At Amazon Studios


Submitted Work

Movie Projects


Title Average Rating Downloads Date

America's Ben Franklin in: The Electrocution String Antony's 1st Draft (Script 56)

5.0 stars
20 01/30/12

Reviews Antony Has Written

Wicked Sweets, Nick's Original Draft

1 out of 1 people found the following review helpful:

An amazingly well crafted emotional journey

Overall Recommendation:
4 stars
4 stars
Story structure:
3 stars
5 stars
4 stars
5 stars
March 15, 2012
First surprise: that this is the first review of this script posted. It's good enough to warrant much more attention on Amazon Studios.

One of the best reads I've had - both of scripts I've reviewed and others I've read.

In the first few pages I was drawn in and though you might need to make some small amendments to the structure, the pace was just right, the characters well drawn and the story engaging.

You have a very simple writing style that I found very engaging.

I think you have an excellent skill in designing and developing your characters and while some of the dialogue (a very small percentage) was a little hammy in places, for the most part it was spot on.

To begin with, I did worry that you were introducing one too many characters - it was a little like the intro to an episode of the 1980s sitcom 'Soap' - with the Tag Line: "Confused? You won't be, after this week's episode of Soap." I even found myself humming the Soap tune (I kid you not). However, by the end, it was clear how they all fitted into the story so I don't really have an issue with this.

The main characters all have good back stories and the whole screenplay fizzes with emotion. It has that sort of dark comedy that is compelling but you cringe a little at the same time. I was glad that Bill got his comeuppance at the end and it would have been nice not to be able to guess exactly, twenty pages from the end, about Evelyn's fate - could you keep us guessing just a little longer. I quite liked the character of Sandra (the first Sandra) and it was a shame she departed so early. I think you could also bring the character of Opal into the latter part of the story - she's a great character and apart from the spitting incident, I didn't really feel her story was resolved. I wanted to know what happened to her and her mother and tha bastard boyfriend of the mother. Did he get reported for example?

I don't really have much more to say other than some description, particularly in the dramatic ending, is a bit too blunt - 'He dies' etc but that's an easy fix.

I wish you the best of luck with this -- it certainly deserves more reviews and more attention.

What Could Possibly Go Wrong? (Mike Tyson Cameo), Anthony's Original Draft

2 out of 2 people found the following review helpful:

Strange, Funny and Sinister - quite a combination

Overall Recommendation:
3 stars
3 stars
Story structure:
2 stars
2 stars
2 stars
3 stars
March 02, 2012
Well - this is perhaps the most difficult script I've reviewed (or read) so far.

On the one hand it's the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. On the other, it works in a lot of places, despite this.

It's an easy read but largely because the story just skips through the script - changes focus a few times but essentially keeps the same goal for the main protagonist.

A note of caution on this - there are two fundamental swerves in the script that take the script away from ridiculous, sort of enjoyable farce to something sinister in the first case - really quite horrible if I'm being honest and then just as sinister and even more bizarre as the ending.

I'll start with what I found enjoyable:

1. The fast read - in has a real pace to it.
2. Ace and Will are likeable characters.
3. The fact that the main characters are clearly just meandering along as all people their age would do.

Now - in terms of story:

Boy meets girl - boy already has girlfriend and is torn between love and lust - all fine. Except it takes pages and pages and pages to get to this.

In the first 10 pages I was trying to work out what the 'hook' was - I can only conclude it's the fact that Ace stares at Jewel and she ignores him - there's not much else.

At page 28 I decided to go back and see what we'd discovered by that point. What we discover is this:

Ace doesn't know how to park his car.
His car gets towed away.
His friends tease him a lot.
The three friends spend over ten pages trying to get across a pond to get the car back.

I carried on reading, despite this. Then by page 30 we discover he already has a girlfriend whom he claims to love.

