Other Reviews by silverberetta17 23

• 
  A Clear 20/20 Vision... (hehe I needed a pun ;)
  A review of Double Vision (The Next Revision)
  by silverberetta17 on 11/02/2009
  Well, well, well. I was very excited to delve into my first Bob script. I've heard great things about your writing...but finally needed to see one for myself. Bob, you write exceptionally well. Your descriptions and actions are crisp and succinct. You get to the point in every scene and that's wonderful. Of course you know that already. Your dialogue is very good. I mean... Well, well, well. I was very excited to delve into my first Bob script. I've heard great things about your writing...but finally needed to see one for myself.
  
  Bob, you write exceptionally well. Your descriptions and actions are crisp and succinct. You get to the point in every scene and that's wonderful.
  
  Of course you know that already.
  
  Your dialogue is very good. I mean reeaaaally good. I'm impressed at the number of witty lines between the Fathers, rather than the typical Hollywood expositional dialogue. Congrats.
  
  Now where to begin.
  
  I am not religious, and therefore was kinda apprehensive to read this. See, I'm kinda dismissive towards preachy religious scripts yada yada yada. But because it was Bob, I made an exception.
  
  And I'm glad I did.
  
  Your characters are wonderful. Joyce, Tom, Lisa, they all have their own stories and problems that we feel and care for them.
  
  I love the idea that Mary is seen by 2 very different women, each giving very different instructions, respectfully. That is a fantastic idea and it gives the audience something to think about.
  
  I also really like the idea that the backdrop is the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, and how you don't take sides but rather make arguments for each.
  
  I don't know what to tell you. The story is fresh, the characters are great (love how you contrast Joyce and her daughters with Lisa and her mother), and the dialogue is sharp.
  
  You've done one *hell* of a job.... hehe.
  
  But....
  
  There's always a but.
  
  But unfortunately, I think this is everything Hollywood/prodcos do not want!
  
  I'm referring to the religion AND politics here. Commercially speaking, this doesn't cut it. Religion startles people and politics polarizes.
  
  How can something like this be made? That's the sad reality I see this facing.
  
  But marketing this script is not my job. Reviewing it is.
  
  And as I said, you've done well. You know the story you want.
  
  It kinda rings more like a drama/thriller at times rather than horror. I guess the nightmarish visions of hell make it a horror-- though this could easily be labeled a drama because of the domestic and political aspects to it.
  
  A few quibbles:
  
  - I think the sequence where Joyce seduces/knocks out the tour guide goes on for a bit long. I think it can be trimmed a 'lil on each end.
  
  - The denouement is 11 pages! Once the climax is over (which I assumed was the assassination) I think it should be 3-4 pages MAX....
  
  ...that is unless the REAL climax was with Cardinal Vincenze and Father Tom. In that case you might consider moving that before the podium scene.
  
  - It seems to me the conversation between David and Talib in the hospital kinda simplifies the whole conflict-- in this story's and the real issue's.
  
  It's convenient I suppose how the survivors of each side are the most open-minded ones. Guess it makes sense... though I'm not sure *killing* the other guys is the right thing to do :/
  
  - And why does Father Tom simply leave Cardinal Vincenze just like that? Isn't he the Devil, or the devil incarnate?
  
  Shouldn't there be a happy ending here? Shouldn't Tom KILL him? I know it sounds predictable, but it makes sense in this story.
  
  After all, will there ever be peace in the Middle East in THIS world? According to you- no, because the final scene shows a bunch of teens being seduced by him yet again.
  
  It's effective yes, but I think it's cheap also because you've almost simplified the West Bank issue for the expense of a horror movie.
  
  I like the ending where everyone lives peacefully ever after.
  
  Hmmm, sorry if that sounds confusing....
  
  And *for the love of God*, please consider a NEW title! 'Double Vision' isn't catchy! It is plain and boring! I know you can think of a better one!
  
  Again, great job Bob. You know how to write 'em. Sorry if I ranted about the marketable factor, but I always look for premise first!
  
  Let's hope you change the name of the game with this script. Religion. Politics. Horror. It can happen.
  
  peAce Bob,
  
  Nick
  
  PS: How about 'Bloody Mary' as a title! It makes sense because Joyce is an alcoholic! ;) read
• 
  No, this Screenplay is Lost.
  A review of America Lost
  by silverberetta17 on 04/19/2008
  This review is especially difficult for me because while I agree with the message here, the story and characters do not work for me at all. Overall, there was way too much talking, nothing really going on that moved me, and stock characters that didn't do anything for this material. A huge disappointment. I couldn't get over your heavy-handedness of this argument here. Let... This review is especially difficult for me because while I agree with the message here, the story and characters do not work for me at all. Overall, there was way too much talking, nothing really going on that moved me, and stock characters that didn't do anything for this material. A huge disappointment.
  
