My Work at Amazon Studios
Credits in 0 works
| No credits yet. |
More About Me
Was once pretty active here, got discouraged, pulled my project, but still intend to breath life into it independantly.
Reviews I've Written
Sawtooth Trailer 3
4 stars
Very compelling, straight to the point dialogue and picture editing. The "bones" could be swapped for humor for better effect, the severed arm goes overboard, but the end works flawlessly. Great work.
January 22, 2012
Flat Pennies, Robert's 12th Draft
1
out of
1
people found the following review helpful:
Think before you drink.
December 14, 2011
Taken Hostage, Jim's Original Draft
0
out of
0
people found the following review helpful:
Hits the ground running is right.
September 11, 2011
Hey, Jim.
I wont belabor my intentions, or the fact that I'm really just trying to help - let's get to it.
ARRGH! The dreaded RTF. You may not get 10 pages from me!
"Polished nails" is great, but does she have a face? I'm just asking.
--
SARAH
Mark. I need some...
Please don't do that. Complete sentences only. The actor will handle the "interuption".
--
Reporters waiting for official announcement. Over descriptive - how does audience know what they are actually waiting for?
--
My son rode with Brandon Masters this morning...
Reader assumes this is page 2 or 3 and can say that it's engaging. A bit contrived, but definitely some complicated conflict occurring right away. That's good!
Now it's bad. On the nose between Spencer and Sarah. Reader understands that writer is not trying to reinvent the genre - oh, gawd forbid!
Getting odd. These pictures are supposed to be odd?
"Mark LOVES school"? I'll let it slide, but I don't know...
(upset) - you don't need a parenthetical for that. reader totally gets it.
Very Nice. Around page 4 or 5 Mark is actually a suspect. I must say that's not terribly original but very story-centric.
There is much going on here. Good job so far.
Honestly, though it's not my cup of tea, it is very strong out of the gate. If you could find ways of shoe-horning more emotional connection - who Sarah is, you could get away with delaying this conflict until page 7 or 8 and achieve much stronger results.
EDIT:
Jim, I did read more of Taken Hostage at one point, but still haven't finished it. Sorry for being a spaz, but here's a couple more thoughts.
Though I didn't finish reading this script, I'll say it's well paced and drives a solid b-line from page 1 into the second act.
But I feel that the current logline for Taken Hostage is not doing the script justice, in that it's very passive. This is a story about a woman who becomes a criminal in an effort to rescue her son.
Strong premise and well written.
I wont belabor my intentions, or the fact that I'm really just trying to help - let's get to it.
ARRGH! The dreaded RTF. You may not get 10 pages from me!
"Polished nails" is great, but does she have a face? I'm just asking.
--
SARAH
Mark. I need some...
Please don't do that. Complete sentences only. The actor will handle the "interuption".
--
Reporters waiting for official announcement. Over descriptive - how does audience know what they are actually waiting for?
--
My son rode with Brandon Masters this morning...
Reader assumes this is page 2 or 3 and can say that it's engaging. A bit contrived, but definitely some complicated conflict occurring right away. That's good!
Now it's bad. On the nose between Spencer and Sarah. Reader understands that writer is not trying to reinvent the genre - oh, gawd forbid!
Getting odd. These pictures are supposed to be odd?
"Mark LOVES school"? I'll let it slide, but I don't know...
(upset) - you don't need a parenthetical for that. reader totally gets it.
Very Nice. Around page 4 or 5 Mark is actually a suspect. I must say that's not terribly original but very story-centric.
There is much going on here. Good job so far.
Honestly, though it's not my cup of tea, it is very strong out of the gate. If you could find ways of shoe-horning more emotional connection - who Sarah is, you could get away with delaying this conflict until page 7 or 8 and achieve much stronger results.
EDIT:
Jim, I did read more of Taken Hostage at one point, but still haven't finished it. Sorry for being a spaz, but here's a couple more thoughts.
Though I didn't finish reading this script, I'll say it's well paced and drives a solid b-line from page 1 into the second act.
But I feel that the current logline for Taken Hostage is not doing the script justice, in that it's very passive. This is a story about a woman who becomes a criminal in an effort to rescue her son.
Strong premise and well written.
Consumption, S.R.'s Original Draft
0
out of
0
people found the following review helpful:
Compelling Writing Style
August 28, 2011
I'm one of those reviewers who tends to focus on negatives, so fair warning.
As others have stated, this story has a lot going for it. This reader doesn't necessarily agree that it should be more of a straight monster/horror flick - but feels that ACT THREE could be a lot stronger. Much of the script is repetitive, re-examining the things learned in ACT ONE - understandable as this seems to be a mystery thriller - but reader thinks there's a great deal more this story can achieve if conventional story structure were followed more closely. Though it would change the story drastically, that's kinda' the point.
PREMISE:
Definitely a fun premise, but under explored in reader's opinion.
(There are some superficial similarities between Consumption and my current project - I hope you wont suspect me of tapping your ideas if you ever read it).
STORY STRUCTURE:
As a cheerleader for traditional/conventional story structure, reader has to say this is rather weak. The mystery unfolds nicely, the writer drawing the reader in and revealing more and more about the characters - but that's not story. That's exposition and character development. The story is what characters do, not who they are.
CHARACTERS:
Some very strong characters here.
Flint strikes reader as simply a great character. Reader doesn't have any critique of him. He really became alive.
Eric makes a fantastic first impression but shortly thereafter he comes off as overly irritable and vulgar. Is this intentional?
Somewhere around the midpoint, reader gets the impression that Eric is a fun guy - sober, a dick when drinking. One doesn't see that very often in movies, but it's not clear if this is, in fact, intentional.
Will is an archetype that treads the thin ice of ending up whiny and loathsome but he never breaks that ice and remains a strong admirable character throughout.
Perry is a major disappointment. Writer has set Perry up as a really screwed up character and then sends her on a journey where she performs her duties flawlessly and demonstrates that she is a consummate professional. She's not struggling with her personal demons. She's also completely reactive rather than showing any pro-activity. She never even had to ask to be involved in this investigation. She is just told to go and she goes. She gets there and does
everything to the letter. Her defense of Flint and connection to the story strikes the reader as marginal at best. Reader feels she should be 10 times more interesting - and seriously wants to know why writer did not write her stronger.
DIALOGUE:
For the most part, the dialogue is on the nose with occasional moments of nice subtext. As dialogue is directly related to the strength of characters though, it would be contradictory to harp on the lack of subtext as a problem.
EMOTION:
It is odd, but even though there is a lot to like about this story, reader can't say emotional connection is one of the compelling attributes. Perhaps it has something to do with the overstatement of the "monster in the woods" element. It somehow overshadows the very compelling cannibalism angle. Perhaps the writer does not intend an overstated emotional experience for the audience in the first place.
FORMAT vs. STYLE vs. Formula
This is where the script's weakest attributes are displayed.
This epic battle is best related through notes made while reading the script.
-----
page 1
EXT. CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS - SUNSET
The wind BLOWS...
...Darkness creeps over a forest road.
-----
The more appropriate format would be something like:
EXT. CANADIAN ROCKIES - FOREST ROAD - SUNSET
-----
page 11
INT. PERRY'S CAR - DAY
Perry's car is parked outside the BALTIMORE FBI FIELD OFFICE.
-----
Again, proper format might be:
EXT. BALTIMORE FBI FIELD OFFICE - ESTABLISHING - DAY
INT. PERRY'S CAR - CONTINUOUS
Another example:
-----
Page 16
EXT. FLINT'S CABIN - DAY
Set in the Canadian forest on the end of the last dirt road sits FLINT'S log cabin.
-----
I would think it should read this way:
EXT. CANADIAN FOREST - LONELY DIRT ROAD - FLINT'S CABIN - DAY
The issues with the above examples are:
1) Writer is directing the camera and set design rather than putting the reader into the scene via the slug line.