The next twenty pages are an abject lesson in how to spin a story out of nothing and still, somehow, though I honestly can't answer why, keep the momentum. Five pages of queuing for a party? But I kept reading - so what do I know (or anyone else) about story and structure if a script can do that. So there we are, another plus.

Then the attention shifts focus onto Gary for perhaps another twenty pages. Some of this is enjoyable, if still ridiculous.

Just how ridiculous is evidenced by Gary and Will taking an answer in a TV quiz show as a serious commentary on the potential for Gary's girlfriend to be having an affair. And then, just to rub the point in - in turns out that their quiz mimics life antenae is spot on and the reader shouldn't have doubted it.

Up to then ok.

Then Ace goes to the gym and makes a bet and we're into a new situation - all fine - perfectly harmless and done in a way so you don't have to think to much and just read. But then...

My god, the stuff between Gary and Gina, when Gary catches her is just nasty - horrible. I almost erased the script after that. I felt I had to carry on just to check what happened to her - so I did. My advice is get rid of that - in a comedy? Really? I think the fact that Aaron does a runner and Will just stands back is quite brutal really - not a good thing to have in any script.

The Tyson thing I can live with - just more part of the ridiculous nature of the story - but the ending? Pointing a gun at Jewel and Ace? Why? If anything, a reader or an audience would be rooting for Gina to get her own back on Gary.

So the story needs so much work on this. I haven't got to the writing yet.

The way in which this review has 'swerved' is an exact mirror of how the script swerves.


Ace and Will are ok
Gary - make that guy nicer - it's supposed to be a comedy.
Eric - doesn't add any different voice.
Jewel - bit cliched but she could be developed.
Gina - strong character but could use that strength for the better.

There is so much on the nose stuff and telling not showing, as well as spelling problems. Examples:

P7 - ACE: 'Don't tow that! That's my car!'
P97 - WILL, ACE and ERIC discussing the boxing comp.
Sign ups are May 10th.
What's today's date?
May 9th.
Typical dialogue on page 47 -
So what did you do!??!

It's a similar story with any description.

P4 - "He smells smoke in the air."
P4 - Ace buys Video tapes in 2012?
P7 - "Camera zooms out." Next line. "Camera then zooms back."
p15 - "Ace is shocked for words."
P45-50? A long set up about pissing in a plant.

I won't add any more - lots of stuff to fix in the dialogue and description.

I think somehow, you could make a nice comedy and a nice story out of this - but it needs a big fix - most notably with the nasty scene and the very end.

I wish you luck with it - the fact it keeps you reading means there's something there.

Soul Legend, Bryan's Original Draft

1 out of 1 people found the following review helpful:

Nice Bones - needs the flesh ironed out

Overall Recommendation:
3 stars
4 stars
Story structure:
2 stars
3 stars
2 stars
3 stars
February 27, 2012
Ok Bryan - brace yourself.

Concept / Story Idea : Very good, had me interested.

Wasteland, Scorched-Earth, Romanesque Coliseum and culture, Differentsocial stratas based on power and control of scarce resources.

Execution: Needs an awful lot of work. So many Dreams and Flashbacks. Ending the screenplay on a dream?

Before I get to story and character I should say the following:

1. I hate picking people up on spelling mistakes. I'm dyslexic so I know how hard it is, even with dictionaries, spell checkers etc - BUT: You have put your work on here for public scrutiny by your fellow writers. You owe to yourself and any readers to fix the hundreds and hundreds of spelling mistakes before you submit. One or two can be forgiven (I think there are one or two in my script - but hundreds and hundreds?

a. The hero's name changes because of this - he's Alex up until p16 and then he becomes Axel - a simple typo that will mean a reader is unlikely to read beyond this page - you won't be taken seriously - let alone by a producer - then he becomes Alex again by p20/21.

2. My advice. By a friend some beers, or chocolate or pizza, or whatever you have to do to persuade them to go through your script thoroughly - fine toothcomb job - and get rid of all the spelling errors.

