Tony Contreras (Upland, Calif.)

The Long War is a metephor not only for the plot of this story but for the Vietnam experience.
Vietnam is and continues to be the seminal event in my life so I had a strong interest in this screenplay
and the characters especially Bobby, the Vietnam vet.
I want to compliment the format which was excellent. No typos, bold face type where appropriate, easy to read and understand.
The story was dark, humorless, violent. Characters and scences, particularly the battle scences were realistic and well drawn. Two characters, Psycho and Hoss were right on. So many villains have redeeming values, more like anti-heros rather than bad ass bad guys. Tony Soprano can be charming, likable, yet a vicious killer at the same time. I'm not quite sure about Psycho, but Hoss Lang is despicable with no redeeming qualities at all. Evil incarnate. When reading this screenplay I couldn't help but think why is Thomas even dealing with this sub-human? I kept urging him to pick up the phone and violate his ass back to prison. So it succeeded. It got a knee jerk reaction out of me. I hated his guts.
There were a lot of flashbacks. There is a debate as to whether flashbacks are a crutch. Personnally I won't use them because of that criticism, I'm afraid a reader will toss, but they seem to work here. The story went back and forth over a 30 year period.
Act III was a bit over the top. Thomas went to a lot of trouble with Hoss, hiring hit men, silencers for guns, building an elaborate explosive. A simple bullet to the brain would have taken care of Hoss Lane.
But then he is one luckySOB suriving multiple gun shot wounds and always getting the upper hand. A formidable opponent.
I did like the ending. It was a pleasant surprise. Bobby D finds a way to live with his demons, and I was happy for him.
To me the extortion plot was the backstory. The main story being how Vietnam effected the lives of so many. Those that went, those that stayed home, those that ran away and those that didn't come back.
Bobby D wasn't particulary likable, almost zombie like, but he did capture the plight of the Vietnam vet who in a lot of cases are just trying to contain their sense of outrage at the atrocities and lies perpetrated on them. 58,000 names on that wall and for what? I'm glad Bobby worked through it and ended up in a good place.
So it begs the question. Is this about Vietnam or is it an extortion thriller? Is it commercial?
To me it very clearly is about Nam and as a veteran of that travesty, I get it. I understand there is a movie about Hamburger Hill in production. I think it will be a blockbuster. If so this screenplay could very well ride that wave.

A realistic drama with a political undertone is a favorite of mine. I'm not much for formatting,present tense dialog things that reader's like,but you already received an excellent review regarding those items, so take heed as they are important.
Your protagonist is well established from page 1. Elias is an intelligent young man, likable, with a good sense of humor. He moonlights as a stand-up comic, although not a very good one. But he is ambitious and sees no future in his own country. He dreams of escaping to America, the land of opportunity. Circumstances quickly force the issue as he and his best friend are soon caught up in the chaos of the country, thrown in jail, escape and are on the run. A good act 1.
The characters are well drawn but what impressed me the most were the surroundings and the world in which they exist. I don't see how you could shoot this movie solely in a studio. A mandatory location shoot. Africa, in all its realistic grit,squalor and uncertainty is a character and part of the story.
Act 2 bogs down a bit, which may or may not be a bad thing. The right director may communicate the characters frustration and anxiety with the hassle of getting a visa. I've been stuck in a foreign country at war and its highly stressful. Time just stands still. The director needs to communicate this to the audience. Despite their difficulties they also seem to have plenty of money, it was unclear how they got it.
Act 3 had the kind of action Hollywood likes. Elias takes matters into his own hands, throws caution to the wind and takes his revenge against the bad guys. Their is also kind of a twist at the end that I didn't see coming.
What I really liked about this screenplay is that it didn't preach. It got a subtle message across about all the ethnic warfare going on in Africa today and the plight of the African refugee, who through no fault of their own are forced to "flee from war and disater."
As I said it was an easy read. If handled properly it could be very commercial. I thorougly enjoyed Hotel Rwanda, Last King of Scotland, Blood Diamond, Constant Gardner, Tsotsi, many others set in Africa. All these movies took me into their own world as did this screenplay.

