as a counter force to Ryan and Wyatt to create drama and provide comedy.
Let's say the Mayor secretly owns a big bar just across the state line. But, no one goes because it's overpriced and the local bars are killing his own business. So, He decides to make his place the only place to get booze by forcing a new ban on all booze and bars in his town. Now, he's doing this all for his own good. He's a bad guy with a clear motivation. Give me a big, bad evil villain with a clear and selfish goal, and the story will improve greatly.
Also, there needs to be a guy that Brandy likes... Is she about to get engaged? Is she going to London to be with a boyfriend? This would give Ryan some SERIOUS competition over the beautiful Brandy. This will up the stakes and give him someone he has to compete against = More drama!
The ending: Personally, I did not care for the courtroom scene as the ending.... kind of out of place in this type of story, and anti climactic for this type of story. See the movie "Unaccepted", which is very similar to this in style and tone. It also ends in the young heros pleading with a council. Yawn! Ryan and Wyatt, etc... need to DO something (something very funny and very outrageous) that backfires and ends in massive failure, that turns and then somehow convinces the town/Mayor etc... to lift the booze ban. This should also reveal the Mayor as a selfish villain and ruin his evil plan. The speeches don't do it. Nope. We really need very very funny visuals and actions here. Action, not talk!
So those are my thoughts. Hope some of this helps and good luck! read -
A review of Cryptocracyby JSteedla on 10/01/2008Cryptocracy: Note by page number: 1: why do we have another INT. C-130 slugline? we haven't change locations, we're still in the same place. 1: also, be consistent in naming your locations, If you call it C-130 TRANSPORT PLANE, then you should always call it that, not C-130 or any other variation. 3: Typo: Intercut has two I's: IINTERCUT throughout: lots of widows 5:... Cryptocracy:
Note by page number:
1: why do we have another INT. C-130 slugline? we haven't change locations, we're still in the same place.
1: also, be consistent in naming your locations, If you call it C-130 TRANSPORT PLANE, then you should always call it that, not C-130 or any other variation.
3: Typo: Intercut has two I's: IINTERCUT
throughout: lots of widows
5: when you use the slug, SECURITY ROOM, you need to include where this room is. I thought, at first, it was on the US Base, since we just had a scene there. This slug should be: INT. AL-QAEDA TRAINING CAMP - SECURITY ROOM - NIGHT, this was we know where this security room is. Same applies to locations like BUILDING... you have to tell us where this building is.
throughout: personally, I'm not a fan of the constant use of SAME TIME and MOMENTS LATER. It's too easy for someone to forget what the last accurate time element was. If you always use DAY or NIGHT, we'll never get confused or have to flip back to see what time it was.
throughout: might want to write using master scenes.
6: Berkson's voice should be (V.O.), not (O.S.), since he's not in the room, and we're hearing him via a radio.
throughout: sluglines need work
7: the (beat) in your dialogue is not correctly placed, it does not go in the middle of a sentence, it gets its own line, check a format guide.
9-10: the continuing dialogue split over two pages is not correctly formatted. Same again on 14-15
12: numbers spoken in dialogue should be written out as words
17: usually, after a slugline, you need to have one line of narrative before you can start dialogue.
throughout: careful of dropped commas
20: Janet and Murdoch should be (V.O.) in the van
throughout: ellipsis are three periods, not two
23: not sure why we have the Aston Hotel Room scene slug repeated since we haven't changed location. There's a lot of these repeating sluglines for the same location throughout, not sure why.
25: we have Janet and Jackson.... so I keep thinking, Janet Jackson! Maybe change one of these names to something else, and to something that starts with a different first letter so they're both not J.
32 and throughout: when we see and hear people, like Anchors/Reporters, on TV, their voices are all (V.O.)
33: structurally, I feel this is all running a bit late, this beat feels like it should be 10 pages earlier than it is.
34: when you write abbreviations in dialogue, technically, ones like FBI should have periods, F.B.I., since they are spoken as individual letters, and not as a word, like SWAT.
36: is there some story reason why the tourists are described as flamboyant? Wouldn't describing them as "foreigners" been a more effective choice, and potentially less offensive?
41: I had forgotten who Sullivan was, I had to scroll way back to find out.
43: having us hear Pauline and Frank dialogue here over the murder the Brian is actually a director's and editor's decision, not the writer's.
43: Pauline and Frank's dialogue here should be (V.O.) since they are not in Brian's Apartment.
46: I wish there were fewer characters, getting a little hard to keep track of everyone.
49: "...sent The blue one...." "The" should not be initial capped.
52: I don't think you need the apostrophe in "Thomas' pulls a 180..."
53: extra space before Sansoni's character slug.
55: the jump from the scene at Wilson's to Murdoch being with Carter seems abrupt... like we're missing something. What else happened at Wilson's?
57: should the garage be an INT, esp if you want an echo? Again on pg 86?
59: here you spell Sargeant differently that you spelled it earlier. Which is correct? Is there a difference?
63: the web is becoming a bit too complex, I'm starting to forget who some of the characters are, and I'm feeling a little lost in the who's good/who's bad line up.
77: Doctor should be fully capped when introduced as he's a speaking character.
89: if you intro the CHINESE MAN with that name, then be sure to always call him that, not The Man, etc... be consistent in what you call each character, and use only one name for each.
95: don't need the apostrophe: Wilson scan's....
100: why is Jackson back in Kandahar?
106: feels like we "jump" to the humvee chase without getting there
106: this entire humvee chase is not correctly formatted - you're missing all kinds of sluglines here.
106: i feel like you got lazy here, this action/chase on this page is all written so superficially.
107: past three years? has it been three years since his wife died?
109: who is Soldier #1 and #2? I missed them?
110: things are falling apart here for me...
Format summary:
biggest areas to take a closer look at:
- sluglines
- (V.O.) vs. (O.S.)
- widows
- placement of (beat)
- dialogue that splits over 2 pages
- repeated sluglines
- constant overuse of SAME TIME, etc... which leaves the reader easily lost as far as time. Just use DAY or NIGHT and we'll never be confused.
Story Notes:
There's a lot of good writing here - you have talent when it comes to character, dialogue, and (most of) the narrative.
I was pretty into the story from the beginning, but as I got further into the act 2, I was started to feel less interested, and then by the mid point, I have become disconnected.
I think you have good elements here, but there are some weak story choices that diminish them, and overall made the story not work for me, despite its promising start.