2. They don't just affect the read, in most cases they change the meaning of the dialogue and description - place a lot in the past tense or present tense when it should be the other way round. I've listed some obvious ones at the end.

Concept / Story / Delivery

I seriously think you should read 'ROMANITAS' by Sophia McDougall (Amazon or your local library) - you'll see why as soon as you read it but in essence it is much of your story set in another time - and executed extremely well.

The idea you have is great at the beginning - I was hooked on the first page, but then it's let down by changes in who, what and how many antagonists there are for the hero.

The stone idea works, as does the wasteland, post-apocolyptic setting. But then you introduce Zombies and strange armies of different creatures. I would pick one or two at most and stick with them. Every time you introduce a new foe you change the dynamic of the film, it means the previous foe loses a little bit of their menace.

Equally, the enemies are dealt with too easily - eradicated too quickly.

The story arc - the hero is fighting for love in a difficult world, with strange powers he didn't know he had, is there. You've got a great imagination and that is your basic story structure, right there. It has all the elements - love, revenge (theme), action, war, survival etc.

The second act is too long - I think you could cut this screenplay by 30 pages and lose nothing of the story or the momentum.

Characters -

1. Too many - they just keep coming and coming (I don't mean the extras like the mind soldiers or the flame soldiers - I mean the walking, talking characters - several of whom are not introduced until the last 3rd of the film).

2. Some characters are just not believable - the way they act, the way they talk etc and mainly that's because they are not introduced - they just appear and start speaking, talking about the plot (past and present and future).

3. Characters introduced like this in the last 3rd of the script: Jennie Reid, James Reid, Ghost Eyes, David Nolan, Running Wolf, Mind Haze, Amber Steel, Mind Doctor, Mind Follower.

You could lose half the characters in the screen play, develop the characters you introduce in the first act and it would strengthen our understanding and empathy for the characters.

Dialogue -

1. Too much of it. Much of it is "On the Nose" - telling us what the character is doing, wants to do, or has done.

2. Key plot points are exposed only through dialogue in a sort of lumpen, meandering series of pages and pages (not helped by the spelling I'm afraid).

Description -

Lots of camera direction - OK if you plan to direct this yourself but - countless examples of "we the see" or "we then start zooming out"

1. Description often doesn't tell us anything of importance.

2. Worse - it often describes things that we can't see - on the screen:

e.g. there are at least 9 instances where you describe one or other characters as 'He/She gets mad.' or 'He she dreams'

Even at the beginning you have a sentence which says that Alex gets into Emma's mind - but if we're watching a film, how do we know when someone is getting into someone else's mind?

The other thing you tend to to is say ' so and so kills so and so' but you don't tell us how. One example: (p15) - Axel (Alex) sees three armored mutants as they kill the stranger --- How do they kills the stranger: (describe what they're doing so we know) - Do they knife him, beat him to death, tickle him to death? How?

Ok - here comes the list of things which affect or change the script because of simple mistakes:

P4 - Markus grabs the body stone and Victor grabs the mind stone - how do we know what they're called? Do they have name tags?

P4 (Typo) Ruble - Rubble

P7 (Typo) Shinny / Shiney

P8 Glade / Glad

p8 Alex gets mad? How?

p8 You have a slug line: EXT. VICE-CITY. DAy - you then have a first line underneath that says: "We now fade to the next day." - So from the slug line we already know it's day and we know the location - you could lose about 50 lines like this throughout the script.

P11 - She then 'splits' in his face / spits

p14 - Crowed / crowd

P15 - Axel / Alex

p40 - Matthew speech - Definitely / Defiantly?

P40 - "Alex nods and they get on to the bikes Matthew puts and helmet on and Alex hits a button making his helmet come one" should this be off?

p18 - Victor reappears with a Mind Soldier - who starts speaking, but we don't know who or what a mind soldier is?

p44 Alex "it's my duty to my county! - country?

