Xolani Mahlangeni (London)

When reviewing a script submitted here the terms of reference never change. They are one or all of the following:
1) You are angling for the prizes,
2) All are spec scripts,
3) You just want feedback in order to horn your writing skills and will not take things personally.

Either way we appraise them the same way. So don’t take what I am going to say personally but realize I have actually taken time to read it and am offering my views to make it BETTER.
This script needs work, a lot of work. There is no running away from that. I suggest you take time to read winning submissions (in similar genres ideally) or specs of produced scripts or even a good script writing book to see what I mean. I have done that myself.
Only then will your work be easy to review in the context of things like the plot, pacing, character development, structure (i.e. beginning, middle, and end. Set up; complication; resolution.) etc. Right now we are worrying too much about formatting and trimming the ‘fat’.
The Bank Out premise is sound enough and has potential to develop into something great but you commit all the spec script writing sins from the onset. I can’t point out everything but I will list the major points.
There is a lot of unneeded action/descriptions that do not help the story in any way. You say things in 5 words when 3 will do; 10 words when 6 will do. The rule of the thumb is: if it is not necessary to move the story forward leave it out, if it is obvious from the scene heading leave it out, if the director is unlikely to miss it, leave it out.
The first five pages of this story could be covered by one and a half pages IMHO.
Take the opening page for instance.

EXT. IN FRONT OF BANK - DAY
A FAT MAN (30s) walks toward the front door to a large bank in a city. He has a full beard, no mustache, and long hair just to his shoulders. He looks serious, but wears jeans and a hoodie that, even for him, is oversized.
A WELL-DRESSED MAN (30s) follows close behind the fat man. He walks quicker, but doesn’t appear to be in a hurry. He wears a big black suit. His hair and sunglasses look nice.
INT. BANK LOBBY - CONTINUOUS
Both men enter the bank through the main entrance.
There are four bank teller windows. One is closed.
The fat man goes to wait for the first teller, who is talking to a customer.
There is already someone waiting to talk the second teller, the well-dressed man gets in line behind her.
As the well-dressed man gets in line, he looks over to a PRETTY WOMAN (low 30s) waiting in the third line. As their eyes meet, they smile to each other slightly.
The person in front of the pretty woman (ANGRY BANK GUEST) is talking to the third teller very loudly.
The camera focuses on the fat man, well-dressed man, and the pretty woman, who are all waiting in line. But the guest talking to the third teller can be easily heard.
Meanwhile the first and second tellers and their guests TALK in the background. There is also a lot of background NOISE created by guests and workers in the rest of the bank.
ANGRY BANK GUEST
(yelling)
Why would I have a receipt from a store I have never been to before? Do you understand? I did not buy that. These extra fees thrown in here, I can’t pay like a thousand dollars in fees, sorry. What is this anyway? Is that even a real store?
Does it help the story to see them approaching the bank? Or that the Fat Man looks serious? Or that the well-dressed man walks quicker but does not seem in a hurry? Or that one of the four tellers is unavailable?

These can be trimmed to:

EXT. CITY BANK ENTRANCE – DAY
A FAT MAN (30s) with long hair and beard shuffles up in his jeans and oversized hoodie.
Close behind, a WELL-DRESSED MAN (30s) leisurely follows, looking chic in a black suit and sunglasses.
INT. BANK LOBBY – CONTINUOUS
The two men walk in and line up to be served by two of the available three tellers.
The Well-dressed man turns to the PRETTY WOMAN (low 30s) in the third queue. As their eyes meet, they exchange slight smiles.
Ahead of the Pretty Woman, a customer complains loudly.
CUSTOMER#1
Don’t you understand? I did not buy that. How can I have a receipt from a shop I never went to? And these fees, I can’t pay a thousand dollars in fees, sorry. Is this even a real shop?

The trick is to remember that the producer and the production team will flesh out the rest without you stating the obvious. It’s not easy I know but with time and revisions you eventually get it.
Other issues.

