Port Wikkalyn
Karl,
I don't quite follow what you're trying to do with this script. I can see that you're interested in music and folklore. But I fail to see a coherent narrative or theme throughout your screenplay.
That said, your script is very well edited, excluding some formatting issues listed below. It's very rare that I come across a script with zero spelling errors. (Or, at least, spelling errors so minor that I read over them.) I can tell that you put a lot of effort into the presentation of this script, which a reader always appreciates. You also have a strong sense of economical wording. Nothing is overwrought and there are very few unnecessary descriptions.
My immediate concern is that you don't handle your set-up effectively. By page 12 I have absolutely -no- idea who Tristan is. He came to Port Wikkalyn to chase after Vendela, but you never justify his attraction to her. Other than that she's hot, why is Tristan even interested in her? You have to convince the audience why Tristan would risk his life to pursue Vendela. Right now, you don't.
Also, Tristan's line of dialogue at the top of page 13 is a bit nonsensical. Things that would get him locked up if he saw them without the evidence? Evidence of what? Why would they get him locked up? Do you mean locked up in prison, or in a mental institution? I think you mean the latter, but both the line and Tristan's character are so vague right now that the audience cannot assume anything.
Formatting wise, it is industry standard to place your (wryly)s on a separate line below the character name, and not in the dialogue line.
When you have dialogue going across a page break, you need to reinsert the character's name at the top of the subsequent page. Also, it is industry practice to write (MORE) at the bottom of the page that the dialogue is crossing over.
The ending of Act One, the scene in which Tristan accidentally sheaths his sword into a sea monster is more comical than I think you're going for... I don't think it matches the tone that you're trying to communicate in the script.
Unless it's absolutely imperative to the scene, I would discourage you from using anything other than "DAY" and "NIGHT" in your sluglines. Think about it from a pragmatic point of view; when filming, can a director fit all of the scene into that specific time, and more importantly, is he only going to want one take?
Only now on page 32 do you reveal that Tristan is some sort of paranormal investigator/photographer. Up until this point, other than the vague line of dialog I mentioned earlier, you haven't established that. Like I said, this is a problem with your set up (i.e., pages 1-10). In your set up, you are supposed to clearly identify your protagonist and show him in his normal world. But you don't reveal enough about Tristan for us to understand him.
Don't refer to Tristan as the photographer. Always refer to him by his name, otherwise you risk confusing a potential reader. Likewise, don't refer to Lucas as the lawyer.
I'm confused by these seemingly pointless scenes between Lucas and Ben. What does their relationship add to the overarching story/theme?
So the secret weapon to weaken Gwen was to build a casino? All so they could rescue some women who have not asked to be rescued?
Your story's world is problematic. I think you expect too much knowledge and acceptance of folklore on the audience's part. Right now, the whole thing feels a bit out of focus. You need to have some scenes in which you establish the rules of the world. Incidentally, I think you could accomplish both this and Tristan's lacking character establishment in the beginning of the script.
In the end, I was unable to become very enthralled by your story or your characters. I am unable to understand why Tristan cares for Vendela so much. Lucas' motives are so unclear throughout the script that his eventual suicide feels unmotivated and flat.
Whatever direction you take with this one, I wish you the best of luck.
Other Reviews by SpesExMachina
33
-
Hey Brian,
This is a great comedy script. It's not very often that I read a comedy that actually causes me to laugh out loud. Yours not only achieved this, but I was laughing consistently throughout the whole thing. This is undoubtedly the best comedy I've read on Trigger Street.
At first I had a difficult time uncovering exactly what the tone of your comedy was. Whether...
Hey Brian,
This is a great comedy script. It's not very often that I read a comedy that actually causes me to laugh out loud. Yours not only achieved this, but I was laughing consistently throughout the whole thing. This is undoubtedly the best comedy I've read on Trigger Street.
At first I had a difficult time uncovering exactly what the tone of your comedy was. Whether it's completely tongue-in-cheek, or whether there's a vein of seriousness. It became clear pretty quickly though that this is a "Goodfellas" type spoof. Works really well.
I think your conversations with Paulie and Georgie can be tightened up. Yes, these round-about conversations are how children speak, but that doesn't necessarily make for a good scene. Once for effect, I think you can have a "kid-logic" scene, in which Georgie and Paulie throw back and forth insults. But after that, I think you should tighten up the scenes and include less repetitive back-and-forths. This is even true in the ending when they're adults. If one thing in particular stuck out as weak to me, it was the exchanges between Paulie and Georgie. Just gotta tighten 'em up.
I have to say I do like Paulie as an antagonistic force. You do a great job intermingling adult humor and kid humor, and contrasting them, too. The bit about holding hands was funny. Just a thought - what if, in the crayon exchange on page 23, Paulie pulls out a HUMONGOUS CRAYON. Even little boys do the "mine is bigger than yours" thing, even if they don't understand it. It would be a funny wink to your older audience members. But again, I'm not exactly sure I have the tone of your comedy, so take this suggestion with a grain of salt.