P61 - EXT.DESERT. DAy - "Time passes and the sun moves till it looks like noon"

P62 - who is David Nolan? He just appears and starts speaking

p64 - David Nolan: "And one suite is to...small for any of us to where..."

p47 - you lost me with the introduction of the Zombie - then Matthew says they're like Zombies - then they're just Zombies again - so we never find out (I could have missed it) what's so special about them. My advice - ditch the Zombies - you're creating a completely different sub-genre here.

p49 - "...a women now runs into the crowed to Alex and Matthew" - Crowd and Woman

p 53 - Black Flame (an unbelieveable character btw) : supposed to be a sinister character then says lines like: "Ha!! My turn..." and "What!!!??" followed by Alex saying "What happen"

There are too many to list completely - hence my advice at the beginning - get a good friend to go through this and eliminate the mistakes.


Great concept but you will not be taken seriously - even by people on here who offer to review your work unless you do the hard work and get rid of the obvious mistakes and fix the plot holes.

I really wanted (hoped) this would be a great script - from the first page it's clear you have an amazing imagination and you've obviously put huge amounts of work into this - my best advice, don't let yourself down Bryan by the sloppy spelling etc - it's extra work but if you want your script to shine and be taken seriously and have a chance in competitions - especially as it's a great concept - you'll have to put the leg work in and get some help, as I say, from friends or family.

I wish you the best of luck with this - you've done the hardest part - with a little work you can really get this script into a good shape.

Sitters, J's Original Draft

1 out of 1 people found the following review helpful:

Getting There

Overall Recommendation:
3 stars
4 stars
Story structure:
3 stars
4 stars
3 stars
3 stars
February 26, 2012
This script has a lot of energy - which counts for a lot in terms of making a script and easier read.

As other reviewers have said, this starts off as one type of film - a sort of wise-cracking 'buddy' story and turns into a comedy action flick in the second and third acts.

Equally - there are two languages and settings competing to be top dog - One is the 'gritty, mancunian, British' and one is the 'classic mobster movie' set in Chicago or somewhere else in the US.

THis is a problem when it comes to dialogue especially - for example, the script starts off with descriptions of Manchester city centre and three normal manc lads - then turns them into wise-cracking action heros. If it's a British comedy then references to Coronation Street etc are fine - but then you can't have the characters speaking as wise-cracking american action heros - as in:

P57 - 'THUG ONE': "The Russians will kill these limp-dick house sitters and they will take the heat"
I can't imagine a thug from Didsbury speaking like that.

P108 - MARK: "I'm pedal to the metal"

P97 - BILLY: "God damn it"

But then one character mentions 'TOM-TOM' as the car navigation so we're back in British brands and speaking.

It's a consistency issue and whether the characters are believeable.

I like the premise and the story is good but it needs better execution and filling in a few plot holes. The idea of three hopeless lads landing a house sitting gig is good as is the idea that there are hidden motives of the Housing Agency.

ACT I - is fine, although it needs less dialogue and less 'telling' not showing - the set up is nice.
ACT II - I was asking myself questions on every page 'Would that character really do that? Would they really say that? Why don't they just do that instead of that?

Key points are:

Francesca - how old is she?
When she's first introduced she leaps through a wooden wardrobe - then the following pages refer to her several times as bursting through the wall. Later, then they put her back in a wardrobe to secure her it means the reader or the audience would ask: "If she burst through one wardrobe already, why won't she just do the same with that one?'

The idea of the Russian gang and the local gang is good - creates a nice plot angle but they're a bit cliched, except when they're being sinister. I think they have to be either comedy, bungling gangsters or sinister - one or the other.

The Alex character - if he's a senior gang member, why's he working as a receptionist in a housing agency (maybe I've missed this - I know it's crucial to the plot but in terms of realism, even within the world of the comedy film you;re aiming for).