1) Remember a page is a minute of screen time. It is not ideal to name people featuring on the opening 9-10 pages (opening 9-10 minutes) as FAT MAN, WELL DRESSED MAN and PRETTY WOMAN. Give them names. Plus in a spec you can’t influence casting to that extent unless if it is relevant to the story in some way,
2) There should be NO CAMERA DIRECTIONS in a spec unless if you strictly have to reveal something in a specific way to help the story. That is for the production team,
3) Keep it simple. There is no such thing as Angry Bank Guest; it’s either Angry Customer or Customer#1.
4) I don't know what software you are using but there should be no spaces between characters, dialog and parentheticals. (I had to convert it into pdf for easy reading on my Playbookas you didn't upload one; if it was my conversion then please excuse me)

Other issues
P3: You say “There WERE two guests…”
“The third teller is TALKING with their loud, difficult guest.”
Seriously?
The bank must have really lax security to fall for this type of a raid. Make it harder; make the robbers more menacing, more well-researched, something we haven’t seen before or the collusion more interesting, slicker, anything. It’s a bank robbery the whole story revolves on after all.
I’m afraid in in its current form few people will go past the first few pages. I did because I promised I would but to be frank this is a draft you shouldn’t even be putting up for review.

First of all, I need to point out I am not very big on space-based stories so my review is going to be stunted by that.
The physics and dynamics are generally very deep and, like animation, it’s an-anything-can-happen kind of world in which nothing is too incredible. Your imagination is generally the only limitation.
That said, Majestic is well written, Glenn clearly knows what he is doing. Typos, grammatical and formatting errors are so rare you have to read it to believe it.
It is a dark, disaster epic with a distinct War of the Worlds feel to it. However, I personally find the concept of a long lost continent in the Atlantic ingenious. That said with the earth’s history so well documented, even around 9,600, BC, I thought Glenn would throw in an explanation as to why the continent’s existence was still unheard of (or was still a state secret) up until the attack.
As you’d expect my concerns are rather few. Here goes:
P35 Okay so it’s in an unprecedented crisis situation but do advisers swear that much around the president?
Obviously Nathan is a great astronaut but he does seem to need little orientation to operate all manner of (Martian) equipment.
Lastly I was hoping to see the terrifying leader of the vipers square up to Nathan in some finale, to really scare me out of my wits.
Maybe it's being petty but how come his suit enables him to dive to great depths without any need for decompressing on the way back up?
But based on structure, style and entertainment value I rate it four stars.

It is an all-action, if violent, flick and I must say with a great opening raid sequence.
The story is relentless and rarely slows down. The conversational gambits certainly complement the situations.
Clearly you like your action fast, loud and frequent, my only word of caution is ensure it remains credible (a lot of arms break too easily in your story) and relevant to help move the story forward. The other consequence of so much action is that the finale needs to blow us away for the story to have a decent climax.
Judging from the language and action I am guessing it’s an adult flick. Based on that my biggest worry is the plot is rather thin, the story too linear and fairly simple. Vic and Rico never seem to draw a blank in their investigations. Everyone seems to need little persuasion to give them info.
Example: P 26-27
Yes, Wayne is in pain but he is giving away too much info without due coercion for someone in the drug biz.
I’m saying this believing you’re someone trying to get his first story sold (excuse the assumption if you have already sold some). Established writers get away with similar stories all the time but for most of us the scrutiny is much closer. What I mean is stories about bounty hunters can be cool but throw in that extra hook to stand out.
The backstories of key characters (e.g. Claire and dad) are rather incomplete when the story revolves around them. The other thing is because people are short and houses blown up from start to finish, stakes never noticeably get elevated for that cool climax. These are drug dealers after all. Someone could be ‘stabbed in the back’. Mckenzie’s handlers could have an ulterior motive linked to the drugs just to throw us off track when we thought we had it all figured out.
A few quirks in your writing style I noticed:
In certain instances, words like BANG!!, SMACK!!, and statements describing people’s exact weight and height take too much away from the production team esp. in a spec draft. Why not just say it explodes? Someone is hit? And that someone is big?
There is some repetition in some of your scene structures, for example
P3
HOOD 5 grabs Vic and throws him into...