The writer's current style practically negates the purpose of a slug line.
The number one concern of screenwriting is to communicate action to the reader.
The director, set director, Director of photography, etc. will do the directing.
2) using information already in the slug line to describe the scene.
Reader has heard that this should be avoided because it just comes across as repetitive.
I don't know if that's a big deal, but I'm just sayin', that's what I've heard.
___________________________
A lot of direction and superfluous details. The writer wants to direct the movie and makes sure the reader knows it, directing the entire script shot for shot.
Writer confuses exposition and character study for story telling.
A lot of unfilmables, it reads very much like a novel.
The writer often indicates or states outright how a character feels, what they are thinking, etc. in action/description lines, resulting in "unfilmables".
This may seem nit-picky, but writer seems to like cars. It's just too obvious and it should be kept in mind that a "beat up old pickup truck" is going to be universally understood, where a "beat up '79 Ford F150" may as well be an airplane as far as the uninitiated would be concerned.
Page 32-33 is good. A bit late, but good.
It wouldn't be late if there were much stronger story elements holding it off, but what's preventing it from being on page 27-28 is lots of "novelization" and over direction. That's why it's "late".
-----
page 37
Flint... LAUGHS. He stops when he realizes she's serious.
FLINT
You're serious?
-----
There's a lot of this repetitive stuff. It may seem nit-picky, but there is a lot of it.
-----
page 38
The trees weave amongst themselves like nervous party goers.
-----
Someone mentioned this line in a previous post. Writer definitely has a great sense of style, but less is more - especially in screenwriting. Consumption (1st Draft) reads too much like a novel and is directed shot for shot.
-----
page 42
...debris being tossed aside by a seemingly invisible force as it marches toward her.
-----
What does "seemingly invisible" mean? This is a script. Is the thing invisible or not? And if so, how is an audience supposed to know it "marches toward her" - besides the writer just saying so. How does the audience get this impression? Writer has conceived some tricky set-pieces with this story - real challenges for which to commit that strong sense of style to the screenwriting medium.
-----
page 42
Regarding the scene where Perry awakens on Flint's couch and what follows: I'd be willing to bet all previous readers can recall what Perry was drinking and the slang term for what she was doing while chit-chatting with Petey - but ask them what that scene was about.
This scene appears to be exposition about Flint which is not the same as including exposition in the driving of the story. Likewise, it's written so that it gives far more credence to drinking coffee and "casing" Flint's cabin than to driving the story. It's stalling the story.
EDIT: page 54 - OK reader admits to suspecting writer did have good reason for the focus on the coffee drinking (meaning there is a confidence in your writing) but committed to the notes about it because those notes are still relevant to the scene. The scene is rather dull and the coffee drinking is distracting - not to mention telegraphic, if the reader does have confidence in the writer. One mention of the coffee on 42 and one mention of coffee on 54 is plenty IMO.
Another example on page 45:
Writer uses eight sentences to tell reader that Eric takes pictures. The way this scene is written, it's more memorable for the beeping and flashing camera than for the non-human foot print or that Seer makes a brief appearance. Is that what writer wants?
page 48:
Reader now totally understands why writer felt it necessary to present the taking of pictures such a laborious affair, but feels it was indeed laborious and that the director should be able to handle that scene just fine without writer's explicit instructions. :)
___________________________
That Flint has a smile like a coyote is very cool. That writer's style gives the impression that Flint seems to HAVE THE ABILITY to smile like a coyote is kind of weird - even if, as reader suspects, he might indeed have that ability; it still seems weird.
EDIT: So it turns out Flint did not have that ability after all.
-----
page 65
Reader feels fatigued. There's a monster and it might be Flint. Got it. The story hasn't taken an interesting turn since page 16 (I know I said 32-33 was good, but it didn't expand the story, rather simply confirmed elements previously alluded to), nor has the protagonist been significantly challenged, save the waking up naked bit. Reader want's to know more about the screwed up version of Perry. What's going on?
-----
page 75
Perry looks into her coffee cup, afraid to tell him about the drugging.
-----
The script is loaded with these unfilmables.
"Perry looks into her coffee cup" is perfectly filmable.
"afraid to tell him..." is unfilmable.
Combine these two problems: The writer wants to direct the entire script shot for shot while repeatedly demonstrating blatant ignorance of what constitutes filmable action.
I suppose that sounds harsh, but that is the script I am reading.
___________________________
The whole dirt and moss eating thing is a neat idea as it occurs in the story, but how is the audience ever supposed to understand that characters are vomiting "dirt and moss"? What's to prevent audiences from thinking it might be chocolate ice cream and broccoli? The script describes nothing "on screen" to connect the vomiting with the passage from the book about
eating dirt and moss.
Similar to the "invisible Wendigo", this "vomit content" is another conceptual challenge the writer has presented himself with - but made no attempt to meet that challenge by conforming it to the screenplay medium. It's just stated that it's so, as would be done in a novel. Novels are unfilmable - that's why they are adapted to screenplay format.
The story leaves an impression on the reader, but the script needs to be reworked IMO.
As others have stated, this story has a lot going for it. This reader doesn't necessarily agree that it should be more of a straight monster/horror flick - but feels that ACT THREE could be a lot stronger. Much of the script is repetitive, re-examining the things learned in ACT ONE - understandable as this seems to be a mystery thriller - but reader thinks there's a great deal more this story can achieve if conventional story structure were followed more closely. Though it would change the story drastically, that's kinda' the point.
PREMISE:
Definitely a fun premise, but under explored in reader's opinion.
(There are some superficial similarities between Consumption and my current project - I hope you wont suspect me of tapping your ideas if you ever read it).
STORY STRUCTURE:
As a cheerleader for traditional/conventional story structure, reader has to say this is rather weak. The mystery unfolds nicely, the writer drawing the reader in and revealing more and more about the characters - but that's not story. That's exposition and character development. The story is what characters do, not who they are.
CHARACTERS:
Some very strong characters here.
Flint strikes reader as simply a great character. Reader doesn't have any critique of him. He really became alive.
Eric makes a fantastic first impression but shortly thereafter he comes off as overly irritable and vulgar. Is this intentional?
Somewhere around the midpoint, reader gets the impression that Eric is a fun guy - sober, a dick when drinking. One doesn't see that very often in movies, but it's not clear if this is, in fact, intentional.
Will is an archetype that treads the thin ice of ending up whiny and loathsome but he never breaks that ice and remains a strong admirable character throughout.
Perry is a major disappointment. Writer has set Perry up as a really screwed up character and then sends her on a journey where she performs her duties flawlessly and demonstrates that she is a consummate professional. She's not struggling with her personal demons. She's also completely reactive rather than showing any pro-activity. She never even had to ask to be involved in this investigation. She is just told to go and she goes. She gets there and does
everything to the letter. Her defense of Flint and connection to the story strikes the reader as marginal at best. Reader feels she should be 10 times more interesting - and seriously wants to know why writer did not write her stronger.
DIALOGUE:
For the most part, the dialogue is on the nose with occasional moments of nice subtext. As dialogue is directly related to the strength of characters though, it would be contradictory to harp on the lack of subtext as a problem.
EMOTION:
It is odd, but even though there is a lot to like about this story, reader can't say emotional connection is one of the compelling attributes. Perhaps it has something to do with the overstatement of the "monster in the woods" element. It somehow overshadows the very compelling cannibalism angle. Perhaps the writer does not intend an overstated emotional experience for the audience in the first place.
FORMAT vs. STYLE vs. Formula
This is where the script's weakest attributes are displayed.
This epic battle is best related through notes made while reading the script.
-----
page 1
EXT. CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS - SUNSET
The wind BLOWS...
...Darkness creeps over a forest road.
-----
The more appropriate format would be something like:
EXT. CANADIAN ROCKIES - FOREST ROAD - SUNSET
-----
page 11
INT. PERRY'S CAR - DAY
Perry's car is parked outside the BALTIMORE FBI FIELD OFFICE.