Billy, Garry and Mark work well, for the most part, notwithstanding my earlier comment about - who are the characters - action heros or jobless wasters in the wrong situation - they have to act/behave and speak as one or the other.

They do seem to have choices all the way along but chose to remain in the house for their fate - I think you'll have to find a compelling reason to keep them there - more compelling than is currently given.

I love the classic underdog improvising weapons from garden tools and gym equipment but then it's spoilt by the sudden and convenient discovery of a hidden room full of high grade rifles and guns.

Equally, where did the walkie-talkies come from? All of a sudden Garry is using one but it was the first (I think) that they'd been mentioned.

General comments:

I suspect you already know that the script is littered with typos in both the dialogue and the description, but if you want more reads / reviews and the next draft to be taken seriously then I'd fix these.

Just a question - what is 'blue waffle'? I know what 'waffles' or 'a waffle' are but am I just out of touch or is 'blue waffle' something specific - as in Billy talking about how his leg looks on p116.

Lots of telling not showing - and in a lot of cases writing stuff that can't be shown on screen:

P72 - She feels guilty
P105 - They are terrified of the situation
p64 - THUG TWO is as the mercy of GRENDLE (How? Is Grendle clutching his throat, has him sprawled on the snooker table with a snooker ball to his face?)

There lots and lots of that type of description - I think you're serious about a career in writing and your enthusiasm comes across in the script but I think you'll have to address the habits of bad description now before they become ingrained. THis script could be improved 30-40% simply by addressing this, cutting down the dialogue (at the moment the script is approx 65% dialogue) and describing more what is happening on screen.

Two specifics:

1. Who are the 'Davvy Lads' - in the speech on page 66 by Alex? They're not explained anywhere else in the script.
2. How old is Francesca and what does she look like? She's a key character.

Now - what I liked about the script:

Lots of things really. The three amigos (Garry, Mark and Billy) are strong, likeable characters. The overall premise and idea of the story.

Some nice lines in the dialogue, especially at the beginning when Garry and Mark are security guards and some later, for example the "Ikea Curtains' dialogue from Billy about his leg.

The energy of the script which keeps you reading. The underdogs angle and the overall scope for comedy action as well as dialogue.

Good luck with this - if this is your first go at writing comedy I think you've made a really good start.

Reasons That Ran, Alexis's Original Draft

4 out of 4 people found the following review helpful:

Dazed and Confused

Overall Recommendation:
2 stars
3 stars
Story structure:
2 stars
2 stars
1 stars
3 stars
February 24, 2012
Guidance to readers by a major studio: “Visual, Aural, Oral. In that order.”
Keep this in mind when reading my review below

Difficult to understand by page 20 what the hero / protagonist actually wants. What is her goal in the whole movie?

I found this a difficult read – essentially because I couldn’t invest in a story or characters I didn’t understand from the writing.

The most difficult part of this SP is that even within its own world it’s just not believable – Heart attack victims under defibrillation who suddenly bounce up asking for forgiveness; people who come back from the dead, first as ghosts, then as victims of deliverate hospital mix-ups; parents of a fiance who calmly post $1m cheques and are never heard of again in the story; Strange characters who seduce a ‘widow’, have a brother who just happens to be an ex-boyfriend of said ‘widows’ best friend but they’ve never met until mister seducer introduces them; a successful book – publication to book signing in nine weeks; A mother in rehab who choses to stay there when the treatment is done; a brother who never comes alive off the page except as a flat, 2D stereotype.

It’s a shame – there is a nice story in here waiting to get out – but it needs a back to the story board approach. What does Ashley actually want – at the beginning? What are the stakes? What are the obstacles?

Major problems with the script:


See what I mean? No? Then look at all the pages from 1-9 and explain why the dialogue is in capital letters and full of explanation marks? If it’s for emphasis it might be nicer to see some description of what the characters are doing before they deliver their dialogue, then cut the capitals, much of the dialogue and definitely every single one of these: !