  I couldn't get over your heavy-handedness of this argument here. Let me explain it this way: remember when critics said the film "Crash" pulled at your heartstrings too much? Well, this screenplay practically rips out your soul. It's almost too pretentious with its overbearing "evil" Republican congressmen.
  
  When we began with the Oval Office, I thought this might be some sort of satire in how a case for war is justified. I even got excited when we cut to the Hollywood scene thinking this could be a quirky dark comedy with both politics and entertainment mashing together.
  
  Problem is, this is more reality than satire. As the story moves forward, things get so ridiculous that I was at the point where I thought this was all a bad joke. Leland asked to appear in court? Pardon my language- but give me a fucking break- that's just going into the absurdity. Earlier you referenced Joe McCarthy and his Communism trials- so this hearing is so preposterous because IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN TODAY.
  
  And when he's locked outside the studio, I wanted to laugh even more. You need to realize that when you set your story is a realistic world like ours, you cannot change things so easily. Let's say this Leland guy was - I dunno- supposed to be Michael Moore or Tim Robbins. Would producers lock them out because they disagreed with Bush and the Iraq war?
  Of course they wouldn't.
  
  Some things here do in fact mimic events that played out. This Teri girl no doubt was based on the Dixie Chicks and what happened to them after they dare speak out. Nothing wrong with imitating history again, but make sure things don't get out of hand, eg. burning down Malloy's Bar? That's another silly scene I advise you to cut.
  
  Like I said, there is so much unnecessary dialogue here it's painful. You keep hammering us with this rightful but redundant message of freedom of speech during a war- that it becomes old fast.
  
  The scene of Adrianna with Cody and the Christian woman is a good example. Stop lecturing us about gays and get to the point. I myself agree with the actress that sexuality isn't a choice but decided early on- yet why do you rub it in our faces so much? So many long conversations are exactly what I'm talking about here- you don't need so much BORING DIALOGUE- just give us the damn idea and move on. (On another note, this scene is pointless in this story.)
  
  Go examine Clooney's film "Good Night and Good Luck". The message there parallels what you have here- but the difference is that there's SUBTLETY in that script. Your script will drive everyone- including me- away because it's beating us over the head with its message.
  And that was the 1950s, a time when America was so unified after WW2 that evil men like McCarthy was able to rant on about citizens he believed were Communist. In today's world, especially 2008, NOTHING IN THIS SCRIPT WOULD EVER HAPPEN. This makes me wonder when you wrote this script? Was it around 2004, when there was still much support for the Iraq war?
  
  Now of course we all know the Iraq war was a mistake and many of America's stands on habeas corpus and privacy and freedoms were stripped apart and used accordingly by Bush and his cronies. But don't let me lecture, because I could go on and on here.
  
  You need to make big decisions here. First of all, decide what world you're setting this in. The future could set a strong parable, for instance if government has become so power-hungry that events in this script could be plausible.
  Also decide if you'll actually be satirizing the current state of affairs instead of just replacing the actual politicians with actors.
  
  You need to find a way to deliver your message without beating us senseless? [Is my point sinking in, now? Good! This is how I felt when I read YOUR SCRIPT! Hehe....]
  
  And for heaven's sake cut all that cliche and overwritten dialogue about freedom of speech and blah blah blah. Everyone agrees with you, man! Relax! Cheer up! America is not ALL LOST, yet! Us screenwriters can maybe save it from its sad state.
  
  Then again, maybe not. read
• 
  Not Much Power On This Circuit.
  A review of Circuit World
  by silverberetta17 on 03/20/2008
  And I say that kindly. This is a half-baked premise with a half-baked script. Despite some funny scenes, the story moves very awkwardly and the character motivation just isn't believable. First off I wouldn't advise you telling us to "Imagine Johan Hill, Cera and Piven" as part of the logline. One- it's sort of cheating, and two- well, I could never imagine Bradley and Jeff... And I say that kindly. This is a half-baked premise with a half-baked script. Despite some funny scenes, the story moves very awkwardly and the character motivation just isn't believable.
  
  First off I wouldn't advise you telling us to "Imagine Johan Hill, Cera and Piven" as part of the logline. One- it's sort of cheating, and two- well, I could never imagine Bradley and Jeff as Jonah and Michael. (Even if it was the other way around it still doesn't seem right.)
  
  The first two pages are pretty good. Then it kind of slides into childish humor I didn't find entertaining at all. The lines Jeff and Brad threw at each other during the costume/fight scene were very very cheap and weak. Bradley says "you can be the first FBI agent that chases bad guys with a plastic gun and a pair of women's sunglasses!" That doesn't really read funny at all- not to mention having some actor scream it. I hate to say it, but much of their bantering is of a middle-school level. If these are our supposed heroes, don't dumb them down so much. The one line I liked was "I told you to dress like an FBI agent, not Derek Zoolander auditioning for Men in Black." That is a great line- the others are passable at best.
  
