3
out of
3
people found the following review helpful:
Great promising story!
1
out of
1
people found the following review helpful:
Kosher Ain't Quite Kosher
As per my usual approach, I've taken notes as I read, and these are followed by more detailed analysis.
---------
p1 Can probably dispense with the OPENING CREDITS.
First slug, generally don't put times in the slug. I'd replace 4AM with NIGHT, and put 4AM into the action line, or if it's absolutely necessary that we know what time it is, put it into SUPER.
No caps for characters named in dialogue.
are peeling -> peel (as in "They peel and slice vegetables"). Look for instances where you can shift the present participle into the -s form of the verb, which makes it slightly stronger.
It's HOLMES not Homes.
p9 Again, watch putting dates in the slug line.
"They appear jittery, most likely from drug usage." Is the drug usage detail something we can actually see? The jittering, yes. Drug use, no. In this case, unless there's a way you can visually SHOW that they're jittery due to drug use (say, one of them drops a needle on the ground) then there's no point in putting into the action line. In most cases, you want to focus on details that can be visually seen on screen. Pretend that what's on the page is what is on the screen. Good rule to write by.
p10 At first I didn't buy that the Warden of a men's prison was a woman. But I did a quick search and found that not only are women wardens in men's prisons, but statistically their presence can reduce in-prison violence. So, well done!
p13 Since Ken is Kosher's attorney, unless he's working pro bono, WHAT AN ASSHOLE for demanding dinner (even jokingly) for doing his job.
One thing that concerns me is that Kosher's release would likely have resulted in at least one instance of him seeing a judge; if for nothing else, exoneration would likely be issued by a judge, due to the requirement of having to overturn a jury decision. Thus your current account of Kosher's exoneration and release seems somewhat clipped, and you may want to go back later and potentially write some additional scenes to fill in the gaps.
p18 For one year of wrongful incarceration I doubt Kosher would be able to get even close to $250k, much less half a million. About half the states currently have NO compensation plans in place for wrongfully incarcerated victims, and many jurisdictions limit compensation, or make it practically unattainable, or both. For example, Wisconsin limits compensation to a measly $5,000 per year and a total of $25,000; Kosher *could* sue the state for wrongful incerceration, but that'd be a much lengthier affair, he'd have to prove gross negligence on the part of the state, and wouldn't happen til after he was released, and likely still wouldn't result in a ton of compensation. For having been in prison a year and change, my guess is he'd probably get ~$10-$15k, max.
p20 Ken: "Kosher's been well tamed." This dude is such a prick.
p24 Vanessa: "... on top of that, I hear that you're a really nice guy." I can't tell if this dialogue her her just being playful, or if she really doesn't know if he's a nice guy.
p25 While Vanessa is O.S. putting flowers in the vase, what is Kosher doing? You leave him with nothing to do, and I assume we are staying on him the entire time? Remember, film is visual, and whatever you put on the page happens on screen. Must account for that.
p25 "In her hands she [carries] (not carrys) the flowers..."
p25 You've already had Vanessa exclaim her love of the flowers. This scene just drags. Cut it short after he gives her the flowers, and jump right to the restaurant.
p27 I understand your "getting to know you, getting to know all about you" stuff with Vanessa and Kosher, but man, it is boring. You HAVE to simply lace this with more than just back and forth dialogue. Is there any subtext here? Obviously you're giving us some Ken backstory, which is really odd considering that Vanessa apparently doesn't know anything about Kosher--why isn't she asking about him, or Kosher asking about her? Why the hell are they talking about Ken? And if you're leading up to some twist where Ken is a pivotal figure in the murders (which I assume are going to start happening ANNNNNY moment now), then it's somewhat transparent.
One thing I'm noticing now, your scenes go on way too long. Get in and get out.
p28 The detail about Kosher tensing up when seeing the three men after the movie is a really nice touch.
p29 Make the deserted playground scene a MONTAGE and it'll play nicer "on screen" for the reader.
p38 So we've got an eighth of the screen time devoted to taking chicken off the grill, onto a platter, then putting more chicken on the grill. Riveting.
End of p38, I notice Ken and Kandi walk away. Then top of p39, suddenly Ken is there to grab the doorbell. There's some internal inconsistency here with the visual blocking; I'm trying to imagine it in my head, and some of the details aren't quite working as written. This can easily be fixed.
p39 Not sure "nonetheless" is the right word here. Maybe try "no less."
p40 Dialogue really suffering at this stage; I understand you need to set up the various conflicting parties (KEN AND KOSHER, SIMON and VANESSA, VANESSA and KOSHER, KOSHER and SIMON) but this dialogue.... Eg. "Thank you. Ken made the potato salad, Kandi made the deviled eggs. Kosherr and I made the rest."--WHO CARES who made what? How is this even remotely interesting or entertaining, much less how is it progressing the story?
More chicken off the grill. You're killing this story with irrelevant details.
p41 KANDI: "on my date's (not dates) car..."
p42 Simon's dialogue at top of the page is waaaay too on the nose.
p44 Glad Kosher's so willing to open up to a woman he just met. Is this a world where everyone speaks what's on their mind, no matter how painful or odd it might be?
p46 Um, a paintball playing bear? Is it real? Is it someone in a bear suit? I'm very confused.
p47 "real quick" should be "really quickly"
When you use INTERCUT, it's more acceptable to first set up both SCENES with individual slug lines; then you can INTERCUT between the two. The way you have it, we don't know WHERE Ken is or what he's doing while he's on the phone with Kosher.
p51 and I have no idea where this script is going. I don't mean that in a good way. The structure here is extremely loose; it feels a bit aimless at the moment. So far I'm not sure if this is a murder mystery, as the LOGLINE claims or a romantic drama, as it currently seems to be. With just over 30 pages left, I'm concerned about the structure.
However, you finally have some nice dialogue between Ken and Kosher about the type of gifts to give girls. It's understated, not on the nose, and hints at something weird beneath the surface; feels like foreshadowing.