Problems with the story:

By page 5 , all we’ve learned is that two young people have become engaged and are meeting the parents and by page 9 that the father doesn’t like his daughter’s fiance. This could be done in a single page. There is no tension in the scene between father and said boy because it’s all done through dialogue – basically shouting at each other. So we don’t find out how controlling the father is towards his daughter except through dialogue.

Where is the hook in the first 10 pages?
The accident doesn’t happen until nearly 30 pages in – it seems a bit cliched if I’m being honest – hero fiance, killed while trying to help a fat waster whom the protag then blames for the death of her fiance.
Then by p51 she’s on a date with this strange character – the scenes leading up to this just don’t do it. They don’t sell the reasons why she goes on a date with him rather than calling the police and having him sectioned or arrested.
Then we have the emerging back story of this young lady – she hails from Coventry. Possibly the worst city in Britain you could possibly choose (trust me I lived there for a while) and not a hint of her English accent or heritage up to then?
Not to mention Ashley being told of the death of her fiance (earlier) in a crowded waiting are of the ‘Emergency Room’ by a doctor, who doesn’t take her aside or into a room.
By page 72 I couldn’t even work out what Ashley wants let alone what the stakes would be if she doesn’t get what she wants and what the obstacles to her getting what she wants actually are – because they keep changing.
What does she want? 1. Father’s approval? 2. Fiance back or his ghost? 3. John? 4. Successful writing career? 5. Mike again? 6. A better relationship with her mother? 7. Her brother back home?

Telling not showing – most of the important parts of the story are told through dialogue including back story, plot points etc. Why?
Where there is description it doesn’t give us anything other than stuff that’s difficult to see ‘on screen’ without using direction rather than description of action. E.g. P 16:
‘A phone sitting nearby rings multiple times and visibly frustrates Mike.’
How? What does he do so that we know ‘visibly’ he’s frustrated? Does he slam down a screwdriver? Kick the phone? Oh yes, we find out – but not for another half page of dialogue via VO answerphone messages.

P21 – again, through dialogue, Ashley says that the meeting between her father and Mike was the worst day of her life. Really? She also says it’s happened three time before with other boyfriends. She’d be used to it by now, surely? Or at least the affect would have dissipated. So where are the stakes in this for Ashley? Mike doesn’t give a sh#t anyway so where’s the drama?

Characters who’ve never been explained. John appears as a named character (first name only) in the café without any explanation of who he is prior to this (this comes later). P 71 – example of fantom characters JOHN: I think James has the hots for her. – who is James? BECCA the therapist appears at the end of the scene between Mike and Ashley (kissing scene) as a VO before she’s even introduced in the next scene. P78 ASHLEY: ‘Oh and Peter thank you’ – who the hell is Peter? Why is he, like James never mentioned before or after or better still introduced?

Confusion – the whole Mike/Paul thing from P82 onwards – is confusing. It took me pages and pages to work out what was going on and then it just seemed corny.

The big reveal with John in the café towards the end – it’s written as an ‘oh by the way’ conversation as it stands then it becomes bitter and sort of violent with Ashley’s kick under the table.

I’m sorry Alexis – this needs a complete rewrite, after you’ve decided what the story actually is and concentrated on Ashley’s goals and obstacles and what the stakes are. I hope in any redraft you’ll ditch 30% of the dialogue – one Heather dialogue goes on for 10 lines for example.

Good luck with this – it’ll be hard work but ultimately worth it.

A Place To Stay, H.'s 2nd Draft

2 out of 2 people found the following review helpful:

Good Story, Needs Work

Overall Recommendation:
3 stars
4 stars
Story structure:
3 stars
4 stars
2 stars
3 stars
February 23, 2012

I'm not a fan of dialogue driven scripts and movies so that probably clouds my review a little (so apologies to the author in advance for that).