The story won best screenplay a few months back and I gave it a read. I couldn't get through it as I found it slow and confusing. And I like Westerns.
I found the test movie to be even more confusing. I didn't quite understand what was going on. But I made a deal with Ryu to exchange reviews so I watched the whole movie. The production value was adequate, but that really is not my focus as I'm looking for a compelling story.
As best as I could determine, the protagonist a man of letters, musters out of the Union Army and goes home to his sweetheart, marrys, and together they head West to San Diego. An arduous journey in 1866. New Mexico and Arizona were territores ruled by Apaches and Comaches. Marauding gangs and bandits were everywhere. A veteran traveling alone with his wife? Didn't find it credible.
The dialogue was too 20th century. When one of the bad guys holds up a train he says, "Don't even think...". This was New Mexico territory, I believe, not the uban Northeast of the 20th century.
The premise of the second act is also incredulous. A young engaged woman travels alone on a railroad yet to be built historically, seeking to rescue her brother, 19, riding with murderous marauders because he's "just a boy." Not in 1866 he wasn't. See the classic "Unforgiven" with Clint Eastwood. Muny leaves his farm and his two children, both less than 10 years old alone. He doesn't know when of if he is coming back. True to the times. People were given duty and responsibility at a young age as a matter of course. The idea that an engaged woman would get involved with a 19 year old man about his business didn't ring true.
The woman protagonist, was her name Julia? walks unescorted into a saloon and convinces two bad guys to take her out to the desert alone shooting. I assume these were part of the gang that raped and killed Rayfield's wife. But it doesn't matter, didn't find it believable. Maybe a dance hall girl or a teamster type like Calamity Jane, but not Julia. Not in character.
I truly tried to suspend my disbelief and just go with it, but there were too many cases like this, and again instead of getting lost in the story I kept trying to figure it out.
But AS (the only real opinion that counts) liked it and I can only surmise it was because of the genre and the spine of the story.
ACT 1- An educated and peaceful man's wife is brutally raped and murdered by bad guys. Does anyone remember Death Wish? Charles Bronson made a career out of a tenderfoot who becomes a gunfighter to avenge his wife and daughter, brutally raped and murdered by scum. A good premise.
ACT II-Now a feared bounty hunter, Rayfield Scott services are sought by a beautiful woman seeking to rescue a loved one. He reluctantly agrees and in the process begins to change his character arc.
ACT III- The final shootout. All issues get resolved, but at a price. Rayfield Scott with the help of a woman finds redemption and love.
All the elements of a good Western. Trouble is it is poorly executed. This Test Movie kills this spine of a story deader than Osama Bin Laden.
Of course, I wouldn't even know the spine of the story if I hadn't watched the test movie all the way through. So, the Test movie served its purpose.
The 1st and 2nd acts need to be re-written, or at the very least re-directed. The 3rd act beginning with the train scene is okay. But you don't have act 3 without the first two.
Or better yet, don't do a test movie of Rayfield Scott. Don't change a word. You've aleady won. I would market solely on that basis. My calling card to agents would be Rayfield Scott won $20,000
(be sure to mention the money) at AS and I'm looking for an agency to push it to the next step.
All scripts get re-written anyway.

Congratulations, Gary. There's a reason you've been the big winner here and Sky Pirates is the evidence. Well done. I believe the public both domestic and international is ready for someting other than super heroes but not too much, Sky Pirates is just the ticket, in the tradition of Indiana Jones, highly commercial. What hooked me was the historical references...USA hadn't entered the war, the cover being piracy to cloak the mission and policy similar to Queen Elizabeth and Sir Francis Drake centuries ago. It was also a little unclear as to what they discovered...secrets to the Atom bomb, I believe. But no matter, it held my attention throughout. Frankly it has been the only test movie I seen here that wasn't BORING. Almost like watching a real movie. But I believe this test movie has accomplished its mission...by all means proceed because Sky Pirates will make an entertaining full length feature. Also proves that AS knows what they're doing, has an eye for talent.
As a side note I didn't like the story of Myth of a Modern Man, even though the production value was excellent. But I'm not the best judge of Rom-Coms. But Sky Pirates, all systems go, give it the greenlight.