I about died laughing during the Principal-Teacher-Georgie scene. Really, really great stuff.
The parable line on 81 might be a bit too far. You have to walk a very fine line with this script in trying to maintain the childlike atmosphere and the comedy. The parable line, while I see why it could be funny, stuck out like a sore thumb to me.
Page 85 you have George saying a line that is clearly meant for Paulie. "I'll hold your hand as hard as I want"
If you want to add a little bit of depth to Nina's character, have her kick Paulie in the balls before leaving him. Currently, she's completely passive, just goes with whichever guy seems like the right move at the time. Kinda goes with the wind. I'd like to see her have a little action, make a choice, be proactive. That would be icing on the cake for me, though.
Like I said, I really, really enjoyed this script. My comments are mostly subjective, so take them as you will. Best of luck with this!
Sam
read
-
Hey Steve,
Overall, my feelings about this are mixed. On one hand, your script is structured and written very well. Nothing feels clunky. On the contrary, your sparse writing style makes this a very quick, tidy read. It's an easy script for the reader.
My problem is with the script's concept, and unfortunately I don't think it's something that can be easily resolved,...
Hey Steve,
Overall, my feelings about this are mixed. On one hand, your script is structured and written very well. Nothing feels clunky. On the contrary, your sparse writing style makes this a very quick, tidy read. It's an easy script for the reader.
My problem is with the script's concept, and unfortunately I don't think it's something that can be easily resolved, if at all, by rewrites.
You are a much braver writer than I am. I think that comedy is the most difficult thing to pull off well, especially in the script medium, because so much of what is funny is determined by timing, delivery, and physicality. It's almost impossible to communicate exactly what you've imagined as funny into a scene. Which is why I haven't tried to write a pure comedy.
The most important question for a reader after a comedy is "Did it make you laugh?"
A couple of times, your script did. The funniest interaction, in my opinion, was when Jeffrey was correcting everyone about the Chinese actually being Filipinos.
Everything else felt a bit lackluster and mundane. This is a concept - the "conman" falls in love, but has to deal with the consequences of his lies - that has been done to death, and recently. The most successful that comes to mind is Wedding Crashers.
Which brings me to my next point. Your main characters, Jimmy and Vince, don't really stand out as anything new or original. Jimmy is the consummate straight man; he's a nice, romantic guy who is strung along by his crazy friend's wild antics. It's hard to find anything really interesting or sympathetic about Jimmy.
Vince is an overdone, cliche character, too. And ironically (or perhaps purposefully), there's not much to separate him from Vince Vaughan's character in Wedding Crashers. He's the catalyst to your Jimmy, the one who leads Jimmy down a path of lies, crazy antics, etc.
Another reason my reaction to your two main characters is tepid is because they don't really have (or maybe it's that you don't spend enough time on them) transformations. Jimmy begins as a a straight-man good guy to Vince. That's about all we really know of him. He's dragged along by Vince into a conman type situation in which he's lying about his identity. Of course, he falls in love with the girl. Then his identity is revealed, but he misses the girl so he throws a cute party for her. But how has HE changed throughout this situation? He hasn't, really. If you had a character transformation in mind, I don't think you're communicating it strongly enough. I don't see a before-and-after moment with Jimmy at any time.
Vince has the same problem. Yes, he begins as a ladies' man and ends crazy about one woman. But beyond that, there isn't really much. He's still the same irresponsible, devil-may-care, gambling lothario. The only difference is that this time he WINS the poker game. But that isn't character development.
To run a comparison to death, imagine Vince Vaughan's character in WEDDING CRASHERS. He also begins as an irresponsible, lying playboy. But he falls in love with a woman, who, as it turns out was playing him. He never expected this - and it makes him fall in love with her. You have Joana lying to your Vince about being a lesbian, but Vince never experiences that revelation. Yes, he meets a woman that might be his match, but does it really change him? Not really.
Melissa's exaggerated naivete makes her a little one dimensional. Cute becomes dumb very quickly. It makes me think that Jimmy is only interested in her for her looks, which will make it hard to justify their inevitable reconciliation after his identity is revealed.
The Jimmy-Melissa dynamic is a little bit twisted, too. Jimmy has SEX with the naive Melissa under a false identity and never even attempts to tell her the truth. Nor does he really show any regret or guilt about it, except in a few short remarks to Vince and a scene in which he cries after leaving Melissa. In many parts of the world this is called RAPE BY FRAUD, and it's actually a punishable offense. If all Jimmy and Melissa had done is kiss, then it would be permissible. But doing the act, Jimmy not being repentant at all, and Melissa not even really caring that she was manipulated into sleeping with a liar doesn't ring true for me. And what does Jimmy have to do to win her back, after lying to her and sleeping with her? He has to throw a party, which she happily attends. The whole scenario is strung along by "movie logic", which leads to the characters feeling one dimensional. Jimmy doesn't have to overcome any obstacles, doesn't have to seek forgiveness or prove himself as a good man at all. It's all just forgive and forget.