I love how Kosher's apparently this big cooking star now, and yet we've only seen him on this show once. It'd be nice to see him do something other than drink beers on the back porch in the sun.
still p51, again, watch the INTERCUT.
p52 They take a drive, and now they're in rural country. So I have to ask, WHERE IS THIS STORY SET? Because it seems earlier they're in a city, and I assume that since they're doing a cooking show that's gotten pretty big, they're most likely in New York? My point is, I think you should establish your scenes a little better.
p55 Good God, more beer drinking on the porch. You should call this script "DRINKIN' ON THE PORCH."
p56 The first murder. Finally. Unfortunately, it's written like a scene in an English tea house. Give it some ACTION! Use PUNCTUATION AND STOPS! DASHES-- CUTTING OFF-- THE AIR-- SUPPLY-- get us to FEEL what Simon feels when he's getting--THUD.
p57 More trudging dialogue.
p58 I hope these puppy scenes are leading somewhere.
p59 Try to break up these big blocks of paragraph text. Here's what you have:
"Kosher pushes the up arrow to call the elevator. Busy people are walking past in all directions. Some with coffee cups in their hands, newspapers tucked under their arm, carrying briefcases and some playing with their Blackberry's. The elevator DINGS. The door slides open. Kosher and Vanessa step inside. Kosher is surprised to find that they are alone in the elevator. When the doors close he pulls her against him and kisses her passionately."
Watch what I do with it:
Kosher pushes the UP ARROW. He waits. People pass behind him. The morning rush.
DING. Elevator door opens. Kosher and Vanessa enter.
INT. ELEVATOR - CONT
Kosher sweeps Vanessa into his arms. They KISS.
Notice how much easier and interesting my version is to read. It reads like it'd play on screen, and with a lot fewer words.
p60 Hmmm, odd reaction from Vanessa, needing to be alone.
p61 So they're on DAY THREE of "SPANISH WEEK", which leads me to wonder when they had time to do a cookout and do all that porch beer drinking? Does Spanish Week begin on Friday?
And the CAMERAMAN wouldn't say "That's a wrap." That's the director's job.
p63/64 You'd think Kosher would have enough sense not to talk to a detective without his lawyer present; I don't care if he's got nothing to hide, he's already been wrongfully convicted, he's not going to talk to the cops any more than he has to. This bit totally doesn't wash for me.
Hmmmm, what's up with Kosher not giving a last name...?
p66 Living Room should probably be in all CAPS.
p72 It should be "accident?" (question mark inside quotes)
p74 Vanessa: "I ant to see the person or persons responsible..." This dialogue sounds so phony. Who talks like this?
p80 This is the third time Ken and Kosher have done the YAWN I'M TIRED routine. There's gotta be a more interesting and inventive way for you to write these things.
Sorry to say, but Ken as the killer was pretty predictable.
p84 Big block of paragraphs. After revealing the killer, there's not a ton of reason to keep reading. You HAVE to make this worth reading. What's in it for the reader? With that much ink most readers are going to skip it. (But I won't.)
It's another action scene that reads like it's WAITING FOR GODOT. You have to write these like they're the most urgent, important things on the planet. It's a fight! Write it fast! Write it brutal! Write it in cuts and jumps and blurs.
----------
Okay, I'm going to have to be a little brutal here and tell you that your extra short screenplay needs to be cut down even more. I'd wager you could kill 20, maybe even 25 pages worth of stuff just by cutting down on extraneous dialogue and eliminating or reducing scenes that come in too early and leave too late (as we say in the industry).
You've got a lot, a lot, a lot of boring, uninteresting, and frankly, unnecessary-to-the-plot details, mostly dialogue but sometimes description, that can be done away with.
Let's pretend that you do that. What you have left is a very barebones plot with more or less a linear trajectory, with the occasional flashback to help bolster our belief in Kosher. Let's talk about these flashbacks. Why do you need them? You've already built a likeable character in Kosher, someone who is demonstrably a "nice guy." So you show the flashback once, if at all. It's all you need. The rest is, honestly, space filler. It doesn't really add to the story, and you haven't really given Kosher or the audience any extra, useful information, until the last flashback, when you show the shadow of the guy picking up the knife--but even then, it could be anyone. The Flashback detail makes me think that you thought it was an awesome idea at the time of creation, and wanted to keep it, despite the fact that you have a much better, much more salient clue already present in the script: THE GOLD WATCH.
Which leads me to the rest of your plot structure. It's boring. We've seen stories like this on Murder, She Wrote. I'll grant you, the Lawyer needing a friend frameup is actually pretty cool. I think that aspect of things is decent, and works quite well, though it probably could be developed a bit more. But it's the meat of the story that feels so stale to me.
There is an A-Line, but you don't have a subplot (romantic entanglements would, at best, be considered a C-line). Subplots are great because they not only break up the monotony of the primary story, but if you're doing your job, you can TIE IT INTO the A-Line such that stuff from the B-line can impact how characters behave in the A-line.
Speaking of Ken's obsession over Kosher, it's a bit odd that you don't really give Ken and Kosher a TON of time on screen. Sure, Ken gets him out of jail (um, that's his job, though), and then lets him stay with him while Kosher transitions back into the real world. So other than that and the occasional bender and cookout, they don't seem like they're that close, which weakens Ken's "justification" (he needs to preserve his friendship with Kosher) down the line.
Along those same lines, Vanessa's reaction to Simon's death doesn't jive with the relationship intensity she shares with Kosher. If it were me writing this, here's how I'd play it:
Simon gets murdered. Kosher denies having anything to do with it, and Vanessa believes it. However, over the course of the next few days, Vanessa starts having doubts, maybe b/c Kosher says stuff that she takes out of context, or perhaps Kosher appears to exhibit suspicious behavior. Remember what I said about subplots? A Subplot could serve marvelously here: What if Kosher had a father who was still alive, but very sick. Maybe Kosher wants to visit him, and so he disappears at a time when Vanessa is starting to suspect he might be responsible for Simon's death. NOW you have a situation where two characters are both acting reasonable in their own eyes, but due to lack of knowledge, one character begins to fear and suspect the other; NOW you've given Vanessa proper justification for being suspicious of Kosher.