-----
Again, proper format might be:
EXT. BALTIMORE FBI FIELD OFFICE - ESTABLISHING - DAY
INT. PERRY'S CAR - CONTINUOUS
Another example:
-----
Page 16
EXT. FLINT'S CABIN - DAY
Set in the Canadian forest on the end of the last dirt road sits FLINT'S log cabin.
-----
I would think it should read this way:
EXT. CANADIAN FOREST - LONELY DIRT ROAD - FLINT'S CABIN - DAY
The issues with the above examples are:
1) Writer is directing the camera and set design rather than putting the reader into the scene via the slug line.
The writer's current style practically negates the purpose of a slug line.
The number one concern of screenwriting is to communicate action to the reader.
The director, set director, Director of photography, etc. will do the directing.
2) using information already in the slug line to describe the scene.
Reader has heard that this should be avoided because it just comes across as repetitive.
I don't know if that's a big deal, but I'm just sayin', that's what I've heard.
___________________________
A lot of direction and superfluous details. The writer wants to direct the movie and makes sure the reader knows it, directing the entire script shot for shot.
Writer confuses exposition and character study for story telling.
A lot of unfilmables, it reads very much like a novel.
The writer often indicates or states outright how a character feels, what they are thinking, etc. in action/description lines, resulting in "unfilmables".
This may seem nit-picky, but writer seems to like cars. It's just too obvious and it should be kept in mind that a "beat up old pickup truck" is going to be universally understood, where a "beat up '79 Ford F150" may as well be an airplane as far as the uninitiated would be concerned.
Page 32-33 is good. A bit late, but good.
It wouldn't be late if there were much stronger story elements holding it off, but what's preventing it from being on page 27-28 is lots of "novelization" and over direction. That's why it's "late".
-----
page 37
Flint... LAUGHS. He stops when he realizes she's serious.
FLINT
You're serious?
-----
There's a lot of this repetitive stuff. It may seem nit-picky, but there is a lot of it.
-----
page 38
The trees weave amongst themselves like nervous party goers.
-----
Someone mentioned this line in a previous post. Writer definitely has a great sense of style, but less is more - especially in screenwriting. Consumption (1st Draft) reads too much like a novel and is directed shot for shot.
-----
page 42
...debris being tossed aside by a seemingly invisible force as it marches toward her.
-----
What does "seemingly invisible" mean? This is a script. Is the thing invisible or not? And if so, how is an audience supposed to know it "marches toward her" - besides the writer just saying so. How does the audience get this impression? Writer has conceived some tricky set-pieces with this story - real challenges for which to commit that strong sense of style to the screenwriting medium.
-----
page 42
Regarding the scene where Perry awakens on Flint's couch and what follows: I'd be willing to bet all previous readers can recall what Perry was drinking and the slang term for what she was doing while chit-chatting with Petey - but ask them what that scene was about.
This scene appears to be exposition about Flint which is not the same as including exposition in the driving of the story. Likewise, it's written so that it gives far more credence to drinking coffee and "casing" Flint's cabin than to driving the story. It's stalling the story.
EDIT: page 54 - OK reader admits to suspecting writer did have good reason for the focus on the coffee drinking (meaning there is a confidence in your writing) but committed to the notes about it because those notes are still relevant to the scene. The scene is rather dull and the coffee drinking is distracting - not to mention telegraphic, if the reader does have confidence in the writer. One mention of the coffee on 42 and one mention of coffee on 54 is plenty IMO.
Another example on page 45:
Writer uses eight sentences to tell reader that Eric takes pictures. The way this scene is written, it's more memorable for the beeping and flashing camera than for the non-human foot print or that Seer makes a brief appearance. Is that what writer wants?
page 48:
Reader now totally understands why writer felt it necessary to present the taking of pictures such a laborious affair, but feels it was indeed laborious and that the director should be able to handle that scene just fine without writer's explicit instructions. :)
___________________________
That Flint has a smile like a coyote is very cool. That writer's style gives the impression that Flint seems to HAVE THE ABILITY to smile like a coyote is kind of weird - even if, as reader suspects, he might indeed have that ability; it still seems weird.
EDIT: So it turns out Flint did not have that ability after all.
-----
page 65
Reader feels fatigued. There's a monster and it might be Flint. Got it. The story hasn't taken an interesting turn since page 16 (I know I said 32-33 was good, but it didn't expand the story, rather simply confirmed elements previously alluded to), nor has the protagonist been significantly challenged, save the waking up naked bit. Reader want's to know more about the screwed up version of Perry. What's going on?
-----
page 75
Perry looks into her coffee cup, afraid to tell him about the drugging.
-----
The script is loaded with these unfilmables.
"Perry looks into her coffee cup" is perfectly filmable.
"afraid to tell him..." is unfilmable.
Combine these two problems: The writer wants to direct the entire script shot for shot while repeatedly demonstrating blatant ignorance of what constitutes filmable action.
I suppose that sounds harsh, but that is the script I am reading.
___________________________
The whole dirt and moss eating thing is a neat idea as it occurs in the story, but how is the audience ever supposed to understand that characters are vomiting "dirt and moss"? What's to prevent audiences from thinking it might be chocolate ice cream and broccoli? The script describes nothing "on screen" to connect the vomiting with the passage from the book about
eating dirt and moss.
Similar to the "invisible Wendigo", this "vomit content" is another conceptual challenge the writer has presented himself with - but made no attempt to meet that challenge by conforming it to the screenplay medium. It's just stated that it's so, as would be done in a novel. Novels are unfilmable - that's why they are adapted to screenplay format.
The story leaves an impression on the reader, but the script needs to be reworked IMO.
Touching Blue, Scott's Original Draft
14
out of
17
people found the following review helpful:
Wow, this is not for me.
August 10, 2011
EDIT: This is a pretty sharp review. I feel I should have PMd the writer rather than posted a "complete" review. I did end up PMing the writer later and we are on polite terms with each other at the very least. I personally learned a great deal reading this script that I've applied to my own writing.
Even though I am somewhat embarrassed by it, I am a person of such integrity that I wont edit it for the sake of appearing to be a nicer guy.
________________________________________________________
PREMISE: On it's face, the premise is fine. Not terribly imaginative, but solid enough for it's sub-genre.
STORY STRUCTURE: I found the story stagnant. The ACT III conclusion summarizes the circular structure where none of the character's get to "leave" the ACT I set up. I felt there was no "journey" undertaken.
CHARACTER: I was uninspired by the characters. Blue is the most glaring example in that she was passive and miserable. She had no relatable goal, save that of feeling like a normal person. That goal being dictated by the story as utterly unattainable, she had nothing to fight for or aspire to.
DIALOGUE: On the nose.
EMOTION: There is some interesting stuff going on between Blue and Taylor, but it's so on the nose and much of it unconvincing for me.
_____________________________________________________
Here are my shamelessly critical but completely honest reactions to the script as I read it:
At page 10 reader has learned that Blue is a miserable girl who helps the FBI pursue rapists in the streets, presumably because she can figure people out just by touching their belongings (Reader actually learns of her power on page 3 but writer wants to go over it again rather than find something more compelling to compliment this revelation) and that some weirdo is taking pictures of her. By the time we get to page ten we learn that she got her powers "somehow" and that her mother apparently abandoned her for no actual reason this reader can identify with (as it is only a passing reference in a V.O) - and that 8 year old boys wink at their female peers to show interest.
Page 1 is the mysterious weirdo with pictures.
2-6 is used to chase the "rapist". Reader feels that having Blue simply mention that the man being chased is a rapist is the weakest possible effort to convince the audiences of the stakes this very long scene is apparently trying to demonstrate. Objectively speaking, there are no stakes. Rather some exposition to familiarize the reader with Blue.