Here's some thoughts, hopefully the provide some insight:
Murdoch vs Pauline: Murdoch is the main character, but there were several times where it felt like Pauline was taking over - she was the one we were following, and the one who seemed to be the most active in solving the mystery. You always want to make sure your main character is the front person, and gets the big discovery moments, and takes the big discovery actions - secondary leads, like Pauline, should always get smaller actions and discoveries. It's a tricky balance, and there were just a few times where where Pauline's "gravity" seemed to overtake Murdoch's.
Arc: Murdoch is a our main character, and he seems to have some clear external goals (find the man who killed his wife and is behind all this), but he has no internal goals or flaws. What is "wrong" with Murdoch, internally, that he has to face, and overcome, if he's to be successful in achieving his external goal? What Inner Demon does he have to face, fight, and defeat before he can go up against, Jackson and his past?
Without an inner goal, for me, Murdoch's fight becomes empty, and this leads to my emotional disconnect in the story.
Theme: without a main character arc, the story has no theme. It's not about anything that has to do with the human experience (other than we live in a world of conspiracy, which is a comment on external society, and not about being a human.) Murdoch needs some kind of inner struggle that speaks to all people, all over. This will be the embodiment of the movie's theme. Without the arc, there is no theme, and no matter how much action and intrigue, the story ends up not being about anything.
Ending: I know there are those who love the downbeat ending, with a hero who dies and fails and achieve nothing.... I'm not one of them, and typically, neither is Hollywood. Having Murdoch die, and not make a difference, might be a powerful political statement, but it will turn off audiences and readers. This is a big budget movie, and will need a star behind it. No star wants to play someone who fails and dies. And audiences will prefer leaving with the feeling that we can make a difference, however small.
Too Complex and Confusing: The large cast, the changing and vague alliances, not knowing who is bad or good, etc... make this a complex and, too often, a confusing story. I like the saying, "simple story, complex characters." Here, we have almost the opposite... I'd like to see a simpler story.
Pedestrian: One thing I felt from the beginning was that this was the kind of story I had seen many times before... everything was a bit too familiar as far as US Govt conspiracy, sets up, deceptions... now, I guess part of that is just par for the "type" of story it is - govt. conspiracy - but I wish it was a bit more original, and had something new and exciting to bring to a type of story we've seen many times before. Less "Pedestrian"
Overall, it generally has a lot of good writing, and it starts out well, but then loses it's way... and the focus on the main character of Murdoch is soon sacrificed to a desire to create an overly complex story than becomes burred because of the writer's goal of adding more and more twists and turns. Remember, stories are first about people, about the main character, and secondly about the events. Refocus your efforts on Murdoch, create an exciting journey that makes him arc, and you're on your way. Good luck! read -
A review of The Unbuggered (V.2)by JSteedla on 09/29/2008The Unbuggered: General Format, style, and technique concerns: - lots of dropped commas from dialogue and narrative, especially in the dialogue. - incorrect formatting of the intercuts throughout. Check a format guide on how to format these correctly. - top margins are way too high? dialogue runs too wide? this just cheats your page count lower than it should be and makes... The Unbuggered:
General Format, style, and technique concerns:
- lots of dropped commas from dialogue and narrative, especially in the dialogue.
- incorrect formatting of the intercuts throughout. Check a format guide on how to format these correctly.
- top margins are way too high? dialogue runs too wide? this just cheats your page count lower than it should be and makes the script look off-format.
- typically, single dashes divide elements in a slugline, not two. Again, check a format guide.
- "lets" missing the apostrophe in a few places.
- lots of widows. These slow the read and waster valuable space, and can almost always be eliminated easily.
- misc location/slugline confusion: ie: where is the conference room? In Eric's office or... sluglines are vague and incomplete throughout.
- voices from the TV need to be indicated as (V.O.)s
- redundant writing - in many places, you repeat info in the narrative that we already know from the slugline
- might want to write using master scenes
- again, sluglines missing key info: for example, INT. CONFESSIONAL should be INT. CATHOLIC CHURCH - CONFESSIONAL since the confessional is not a location, it's an area that's within a location.
- scenes that have one or two last lines stray onto the following/previous page: try to keep all of a scene together and have it break cleanly, don't let a single last line be orphaned alone on the next page. It's clean writing.
- misc. confusion: Huh? Eric's office is at the courthouse? I thought it was in an office tower? Oh, this is just incorrect intercut formatting again.
- lots of places where question marks are missing from lines that are questions. Questions end in question marks. There are several of these.
- Characters that speak should be initial capped when they're mentioned in the narrative.
- 81: alley's should not have an apostrophe, it's a plural, not a possessive.
- Fade Out should have a period, not a colon.
The biggest issues here revolve around the slugline problems, intercut formatting, and the use of commas and question marks should also be addressed.
Story Concerns:
The very unlikable lead: Eric, right off the bat, is a cad. He's a liar, a cheat, a womanizer, and a lawyer. You've made your main character difficult, if not impossible, to like. This becomes a challenge for the audience: how do we get behind, get emotionally attached to, and root for someone who we don't like, and shows no redeeming qualities?
We have to like, admire, sympathize, get attached to, etc... our lead. He is us, we are him. Problem is, there is Nothing good about this guy. He does not do a single nice thing for anyone or anything, and he does not show a single admirable quality or sense of honor or morals. Why will we want to like him? Why will we root for him, and not against him?
There are many flawed/dark heros in stories, but usually, while they are flawed people, they are still the best ones we'll meet in the world of the story. They are the "moral center" of their universe. in CASABLANCA, Rick is a shady guy who runs a bar and secret gambling joint - not exactly a saint - but he's the best person we'll meet in his world - even other criminals (Peter Lorre) trust him!
Eric lacks anything good, anything redeemable, has no honor, etc... So, whatever his problems, whatever his goal or want, the audience won't be emotionally attached or personally involved. He's a bad man who deserves whatever bad stuff happens to him.
He's a cad, yeah, we get it: In act 1, we see Eric with: Tara, Alice, Coat Check Girl, Dolores... all in 12 pages. I feel this is overkill. Show him with one woman, then cheat on her with another, and we'll know he's a womanizer. We don't need 4 examples, it's like being beat over the head with something we learn by woman Number 2. use these pages for other things like story and character.
Location confusion: pg. 9 you tell me I'm in LA. Where have I been prior to this? I "assume" the casino is in Vegas, but you don't tell me. You also don't tell me where we are at the very beginning of the script. This ties in to my "slugline problems" notes above, but it also hinders the story as so much key location info is left out, I lose my sense of place within the story.
