|
S T E A L E R S
|
(Based on 33 ratings)
|
License:
Views: 1074
Comments: 168
Comments: 168
By A.T. Barker
Created 3 years, 6 months ago
Edited 2 years, 6 months ago
Comments
Twitter
Facebook
The only problems I noticed with this piece is some of your characters dialogue runs on for almost a paragraph. You were the one whom told me less is more.
Great work! I could use any help you'd care to give with my action lines.
Once in a while, you just have to get out of the way and let the characters say their say. When people develop their skills as a writer, they will learn to recognize the moment when a character demands the spotlight and their chance to speak.
This is one of my favorite monologues, from the film Changing Lanes. This is a film filled with short, realistic exchanges, but at the end comes this beautiful reverie, which takes up most of a page:
"It's like you go to the beach. You go down to the water. It's a little cold. You're not sure you want to go in. There's a pretty girl standing next to you. She doesn't want to go in either. She sees you, and you know that if you just asked her her name, you would leave with her. Forget your life, whoever you came with, and leave the beach with her. And after that day, you remember. Not every day, every week... she comes back to you. It's the memory of another life you could have had. Today is that girl."
It's SO tricky to make this sort of thing work, but it's a sign of great craft when it happens. Again, the key to all dialogue writing is rhythm. Staccato exchanges between two people, to lovely, lyrical passages: ebb and flow.
I love the set up of the steel factory and the semis starting to roll. This obviously is a very important part of the set up for the script, and flows really well.
I also like the dialoge between the father and son cops. Think this is typical of what would happen on a boring day at work. You have to find something to waffle on about to pass the time and it really lets you into the fathers personality.
I also like the scene with the pawn broker. it brings in a sort of irony that Allen gets caught.
The set up of the first ten pages brings me to conclude the story is going to be about two cops trying to get justice for the murder of all in the factory, and about how maybe their relationship as father and son changes.
I am interested in where its going so will read on.
Dawn
didn't catch the setting...
nothing major but might want to have Warner reload his silencer in a scene... i dunno but it seems he has unlimited bullets
very good action that keeps me reading
cant wait for more!
The good:
- Great character development!! Warner is, as I said, crazy in a good way.
- Nice, crisp action lines (for the most part). I like that as a reader and as a writer it's a good example for me to follow. That's an area I have major problems with. So thank you.
- The plot isn't obvious and so I want to see more and follow where it leads.
- Great dialogue (for the most part). There are some real gems in there. "I'm not going to hurt you" and "This won't hurt a bit". Bound to be a classic.
The bad:
- I feels like Allen's involvement is a pushing the boundaries of belief. I can believe he knows when Terry and Clint will be on patrol, but it's pushing it that it works out so well for Warner's plans.
- I think Warner's speech patterns change around page 33 when he kills Mrs. Lakey. He was rough speaking up to this point, but when he's killing her he gets down right "country" as we call it here in Memphis. Then he switches again during the longer speeches to Terry around page 45 and becomes somewhat eloquent. Just seems to bounce a round a little too much.
The nit picky:
- You have (CONT.) throughout in odd places. I think I know what that's from. I've worked in MS Word and put (Cont.) in where there's a page break. But when I cut and paste into Zhura, they're not necessary and end up in odd places like this. Just go through and delete 'em.
But, like said, I'm loving this. Hoping for more twists and turns. I won't rate it until it's done, but right now it's getting a 4 star from me.
- Ted
I've also been meaning to work on some of Warner's dialogue when he goes on his rant with Terry in the cruiser. I was basically just trying to make sure that I got everything out that I felt he wanted to say, and so now that I have that, I'll go back through and trim it and mold it a bit more to fit Warner's phsyche.
I went through and tried to find the places where you pointed out there were "CONT."s that shouldn't be there, but I couldn't find any (maybe I'm overlooking them... I have read the script over like 70 times). I might be wrong, but I think the only places that have "CONT."s are when someone's speech in broken up by an action, and so when they continue talking it's correct format to place "CONT." after their name. But I'm guessing you already know this. Maybe you could just point out a couple of those accidental "CONT"s.