1. It's a good idea (for a story) - the execution needs quite a bit of work.
2. I would change the genre categories around - this is a dram first and a comedy second. Why:

a. The comedy comes solely from the dialogue - more in a 'wise-cracking' way than through any comedic drama presented in the script.
b. It is if anything a drama / romantic comedy - the central drama is a girl/boy relationship.
c. I think if the author works on the tension more than the comedy this could be a strong drama with hints of comedy rather than aiming for comedy through dialogue which - just being blunt here - misses the mark, much of the time or comes across as lame.

3. Much of this script is well written and it did hold my interest for a lot of the time but I struggled beyond page 70+ - though I forced myself to the end.

4. Personally, I would change the ending - no reader or audience wants ambiguous endings or, even worse, to be forced to 'read between the lines' to get the writer's intentions and possibly miss the correct conclusion.

5. Cut the dialogue by at least 30% and write the hard part i.e. move the story forward - great chunks of the dialogue repeat what has already been said or just repeat what has already happened.

6. The hero / protagonist comes across in the first 40 pages as a 'sorry for himself' whiney, annoying bloke. If a reader cannot empahise with him an audience certainly won't.

7. His girlfriend Tina is far too passive. Most women I know (or have ever known) would have kicked his ass out of there long before the script gets to page 50. Why does she stay with him? Why does she allow him to come back at all hours, hop into bed and talk to her like it's her fault without any fuller explanation of why she loves him so much? If her back story was exposed I didn't catch it (sorry).

8. Where is the cinematic quality versus the TV quality of this movie? At the moment, the screenplay reads like 2.6 episodes of a TV drama/romantic sitcom. Maybe that's a good thing if AS is moving to TV scripts as some people suggest? At the moment there is nothing to say that this movie couldn't be made for TV - locations, level of drama, tension, rooting for the hero?


1. Dialogue - too much of it e.g. pages 35-38 - almost completely three pages of dialogue that rambles and doesn't move the story forward. This is one example.
2. Telling, not showing. Every scene with Danny driving starts with a slug line: EXT. DANNY'S CAR - then the first line each time says 'Danny is driving his car'. Too much description of how characters are feeling and not enough description of what is actually happening in the scenes. Where's the subtext? Where are the gestures than mean something, the understones, the drama? Because the conflict in almost every scene is told through dialogue it dissipates the impact by about 90%.


1. Despite all of the above - somehow the writer has managed to create some really strong characters - Sonia, Mark, Scott (not Phil - he comes across as a cliche).
2. The relationship between the workers at the bar/restaurant works well and does conjure up that whole feeling of 'we're all in this shit place together let's just get through it' attitude that anyone who has ever worked in those places can recognise.
3. Some of the scenes between Sonia and Danny do work very well.


The stakes need to be higher for the hero - what's he got to lose? Two jobs he doesn't much like and a girlfriend he can't stand to be with most of the time?

It's not clear what Danny actually wants - because of that - at the moment - he just drifts - not a compelling reason for an audience to sit through 1.35 hours of cinema time.

Make Tina proactive not just reactive. Make a clear antagonist (person of something else).

Stop the hero moaning so much - it's not endearing - give him some real challenges and make him work for his goal - and give him a goal to work for.

I apologise if this review is not as positive as some of the others - I don't believe it's in anyone's interest to ignore what needs to be fixed to make a script work well - and this script has the potential to be really good - but it needs some objective - standing back - and reworking to create the strong SP I think it has the potential to become.

Good luck with it - I'd like to read a newer revamped version in a while. You can clearly write good characters and interaction and the basics of the story work but it does need to be more compelling, challenging and difficult for the hero.

Favorite Movies

(In no particular order)
North by Northwest
Midnight Cowboy
Mr Smith Goes to Washington
Rear Window
The Shawshank Redemption
Donnie Darko
All the President's Men
The Day of the Jackal
My Cousin Vinny
Groundhog Day


0 Projects

0 People