Eric being a cad has nothing to do with him not getting buggered - his symptom does not match up with the cause: We meet Eric the womanizer - and he's good at it. This is his "symptom." He gets any and every woman he wants. Now, first concern is, this is not necessarily a problem, many men would be very jealous. So, he doesn't really have a "problem." Eric's symptom is not necessarily a bad thing.
Next, is the cause: Eric was not buggered by his priest. Here, there' s a huge disconnect. What does the symptom (sleeps around) have to do with the cause (wasn't molested)? They don't relate, they don't connect. Now, if Eric could NOT connect with women, no matter what, that might be a symptom that relates to the cause: A Man has sexual trouble with woman because he wasn't found attractive by his Priest. It's not perfect, but you can see a connection between the two - can't have sex now because he secretly feels "unattractive" because he was not a sexual target like everyone else around him.
Think of a simple example like: A boy is attacked by a dog. As an adult, the Man is still nervous around dogs. See? One naturally leads to another. The idea here is to make sure that the two work together like puzzle pieces.
As is now, Eric being a womanizer almost seems the opposite to what we might expect from someone who was NOT molested. The parts just don't click, so the premise crumbles and the story "doesn't hold water."
Character Issues: Would Father Tim really say "fuck"? Would Eric call father Tim, "Tim"? These very out of character moments, and others, kick me out of the story - everyone needs to act in a way that's true to who they are, and what they are. Seeing Father Tim struggle and fight the urge to say "fuck" (because he's a priest, and he knows he can't) is actually much funnier than having him blurt it out.
South Park: a story line much like this was already tackled in South Park, where Mr. Garrison discovers he was not molested by his father, while all the guys around him were. Garrison goes home and breaks down, begging his father to explain why he wasn't molested. So, it has been done, and works well in a 22 minute show.
Repeating scenes: For example, when Eric first talks to Yvette about Father Joe being arrested, the scene repeats itself, goes around in a circle. Careful of these.
Story told via visuals?: Movies are stories that are told via the moving image. I felt this was mostly static scenes with talking heads. There's just not enough of the story being told by the images. If we took out the dialogue and read only the description, would we be able to follow the story? I don't think so. Try to rethink the story using visuals and not dialogue.
Unbelievable Motivation: Eric is determined to find out why he wasn't molested. Why? Why does he need to know this? Why is finding this out vital to him? Problem is, it isn't. It's a false motivation - Eric needs to find out why because the story/author needs him to. This is too weak. Eric must NEED to find this out, and have good, relatable reasons for doing so.
Let's say Eric couldn't have sex with women, not even a woman he truly loved - and so he couldn't ask her to marry him - how could he be a good husband if he can't get it up? Then, he discovers he was the only one not molested as a kid. Ah ha! That's it! He can't perform with women because he was passed over for other boys! Why was he passed over? He has to find out, hoping it will unlock his sexual inability and allow him to finally be intimate with, and even propose to, the woman he truly loves! Now, he's a good guy, a victim, a damaged goods who has a clear goal and a good, strong, honorable motivation to find out why.
Melodrama?: For example, Eric, an adult lawyer, bursts into tears and runs out a room? So much of Eric's actions were over the top melodrama. Why not write him as a believable adult man who's smart and educated?
Very Dated references: Careful of these: Boy's Town, Claude Raines, James Dean, etc... will all be lost on today's 20 something readers, execs and audiences.
Problem solved with one line: This is one of those "it could be solved with one line" stories. Eric asks, why didn't you molest me? Father says, "you weren't my type." End of movie. it CANNOT be something that can, realistically, be solved that easily. Then all the drama and fuss comes across as false.
Beating a one beat joke to death: Overall, this is a one joke SNL skit that's stretched wafer thin to fill 107 pages - and so it has nothing to do other than ask the same question, over and over and over... "Why didn't you molest me?" "Because." The premise is too thin to support a 2 hour movie. There's not enough story, not enough meat on the bones, for that.
Funny? Comedy?: It's so subjective, but it was not, for me, funny. Low brow humor, slapstick, lines the characters say because the author wants the joke (as opposed to the comedy coming from inside the characters, it's usually forced upon them externally by the writer), etc... all make for comedy where the jokes are "not earned." It's surface and shallow comedy, as opposed to laughs that are not only funny, but are deeper and have some kind of insight to them.
I'm sure this review will be one of the ones you remove from the site rankings, but I hope some of it still filters through and proves useful, if only to others who read it. Good luck! read -
A review of Project Death Rattleby JSteedla on 09/27/2008Project Death Rattle: Format, style, technique notes, by page number: 1: FADE IN should have a colon after it. 1: careful of redundant writing, dont give us info in the narrative that we already know from the slugline. 1: try to keep narrative blocks to 3 or 4 lines, if they go longer, split them up. Again on pg. 11. 1: Ray's age should go with his fully capped intro,... Project Death Rattle:
Format, style, technique notes, by page number:
1: FADE IN should have a colon after it.
1: careful of redundant writing, dont give us info in the narrative that we already know from the slugline.
1: try to keep narrative blocks to 3 or 4 lines, if they go longer, split them up. Again on pg. 11.
1: Ray's age should go with his fully capped intro, not later.
8 to 9: can't go from EXT PORCH to the LIVING ROOM, as the Living Room is an INT., and since the EXT has changed to an INT, you have to fully reslug, you cannot use the mini-slug here. Same note again on pg. 16.
11: fat bum should be initial capped in the narrative, since that's his name and he's a speaking character
13: yeah.. should have either one period or three (an ellipsis) but not 2
17: dropped comma: Capt. Crag(,) sir!
17: don't use abbreviations in dialogue (Capt.) as we speak in full words, so write in full words.
17: maybe just slug Capt. Crag as Crag?
25: internet should not be initial capped. Again on pg. 37 and throughout.
29: odd here, as Ray is trying to find his brother's wife, but the acts of the Officers around him are acts of romantic/erotic love... this might work if Ray was trying to find his wife or his gf, but the two don't quite match in tone as is.
30: way back on pg. 21 Schlitz gave Ray some contact info for a friend in the crime lab... he should have gone there afterwards. Why does he go to Crag now and instead of the lab? What is the point of this scene, and its placement here? A should lead to B.
32: I think this line should be slugged as Christine, and not Ray: "Come on. I want to show you something." Sounds like her line and not his?
32: god should be initial capped. Again on pg. 35 and throughout.
33: missing comma: thalamuses(,) too.
33: supervisor should be initial capped in narrative since that's his name.