As for your compliments... really, I can't think you enough. That's what I'm going for- something easy to read, but complex both in plot and character. And I'm glad you like the twists and surprises. There are plenty more to come.
I'm really trying to finish this ASAP, so check back for updates whenever you want, there should be some every couple of days.
I'll keep reading!!
If you're confused about Randall shooting Terry's cuffs off, just stay tuned. You'll get it in a couple scenes. Thanks for raising the question though. I *do* need to put something about Warner asking Terry where the keys to the handcuffs are.
It's a work-in-progess, what can I say. Thanks again for the comment.
And I'm sure my revisions are going to get up there with RHOG. I've got a lot of writing to do and not a lot of time to do it.
Thanks again, Chad.
Try a less demeaning approach with your opinion, PGL... should help the response.
Furthermore, I dont deem my opinion to be demeaning whatsoever...one could always sugarcoat a critique, but I submit that that can never really be in the author's best interests. You need to learn to be objective...once you achieve this, Im confident that any sort of criticism you receive will cease to be anything but constructive.
I've studied all the key structural assists: Field, McKee, Truby, Poetics, whatever. I'm not advocating the absence of structure. I'm saying that when you throw out buzzwords like "inciting incident," you make it that much harder for the screenwriter to THINK. The first rule of screenwriting, in fact of all storytelling, is this: *just be interesting.*
And no, I dispute that these films all have a natural three-act structure. Sure, they can be interpreted as having three acts, if you're determined to graft that onto them. But I've done experiments on many of these screenplays where I seamlessly revealed a two-act structure. Or a five-act structure. No muss. (Paul Thomas Anderson screenplays are especially interesting in this fashion.) There's even a growing movement supporting the four-act structure, which is more what you get in classic myth.
Look. I know you're trying to do some good, but you're coming off as arrogant, as if you're the sole arbiter of wisdom and knowledge - which is worse when you're not putting your own work out there for criticism, or identifying a single aspect about yourself. Some of us have actually spent serious time trying to truly understand the underlying theories of all this, y'know.
I'm not going to take up any more of A.T.'s space debating this. If you want to toss around more theories, you can private mail me.
For some reason, my last comment didn't show up as a post, so here I go again. I got the chance to read the first 10+ pages of this, and I'm really impressed.
Your narrative style is what screenwriting is all about, in my opinion. I know that you mentioned this to be an ensemble piece, but your opening pages makes me think that maybe Warner is your m.c.? Just a thought.
The scene on the towboat speaks volumes about his character, much more than the following scene with Terry and his outwardly expressed thoughts.
Anyway, excellent job so far - the best I've read on this site at this point. Looking forward to catching up on more.
I actually didn't mention this as an ensemble piece... some arrogant guy named "Phillip Gary Lombard" apparently put words in my mouth. Warner is absolutely the main character. It's a story about Warner while making a slight social comment about the decline or possibly the unnecessary social conventions and practices that might drive a young person mad today.
But I guess the "ensemble piece" thing came from my point that this script does defy the normal convention of Protagonist-Antagonist. PGL pointed out that I need to introduce a protagonist earlier. So I pointed out that there is no protagonist... and he construed that as an "ensemble piece"... who knows. But the entire story is intended to be about "STEALERS," it's about the bad in every person, no matter how good they may seem at the outset, the inherant savagery of mankind, and the dillusion of civility, or protection, within a self-contructed society.
Thanks again for the critique, and let me know what you think of the rest of the story.
-A.T.
Just a short note - I'm reading this at 5 a.m. so my critical faculties are not exactly in peak condition, but my overall impression is that this is a very good, very moody piece.
I could see it being shot somewhere out in the desert, and I guess I'm saying this because it reminds me very strongly of "No Country for Old Men", and I mean that in a very, very positive and complimentary manner.
Warner is a very scary character, and like Chigurah, he is almost like some sort of plague or force of nature, sweeping through people's lives, leaving death, destruction and sorrow in his wake.
I'll be interested in seeing where this goes.