As you have currently written this, Vanessa and Kosher have a whirlwind romance, both hot and heavy and both loving the ride, and then out of the blue, BAM! Simon gets murdered and Vanessa IMMEDIATELY leaps to the conclusion: Kosher must have done it. WHY? Because he's an ex-con? You've already proven she's bigger than that because SHE'S FUCKING DATING HIM. She knows his past, she knows he was wrongfully imprisoned and was exonerated, and she's since then had the benefit of seeing how he acts (ie, loving, respectful, gentle, amazing lover, etc.) Her reaction in this version of the script is thus amazingly off, and I think needs a complete revision.
Character-wise, you've got a great character in Kosher. A great name, a great skill and a good balance of THREATENING when he needs to be and GENTLE (that's who he really is). He's a paradox (huge guy who reads cookbooks) which you point out in the (a bit too) on the nose dialogue from the two cons in the prison. However, if you want us--the readers--to suspect him more at the end, or at least give us a hint that he MAY be guilty of killing Simon and Kandi, you should build in a little doubt about him at the get-go, and pepper the script with it.
Ken is also interesting, as a character and a collection of conflicting traits--he seems nice, but he also demonstrates a lack of tact ("He's well tamed.") and a kind of open desperation when it comes to relationships. The buying of the diamond for Kandi was a good moment precisely because it's an OUTWARD ACTION that directly EMERGES from an INNER STRUGGLE. So kudos on that end.
Vanessa... eh, she's kind of just there, doesn't have much to do, doesn't change significantly. Kandi, even less so; she's mostly window-dressing.
Things I'd immediately do in your next draft: work on shortening your scenes--all of them. Think of this: When writing, make it YOUR goal to start the scene as LATE as possible and end it as EARLY as possible. Cut out the clutter ("Hi." "How are you." "Good." "Want something to drink?" "Kandi made the deviled eggs.", etc.)
Then I'd work on building a subplot that you can reasonably tie into the main line; it's gotta be Kosher-centric, and it should be something that can potentially be used to further cast doubt and suspicion upon him.
You had a few technical flaws through the script, but those can be worked on.
I hope these notes are helpful and that you know my directness is meant for your benefit. All the best on the next draft.
---------
p1 Can probably dispense with the OPENING CREDITS.
First slug, generally don't put times in the slug. I'd replace 4AM with NIGHT, and put 4AM into the action line, or if it's absolutely necessary that we know what time it is, put it into SUPER.
No caps for characters named in dialogue.
are peeling -> peel (as in "They peel and slice vegetables"). Look for instances where you can shift the present participle into the -s form of the verb, which makes it slightly stronger.
It's HOLMES not Homes.
p9 Again, watch putting dates in the slug line.
"They appear jittery, most likely from drug usage." Is the drug usage detail something we can actually see? The jittering, yes. Drug use, no. In this case, unless there's a way you can visually SHOW that they're jittery due to drug use (say, one of them drops a needle on the ground) then there's no point in putting into the action line. In most cases, you want to focus on details that can be visually seen on screen. Pretend that what's on the page is what is on the screen. Good rule to write by.
p10 At first I didn't buy that the Warden of a men's prison was a woman. But I did a quick search and found that not only are women wardens in men's prisons, but statistically their presence can reduce in-prison violence. So, well done!
p13 Since Ken is Kosher's attorney, unless he's working pro bono, WHAT AN ASSHOLE for demanding dinner (even jokingly) for doing his job.
One thing that concerns me is that Kosher's release would likely have resulted in at least one instance of him seeing a judge; if for nothing else, exoneration would likely be issued by a judge, due to the requirement of having to overturn a jury decision. Thus your current account of Kosher's exoneration and release seems somewhat clipped, and you may want to go back later and potentially write some additional scenes to fill in the gaps.
p18 For one year of wrongful incarceration I doubt Kosher would be able to get even close to $250k, much less half a million. About half the states currently have NO compensation plans in place for wrongfully incarcerated victims, and many jurisdictions limit compensation, or make it practically unattainable, or both. For example, Wisconsin limits compensation to a measly $5,000 per year and a total of $25,000; Kosher *could* sue the state for wrongful incerceration, but that'd be a much lengthier affair, he'd have to prove gross negligence on the part of the state, and wouldn't happen til after he was released, and likely still wouldn't result in a ton of compensation. For having been in prison a year and change, my guess is he'd probably get ~$10-$15k, max.
p20 Ken: "Kosher's been well tamed." This dude is such a prick.
p24 Vanessa: "... on top of that, I hear that you're a really nice guy." I can't tell if this dialogue her her just being playful, or if she really doesn't know if he's a nice guy.
p25 While Vanessa is O.S. putting flowers in the vase, what is Kosher doing? You leave him with nothing to do, and I assume we are staying on him the entire time? Remember, film is visual, and whatever you put on the page happens on screen. Must account for that.
p25 "In her hands she [carries] (not carrys) the flowers..."
p25 You've already had Vanessa exclaim her love of the flowers. This scene just drags. Cut it short after he gives her the flowers, and jump right to the restaurant.
p27 I understand your "getting to know you, getting to know all about you" stuff with Vanessa and Kosher, but man, it is boring. You HAVE to simply lace this with more than just back and forth dialogue. Is there any subtext here? Obviously you're giving us some Ken backstory, which is really odd considering that Vanessa apparently doesn't know anything about Kosher--why isn't she asking about him, or Kosher asking about her? Why the hell are they talking about Ken? And if you're leading up to some twist where Ken is a pivotal figure in the murders (which I assume are going to start happening ANNNNNY moment now), then it's somewhat transparent.
One thing I'm noticing now, your scenes go on way too long. Get in and get out.
p28 The detail about Kosher tensing up when seeing the three men after the movie is a really nice touch.
p29 Make the deserted playground scene a MONTAGE and it'll play nicer "on screen" for the reader.
p38 So we've got an eighth of the screen time devoted to taking chicken off the grill, onto a platter, then putting more chicken on the grill. Riveting.