33: "He nods." Should be: "Ray nods." Since Ray did not just speak (Christine did), you have to use his name. same note again on pg. 38, with "He slams..." There are many of these misplaced "He..." and "She..." after dialogue throughout.
33: B Plus... Plus should not be initial capped.
throughout: I usually hear that it's better to avoid underlining words in the narrative
38: sushi chef should be initial capped in the narrative, since that's his name
43: now you're not writing in master scenes, I thought you had been earlier. Either style is fine, but pick one and stick with it.
43-44: when Crag leaves the INT FRONT HALL and goes outside onto the PORCH, we need a new, full slugline, as he has gone from INT to EXT. Again on pg. 46-47. And 93-94.
50: when we go from EXT. RAYS APT. to inside his CAR, we need a new and full slugline as we have changed location, and have gone from an EXT to and INT.
67: here you initial cap God! Yay! But then, on the same page, you don't! Boo!
72: City should not be initial capped.
72: peddle should be pedal
76-77: Ray's split dialogue is not correctly handled here.
94: scripts end with FADE OUT., which goes in the right hand margin.
Format, etc... summary:
Formatting needs some work, in particular, correct use of sluglines, intercuts, split dialogues, initial capping the names of speaking characters, and other issues as noted above.
Story Notes:
This is an odd bird, so it's a bit tougher to review since many of the
"usual" screenplay and story "rules" either don't apply, or apply in a slightly different context.
There are some funny bits - nothing that made me laugh out loud, but made me smile and I thought were clever, so good work there.
But I have to ask myself, does it work, overall? Is it a movie?
It did not work for me. And I'm not entirely sure why. I think it's not quite defined as to what is it, and what it wants to be. Vague? I know.
Movies like SCREAM are clear comedy-parodies of a genre. THE NAKED GUN series are just off the wall comedies. PDR didn't seem to be clearly self defined as a comedy parody, or a wacky comedy, or something else. It seems to float in some nether-world in between this, that and something else.
It's not quite scary enough to be a horror, not quite funny enough to be a full comedy, it doesn't mock anything so it's not a satire... though it might have some or all of these elements, I think it's the proportions that are off.
The script seemed too focused on creating comedy and surprising moments, at the cost of the tone and the story. Fart jokes, Death appearing out of no where, Sam's ghost, etc... this script has everything including the kitchen sink. It's the "shotgun" method of comedy - throw in every type of comedy and joke and visual in the hopes that some of it sticks. problem is, when you add every ingredient, no one knows what you've made and it becomes a befuddled dish.
Writers have the responsibility to know exactly what they are crafting, and to carefully choose what goes in - even if a joke or gag is funny, it might not have a place in a particular story. The writer must know their goal and material well enough to decide "this is funny AND fits in with what I'm trying to do." and, "while this is funny, it's out of place in this particular script and its feel." You have to pick and use only what is right for this story, and file the other things away for future use.
So I feel like that was a lack of self-awareness here, and a lack of commitment to what this was/is supposed to be, when it's done.
I also feel the story really needs more work. The story is what everything is built upon: the comedy, the satire, whatever. If your base foundation of a good, strong story is weak, then whatever you build upon it will be weak, as well.
In the beginning, one problem is that we leave our main character too much and for too long. We leave Ray to follow Sam's POV, and then we leave Sam and follow Cammy's POV, and so Ray drops out of the story for too long. We need to be with our main character as much as possible; they are our emotional tie to the movie and story.
Also, everything is pretty easy for Ray; they find the center, they get into the center, they find Cammy, they get out, etc..., very easily. This robs the story of conflict and drama. Again, the effort was put into all the comedy, and not enough into crafting a really good story.
God, I hate when I can only give vague notes, but it's all I can come up with. Hope some of it helps! Good luck. read -
A review of Expirationby JSteedla on 09/24/2008Expiration: Format, style and technique notes, by page number: 33, 40: numbers spoken in dialogue need to be written out as words. throughout: lots of dropped commas 41: voices from the radio should be (V.O.) not (O.S.) Same again on pg. 42 with Nick through the phone, this should be a (V.O.), and on 46 as well.... and 56... and 82, and 88.... etc.... throughout: misc... Expiration:
Format, style and technique notes, by page number:
33, 40: numbers spoken in dialogue need to be written out as words.
throughout: lots of dropped commas
41: voices from the radio should be (V.O.) not (O.S.) Same again on pg. 42 with Nick through the phone, this should be a (V.O.), and on 46 as well.... and 56... and 82, and 88.... etc....
throughout: misc minor slug line issues, ie: pg. 42: elements should be divided by dashes not slashes. Also, sometimes you write in master scenes (pg. 34), but other times you don't. Either is fine (I prefer master scenes), but you should choose one style and stick with it.
Also there are places where there should be mini slugs as we move around within a master location, but they're missing.
46: in Alan's dialogue, Doctor should not be initial capped here.
52: when Alan rings the doorbell, he's EXT, not INT.
54: Becky should be a (V.O.) here, not an (O.S.), since she's not in the room.
55: you're not using INTERCUT correctly. Once you state INTERCUT, then you stop using separate sluglines as we flip between locations, you write them all as if there are in the same place. Here, you tell us it's an INTERCUT, but then you use the sluglines as well - one or the other, but not both.
throughout: kind of feels like your bottom margins are too high? And in many places, your top margin looks too low...
55: whatever happened to Jason Daniels? He was a key character for Alan to find, but he's disappeared...
58: it feels like Alan has lost his goal, and no has no goal... he's wandering, drifting. This is a story structure note, really, but I wanted to bring it up where it hit me.
70: I'm feeling lost, and I think the story has become very complex, and has no direction... I'm hoping this will change soon...
79: typically, you can't have a slugline and then dialogue; there needs to be at least one line of narrative before you can start dialogue.
79: consistency in sluglines: here you call it "Dr. Gina McKinley's Office" but on pg. 81, you call it "Dr. McKinley's Office" Be consistent in your sluglines, choose one name for each location and stick with it.
87: when dialogue is split and continues on the next page, the dialogue at the bottom of the first page should have a (Cont'd) after it to indicate it continues and has not ended.
90: doctor's should not have an apostrophe, it's not a possessive, it's a plural... it should also not be capitalized here
94: this has become very confusing.... I'm lost.
100, 105: usually, it's preferred to avoid using the term "we" in the narrative.
same applies to describing number we might see on the screen.
111: ellipsis are three periods, not two.