Then reader is subjected to pages 7-9 devoted to Blue's childhood, during which, literally - nothing is learned about how she suddenly became a "screamer" even though it's riddled with Voice Over from Blue. Even more odd when considering the fact that VO is always strictly for the audiences benefit.
Pages 9 and 10 are the obligatory INSTITUTE beats where Blue is a guinea pig with the rest of the mutants - ah, I mean - odd children or whatever. This is where reader is informed through VO that dear old mom is some kind of scumbag who doesn't care about her freak daughter. Reader suspects that is the more interesting story here, but maybe there's hope.
Reader is treated to an interesting shot of a boy igniting his thumb like a cigarette lighter, only to be shown another little boy igniting an entire barbeque to the point of overkill, to say the least. Sounds kinda' cool, as if writer is showing us the pyro-mutant ward, but reader suspects there is no pyro-mutant ward and exits the story to ask reader "why didn't lighter boy just do that?"
Let's not forget the winking eight year old boy. Reader can't fathom eight year old boys winking at their female peers. Nit-picky, yes. But completely distracted from the story none the less.
Writer often demonstrates nuances of writing for visual media, but seems to forget to demonstrate it just as often.
Blue's V.O. during the flashback to the boring been-there-seen-that institute scenes is really some of the most irrelevant use of V.O. reader has seen. Giving information about things not related to what is happening on screen. Sounds interesting, but is not. It's perplexing.
More winking? Who winks at people they don't know?
More winking... As Norman waits in line. At least it's appropriate this time.
By page 26 the reader is shocked by the amount of superfluous, un-filmable action lines in a winning script. How shocking!
By page 29 there's plenty of clarification about what exactly Blue's powers are good for (as if the reader hasn't been exposed to that already) and what a nuisance it can be, what the rubber cloak is for (just in case the reader hasn't got enough sense to work that out on his/her own), that Spencer has a missing niece (and that Blue thinks men are hopeless, hormone driven jerks), but there is no indication of conflict for the closing of the first act.
________________
As if on cue, Graham comes out of the bathroom...
________________
As if on cue? The very embodiment of superfluous. It's on cue. Writer wrote it into the script. Reader feels frustrated over this kind of writing, which, in part, seems to be causing page 10 to be completely stalled out and floundering around on page 28 where something should be HAPPENING!
Page 32 is the simply riveting revelation that - Blue is a miserable girl that helps the FBI solve murder mysteries - not just chase rapists.
Blue has not been presented with any new objective, personal challenges save that of standing in line for an ice cream cone. Reader does understand Blue is a screamer and simply waiting in line for an ice cream could lead to a painful and embarrassing moment - but that's it for the first act, huh? Also, Blue and this mutant investigation team flew from New York to Ohio to investigate the murder of - some woman (I hope I'm not wrong about this. but, seriously, I don't recall any meaningful info about the importance of this particular murder mystery).
Act One feels like a cliched episodic, with an utterly reactionary main character. At best, a Lifetime movie, the writer of which demonstrates such empathy for his main character that he forgot to give her a definable challenge.
___________________________________________________
Blue looks at him. Sadness in her eyes.
___________________________________________________
Yes, I get it. Could we get to the story now? Has writer heard of "The Pope in the Pool". This screenplay is in desperate need of some Pope in the Pool action.
I wanted to stop reading this script, but got through it on principle.
My opinions about the story do not improve. There are some good moments here and there, but nothing that lasts more than a line or two for me.
I would strongly suggest a page one rewrite that includes a pro-active Blue, zero fellow mutants, and a riveting antagonist for Blue to defeat.
But, what do I know?
Even though I am somewhat embarrassed by it, I am a person of such integrity that I wont edit it for the sake of appearing to be a nicer guy.
________________________________________________________
PREMISE: On it's face, the premise is fine. Not terribly imaginative, but solid enough for it's sub-genre.
STORY STRUCTURE: I found the story stagnant. The ACT III conclusion summarizes the circular structure where none of the character's get to "leave" the ACT I set up. I felt there was no "journey" undertaken.
CHARACTER: I was uninspired by the characters. Blue is the most glaring example in that she was passive and miserable. She had no relatable goal, save that of feeling like a normal person. That goal being dictated by the story as utterly unattainable, she had nothing to fight for or aspire to.
DIALOGUE: On the nose.
EMOTION: There is some interesting stuff going on between Blue and Taylor, but it's so on the nose and much of it unconvincing for me.
_____________________________________________________
Here are my shamelessly critical but completely honest reactions to the script as I read it:
At page 10 reader has learned that Blue is a miserable girl who helps the FBI pursue rapists in the streets, presumably because she can figure people out just by touching their belongings (Reader actually learns of her power on page 3 but writer wants to go over it again rather than find something more compelling to compliment this revelation) and that some weirdo is taking pictures of her. By the time we get to page ten we learn that she got her powers "somehow" and that her mother apparently abandoned her for no actual reason this reader can identify with (as it is only a passing reference in a V.O) - and that 8 year old boys wink at their female peers to show interest.
Page 1 is the mysterious weirdo with pictures.
2-6 is used to chase the "rapist". Reader feels that having Blue simply mention that the man being chased is a rapist is the weakest possible effort to convince the audiences of the stakes this very long scene is apparently trying to demonstrate. Objectively speaking, there are no stakes. Rather some exposition to familiarize the reader with Blue.
Then reader is subjected to pages 7-9 devoted to Blue's childhood, during which, literally - nothing is learned about how she suddenly became a "screamer" even though it's riddled with Voice Over from Blue. Even more odd when considering the fact that VO is always strictly for the audiences benefit.
Pages 9 and 10 are the obligatory INSTITUTE beats where Blue is a guinea pig with the rest of the mutants - ah, I mean - odd children or whatever. This is where reader is informed through VO that dear old mom is some kind of scumbag who doesn't care about her freak daughter. Reader suspects that is the more interesting story here, but maybe there's hope.
Reader is treated to an interesting shot of a boy igniting his thumb like a cigarette lighter, only to be shown another little boy igniting an entire barbeque to the point of overkill, to say the least. Sounds kinda' cool, as if writer is showing us the pyro-mutant ward, but reader suspects there is no pyro-mutant ward and exits the story to ask reader "why didn't lighter boy just do that?"
Let's not forget the winking eight year old boy. Reader can't fathom eight year old boys winking at their female peers. Nit-picky, yes. But completely distracted from the story none the less.
Writer often demonstrates nuances of writing for visual media, but seems to forget to demonstrate it just as often.
Blue's V.O. during the flashback to the boring been-there-seen-that institute scenes is really some of the most irrelevant use of V.O. reader has seen. Giving information about things not related to what is happening on screen. Sounds interesting, but is not. It's perplexing.
More winking? Who winks at people they don't know?
More winking... As Norman waits in line. At least it's appropriate this time.
By page 26 the reader is shocked by the amount of superfluous, un-filmable action lines in a winning script. How shocking!
By page 29 there's plenty of clarification about what exactly Blue's powers are good for (as if the reader hasn't been exposed to that already) and what a nuisance it can be, what the rubber cloak is for (just in case the reader hasn't got enough sense to work that out on his/her own), that Spencer has a missing niece (and that Blue thinks men are hopeless, hormone driven jerks), but there is no indication of conflict for the closing of the first act.
________________
As if on cue, Graham comes out of the bathroom...
________________
As if on cue? The very embodiment of superfluous. It's on cue. Writer wrote it into the script. Reader feels frustrated over this kind of writing, which, in part, seems to be causing page 10 to be completely stalled out and floundering around on page 28 where something should be HAPPENING!
Page 32 is the simply riveting revelation that - Blue is a miserable girl that helps the FBI solve murder mysteries - not just chase rapists.