End of p38, I notice Ken and Kandi walk away. Then top of p39, suddenly Ken is there to grab the doorbell. There's some internal inconsistency here with the visual blocking; I'm trying to imagine it in my head, and some of the details aren't quite working as written. This can easily be fixed.
p39 Not sure "nonetheless" is the right word here. Maybe try "no less."
p40 Dialogue really suffering at this stage; I understand you need to set up the various conflicting parties (KEN AND KOSHER, SIMON and VANESSA, VANESSA and KOSHER, KOSHER and SIMON) but this dialogue.... Eg. "Thank you. Ken made the potato salad, Kandi made the deviled eggs. Kosherr and I made the rest."--WHO CARES who made what? How is this even remotely interesting or entertaining, much less how is it progressing the story?
More chicken off the grill. You're killing this story with irrelevant details.
p41 KANDI: "on my date's (not dates) car..."
p42 Simon's dialogue at top of the page is waaaay too on the nose.
p44 Glad Kosher's so willing to open up to a woman he just met. Is this a world where everyone speaks what's on their mind, no matter how painful or odd it might be?
p46 Um, a paintball playing bear? Is it real? Is it someone in a bear suit? I'm very confused.
p47 "real quick" should be "really quickly"
When you use INTERCUT, it's more acceptable to first set up both SCENES with individual slug lines; then you can INTERCUT between the two. The way you have it, we don't know WHERE Ken is or what he's doing while he's on the phone with Kosher.
p51 and I have no idea where this script is going. I don't mean that in a good way. The structure here is extremely loose; it feels a bit aimless at the moment. So far I'm not sure if this is a murder mystery, as the LOGLINE claims or a romantic drama, as it currently seems to be. With just over 30 pages left, I'm concerned about the structure.
However, you finally have some nice dialogue between Ken and Kosher about the type of gifts to give girls. It's understated, not on the nose, and hints at something weird beneath the surface; feels like foreshadowing.
I love how Kosher's apparently this big cooking star now, and yet we've only seen him on this show once. It'd be nice to see him do something other than drink beers on the back porch in the sun.
still p51, again, watch the INTERCUT.
p52 They take a drive, and now they're in rural country. So I have to ask, WHERE IS THIS STORY SET? Because it seems earlier they're in a city, and I assume that since they're doing a cooking show that's gotten pretty big, they're most likely in New York? My point is, I think you should establish your scenes a little better.
p55 Good God, more beer drinking on the porch. You should call this script "DRINKIN' ON THE PORCH."
p56 The first murder. Finally. Unfortunately, it's written like a scene in an English tea house. Give it some ACTION! Use PUNCTUATION AND STOPS! DASHES-- CUTTING OFF-- THE AIR-- SUPPLY-- get us to FEEL what Simon feels when he's getting--THUD.
p57 More trudging dialogue.
p58 I hope these puppy scenes are leading somewhere.
p59 Try to break up these big blocks of paragraph text. Here's what you have:
"Kosher pushes the up arrow to call the elevator. Busy people are walking past in all directions. Some with coffee cups in their hands, newspapers tucked under their arm, carrying briefcases and some playing with their Blackberry's. The elevator DINGS. The door slides open. Kosher and Vanessa step inside. Kosher is surprised to find that they are alone in the elevator. When the doors close he pulls her against him and kisses her passionately."
Watch what I do with it:
Kosher pushes the UP ARROW. He waits. People pass behind him. The morning rush.
DING. Elevator door opens. Kosher and Vanessa enter.
INT. ELEVATOR - CONT
Kosher sweeps Vanessa into his arms. They KISS.
Notice how much easier and interesting my version is to read. It reads like it'd play on screen, and with a lot fewer words.
p60 Hmmm, odd reaction from Vanessa, needing to be alone.
p61 So they're on DAY THREE of "SPANISH WEEK", which leads me to wonder when they had time to do a cookout and do all that porch beer drinking? Does Spanish Week begin on Friday?
And the CAMERAMAN wouldn't say "That's a wrap." That's the director's job.
p63/64 You'd think Kosher would have enough sense not to talk to a detective without his lawyer present; I don't care if he's got nothing to hide, he's already been wrongfully convicted, he's not going to talk to the cops any more than he has to. This bit totally doesn't wash for me.
Hmmmm, what's up with Kosher not giving a last name...?
p66 Living Room should probably be in all CAPS.
p72 It should be "accident?" (question mark inside quotes)
p74 Vanessa: "I ant to see the person or persons responsible..." This dialogue sounds so phony. Who talks like this?
p80 This is the third time Ken and Kosher have done the YAWN I'M TIRED routine. There's gotta be a more interesting and inventive way for you to write these things.
Sorry to say, but Ken as the killer was pretty predictable.
p84 Big block of paragraphs. After revealing the killer, there's not a ton of reason to keep reading. You HAVE to make this worth reading. What's in it for the reader? With that much ink most readers are going to skip it. (But I won't.)
It's another action scene that reads like it's WAITING FOR GODOT. You have to write these like they're the most urgent, important things on the planet. It's a fight! Write it fast! Write it brutal! Write it in cuts and jumps and blurs.
----------
Okay, I'm going to have to be a little brutal here and tell you that your extra short screenplay needs to be cut down even more. I'd wager you could kill 20, maybe even 25 pages worth of stuff just by cutting down on extraneous dialogue and eliminating or reducing scenes that come in too early and leave too late (as we say in the industry).
You've got a lot, a lot, a lot of boring, uninteresting, and frankly, unnecessary-to-the-plot details, mostly dialogue but sometimes description, that can be done away with.
Let's pretend that you do that. What you have left is a very barebones plot with more or less a linear trajectory, with the occasional flashback to help bolster our belief in Kosher. Let's talk about these flashbacks. Why do you need them? You've already built a likeable character in Kosher, someone who is demonstrably a "nice guy." So you show the flashback once, if at all. It's all you need. The rest is, honestly, space filler. It doesn't really add to the story, and you haven't really given Kosher or the audience any extra, useful information, until the last flashback, when you show the shadow of the guy picking up the knife--but even then, it could be anyone. The Flashback detail makes me think that you thought it was an awesome idea at the time of creation, and wanted to keep it, despite the fact that you have a much better, much more salient clue already present in the script: THE GOLD WATCH.