Format, style and technique summary:
Overall not bad, the key areas you should brush up on are:
- (V.O.) vs (O.S.) confusion
- sluglines need some work throughout
- numbers spoken in dialogue need to be written out as words
- Doctor should not be initial capped unless it's part of a person's name/title, (ie: Doctor Smith), don't initial cap when it's just the profession (ie: he's a doctor)
- dropped commas
- brush up on correct formatting for flashbacks, intercuts, etc...
Story Notes:
The writing here is wonderful. Beautifully, masterfully done scene descriptions, narrative/action, character descriptions and excellent dialogue, I was really enjoying these aspects of the script a lot, and it's rare to encounter someone who has a real talent in these areas.
However (you knew this was coming) I felt the story itself did not live up to the writing and to the writing talent behind it. Here's where I felt the story needs to be rethought:
Alan as Main Character vs Ray: One basic question is, who is and who should be the main character... now here, Alan clearly is the main character, but I was wondering if this was the strongest choice. you've given the "incredible gift" to someone who is not the main character. Maybe this is a weak choice. Maybe Alan should discover/believe he has this ability. Then he/us has to determine: is it real? what do we do with it? would he/we want this knowledge and responsibility. Think of the logline: When an insurance actuary feels he suddenly gains the ability to predict a person's death, he finds himself torn when he sees the impending deaths of those close to him. Can he stop the deaths, or is doomed to be the helpless witness?
Now our main character has a cool, yet dark, gift, and now has choices and challenges, and when he predicts the death of Becky, he has to take action. There's some good fertile ground here, with this set up.
By having Ray be the guy with the gift, you diffuse a lot of potential power. Think of Spiderman... who gets the superpowers? Our main character of everyday Peter Parker... or some other guy that Peter knows? Give the powers to our main character, and create the drama of him having to deal with them.
Cyclical/repetative:
Losing Ray at 55: Since ray is the guy with the gift, his death at 55 really brings the story to a stop. Spiderman is dead. Now what? Here the story starts to wander, without focus or direction.
How many People have this power?: Ray ash the gift. But then, it seems that perhaps Jason also has it. Then, Alan starts to think he's getting it... by allowing the gift to spread takes away how unique it is. Give your superpowers to one person, don't let it be something that can spread or jump around, this lessens the power of the power.
Too Much Mystery to the Mystery: You keep the secret, and the story's hook, of what's happening from the audience for way too long. By the end of act 1 I need to have some kind of idea what's happening here. But you keep your cards so close, your mystery shielded from me, for so long, that I lose interest. The hook has to be revealed, and has to be shared, earlier, so the audience can "get it" and get involved.
Too Complex to Care: what is going on throughout much of act 2 is so complex I can't and don't get it. problem is, an audience won't care about what they can't understand. The reading of journals, the flashing of clipping, dates, and numbers, and doodles and white dry erase boards... became too much for me to keep a clear grasp on. I often felt my attention wandering because this artificial complexity kept me distant from the story and what was happening. "Dumb it down" might apply here, make it simpler so we always understand the events, and therefore, can be and remain emotionally invested in them. Once I lose track, I break away from them and the story, and I cease to care.
Missing Jason: Jason is someone Alan desperately wants to find... until suddenly Jason falls out of the story, and Alan seems to suddenly lose his interest in finding him.
Main character's goal: We start out with an Alan who is determined to find out what really happened to his sister. Good. Got it. But by the midpoint, Alan's goal has become muddled, and eventually disappears. When your main character loses their way, the entire story does too, and so do we. What is Alan's goal in the second half of act 2? I have no idea.
Main character arc: I felt Alan didn't have an arc. This is a problem, as the main character's arc is the embodiment of the story's theme. Alan doesn't seem to change, and so the story has no theme, and it isn't about anything. What question is asked, explored, and answered here via Alan and how he's changed by the end of the story? As is, there is nothing asked, explored, or answered, which makes the story itself hollow.
A Beautiful Mind?: This felt a lot like A Beautiful Mind, where a character sees numbers and clippings and such and somehow, in their mind, creates a false pattern out of random info (something playfully done in an episode of South Park). Because of A Beautiful Mind, this element of your story felt very familiar... too close to it, in fact.
Flashbacks that Alan can't have seen himself: You have many many flashbacks where we see things that we, and Alan, were not there to see. I feel like this is a weak device, a cheat, that tries to make up for flawed storytelling and story structure. How can we or Alan see or remember events we weren't there to see in the first place? Is he suddenly psychic?
Baseball cap?: you make a point to tell us that Alan grabs Nathan's baseball cap after he dies... but this plant never materializes as anything. Same applies to the Nathan character... I still don't understand what role he had in all of this. Was his death predicted? Nathan is all but forgotten shortly after he dies. Why is he a vital part of this story? He's not.
So, there's some really good writing, dialogue and character stuff here, and the story's first pages are good... but a slew of weak story and structure choices soon undermine and let down the good writing, and what starts out as an intense mystery slowly collapses into a confusing series of events. read -
A review of Principles of Buoyancyby JSteedla on 09/04/2008Principles of Bouyancy: Notes by page #: 1: clown should be fully capped when we first meet him, since he's a speaking character. 1: I know we're in Berlin American Sector, but you haven't told me how Albert and Marta speak - in perfect English, or with German accents, or what? In this place, they could be german, american, or other, so you need to let us know if they have... Principles of Bouyancy:
Notes by page #:
1: clown should be fully capped when we first meet him, since he's a speaking character.
1: I know we're in Berlin American Sector, but you haven't told me how Albert and Marta speak - in perfect English, or with German accents, or what? In this place, they could be german, american, or other, so you need to let us know if they have accents or not.
1/2: try to keep the last line of the scene on page one on page one, don't let one last line straggle all alone onto page two.
throughout: careful of widows
5: when you write: "He picks up a picture." I think, where this is placed, it should be: "Albert picks up a picture." You should only use He or She in the narrative if the person doing the action is also the last one who spoke. In this situation, Mother spoke last, so if Albert has the following action, using He could be confusing, since Mother is not a He. Does this make sense? There's a lot of these He/She mixups within this scene.
6: here, you need some kind of DAY shot in between the Night at Mother's scene and the Night at Marta's scene - As is, I thought both were taking place on the same night, consecutively. We only know a day has passed by seeing the cycle of DAY and NIGHT, or by some other means such as a SUPER, exposition, etc...
12: I don't think Hospital should be initial capped here in the narrative.