  Consider the awful Dane Cook film "Employee of the Month". One of the reasons I hated it was because our hero Dane was pretty much a rude jerk like his rival, played by Dax Shepard. Point is, we don't care for Dane if we understand him to be some loser who stoops down to the bad guy's level.
  
  A few of your characters are introduced poorly to us. When I first saw Jeff I took him to be a rude slacker, somewhere along the lines of Bradley. But at the birthday party later we're told he's gay? I never got that- at all. Looking back I saw his lines discussing Ray and someone else and can possibly see how he's rambling on like a gossip-girl, but you never make that clear to us. You need to insert something, letting us know Jeff is gay. Maybe a hair style, clothing, even how he speaks and his lazy female tone of voice.
  One last thing about Jeff and his sexuality. I'm somewhat bewildered by the scene after the party when Jeff and Brad run into the football punks. One of their gay friends is outed and subsequently teased/bullied much to the extent that this turns into a dark drama for a bit. I don't understand why this is in there- it certainly isn't funny and I'm not sure what you're trying to say about this issue. Respecting and being tolerant of gays is one thing, but making a social statement on the treatment of gays and gay-bashers is something totally different that doesn't belong here.
  And this character-introduction thing happens before with the manager, James Yen. I assumed "Yen" might make him Asian but was never sure. Tell us he's Asian. And tell us Andy Perez is a Mexican. Again a name doesn't tell us anything, make sure we know he's Hispanic.
  
  You have a standard formatting problem with describing how characters are saying things. On page 18 Andy says, "Yeah, a fashion consultant wouldn't hurt either." Nothing wrong with the line- in fact I liked it. But before the dialogue you write, "Under his breath...". You don't do that. You put the character's name, then in parenthesis below the name you can write "mutters". Something like:
  
  Andy
  (mutters)
  Yeah, a fashion consultant wouldn't
  hurt either.
  
  Like I said this goes for many lines. While the character is talking have the action written in between the name and the dialogue.
  
  I like it in the story when Jack and Andy show up and start spilling nasty lines to James. Many good lines I admit. But here's another big problem that arose in the script... I started wanting to see more of Jack/Andy than of Bradley/Jeff. To me Brad and Jeff were bums with no direction and purpose. There wasn't much energy to their actions. Again, make us WANT to root for these guys, don't just throw in some baddies and expect us to like these slackers. There's no fun in that.
  One last thing about these bad guys- they laugh too much. Have them say their witty lines without always laughing at each other- that way it's much better because they know their lines are good and hence it speaks for itself.
  
  For that matter I didn't buy any of Brad/Jeff's "Alien" discussions. That got very old and boring. Here's what I do whenever I write funny- I stand back and look at it from a third person POV. I ask myself, Can this really make people laugh? This ties in to character motivation which sets up the rest of the plot. Getting their jobs back to return this Lotus seems way to unconvincing or satisfying for us. There's no pressing need to go back. The whole deal with the Alien/Lotus hypnotizing concept or whatever is happening to Bradley doesn't work for me at all. Truth be told, I think it's the weakest element of the script. My advice is drop that altogether and incorporate a whole new reason to have them go and get back their jobs from those assholes.
  
  I have a problem with the psychic, Raul. His presence doesn't move the story in any way other than have Jeff and Brad argue yet once again. To me it's an OK scene but it doesn't have much meaning. In other words, the story could probably go on without that scene. So what if Raul predicts the future events? Not justified in the end. I don't know- maybe it's my bias against psychics as I think they've been beaten to death and simply aren't funny anymore.
  
  It's pretty interesting not to see a love interest in the script for Bradley (besides the marriage thing in the denouement). I don't have a problem with it, and am glad you opted out of the obvious path of having Brad and Jack compete for Katie.
  
  I found the climax with the various customers watching Jack's recorded outburst pretty funny- in fact I think right now it's the best bit in here. Though I'm not sure Katie would react how she did as we just saw he sucking off Jack like a total slut... maybe have her do something far less dirty.
  
  Like I said earlier, this premise is only half way there. There needs much more added to these heroes to make them likable. And the plot needs to gain some focus and plausibility. Again, the whole Alien thing just doesn't fit in here. And if you really want this to be a selling vehicle for the "Superbad" duo, you'll really need to sharpen Bradley and Jeff to the point that they're losers with a charming side. Otherwise we don't care for them much.
  
  There's a lot of potential here, though you need a whole lot of work at this point if you ever want Judd Apatow producing this picture.
  
  Best of luck,
  
  Nick O. read