Which leads me to the rest of your plot structure. It's boring. We've seen stories like this on Murder, She Wrote. I'll grant you, the Lawyer needing a friend frameup is actually pretty cool. I think that aspect of things is decent, and works quite well, though it probably could be developed a bit more. But it's the meat of the story that feels so stale to me.
There is an A-Line, but you don't have a subplot (romantic entanglements would, at best, be considered a C-line). Subplots are great because they not only break up the monotony of the primary story, but if you're doing your job, you can TIE IT INTO the A-Line such that stuff from the B-line can impact how characters behave in the A-line.
Speaking of Ken's obsession over Kosher, it's a bit odd that you don't really give Ken and Kosher a TON of time on screen. Sure, Ken gets him out of jail (um, that's his job, though), and then lets him stay with him while Kosher transitions back into the real world. So other than that and the occasional bender and cookout, they don't seem like they're that close, which weakens Ken's "justification" (he needs to preserve his friendship with Kosher) down the line.
Along those same lines, Vanessa's reaction to Simon's death doesn't jive with the relationship intensity she shares with Kosher. If it were me writing this, here's how I'd play it:
Simon gets murdered. Kosher denies having anything to do with it, and Vanessa believes it. However, over the course of the next few days, Vanessa starts having doubts, maybe b/c Kosher says stuff that she takes out of context, or perhaps Kosher appears to exhibit suspicious behavior. Remember what I said about subplots? A Subplot could serve marvelously here: What if Kosher had a father who was still alive, but very sick. Maybe Kosher wants to visit him, and so he disappears at a time when Vanessa is starting to suspect he might be responsible for Simon's death. NOW you have a situation where two characters are both acting reasonable in their own eyes, but due to lack of knowledge, one character begins to fear and suspect the other; NOW you've given Vanessa proper justification for being suspicious of Kosher.
As you have currently written this, Vanessa and Kosher have a whirlwind romance, both hot and heavy and both loving the ride, and then out of the blue, BAM! Simon gets murdered and Vanessa IMMEDIATELY leaps to the conclusion: Kosher must have done it. WHY? Because he's an ex-con? You've already proven she's bigger than that because SHE'S FUCKING DATING HIM. She knows his past, she knows he was wrongfully imprisoned and was exonerated, and she's since then had the benefit of seeing how he acts (ie, loving, respectful, gentle, amazing lover, etc.) Her reaction in this version of the script is thus amazingly off, and I think needs a complete revision.
Character-wise, you've got a great character in Kosher. A great name, a great skill and a good balance of THREATENING when he needs to be and GENTLE (that's who he really is). He's a paradox (huge guy who reads cookbooks) which you point out in the (a bit too) on the nose dialogue from the two cons in the prison. However, if you want us--the readers--to suspect him more at the end, or at least give us a hint that he MAY be guilty of killing Simon and Kandi, you should build in a little doubt about him at the get-go, and pepper the script with it.
Ken is also interesting, as a character and a collection of conflicting traits--he seems nice, but he also demonstrates a lack of tact ("He's well tamed.") and a kind of open desperation when it comes to relationships. The buying of the diamond for Kandi was a good moment precisely because it's an OUTWARD ACTION that directly EMERGES from an INNER STRUGGLE. So kudos on that end.
Vanessa... eh, she's kind of just there, doesn't have much to do, doesn't change significantly. Kandi, even less so; she's mostly window-dressing.
Things I'd immediately do in your next draft: work on shortening your scenes--all of them. Think of this: When writing, make it YOUR goal to start the scene as LATE as possible and end it as EARLY as possible. Cut out the clutter ("Hi." "How are you." "Good." "Want something to drink?" "Kandi made the deviled eggs.", etc.)
Then I'd work on building a subplot that you can reasonably tie into the main line; it's gotta be Kosher-centric, and it should be something that can potentially be used to further cast doubt and suspicion upon him.
You had a few technical flaws through the script, but those can be worked on.
I hope these notes are helpful and that you know my directness is meant for your benefit. All the best on the next draft.
2
out of
3
people found the following review helpful:
Kosher the cook! Great story!
Great story. A few technical details can be fixed.
Notes for Kosher
First, the technical nit picking. We should strive to write scripts in the present tense, use active voice, and strong verbs that do not require adverbs.
Action paragraphs should get right to it with as few words as possible, four lines of text absolute max.
Page 2: Passive voice.
"George, Boom Boom, Sanchez, Tinman and Downer are seated"
Page 3: More passive voice.
"doors are unlocked"
Page 4: Continuous tense, passive voice, and a lot of unfilmable action. Unfilmable example below.
"With only a half an hour to eat they are always in a hurry."
Page 7: Unfilmable reason why.
"Wendell turns to see who Devon is referring to."
Page 12:
The story is developing well.
Brilliant, a cook named Kosher.
Funny episode with the bear and paint ball game.
Page 77:
The detective role seems important enough for him to be a named character.
Nice twist at the ending. Who would have thought? Complete surprise.
Notes for Kosher
First, the technical nit picking. We should strive to write scripts in the present tense, use active voice, and strong verbs that do not require adverbs.
Action paragraphs should get right to it with as few words as possible, four lines of text absolute max.
Page 2: Passive voice.
"George, Boom Boom, Sanchez, Tinman and Downer are seated"
Page 3: More passive voice.
"doors are unlocked"
Page 4: Continuous tense, passive voice, and a lot of unfilmable action. Unfilmable example below.
"With only a half an hour to eat they are always in a hurry."
Page 7: Unfilmable reason why.
"Wendell turns to see who Devon is referring to."
Page 12:
The story is developing well.
Brilliant, a cook named Kosher.
Funny episode with the bear and paint ball game.
Page 77:
The detective role seems important enough for him to be a named character.