12: nurse should be fully capped when first introduced since she's a speaking character, and her name should be initial capped in the narrative after that.
13: doctor should be initial capped in the narrative.
13-14: A lot of time and space is used here describing Albert at the elevator, running up stairs, and searching various rooms - I think all this should be cut out, cut down or condensed. Do wee need to see Albert at each landing? Can the rooms/patients be shown in a series of shots? As is, it seems like padding, let's get to the important stuff sooner.
15: here you slug the location as Mother's Hospital Room, but previously it was Room Six. Best to pick one name for each location and use it consistently to avoid confusion.
17: again, lots of widows.
18: in Marta's dialogue, Mother should not be initial capped.
18: sometimes you initial cap Doctor, then you don't. You should always since that's his name and he's a speaking character.
19: try to keep the PHARMACY mini slug with it's scene
20: same with the HOSPITAL slug, don't let it float on its own, tie it to its scene.
26: extra space between checkpoint and and in the narrative.
28: I think lies on the bed should be lays? I always get these confused...
46: awkwardly written: Albert pushes a carcass towards his work station. He struggles to get the thing pushed up onto his work station.
47: missing time element from the Meat Proc. slugline
48: stranger should be initial capped in narrative.
48: dropped comma: If there is (,) I'll turn you in.
49: not sure if CROWD can be a mini slug, as it's not really a location, and is it needed anyway?
49: Bottom; angry woman and Butcher should be initial capped
50: when Albert arrives at the MOL, we should have a new slug - EXT. MOL - DAY since we have arrived at a specific location
50: when starting a new scene, best to avoid referring to characters as He or She, etc... best to use their names to establish exactly who is here.
50: clerk should be initial capped
54: do you mean Optomatrist? I think an Optomatrist does eye exams and eyeglasses, while an Opthalmologist is an eye surgeon? If this place makes eyeglasses, then Optomatrist is probably more accurate.
55: missing question mark: .... good joke, huh(?)
58: missing question mark: Where's my wig, Albert(?)
59: missing word?: puts a hand out feel the precipitation.
64: here you tell us that Katarina is three. Somehow, I never got the sense that three years had passed. The days just blend, and there are no time markers to tell us of the years passing - like if there were three Christmas's, I'd have a better grasp of three years going by.
throughout: I'm not familiar with the specific songs you refer to, so in a way, I feel left out. Obviously, you're choosing these songs carefully, as each probably has an emotional resonance that accentuates that scene - but since I don't know the songs, I can't appreciate the choice you've made, and miss out on what each song might add. Maybe, if you gave us a few words of how that song "feels", I could understand your choices and enjoy it more.
67: hard to believe a man would find Albert at a cemetery to tell him about the food allotment change.
71/72: you have the Eye Doctor's dialogue split between two pages, but you're missing the second character slug and (CONT'D) on top of pg. 72
73: Rich Quiet Street should be it's own full slugline and not a mini slug, as it is not "within" the prev. Street slugline location
77: why are the balloons popping? I'm confused.
84: not sure, but watching someone diet might not be too visually stimulating. Can't he exercise? Can this be done in a montage?
85: while I'm all for visual story telling, your extreme restraint in having Albert speak could be a weak choice. Have him talk more and use hand gestures less (not something I would normally tell any screenwriter, but I feel here you've taken show don't tell too far) Many scenes have Albert not say a thing, and I think he could, providing that thing was very well chosen. Pg 86 has no dialogue at all. This is not bad (usually it's good), but I really wanted to hear Albert talk more.
Format Summary:
Here's what I thought were the areas of concern:
- lots of problems with not fully capping characters when intro'd and then not initial capping them in the narrative. Also, sometimes you initial cap a character(s), then on the same page, you don't.
- lots of widows
- lots of "split scenes" where the first line or last line of a scene is separated from the majority of its scene and is left orphaned on a different page.
Story notes:
Structure: I feel like the separation between Albert and Marta happens too late, esp for a 96 page script. The wall is closed at page 29 - this should happen much earlier, maybe around pg. 17-18. This would be the event that changes Albert's world, and sets his goal, with Act 2 starting right afterwards.
Looking at the midpoint-lowpoint, this would seem to be when Albert's first attempt to get himself and his Mom across via The Stranger fails and the Stranger abandons him. In a 96 page script, one might expect this at page 48, but this event occurs at 58. So, perhaps rethinking things so that this happens sooner.
Albert has no goal, no motivation, and so there is no drive to the story: This is a really big note. Albert wants nothing. And he seems to take no steps to achieve it. I was expecting that, once he is separated from Marta, the love of his life, he would do anything, everything, even the impossible, to get himself (and Mother) back to this woman. But, what does he do? Nothing. He doesn't even try. He never talks about it, he never researches it, he never plans, schemes, wonders, investigates... he does nothing. And, by all accounts, while he stares at Marta from afar, he doesn't really seem like he NEEDS to get back to her. He's almost content to just sit and watch her through a telescope until pg 67, when he (finally) gets an escape idea, and it's not until pg 75 do we finally see Albert actively DOING something that is a plan/effort to get back to Marta.
You present us with this "perfect love" at the beginning, then have cruel fate separate two people who have to be and should be together... all the makings for a fine romantic drama... but then Albert does nothing to get back to her! He doesn't even talk about it, until page 58 when he makes a weak attempt via the Stranger, and then does nothing for another 20 pages until he gets the balloon idea.
So, for much of the script, your main character has no goal. He has no drive, and seems okay with just getting through life one day at a time. Now, this may be true to life, but movies require bigger than life characters and actions - Albert has to be DRIVEN to get back to Marta... everyday, every minute, every second. Without this drive the story just "moseys" forward through time, one day looking like another, one scene being just a variation of the ones we've seen before. He just accepts the situation, and so the story just sits stagnant. He's a passive observer of Marta, not an active man with an undeniable goal.
I want to see an Albert who, from the moment that wall separates them, is working on a way to get past it - one that stays awake at night pondering ways to get back to his true love. That's drive, that's passion... that is love.
Variations in Scenes: I mentioned above that many of the scenes are repeats or variations of scenes we've seen before. Albert feeds Mom, Albert fights pedestrians, etc... I know his life would be dull and repetative, but this makes for dull cinema. We need variety, even in the face of monotony. The script feels duller and flatter because of the number of familar scenes and events.
Escape Attempts become comical: Albert (and us) see a variety of escape attempts made by citizens. The first few were effective, but they then started to feel slap-stick comical - when the guy with wings and giant rocket tries to take off, this was, for me the comedy breaking point. I'd either make sure they don't become funny, or cut down on the number of them.