INT. BEDROOM

...a bedroom smashing through the door crashing onto the floor.

Should be

HOOD 5 grabs Vic and throws him into...

A BEDROOM

...smashing through the door crashing onto the floor.

Some of the paragraphs can be split or condensed; a typical example is the first/last paragraphs on pages 11 and 12.
P16 Please use accepted formatting of telephone conversations
P 20 I I captain is Aye, aye captain.

I know how easy it is to miss typos and drop the ball on grammar here and there (God knows I do it all the time) so at completion why don’t you run the rich text file in MS Word for a more thorough spell/grammar check? 9 times out of 10 it would pick up most mistakes.

Clearly you know your poker well. I definitely wouldn’t want to square up with you at any table.
The script is very visual, very descriptive and is fraught with suspense throughout. Just the way I like it in gambling based stories. The conversation is great.
My worry is; based on the rule that a page is about a minute of screen time, the ‘set up’ is bit long i.e. putting the case for Peter, Janet and friends playing poker regularly leading to use of AcesHigh’s account. (14-15 pages = 14-15minutes, that is normal in complex stories I know). It sort of steals time for raising stakes later.
A few Suggestions
Consider using CONTINUOUS and SIMULTANEOUS for seamless action sequences e.g. when characters move room to room.
Call me disturbing (wink) but with stakes running into millions, lambos, yachts and poker I’d have wanted to see someone getting hurt, just to push viewers further onto the edges of their seats with the darker side to glamorous (?) world of poker. It would also elevate the gravity of Ben and Janet’ predicament vis-a-vis AceHigh’s money and the Barnabas con.
Barnabas could easily provide just that as he plays with high stakes and his character would be great with a couple of bruisers (security) hanging around him.
The other thing Janet seems to be hooked on gambling without a clear-cut explanation or consequence. How about throwing in a financial headache (a huge debt or similar) just to push stakes up again.

Lastly I have been urged to avoid writing styles with heavy use of ‘is’
Example:
P 90 at the bottom
INT. STOCKHOLM APARTMENT - DAY
Matthias is sitting at a large desk playing online poker.
Maja is lounging on the sofa playing on her laptop.
Suggestion
INT. STOCKHOLM APARTMENT - DAY
Matthias sits at a large desk playing online poker.
Maja lounges on the sofa playing on her laptop.

Never one to worry about such (but it counts for a lot around here), I think your log line doesn’t do the story justice.
That said it is a great read.

I am not entirely sure of your intentions with this piece because although it is 90 pages long it is not a 'full length motion picture' in the true sense of the word as it is in effect a prologue.

It actually ends just when it is getting more interesting. But what do I know maybe you are not angling for the script prizes like some of us. I suppose you prefer it as a mini-series but with the amount of detail you clearly have is it too much to ask for you to coalesce it all into a feature length screenplay?

That said it is a brutal, compelling tale (as probably was Egyptian royalty of the time).

A few issues I picked on: -

a) You introduce the Pharaoh as physically fit (p4) but clearly, throughout he is unwell. This could be an error or the deterioration of his health needs clarification. Possibly his circumcision goes awry but its unclear/unlikely as he sleeps with the Galikhupa.

b) You give the Pharaoh’s age as 30's (p4) but his Chief wife is 40's and eldest son 16. I'm not sure if Pharaohs ever married older women, you obviously know better.

c) The other thing is if you write as you visualize, it is easy to write about 'loud thuds' or 'sudden halts'. They say a thud is a thud and a halt is halt.

d) In a few instances I thought you needed to cross-check your usage of ‘had’ and ‘have’.
I did not note the exact pages these two issues occur but you could do a search and sort them out.
Hope this helps.

Didi you consider developing it into a feature length script? IMHO it certainly would work.

It's a hoot to read with great conversational gambits at every turn.
Could someone make a test movie please?