Blue has not been presented with any new objective, personal challenges save that of standing in line for an ice cream cone. Reader does understand Blue is a screamer and simply waiting in line for an ice cream could lead to a painful and embarrassing moment - but that's it for the first act, huh? Also, Blue and this mutant investigation team flew from New York to Ohio to investigate the murder of - some woman (I hope I'm not wrong about this. but, seriously, I don't recall any meaningful info about the importance of this particular murder mystery).
Act One feels like a cliched episodic, with an utterly reactionary main character. At best, a Lifetime movie, the writer of which demonstrates such empathy for his main character that he forgot to give her a definable challenge.
___________________________________________________
Blue looks at him. Sadness in her eyes.
___________________________________________________
Yes, I get it. Could we get to the story now? Has writer heard of "The Pope in the Pool". This screenplay is in desperate need of some Pope in the Pool action.
I wanted to stop reading this script, but got through it on principle.
My opinions about the story do not improve. There are some good moments here and there, but nothing that lasts more than a line or two for me.
I would strongly suggest a page one rewrite that includes a pro-active Blue, zero fellow mutants, and a riveting antagonist for Blue to defeat.
But, what do I know?
Take No Moore, Jared's 4th Draft
2
out of
2
people found the following review helpful:
Cool Story.
August 03, 2011
Keeping in mind the first suggestion for "what makes a good review" on AS, insight on my approach to reviews can be read @ http://studios.amazon.com/users/30125
I like this writer.
TAKE NO MOORE is a straight forward action drama going for a noir feel - until the end, where it beats the reader over the head with a sneak attack message that seems every bit as literal in it's intention as it's presence in the story suggests.
PREMISE: Nothing new here, but done with style for the most part.
STORY STRUCTURE: I'm being very hard on the structure because it has so much potential. Writer either doesn't understand screenplay structure or isn't concerned with it. I don't know which.
I also think there's a strong foundation here that can easily support a lot of story.
CHARACTER: It's obvious the writer intends for his characters to be very charismatic but is not demonstrating their charm fully in the script.
DIALOGUE: Pretty good dialogue if you like it predominately on the nose. That's not trying to be sarcastic. The dialogue effectively moves the story forward and there is some good conflict going on here. Strong subtext would make it stronger of course.
EMOTION: Again, potential is extremely evident. Some strength training for the structure will draw a tear or two, IMO.
The glaring problems with TAKE NO MOORE (4th draft) are:
- Superfluous and/or un-filmable information in action lines.
- Writer is confusing exposition, both visual and dialogue, for story telling.
The following are notes I made while reading the script:
_________________________________________________________
Page 4
Speaking from a technical perspective, four full pages are a lot to establish a raid and a new recruit for the team who did the raiding - without giving any insight to who these characters are.
To clarify: There are two problems.
1. Writer is directing the movie rather than telling the story. Action lines include too many "cool details" rather than just the "real details" that tell the reader what happens.
Screenwriting is literal. For example:
-----------------------------
The truck starts up and sends dirt flying as it speeds down the road.
-----------------------------
This action line implies that the writer expects the film makers to make sure that they get some dirt flying when the truck leaves, as if it somehow makes all the difference in the story.
Multiply "cool details" like that over and over again and the writer is running out of space for the important parts of the story. Screenwriting is straight forward action lines that tell a cool story.
2. There is not much story so far.
A band of untouchable soldiers who enjoy the occasional ass-kicking get a new recruit.
That's what I got out of it so far. Pretty cool, but it took the writer 4 full pages to say that?
On to page 5...
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
A hand is swirling a glass half full of bourbon and ice as the light reflects off the surface making it almost glow in the otherwise dimly lit bar.
-----------------------------
I'm not going to keep pointing it out, but I hope the writer understands that this is not screenwriting - it's directing.
Practically every action line is a shot for shot direction. It's like saying to the reader "I can direct this movie. I am the director."
The problem with this is that the reader is not reading the screenplay to find a director, he/she is looking for a great story.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
...sending him crashing into the cardboard boxes stacked up along the wall
-----------------------------
Cardboard boxes!? Is this a 70's movie?
:P little joke there
_________________________________________________________
Convention holds that by page 10 the reader should understand who the main character is. With James' agreement to rescue Sierra, reader gathers that James is a mercenary - a rather miserable mercenary - this could be referred to as his "professional" problem, but writer made clear that James likes when "the shit hits the fan", so just how miserable is he really? And why exactly is he miserable? Writer has not explained what his "personal" or "private" problems are. The effect of this is that the reader is on page 10 and has very little understanding of the main character, and consequently, very little understanding of the story.
Something really cool is supposed to happen around page 15. In Take No More, that really cool thing is that James has an ex-wife and a daughter.
James and his wife have separated because of the usual spousal problems.
But they are still friends.
Not terribly fascinating - this should have been revealed 5 or 6 pages ago.
Next we have pages 16-19 being used to tell the reader that James' daughter knows who Samantha is and that James likes chocolate shakes over strawberry.
I hope the writer doesn't think I'm trying to be sarcastic - because I'm not trying to be sarcastic. Just am that way naturally, I guess - but, seriously:
If James is a miserable, ass-kicking mercinary in the near future with a daughter and an ex-wife, why does the writer need to use 20 pages, about 3 quarters of the first act, to communicate this information? Where is the story?
I'm just asking.
Convention holds that somewhere around page 27-30, the main character takes action - and commits to the journey that represents the nut of the story.
At page 30, writer has clearly established a wrap-up of a rescue mission - but no new "cool story ideas" have been presented to drive the story forward. It's like the movie is over.
So the writer has missed all 3 key beats in in the first act - page 10, page 15, and page 28 (I don't mean to be literal when I use the page numbers, they are to be played around with - but the writer has not played with them, rather, missed them by a long-shot).
Now I'd like to address the idea that the writer has every right to toss the rules out the window in favor of unconventional, non-cliched story telling. Of course.
I like the tone for this movie. I like that James is a weapons expert, can fight like all get out, drives the only cool car left in Boston, and has a sense of humanity lost on most of the world around him - I totally get it and I like it.
But the story could be stronger if the writer played closer to the "rules".
This reader is asking - why are the story rules not being nailed while the "cool details" are conventional cliche after conventional cliche? - right down to the main character rescuing someone he has no connection with and allowing the antagonist to live when he could have shot that fool dead like he did the 15 other guys.
All of this nit-picking is only to try and get the writer to understand the importance of substance (nailing strong story points, the same way most good movies do) over style (all that other good stuff).
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
page 32
JAMES
Can’t, he’s dead.
-----------------------------
OK, Noah IS dead. Good.
Reader is making assumptions about the story before finishing it.
Damn right. Reader has to read all day 5 or 6 days a week. Reader is looking for good storytelling AND good screenwriting skills.
Reader SUSPECTS writer is playing with the audience (as apposed to just being unclear about the death scene), but can't be sure because of the previous "problems".
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
page 37
JAMES
Michaela! I must find Michaela.
-----------------------------
This whole scene is a classic build to a first act climax. This should happen between 27 and 30. I think page 28 is considered the sweet spot, but page 37 is way late.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
He sees Logan, face covered by his Enforcer helmet...
-----------------------------
Writer neglects to communicate whether or not the audience is supposed to know it's Logan, but the overall writing style is beginning to show through. Writer appears to give the reader enough respect to assume he/she is intelligent enough to see that the audience is not suppose to know it's Logan.
But this is more of a suspicion than an outright confidence in the writer's intention.
What I'm saying here is that I personally appreciate your style. This scene demonstrates a confidence in your writing - "If it says Logan's face is covered, it means Logan's face is covered."
Hiding the fact that it's actually Logan at this point would be fine, but, as this is a script, revealing to the reader that it IS in FACT Logan is perfectly acceptable.
The problem is that this demonstration of confidence and respect for the intelligence of the reader comes across as an anomaly this late in the script.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
page 41
JAMES
I won’t be the one dying tonight.