Mother a mute: I might rethink this, as her being a mute gives Albert no one to talk to - and dialogue is a great way of providing exposition, and arguments can create exciting drama, etc... Mom's inability to interact denies us too much. She can still be a weak invalid, but let her talk.
Too Many enemies: nurses, doctors, pharmacists, black market vendors, people in the streets, people in offices, guards, etc... - everyone is against Albert and his enemy - everyone is a counter force that he has to fight constantly. Even the masses on the streets are always fighting him. Even the locations are enemies! Albert "struggles" with crowds every single time he steps outside. It becomes a bit much. Remember, your main character is your audience, and the more he fights and ends up exhausted, the more we fight and become exhausted, too. I found myself feeling beaten up and tired after watching Albert fight everyone everyday. Choose your fights, they say.
No Friends: Just as everyone and everything is Albert's enemy, he has no friends. Zero (other than Mom). Even in this dark world, Albert would make some kind of friends - co-workers, neighbors, relatives, black market dealers, anyone. Albert's total lack of friends is unrealistic, and robs you of opportunities to add more to the story and create more opportunities to explore Albert's character. He needs to interact with people so we can see who he is, and how he changes.
Why doesn't Albert meet any women? A city full of women and Albert doesn't meet a single one? huh? If he met a nice girl, she could be a friend, she could be a potential girlfriend, etc... All very useful tools for adding to a story and to a character.
Brazil?: Parts of this reminded me of Brazil. Have you seen it?
Very airy writing and many padding scenes: There are many scenes that could, honestly, but cut, as they don't advance the story or add vital info to the characters. Nothing would change if they were gone, except for the page count. They seem to exists only to take up space.
Also, much of the writing style utilizes single line action or narration. This is where something that could and maybe should be written in a a few consecutive lines to form a small paragraph, is artificially broken apart into several separate lines. This comes across as an attempt to increase the page count. This ties to my next note:
Not Enough Story: The script is a little short, and if you were remove the widows, condense the expanded writing, and remove the fluff scenes, it would be even shorter - too short. The cause - not enough story. Here's a breakdown of what we've got:
Meet Albert and Marta
Albert looses Marta
Albert does nothing.
Mom dies.
Albert finally does something.
Albert gets back to Marta.
It's just not enough. As I mention above, if Albert was making determined efforts to get back to Marta, if Mom could speak, if Albert had friends, or even interesting enemies, this would add to the story and allow you to create more scenes. But, a silent Mom, an inactive main character and no buddies work against you.
Colors and redundancy: If I had to guess the number of times you tell us something is gray, I'd say a million plus - here's an example:
A gray sky, another gray monolithic building with no windows.
This one has two smokestacks that belch out gray smoke.
There is just too much attention and time spent on telling me the colors. Tell me once, and I'll get it. But over and over I'm told that it's gray, that the soldiers are in drab green (of course they are, they're soldiers!) I know, the American side is bright and colorful, the Russian side is dull and colorless - no need to repeat and repeat.
Albert and Marta - chemistry, est. their relationship, and melodrama: I'd really like to see more of Albert and Marta. I meet them and they're madly in love - problem for me is, I didn't see WHY they were perfect for each other. What is their chemistry? Why is he perfect for her, and her for him? How do they complete each other? You tell me this is an epic love, but you don't show me how or why. The relationship is not established well enough for me to buy the size of the love I'm told they share. Without firmly establishing the reason and strength of the relationship, it's harder for me to believe the power behind it, and that's what the entire movie is based upon.
Great End Set Piece: basically, the entire story exists to support and create a way to have the great end set piece of Albert floating up and away to freedom. It is a great ending visual, and might even be strong enough of one to get a producer interested, I just wish there was more to the story before the great balloon escape. Other than this one set piece, what other great visual moments are there in the script?
So, them's my thoughts and opinions, hope some of it helps, if they're not to your liking, just ignore em!, and good luck. read -
A review of The Christmas Contractby JSteedla on 05/13/2008The Christmas Contract Format, style, techniques notes, by page #: 1 & 3: Dumpster should not be initial capped. It's not a name and it's not a brand name. throughout: there's a LOT of widows, these slow the read and take up valuable space on the page, and can usually be easily eliminated. 6 and throughout: might want to write using master scenes 13: DNA should be D.N.A... The Christmas Contract
Format, style, techniques notes, by page #:
1 & 3: Dumpster should not be initial capped. It's not a name and it's not a brand name.
throughout: there's a LOT of widows, these slow the read and take up valuable space on the page, and can usually be easily eliminated.
6 and throughout: might want to write using master scenes
13: DNA should be D.N.A. as it's spoken as separate letters and not a word, like INTERPOL. Same with FBI on pg. 38.
but then you do it right on pg 63! Yay! (F.B.I.)
throughout: careful of multiple characters whose names begin with the same letter, like Jake and Jimmy, and Marcus and Mickey, as this can get confusing while scanning the character slugs.
note: not sure why Jake gets rid of Kyle's money, it doesn't make sense since jake does what he does for money. It's more of a plot necessity as opposed to something Jake would really do. Maybe if he dumped Kyle's Rolex into the pail?
note: also, why does Kyle go out and kill bums? It might be nice to know why a rich kid of a mob boss would do this, it seems like a high risk thing, and I doubt his mob boss dad would allow it, as it would def. draw unwanted attention to him and his business. Kyle's dad would have killed him himself, or sent him far away to protect himself and the family.
72: after a scene slug, you have top have at least one line of narrative before you can start dialogue (see last scene slug).
80: policeman should be initial capped in the narrative since he's a speaking character
Format Summary:
well, it certainly is nice to read a script that's, overall, well formatted, proofread, and written with what is generally considered "good technique!"
Other than the few notes above, this was well put together - bravo on the formatting/craft side!
Story Notes:
- moments of brilliance!: One of the things I look for, and I think is absolutely vital in a script that has any chance of selling, are what I call "moments of brilliance," where the writer(s) do something so creative, inventive, unique, that I'm impressed, and chances are other readers/audience will be, too. This is a creative business, so it's every writer's job to "be creative," and these moments are the places where we're supposed to show the biz just how creative we can be. The more of these there are in one script, the better.
You had, I felt, two real stand out moments of brilliance - one was having Jake throw a car cover over the car when they hide from the mob (genius!) and the other was the big switch you pulled by having Linda be Mickey (though it's a bit of a cheat since we barely hear about Mickey in act 1). Great stuff here, and it's these bits that any audience will remember when they leave the theater. You'd be surprised how most scripts I read have Zero moments... you've got two. If you can add more, you'll have an even better chance of impressing readers.