Nice twist at the ending. Who would have thought? Complete surprise.
2
out of
3
people found the following review helpful:
Who Did It???
Semifinalist: Best Test Movie, Best Script, Best Sci-Fi/Action Script
California
April 04, 2011
I was thoroughly hooked by the structure of this script. I wanted to know who did it! I thought the reveal was done with a swift hand...it wasn't in your face obvious but there were definitely enough clues to help me figure it out. I really liked that!
The script was a quick read which is a good thing. I didn't want to put it down. I was engaged by the characters and cared about them throughout.
I did have a few problems with some elements.
I didn't quite get the character of Ken. His motives for killing everyone just didn't seem enough. So he saw Kosher at the bar, thought he seemed cool and then framed him for murder so he could be his lawyer? I mean that sounds really out there. I think that motive could work if you really made Ken more crazy throughout the script. He seems pretty normal until that reveal. And did he kill Kandi? Why did he do that? I didn't quite understand that. And Simon...that was because he was flirting with Vanessa? I just didn't get how it all tied together.
And I think that dovetails into my 2nd point. It ends so fast. The rest of the script had a nice pace to it and then all of a sudden, in the last 5 pages, all hell breaks lose. I think you could really massage out a stronger ending. Ken either needs to be a psychopath stalker of Kosher and be that more clearly through the story (give us clues!) or he needs to have a different reason to be doing all this stuff.
Overall, I really liked this script, just work on the ending and I'd be hooked!
The script was a quick read which is a good thing. I didn't want to put it down. I was engaged by the characters and cared about them throughout.
I did have a few problems with some elements.
I didn't quite get the character of Ken. His motives for killing everyone just didn't seem enough. So he saw Kosher at the bar, thought he seemed cool and then framed him for murder so he could be his lawyer? I mean that sounds really out there. I think that motive could work if you really made Ken more crazy throughout the script. He seems pretty normal until that reveal. And did he kill Kandi? Why did he do that? I didn't quite understand that. And Simon...that was because he was flirting with Vanessa? I just didn't get how it all tied together.
And I think that dovetails into my 2nd point. It ends so fast. The rest of the script had a nice pace to it and then all of a sudden, in the last 5 pages, all hell breaks lose. I think you could really massage out a stronger ending. Ken either needs to be a psychopath stalker of Kosher and be that more clearly through the story (give us clues!) or he needs to have a different reason to be doing all this stuff.
Overall, I really liked this script, just work on the ending and I'd be hooked!
1
out of
2
people found the following review helpful:
First Act is Too Long
Kosher is a very authentic character. But as a protagonist he's very passive. Right now his lawyer puts him in prison, gets him out of prison, gets him a job and finds him a place to live.
Kosher is a likable, realistic character. But he's a horrible, horrible protagonist. He's not doing anything. He's not making things happen. Things happen to him. We wait around for something to happen to him. To be an effective protagonist, Kosher needs to do things. He needs to go after something. And somebody tries to stop him. That's a protagonist-antagonist conflict and it's really what this screenplay needs.
Kosher's one assertive act is when he asks Vanessa for a date. That's his one active step as a protagonist, trying to romance Vanessa. And she says yes right away. So there's no conflict at all. If this is your B storyline, the Kosher-Vanessa romance, you need to make it difficult for him. He's got to overcome some obstacles. She's his antagonist. In this particular conflict, Kosher is the protagonist (trying to win her heart) and Vanessa is trying to keep them apart. Or some third party is trying to keep them apart. Right now, nobody is trying to keep them apart.
You have Vanessa say, "I'm sorry, Kosher. I need time alone." That's the first romantic obstacle and it happens really late in the screenplay. For the first 60-70 pages, she's easy as pie and they're happy as clams. They're happy, but we're miserable. We're bored! You don't need to go soap opera. But we definitely need some ups and downs in their relationship. Right now it's all sunshine for 70 pages.
Your inciting incident, the murder of Simon, takes place on page 56. What this means is your first act is 56 pages long. That's an insanely long set-up. We have to get to your murder conflicts and your romance conflicts a lot sooner. All the screenplay pros will tell you that an inciting incident should happen around page 20. It can happen sooner. It can even happen later. But you're making us wait almost an hour before the movie really gets going.
Here's a suggestion. Like on page 20 or 24 (a lot sooner!) Simon calls Vanessa into his office and tells her that he just found out that Kosher is a convicted criminal. And he tells her that she needs to cancel his show. She has to fire him and find a new chef. Now that's a conflict. Right away that creates an issue with their romance. Vanessa is supposed to fire the man she loves. Will she? We don't know what's going to happen. So we're interested. And then, that weekend, somebody kills Simon. Oooo!
You might even make Vanessa the killer. Maybe she kills Simon because she loves Kosher so much (and she hates her boss). That would be something.
Right now it's obvious that Kosher didn't kill anybody. So you might want to tweak his character a bit. What if he has a violent past? We know he accidentally killed a man. What if in his dreams we see him as an aggressive, violent person? Then all of a sudden we're wondering about Kosher.
What if Kosher was rehabilitated in prison? What if Ken gets him released on a technicality, but Kosher actually committed the crime that put him in prison? I don't think any of us are ever going to suspect Kosher, but if he has violent dreams, at least that would give us some doubt and keep us in suspense, as we try to figure out what's going to happen next.
Or Ken kills Simon. But why? I feel like you have to motivate his actions a lot more. Right now you are relying on him being insane and irrational. It seems like a plot device. I think your premise is something like this: "A lawyer gets a criminal released on a technicality in order to frame him for a murder." Now that's pretty good! But you need to really focus on the lawyer and his motivations, his plan, everything. He's framing Kosher. That's why he got him released, to be the suspect. And he specifically wants to kill one person. Who? And why? That person could be Simon. Or it could be Kandi.
What if Vanessa kills Simon and Ken kills Kandi? All of a sudden your mystery really is mysterious. Right now, Kosher is obviously innocent, and Ken's the only suspect in the story. If you want this to be a mystery, you've got to give us a reason to suspect some innocent people. And if you want it to be suspenseful, you need to put Kosher in danger. Right now, the police barely suspect him. Ken's not framing him. And Kosher remembers a dream and solves the case. And he marries Vanessa and lives happily ever after.