-----------------------------
Reader has no choice but to assume the main character's goal is now to avenge his wife's murder. This being communicated on page 41 is "late". This is a problem because according to the writer, things like flying dirt, shiney ice cubes, and chocolate shakes are more important than putting the main character's goal on page 27-30 where it "belongs".
Perhaps it belongs in the ACT II mid-point, but we'll get to that.
There's nothing wrong with breaking convention if the story is so cool that it laughs at convention - but that's not what we have here.
_________________________________________________________
All characters are described the same: tall, fit, average, athletic - the same redundant descriptions. These descriptions infer writer simply imagines a bunch of magazine models playing these parts. They don't have individuality. Reader can't tell them apart, as they don't appear to be fully imagined. Further, they don't have individual voices. The characters lack character.
_________________________________________________________
The introduction scene in the warehouse is handled very well, giving these characters something the reader can hang onto and remember them by. A solid attempt to give them individual voices. Nice job with that. Writer surprises reader again!
This scene could be even stronger using "The Pope In The Pool" technique. If you've not heard of it, just google it. If you have heard of it? Why (I ask any reader) aren't you using it?
_________________________________________________________
Nice dialogue between Gabriel and Logan. Suggestion: As Logan is the good guy in this sub-plot and the audience knows this, consider finding a way to give him the last word. Simply ending the scene on "we didn't see it" and a stare would work better.
Reader just feels it would work better if Logan "controls the scene" - even if he isn't in control of what Gabriel may be thinking.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
JAMES
Maybe you could meet my daughter
too; she’s a lot like you.
-----------------------------
Is this supposed to be subtext? Sierra is not like Michaela at all. If writer informed the reader that Sierra is mentally retarded, no changes to her action/dialogue up to this point would be necessary, if you take my meaning.
Come to think of it, if you want to make this whole rescuing of Sierra thing a lot stronger, maybe she SHOULD be retarded. I certainly would.
_________________________________________________________
This is weird. Writer keeps presenting conflicts that look like first act set ups. The main character encounters compelling reasons to accept new challenges, rather than dealing with new obstacles preventing him from achieving one clearly defined goal in the classic sense. Pretty cool.
_________________________________________________________
Convention hold that page 60 should be a big moment where the main character's attempt to control his destiny (and that of his "romance character") is compromised in a new way. The story should sort of change suddenly, and preferably, quite drastically. In Take No More, the ACT II mid-point is that James and his new friends are planning an assault on a prime target.
It's great that James has these new buddies. It's great that they are going to hit the DEC where it hurts. It's great that he's doing this because he has nothing left but to try and make the world a better place for his daughter and he isn't very good at finding another way to do it, because trouble has a way of finding him no matter what he does. But none of that belongs on page 60-63.
On the assumption that you are in defensive mode about Take No More's story's structure, let me present the following hypothetical situation:
Let's say you're having a conversation with a producer about your story and he asks what your ACT II mid point looks like. So you tell him that your story is written in such a way that negates the importance of a conventional ACT II midpoint. Where does the conversation go from there?
I'm only suggesting you put yourself in a position to simply answer his question.
What if a reader has 9 scripts to get through over the next 16 hours and he/she is holding your script.
"Take No Moore, what's that mean?. Let's see what ACT II looks like."
flip, flip, flip. page 60:
-----------------------
NICK
You need to be doing psychological
warfare of your own and get the
truth out about the government.
Show people the real government and
instead of having to try to find
people to recruit, they will find
you.
etc.
------------------------
May as well have written: "I will not try to make an ACT II midpoint that presents a high impact, stakes changing beat for my main character, so go to the next script."
The cool part about your midpoint is that it IS the point where James decides to take down the DEC - the ACT II midpoint is a great place for that -but why is he doing it? His wife was murdered 20 pages ago. Mikaela and Samantha are both safe, Sierra is presumably with her mom, Nick is fine, and Logan's plan is to protect James from Gabriel.
Perhaps I'm forgetting something that clearly demonstrates that James has no choice now but to fight back and TAKE NO MORE?
_________________________________________________________
----------------------------
Echo scowls at James.
and
The remaining team is firing at several soldiers in the
hall, occasionally killing one who is quickly replaced by
another.
----------------------------
Examples of action lines that don't use superlative, un-filmable information or impose direction. More like this, please. :)
Speaking of un-filmable information, I don't think I addressed that fully.
----------------------------
James freezes fearing his last moment alive may be near.
----------------------------
"James freezes." is filmable - role camera while James moves and then freezes.
How does one photograph "fearing his last moment alive may be near"? If you know of a way to shoot "fearing his last moment alive may be near", Please put it in the script. Remember, only literal action or dialogue can be put onto film.
_________________________________________________________
----------------------------
MUSIC plays - The Man Comes Around - Johnny Cash
----------------------------
I've heard this is a bad idea for a spec script.
_________________________________________________________
Opinions:
Some of the final act feels rushed to me.
Close to 5 whole pages of "the message"!
The epitome of the term "preachy". It'll never fly IMO.
Plus, it's delivered by Thomas? Who the hell is he again?
James and Samantha having sex at the end of the movie doesn't feel like "happily ever after", it feels like "SCORE!"
If that's the vibe your going for, you nailed it. But I would dial it back quite a bit.
I think you missed a great opportunity for serious conflict to erupt between Logan and Gabriel.
Give that Mustang something to do! I don't like it when a main character drives a great car and there's no kick-ass car chase. (wah wah!)
There is a lot that can be done with the premise you've set up here. I'd like to see more of your work.
I like this writer.
TAKE NO MOORE is a straight forward action drama going for a noir feel - until the end, where it beats the reader over the head with a sneak attack message that seems every bit as literal in it's intention as it's presence in the story suggests.
PREMISE: Nothing new here, but done with style for the most part.
STORY STRUCTURE: I'm being very hard on the structure because it has so much potential. Writer either doesn't understand screenplay structure or isn't concerned with it. I don't know which.
I also think there's a strong foundation here that can easily support a lot of story.
CHARACTER: It's obvious the writer intends for his characters to be very charismatic but is not demonstrating their charm fully in the script.
DIALOGUE: Pretty good dialogue if you like it predominately on the nose. That's not trying to be sarcastic. The dialogue effectively moves the story forward and there is some good conflict going on here. Strong subtext would make it stronger of course.
EMOTION: Again, potential is extremely evident. Some strength training for the structure will draw a tear or two, IMO.
The glaring problems with TAKE NO MOORE (4th draft) are:
- Superfluous and/or un-filmable information in action lines.
- Writer is confusing exposition, both visual and dialogue, for story telling.
The following are notes I made while reading the script:
_________________________________________________________
Page 4
Speaking from a technical perspective, four full pages are a lot to establish a raid and a new recruit for the team who did the raiding - without giving any insight to who these characters are.
To clarify: There are two problems.
1. Writer is directing the movie rather than telling the story. Action lines include too many "cool details" rather than just the "real details" that tell the reader what happens.
Screenwriting is literal. For example:
-----------------------------
The truck starts up and sends dirt flying as it speeds down the road.
-----------------------------
This action line implies that the writer expects the film makers to make sure that they get some dirt flying when the truck leaves, as if it somehow makes all the difference in the story.
Multiply "cool details" like that over and over again and the writer is running out of space for the important parts of the story. Screenwriting is straight forward action lines that tell a cool story.
2. There is not much story so far.
A band of untouchable soldiers who enjoy the occasional ass-kicking get a new recruit.
That's what I got out of it so far. Pretty cool, but it took the writer 4 full pages to say that?
On to page 5...
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
A hand is swirling a glass half full of bourbon and ice as the light reflects off the surface making it almost glow in the otherwise dimly lit bar.
-----------------------------
I'm not going to keep pointing it out, but I hope the writer understands that this is not screenwriting - it's directing.