- DNA?: the whole idea of DNA from the scarf is just too much to believe, and never really materializes in the story anyway, so I think you could easily delete all that and smooth the story out. The DNA tests never seem to show up anyways, so why have them at all? Also, Jake would not throw any part of his outfit in the trash at the location of the crime- this diminishes our perception of him as a "pro."
- protect the main character!: Okay, Jake is a bad guy who does bad things... but he does them to people that are worse than him, and almost everyone around him is worse than him. He is thus our moral center in a world where everyone is worse.
He has rules (he won't kill a woman) which is great - until, on pg. 9, he agrees to kill an innocent woman. Boo! So much for his rules, 9 pages in and he's willing to cave in? This weakens the moral center that keeps your bad-guy hero better than the garbage around him. He HAS to stick to his code of conduct - no matter what. He might agree to kill the guy who fooled around with Hiram's wife, but offing the wife has to be something he refuses to do and tells Hiram to do himself - "You want her dead, you'll have to do that yourself. I don't whack women. Ever." Hiram can threaten all he wants, but Jake must stick to his code - we'll respect him and even admire that in him.
Secondly, I feel Jake's killing of Abby is a huge problem - again, protect your main character. It doesn't matter if it was accidental, he has rules, and he has to stick to them. He kills a little girl's mother, in front of her! Boo! Whatever happens to Abby, needs to be something she does to herself, or is done to her by someone who is NOT Jake.
- two stories/one story/which story?: We have two stories here: 1- Jake vs the Mob, and 2- Jake and Natalie vs the world. Great, and I like both. BUT....
I think there's some structural issues. Once Jake gets to the Mall as the Santa, he doesn't seem to be very active in his search for the guy who works at the food court. He's mostly involved with Natalie (which is good), but there's either confusion, or a lack of commitment to which story is A and which story is B - it seems to shift about.
Here's my suggestions:
1) get rid of the whole "Jake is after Hiram's wife and the food court kid set up" Just have Jake off Kyle, Hiram confesses to Erasmus, Erasmus is now after Jake, Jake finds out Erasmus knows and is now after him, so Jake goes into hiding as a mall Santa.
2) or, maybe make these 2 stories more like one. Suppose Natalie witnessed Jake killing Kyle, Erasmus is after the girl (she knows who killed his son) and Jake somehow becomes her protector. Sounds familiar, I know, but I like feeling that the 2 stories are more connected than they are now.
Whatever you might do, I do feel there are concerns about which story is A and which is B, and the structure of the script as related to that. Your A story determines the script's structure, but the unclear A story here muddles your structure.
Look at something like "Some Like It Hot" (a case where people hide undercover from the Mob) for a good A/B story and structure example.
- tone deaf: There's a tonal problem in the story - some moments are "Bad Santa" funny, others are really very dark and disturbing, and this fluctuation, or perhaps, "lack of commitment" to what this is, and what it's tone should be, kept me off balance sometimes. Jake as Santa has funny moments, but his "hitman" side perhaps went too dark - it's too big of a pendulum swing from one to the other.
Since Christmas and Santa are key parts of this story, I think it would work better if you moved away from the "dark-disturbing" elements and moments, and went more towards the "fun/funny/ironic" moments. Christmas and fun stuff are a natural fit.
Anything that feels really dark (many of the moments where child molestation, or child abuse, are present, for example) should be readdressed. How can this be lighter, less "edgy" and still do what it needs to to move the story forward?
- there's some very good dialogue, very good character work, so bravo there. I think we could a little more to Jake, Kyle and the others. Also, overall, the writing is very good.
If Jake's sister, Penny, was killed, why would he become a killer himself? There's some logic problems here. How would being a hitman make up for what happened to Penny?
Also, how does Jake change? He gets what he wants at the end (enough money to escape and start a new life), but he hasn't changed, or come to any kind of revelation about himself. If there was something more to Jake's character, esp by the end, it would really do wonders to him and the story.
Hope some of this helps and good luck, and good work! read
Comments About JSteedla 22
-
kepow on 03/02/2010
Hey dude, there's another one of these going on:
http://bulletin.triggerstreet.com/viewtopic.php?t=50992&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Let me know if you're planning to attend! -
Chanel Ashley on 12/07/2009
Hello John,
you may have seen it already, but InkTip Scripts Wanted 463 - Company B is after a script that sounds like Imaginary Friends - I'd have a look at it.
Chanel -
**DELETED ACCOUNT** on 08/31/2009
Congrats! on the SOM nom. It's a good thing. It's not all about winning. At least that's what I tell myself.
Good Job!
Chris Keaton -
duncanjames on 08/14/2009
You're smokin' hot! Congrats on another SOM nom. Duncan. -
Agent Cooper on 07/18/2009
Hey Thanks for taking the time to review Victim8. Much appreciated. -
WANDERON on 07/16/2009
Great review for The Woods. Thank You. These notes will be very helpful in tightening up the script and we really appreciate the line by lines. To clarify with David and Jeremy... David is Peter, Michael and Charlie's friend who dies in the beginning... Jeremy enters the woods with Alison and is killed by Darius. We'll look at that closer to see how to make it clearer. Overall... a much appreciated review. Thank you. -
alvayoung on 07/10/2009
Comment deleted by JSteedla -
tarboy on 07/07/2009
Comment deleted by JSteedla -
asyouwish on 07/01/2009
Thank you very much for your incredibly detailed review of 'Born to be Jolly'. Very useful indeed. -
kepow on 03/10/2009
Comment deleted by JSteedla
Write a Comment
Browse:
Copyright © 2001-2013 Trigger Street Labs. All Rights Reserved.
Comments About JSteedla 22
-
Quote
Hey dude, there's another one of these going on:
-
Quote
Hello John,
-
Quote
Congrats! on the SOM nom. It's a good thing. It's not all about winning. At least that's what I tell myself.
+ more commentskepow on 03/02/2010
http://bulletin.triggerstreet.com/viewtopic.php?t=50992&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Let me know if you're planning to attend!
Chanel Ashley on 12/07/2009
you may have seen it already, but InkTip Scripts Wanted 463 - Company B is after a script that sounds like Imaginary Friends - I'd have a look at it.
Chanel
**DELETED ACCOUNT** on 08/31/2009
Good Job!
Chris Keaton