As I said, my main problem is the script's concept. You lack an engaging logline, because this story - or at least the template for this story - has been done a lot. What makes your script stand out? What's the unique attribute that makes this script stick out from the crowd? In my opinion, you don't have one right now. It's a pretty tame take on this type of story. Wedding Crashers had, well, wedding crashing to fall back on. A story about two guys who crash weddings to meet girls - that's a concept that is IMMEDIATELY entertaining. 40 Year Old Virgin sells itself, too. So what about your script is going to be immediately promising and engaging?
Funnily enough, as I read the script I couldn't help but thinking that you've written the seeds of a really great, high concept comedy, but hadn't realized it. Jeffrey - and his story - is far more interesting than what occurs with Jimmy, Vince et al. Take Jeffrey, a snobby hissyfit, and throw him into a world of modern piracy. Your Jeffrey characters (sans his barrister catch phrase), is by far the funniest character in your script. Maybe you should give him the limelight.
Other than my previous comments about concept and character above, I only have one idea about dialogue.
Lines of dialogue like "Is she one hot chick or what?" feel a bit dated... Assuming this story is set in the present, then a guy like Vince would probably say something more like "Fuck, man. She's hot."
Taking into account that I might not have the rhythm of Vince's speech in my head, your line might work fine, too. But that was one line - but not the only one - that stuck out as a bit stilted.
After reading this, I can see why your script is in the Top 10. Here at Trigger Street we love well-written, fast flowing scripts. It's the mark of a professional, and that certainly earns you a lot of points. Not very many people can pull that off, myself included a lot of the time.
In order for this to find success on the spec market, to be bought or used a writing sample, I think your concept and characters need a major overhaul. Right now the read ends tepidly. Not badly, by any means - I want to highlight that - but tepidly.
Best of luck with developing your script. I hope things come of it.
read
-
I was excited to read this story, because I'm a huge fan of Buffy, and I can definitely see the affect Joss Whedon's work has had on your own.
But this script has a long way to go in terms of its execution. You have some nice plot twists that come together in the end, and your basic concept for the theme of the script and Sarah's character growth has a strong core. (I wonder,...
I was excited to read this story, because I'm a huge fan of Buffy, and I can definitely see the affect Joss Whedon's work has had on your own.
But this script has a long way to go in terms of its execution. You have some nice plot twists that come together in the end, and your basic concept for the theme of the script and Sarah's character growth has a strong core. (I wonder, was the choice of Sarah as your protagonist's name a reference to Sarah Michelle Gellar?)
However, you need to follow 3 Act Screenplay structure more closely. Right now, your script meanders a lot throughout Act Two. Act Two is always, ALWAYS the most problematic part of a script, you will find.
In my experience, the most common pitfall that writer's fall into when trying to cross Act Two is scenes in which your story is just treading water. Scenes that only vaguely propel the action and thematic tension of the story. This is your largest problem with Act Two. Your two heroes have arrived in the past with only the most vague idea of why they're there and what they're going to do about it. The result of this is that Sarah is only reacting for well over 2/3rds of the script. She doesn't make any choices, and when she does, it's because outside forces have persuaded her to do so. This makes her a very passive protagonist, which is the exact opposite of what you want. What I think you should do with her is elaborate on her inner conflict, that being her accepting her witch heritage.
Your subplot about the Necromancer is also underdeveloped. Because you mention it so early in the script, I assumed that the Necromancer would be your primary antagonist. But you basically ignored him all through Act Two until Act Three, by which time we've already forgotten about him.
Unless it's entirely necessary for the story, don't describe what clothing the characters are wearing. True, these details will often provide a lot of insight into the character, but there's a better way to do it. I bring this up because of your description of Jared.
When inserting something like a text message, don't put it in the dialog line, because it isn't dialog. The dialog line is only used for spoken words. Use a super instead, like INSERT TEXT: BLAH BLAH BLAH, etc.
You shouldn't be giving directions so often, such as FADE OUT and FADE IN:, especially the latter, which is usually reserved for the beginning of a script only.
Overall, I think you have a better, more fleshed out concept of what you want your story to be, but you have failed to execute it. The mythology between the Necromancer and the witches is actually very interesting, but you didn't cash in on it enough.
As far as your script's appearance, you need to do a major overhaul. Your script is rife with spelling and grammatical errors. You need to keep an eye on your apostrophes, as you often use them when you don't need them, and fail to use them when you do. A common example of this is in the word "sees", which you always misspell as "see's". That apostrophe is unnecessary; "see's" is not a word. On page 8 you use the word "non-sense", which is also incorrect. You don't need to use a hyphen, as "nonsense" is the correct compound word. You always spell the word "rifle" as "riffle" and you mix up the word "apart" and "a part", which have two different meanings. You also often mistake which "there", "their", or "they're" you want. These mistakes are especially distracting for a reader.
Anyway, I would advice you to highly rethink the structuring of your script. I think that, with a lot of work, this idea could be fleshed out to be something more successful.
Good luck in your rewrites and future projects.
SD
read
+ more reviews