Maybe you can keep the happy ending--I like happy endings--but I think we need to have a lot more suspense earlier in your screenplay to keep us on the edge of our seats. And you do that with conflicts. Somebody trying to do something and somebody else trying to stop them.
What you might want to do is a "beat sheet". That's when you take a piece of paper and organize all your scenes. You should have 30-40 scenes, more or less. So on your beat sheet, you write #1, and describe in a sentence what happens in your first scene. And you do that for all your scenes. It should be 1-2 pages. Once you've organized your scenes on a beat sheet, you can look at them with a critical eye. It focuses you on plotting. A beat sheet gives you a concise, one page summary of your plot structure. Do we need this scene? Is it important? Is it moving the plot forward? That might help a lot with your next rewrite.
Kosher is a likable, realistic character. But he's a horrible, horrible protagonist. He's not doing anything. He's not making things happen. Things happen to him. We wait around for something to happen to him. To be an effective protagonist, Kosher needs to do things. He needs to go after something. And somebody tries to stop him. That's a protagonist-antagonist conflict and it's really what this screenplay needs.
Kosher's one assertive act is when he asks Vanessa for a date. That's his one active step as a protagonist, trying to romance Vanessa. And she says yes right away. So there's no conflict at all. If this is your B storyline, the Kosher-Vanessa romance, you need to make it difficult for him. He's got to overcome some obstacles. She's his antagonist. In this particular conflict, Kosher is the protagonist (trying to win her heart) and Vanessa is trying to keep them apart. Or some third party is trying to keep them apart. Right now, nobody is trying to keep them apart.
You have Vanessa say, "I'm sorry, Kosher. I need time alone." That's the first romantic obstacle and it happens really late in the screenplay. For the first 60-70 pages, she's easy as pie and they're happy as clams. They're happy, but we're miserable. We're bored! You don't need to go soap opera. But we definitely need some ups and downs in their relationship. Right now it's all sunshine for 70 pages.
Your inciting incident, the murder of Simon, takes place on page 56. What this means is your first act is 56 pages long. That's an insanely long set-up. We have to get to your murder conflicts and your romance conflicts a lot sooner. All the screenplay pros will tell you that an inciting incident should happen around page 20. It can happen sooner. It can even happen later. But you're making us wait almost an hour before the movie really gets going.
Here's a suggestion. Like on page 20 or 24 (a lot sooner!) Simon calls Vanessa into his office and tells her that he just found out that Kosher is a convicted criminal. And he tells her that she needs to cancel his show. She has to fire him and find a new chef. Now that's a conflict. Right away that creates an issue with their romance. Vanessa is supposed to fire the man she loves. Will she? We don't know what's going to happen. So we're interested. And then, that weekend, somebody kills Simon. Oooo!
You might even make Vanessa the killer. Maybe she kills Simon because she loves Kosher so much (and she hates her boss). That would be something.
Right now it's obvious that Kosher didn't kill anybody. So you might want to tweak his character a bit. What if he has a violent past? We know he accidentally killed a man. What if in his dreams we see him as an aggressive, violent person? Then all of a sudden we're wondering about Kosher.
What if Kosher was rehabilitated in prison? What if Ken gets him released on a technicality, but Kosher actually committed the crime that put him in prison? I don't think any of us are ever going to suspect Kosher, but if he has violent dreams, at least that would give us some doubt and keep us in suspense, as we try to figure out what's going to happen next.
Or Ken kills Simon. But why? I feel like you have to motivate his actions a lot more. Right now you are relying on him being insane and irrational. It seems like a plot device. I think your premise is something like this: "A lawyer gets a criminal released on a technicality in order to frame him for a murder." Now that's pretty good! But you need to really focus on the lawyer and his motivations, his plan, everything. He's framing Kosher. That's why he got him released, to be the suspect. And he specifically wants to kill one person. Who? And why? That person could be Simon. Or it could be Kandi.
What if Vanessa kills Simon and Ken kills Kandi? All of a sudden your mystery really is mysterious. Right now, Kosher is obviously innocent, and Ken's the only suspect in the story. If you want this to be a mystery, you've got to give us a reason to suspect some innocent people. And if you want it to be suspenseful, you need to put Kosher in danger. Right now, the police barely suspect him. Ken's not framing him. And Kosher remembers a dream and solves the case. And he marries Vanessa and lives happily ever after.
Maybe you can keep the happy ending--I like happy endings--but I think we need to have a lot more suspense earlier in your screenplay to keep us on the edge of our seats. And you do that with conflicts. Somebody trying to do something and somebody else trying to stop them.
What you might want to do is a "beat sheet". That's when you take a piece of paper and organize all your scenes. You should have 30-40 scenes, more or less. So on your beat sheet, you write #1, and describe in a sentence what happens in your first scene. And you do that for all your scenes. It should be 1-2 pages. Once you've organized your scenes on a beat sheet, you can look at them with a critical eye. It focuses you on plotting. A beat sheet gives you a concise, one page summary of your plot structure. Do we need this scene? Is it important? Is it moving the plot forward? That might help a lot with your next rewrite.
0
out of
1
people found the following review helpful:
Kosher - It plays well commercially I think...
Kosher brings to mind the many lives that has been touched by the criminal justice system in wrongful convictions; I like the depth that you've taken this where he begins to release his subconscious to lead him to the truth. This may lead to various other subplots.... it works well :)
Catherine
Catherine
< Previous | Page: 1 | Next >
The story is long to begin maybe because the first 20 pages are dedicated to show what kind of person Kosher is. There’s no need to do that much, a lot of scenes can be deleted or modified. Also it’s all about Kosher and every line seems to be there only to shine light on him even more. So much that it makes us don’t like him. I think that’s the main problem in this story is that your hero (Kosher) is too perfect, he needs a flaw. He’s too good at everything, too nice, too strong, so untouchable that he’s not believable.