Practically every action line is a shot for shot direction. It's like saying to the reader "I can direct this movie. I am the director."
The problem with this is that the reader is not reading the screenplay to find a director, he/she is looking for a great story.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
...sending him crashing into the cardboard boxes stacked up along the wall
-----------------------------
Cardboard boxes!? Is this a 70's movie?
:P little joke there
_________________________________________________________
Convention holds that by page 10 the reader should understand who the main character is. With James' agreement to rescue Sierra, reader gathers that James is a mercenary - a rather miserable mercenary - this could be referred to as his "professional" problem, but writer made clear that James likes when "the shit hits the fan", so just how miserable is he really? And why exactly is he miserable? Writer has not explained what his "personal" or "private" problems are. The effect of this is that the reader is on page 10 and has very little understanding of the main character, and consequently, very little understanding of the story.
Something really cool is supposed to happen around page 15. In Take No More, that really cool thing is that James has an ex-wife and a daughter.
James and his wife have separated because of the usual spousal problems.
But they are still friends.
Not terribly fascinating - this should have been revealed 5 or 6 pages ago.
Next we have pages 16-19 being used to tell the reader that James' daughter knows who Samantha is and that James likes chocolate shakes over strawberry.
I hope the writer doesn't think I'm trying to be sarcastic - because I'm not trying to be sarcastic. Just am that way naturally, I guess - but, seriously:
If James is a miserable, ass-kicking mercinary in the near future with a daughter and an ex-wife, why does the writer need to use 20 pages, about 3 quarters of the first act, to communicate this information? Where is the story?
I'm just asking.
Convention holds that somewhere around page 27-30, the main character takes action - and commits to the journey that represents the nut of the story.
At page 30, writer has clearly established a wrap-up of a rescue mission - but no new "cool story ideas" have been presented to drive the story forward. It's like the movie is over.
So the writer has missed all 3 key beats in in the first act - page 10, page 15, and page 28 (I don't mean to be literal when I use the page numbers, they are to be played around with - but the writer has not played with them, rather, missed them by a long-shot).
Now I'd like to address the idea that the writer has every right to toss the rules out the window in favor of unconventional, non-cliched story telling. Of course.
I like the tone for this movie. I like that James is a weapons expert, can fight like all get out, drives the only cool car left in Boston, and has a sense of humanity lost on most of the world around him - I totally get it and I like it.
But the story could be stronger if the writer played closer to the "rules".
This reader is asking - why are the story rules not being nailed while the "cool details" are conventional cliche after conventional cliche? - right down to the main character rescuing someone he has no connection with and allowing the antagonist to live when he could have shot that fool dead like he did the 15 other guys.
All of this nit-picking is only to try and get the writer to understand the importance of substance (nailing strong story points, the same way most good movies do) over style (all that other good stuff).
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
page 32
JAMES
Can’t, he’s dead.
-----------------------------
OK, Noah IS dead. Good.
Reader is making assumptions about the story before finishing it.
Damn right. Reader has to read all day 5 or 6 days a week. Reader is looking for good storytelling AND good screenwriting skills.
Reader SUSPECTS writer is playing with the audience (as apposed to just being unclear about the death scene), but can't be sure because of the previous "problems".
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
page 37
JAMES
Michaela! I must find Michaela.
-----------------------------
This whole scene is a classic build to a first act climax. This should happen between 27 and 30. I think page 28 is considered the sweet spot, but page 37 is way late.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
He sees Logan, face covered by his Enforcer helmet...
-----------------------------
Writer neglects to communicate whether or not the audience is supposed to know it's Logan, but the overall writing style is beginning to show through. Writer appears to give the reader enough respect to assume he/she is intelligent enough to see that the audience is not suppose to know it's Logan.
But this is more of a suspicion than an outright confidence in the writer's intention.
What I'm saying here is that I personally appreciate your style. This scene demonstrates a confidence in your writing - "If it says Logan's face is covered, it means Logan's face is covered."
Hiding the fact that it's actually Logan at this point would be fine, but, as this is a script, revealing to the reader that it IS in FACT Logan is perfectly acceptable.
The problem is that this demonstration of confidence and respect for the intelligence of the reader comes across as an anomaly this late in the script.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
page 41
JAMES
I won’t be the one dying tonight.
-----------------------------
Reader has no choice but to assume the main character's goal is now to avenge his wife's murder. This being communicated on page 41 is "late". This is a problem because according to the writer, things like flying dirt, shiney ice cubes, and chocolate shakes are more important than putting the main character's goal on page 27-30 where it "belongs".
Perhaps it belongs in the ACT II mid-point, but we'll get to that.
There's nothing wrong with breaking convention if the story is so cool that it laughs at convention - but that's not what we have here.
_________________________________________________________
All characters are described the same: tall, fit, average, athletic - the same redundant descriptions. These descriptions infer writer simply imagines a bunch of magazine models playing these parts. They don't have individuality. Reader can't tell them apart, as they don't appear to be fully imagined. Further, they don't have individual voices. The characters lack character.
_________________________________________________________
The introduction scene in the warehouse is handled very well, giving these characters something the reader can hang onto and remember them by. A solid attempt to give them individual voices. Nice job with that. Writer surprises reader again!
This scene could be even stronger using "The Pope In The Pool" technique. If you've not heard of it, just google it. If you have heard of it? Why (I ask any reader) aren't you using it?
_________________________________________________________
Nice dialogue between Gabriel and Logan. Suggestion: As Logan is the good guy in this sub-plot and the audience knows this, consider finding a way to give him the last word. Simply ending the scene on "we didn't see it" and a stare would work better.
Reader just feels it would work better if Logan "controls the scene" - even if he isn't in control of what Gabriel may be thinking.
_________________________________________________________
-----------------------------
JAMES
Maybe you could meet my daughter
too; she’s a lot like you.
-----------------------------
Is this supposed to be subtext? Sierra is not like Michaela at all. If writer informed the reader that Sierra is mentally retarded, no changes to her action/dialogue up to this point would be necessary, if you take my meaning.
Come to think of it, if you want to make this whole rescuing of Sierra thing a lot stronger, maybe she SHOULD be retarded. I certainly would.
_________________________________________________________
This is weird. Writer keeps presenting conflicts that look like first act set ups. The main character encounters compelling reasons to accept new challenges, rather than dealing with new obstacles preventing him from achieving one clearly defined goal in the classic sense. Pretty cool.
_________________________________________________________
Convention hold that page 60 should be a big moment where the main character's attempt to control his destiny (and that of his "romance character") is compromised in a new way. The story should sort of change suddenly, and preferably, quite drastically. In Take No More, the ACT II mid-point is that James and his new friends are planning an assault on a prime target.
It's great that James has these new buddies. It's great that they are going to hit the DEC where it hurts. It's great that he's doing this because he has nothing left but to try and make the world a better place for his daughter and he isn't very good at finding another way to do it, because trouble has a way of finding him no matter what he does. But none of that belongs on page 60-63.
On the assumption that you are in defensive mode about Take No More's story's structure, let me present the following hypothetical situation:
Let's say you're having a conversation with a producer about your story and he asks what your ACT II mid point looks like. So you tell him that your story is written in such a way that negates the importance of a conventional ACT II midpoint. Where does the conversation go from there?
I'm only suggesting you put yourself in a position to simply answer his question.
What if a reader has 9 scripts to get through over the next 16 hours and he/she is holding your script.
"Take No Moore, what's that mean?. Let's see what ACT II looks like."
flip, flip, flip. page 60:
-----------------------
NICK
You need to be doing psychological
warfare of your own and get the
truth out about the government.
Show people the real government and
instead of having to try to find
people to recruit, they will find
you.
etc.
------------------------
May as well have written: "I will not try to make an ACT II midpoint that presents a high impact, stakes changing beat for my main character, so go to the next script."