Once the intrigue begins the story is really engaging. I immediately suspected Ken because he was too obvious, but for that same reason I thought it couldn’t be him. I could have suspected Simon though if I didn’t already knew that Ken was the bad guy. I liked that Kosher is such and easy victim to frame up but maybe you could have played stronger with this. Maybe this whole thing could go public, first page of magazines and people would boo him in the street. He could lose his job and everything he worked to have, maybe crazy Ken could even be mad at him because he wasn’t grateful enough for everything he did for him. Instead of Vanessa just suspecting him, maybe she could leave him, be afraid of him and even make a statement to the police. When I first read Ken and Vanessa, I thought they had a history, it would be an interesting detail to add too.
I loved how the flashback came progressively through the nightmares; it was intriguing and kept my interest alive. Maybe though he could be more affected by those dreams. I mean you don’t just kill someone, dream about it and you’re good. The dreams affect you and your comportment. Maybe even make him look even more guilty to Vanessa?
I loved the background story with Kate but didn’t buy Ken’s obsession for Kosher. I would have prefer that Vanessa would be his obsession. Maybe somehow she could be the reason why Kate wanted to leave him, like he had an affair with her while they were drunk, Kate found out and wanted to leave him and since then Ken has been planning his revenge on her. Something like that. You could still find a reason why Ken frame up Kosher though, this was good, I liked when that detail was revealed.
So, this was my general overview, now here’s some notes I took while I was reading, and I hope they will be helpful.
Maybe 100 hundreds employee is too much in the kitchen. I’m not sure you really want that much of actor on the set in the same time. Moreover, this is way too much employee for only one man to handle.
No need to caps the name in the dialogue.
Some of the stage direction belongs in the action line. Like: DOWNER
(sniffling, tears running down his cheeks)
Why do I always get stuck with onion duty?
Stage direction is only for the tone of the voice or the accent or the language, things that indicates the actor how he says the line, not what he’s doing while he’s saying the line.
DOWNER
(Feminine voice with gay lisp)
Shut the fuck up, man. I'm no girl.
This line seems to masculine and angry to be said with a feminine voice.
P.3 is there’s a special event because I know usually in prison they don’t get that kind of food, even if Kosher is a great cook, he still needs to have the ingredients.
Here are a few places where I found example of action line that weren’t visual.
P.4 With only a half an hour to eat they are always in a hurry.
P.5 he thinks back over the time that he has known Ken.
P.32 He remembers where he is
EXT. PRISON YARD. DAY-4 P.M.
Inmates are outside in the yard. (You just mentioned it in the Headline, no need to say it again) Some are walking (Avoid the passive tens) (it should be like : Inmates walk around for exercise, one lifts weights, several sit on benches and talk)around for exercise, one lifts weights, several sit on benches smoking and talking. (It makes it more dynamic, I found a few sentences like this that could be easily fixed)
P.6 Yo Cuz. There be some big ass dudes in this here place. (here should be deleted)
P.9 Why would Kosher offer them to be his bitches? He doesn’t owe them anything so what would it gives him? And I didn’t buy the whole plot of proving his point after that. Didn’t work for me.
WARDEN ALBRIGHT
If I couldn't read, I would not have this job, Mr. Wilson.
(Ha! Loved that line)
P.13 Maybe find another reason why they found the knife, it seemed to easy for me. Also, I’m not sure how many people would understand the term affidavit. I’ve been working for lawyers for years (and married one loll) so I do, but before I get into this world I didn’t have a clue of what it was.
Devon and Wendell are completely useless and not likeable characters, so maybe thinking about erasing them from your next draft. If the point was to state that Kosher is a tough guy, we got it in your introduction, it was enough.
P.30 When they kiss, I thought it ended to roughly. I mean they kiss passionately and then he just gets up and asks if she enjoyed the evening? He doesn’t caress her, looks into her eyes or tells her something romantic that would close that great moment? I didn’t have enough of it, lol.
P.36 I could have suspected Simon if Vanessa would be target. Another reason why she should be Ken’s motive. It makes a lot more of suspects, even Kosher could become a suspect in our mind.
P.43 I liked that part! Nicely done! I almost got confused and started suspecting Simon.
P.44 When Kosher explains the night, he doesn’t need to explain with so much details as it’s all things that we already know, so it just makes it lousy. A brief explanation would do it.
VANESSA
That's preposterous. What kind of crackpot attorney did you have?
(Hahahahaha that one made me laugh!) Especially considering that usually when the evidence is missing, they can’t accuse him of anything, Ken must be a really bad lawyer that’s right.
P.47 Love that moment, but maybe make it a little harder to escape from the bear though.
P.48 If the chashier’s name is Leslie, you should always call her Leslie and not Cashier.
P.49 On the phone conversation, Ken should be in V.O
P.50 and he knows my girls name. Should be girl’s name.
KOSHER
I have a show on television. Just a small show, nothing extravagant. This last sentence makes us think that Kosher is afraid of the guy, which is not like him. Maybe just : I have a show on television would be enough.
P.51 Now I start to see a side of Ken’s personality that makes me say he’s definitely not normal. More details like this would make the ending more punched and we would actually fear Ken.
P.52 Again a phone conversation, Vanessa should be in V.O
P.54 I liked how Ken’s character is turning. But page 55 Honey I’m home? Really? Kinda weird since it’s Kosher that is waiting for him. If it’s meant this way then maybe Kosher should react to this, showing us that’s it’s not just weird.
Love the name of the dog
P.81 Wouldn’t Kosher makes sure that Vanessa is safe before to ask for any explanation? Logically it would be the first thing in his mind no? Also he’s kinda playing with fire, saying things that would anger any psycho maniac while the guy holds a knife under the throat of his girlfriend.
Kosher dives for him. He knocks Vanessa out of the way in the process. She hits the floor with a thud. Kosher body slams Ken sending him flying against the wall. (That scene seemed straight out of a Smallville episode, I swear when I read those lines, I saw Clark Kent, maybe an indication that it’s a bit exaggerated, unless Kosher is supermen…)