The cool part about your midpoint is that it IS the point where James decides to take down the DEC - the ACT II midpoint is a great place for that -but why is he doing it? His wife was murdered 20 pages ago. Mikaela and Samantha are both safe, Sierra is presumably with her mom, Nick is fine, and Logan's plan is to protect James from Gabriel.
Perhaps I'm forgetting something that clearly demonstrates that James has no choice now but to fight back and TAKE NO MORE?
_________________________________________________________
----------------------------
Echo scowls at James.
and
The remaining team is firing at several soldiers in the
hall, occasionally killing one who is quickly replaced by
another.
----------------------------
Examples of action lines that don't use superlative, un-filmable information or impose direction. More like this, please. :)
Speaking of un-filmable information, I don't think I addressed that fully.
----------------------------
James freezes fearing his last moment alive may be near.
----------------------------
"James freezes." is filmable - role camera while James moves and then freezes.
How does one photograph "fearing his last moment alive may be near"? If you know of a way to shoot "fearing his last moment alive may be near", Please put it in the script. Remember, only literal action or dialogue can be put onto film.
_________________________________________________________
----------------------------
MUSIC plays - The Man Comes Around - Johnny Cash
----------------------------
I've heard this is a bad idea for a spec script.
_________________________________________________________
Opinions:
Some of the final act feels rushed to me.
Close to 5 whole pages of "the message"!
The epitome of the term "preachy". It'll never fly IMO.
Plus, it's delivered by Thomas? Who the hell is he again?
James and Samantha having sex at the end of the movie doesn't feel like "happily ever after", it feels like "SCORE!"
If that's the vibe your going for, you nailed it. But I would dial it back quite a bit.
I think you missed a great opportunity for serious conflict to erupt between Logan and Gabriel.
Give that Mustang something to do! I don't like it when a main character drives a great car and there's no kick-ass car chase. (wah wah!)
There is a lot that can be done with the premise you've set up here. I'd like to see more of your work.
Influences
When it comes to writing, I'm influenced mostly by pre 1980s cinema - from true classics to the sorriest B-movies.
Post 1980s cinema bores the hell out of me.
I really can't think of one contemporary film that inspires me to write a story of my own.
Post 1980s cinema bores the hell out of me.
I really can't think of one contemporary film that inspires me to write a story of my own.
Following
0 Projects
14 People
Winner: Best Trailer
Finalist: Best Trailer
Semifinalist: Best Test Movie, Best Trailer
Winner: Best Script, Best Sci-Fi/Action Script
Finalist: Best Test Movie, Best Script, Best Sci-Fi/Action Script
Semifinalist: Best Test Movie, Best Script, Best Sci-Fi/Action Script
The premise/logline for Flat Pennies would have you believe that it's the story of a troubled teen who becomes the errand boy for a former train engineer living in a world of heroic fantasies and untold guilt until a revelation ends it all.
This is a ruse. It's a fine stab at copy for the DVD card or catalog, but does little to communicate what the story is really about to fellow writers and/or potential producers.
While I found Ian to be generally interesting and the double twisted second/third act very strong conceptually, the problem I'm having with this story is that it's clear from the beginning that Alex is not the main character because he strives for nothing. Ian also has no clear goal. So I'm struggling to understand how to relate to either of them.
The writer is confusing exposition/character development for story telling. I came up with that phrase, find I have to use it often, and suffer it's accusation myself.
This story could function without loss of impact as a two act play with only two actors (I don't know diddly about theater but hopefully you understand what I mean to imply).
The end works very well, but I don't understand why it's a feature length script, especially for the kind of competition AS appears to be hosting.
I also had a very hard time with Act One.
Here's some notes I made while reading. I hope they're meaningful to you.
Reader gathers that Alex feels abandoned and that he achieved something or other (the stuff about being in the papers), but his dialogue is repetitive, expressing the same sentiment over and over for an entire page.
Reader does not understand how to picture a shadowy pale-white figure.
Don't people usually lean forward when they're engrossed?
Shouldn't pages be numbered?
By page 4 Reader concludes that Writer is directing a movie rather than telling a story. This feels like it's going to be a long read.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tanya is a pretty 15-year-old girl bored with everything.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Reader is praying this personality trait is about to come across via her dialogue.
Nope. Why was it necessary to inform the reader that she's bored with everything if she's clearly getting a kick out of trading verbal shots with Alex?
----------------------------------------------------------
Doris
I have to run. Great to see y'all.
----------------------------------------------------------
I've heard of getting into a scene late, but that's ridiculous!
----------------------------------------------------------
Tanya smirks.
----------------------------------------------------------
So much for being bored with everything.
Ian keeps "working the controler" and the like. It's nit-picky, but don't electric trains have a throttle, maybe a switcher, and - what? Some light switches or something? What's he so busy with?
(mumbles) Reader knows he mumbles, read it the first time.
sunlight attacks Ian. nice line.
Ian is a likeble bum at page 10. Reader feels good about page 10 and is now looking forward to the adventures of Ian and Alex.
Interesting backstory on Ian, but the script is extremely lean on subtext at page 15.
Alex has a knack for using a bizzare combination of contemporary slang, old school jargon, and proper English. Is he putting on some kind of act or is this just poorly concieved dialogue?
coincidently -
----------------------------------------------------------
Alex
I'm so looking forward to my
eighteenth birthday.
PHYLLIS
I'm so thrilled you're so looking
forward to it.
ALEX
Quit buggin' on my rap. I can't
help the way I talk. Blame my
deadbeat parents.
----------------------------------------------------------
This is confusing. Is Phyllis mocking his proper English?
How long has Alex lived with Phyllis? 5 years, 10 years, all his life? Is it supposed to matter at all?
Alex and squirrel puppet - the absolute epitome of on the nose dialogue, but utterly priceless. The sad thing is that this Reader would rather spend more time exploring this perfunctory team than go back to Ian's apartment where there is very little conflict occurring.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ian digs out some cash and hands Tony a twenty and ten. Tony hands Ian his change.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Writer is often doing things like this. Does the reader really need to be held by the hand through these kinds of shots? Of what significance is this?
Page 29, great subtext, but way too late to be meaningful.
OK, here's the deal. It's 7AM. Reader hasn't slept, and on page 31 Writer informs that Ian has an unusual relationship with his "layout" and that Alex is broken up over being rejected by his parents.
Writer demonstrates some writing flare, a bit of wit, a talent for directing - but most importantly - the same thing over and over and over for 31 pages.
Writer has been tip-toeing around, exploring and nudging for 25 pages and then pages 26-30 are great - but they should be pages 1-4.
Once past page 30 there is a good deal of exposition about Ian, which is learned through lots of on the nose dialogue between Ian and Pete and then more between Ian and Alex. It's all very interesting, but it's not a story - it's backstory. Why aren't Ian and Alex plotting their trip on the Eurostar? What do either of them want?
OK, maybe this is it. They want to get to the railroad. I guess that works, but it could be stronger.
Dialogue is often very on the nose throughout - sometimes very good and sometimes very cornball.
This sequence is confusing. are they yelling/fighting with the train practically scraping Ian's nose or are they just talking on the way back to the car?
Alex tends to go from being a mature well spoken boy to a full on inner city thug. Back and forth back and forth. Sure, he could be just feigning the thug personna, as kids do I suppose - but there's no clear reason. He just switches his speaking style and attitude right in the middle of conversations.
Dialogue is split between pages often. That can't be good.
There's plenty of small talk. In other words, dialogue that does not drive the story. The dialogue for the most part comes across as that of a play - not that I know much about plays, but the dialogue is not big or "cinematic".
page 76 - 77, super-duper on the nose dialogue retelling of the previous pages.
Alex is now hollering at Ian in proper English. Reader can't tell if this is character trait or oversight.
Around page 82 there's little more to comment on. It's handled well and very depressing. It is, as I believe the writer mentioned he aimed to achieve, a kick in the balls. And a pretty good one too.