Thank you so much for the comparison to No Country for Old Men. I initially wanted to create something with a cross between There Will Be Blood and NC4OM. I don't think I followed that as strongly as I set out to, but that's a very high compliment in my book.
I would definately like for Warner to come across like Anton Chigurh, but I'd like him to feel more real. For a viewer, probably not in the beginning but at some point, to be able to relate to him would be ideal. I'm trying to give him a history with some flashbacks, and the story of his parents deaths, so that we can understand him in some way... but still be affected by his actions.
Really, thanks for the comments.
- A.T.
My only real problem with the draft so far is at page 54 - I was surprised to find Allen not dead. And it's just a minor thought, because there's no followup between when he's shot and left for dead to when we see him pick himself up and drag himself to the hospital. The fact that he was dead - or would be dead - became an automatic assumption in my mind. Maybe we can actually hear Allen whining through the whole segment until Warner knocks Terri out cold. Then seeing him drag himself to the hospital later might not be such a surprise. Just a thought.
Other than that, WOW, A.T. Really, really WOW! Do you have anybody in mind for the role of Warner? A list of players you could picture as him? You know, like B or C list actors?
I'm certainly not planning on just leaving the script on my desktop to collect dust. So, competitions are an option. Though I'm certainly not Disney material, or I really hope I wouldn't be.
Thanks for the suggestion on Allen. I was thinking that a while back, just didn't get around the revisiting the scene. I'm thinkin of just having him shot off of the porch, so that he wouldn't be a focus. It would be suggested that he died, but he wouldn't be seen dead. And I might just have him shot with the shotgun once. I'll probably go back to that once I've finished the first draft.
I'd like to finish this really soon. I've got an ending that I think will be a bit of a whopper. Some good surprises and some good focus. But I don't want to rush myself to get there. I don't exactly have it completely mapped out for the ending of "Act II."
As for actors, I see Warner as a very sensitive, lost boy, with an uncontrollable mean streak stemming from that loss. So the actor would need to show a kind of "hard softness," if that makes sense. To throw out a couple names, I'd say someone with a mix of Heath Ledger in "Ned Kelly" or Brad Pitt in "The Assassination of Jesse James..." Not B list actors, I know, but that's the image in my head.
I agree about the Spanish. I think I might take it out. But I might find a way to work it in more believably. It's just the first draft, so I'm not sure.
Thanks again.
Sorry I didn't catch this sooner.
You know what's awesome about this? I can tell you are an English Major. My vocabulary seriously lacks and I think it shows if you read my stuff the read this.
Now, that isn't always a bad thing, but at the same time, This is so well written that I honest to god felt like I was reading a script for a major motion picture that has already made its rounds on the big screen.
I LOVE the excnage between Allen and the Pawnbroker. This line had me laughing so hard:
PAWNBROKER
Screw off, white trash. Go smoke outside with shirt off, get tan.
Love it.
I'm only on page ten as this is a pretty long read, but I will try to get in atleast ten pages every so often and hopfully finish it by the end of the week.
So far, I'm amazed at how it's written. Money well spent, sir!
Jeff
By the way th ratings thing is so screwy. It let me rate it again, The only reason I did it was because I didn't think it'd take, again, but it did, and it STILL didn't change the number of ratings... Ahhh This is realy pissin me off..
I think it's your Genre. People say the don't like Horror or Fantasy, but I see so many scripts with those elements posted.
If you get a chance would you please go over RHOG again? I have added a lot more than before. The script isn't finished but is already on page one hundred. I just need to hear some comments on my new additions.
Peace,
Chad
WOW! YOu are very very very good, I anm impressed.
THe opening is absolutly perfect, no dialogue for three/four pages, just direction, loved it.
Action packed.
WHat can I say? YOu are a very talented guy! :D!
XxkissessxX
terry
- (Into mic) No, no. He's fine. We're fine. We're partroling the area. Perp should be within a mile of the Interstate exit.
You need to either add a line into the action about Terry speaking into the mic, or, add it as a paranthetical.
I assume you mean that he puts the mic closer to his mouth, so the dispatcher can't hear clint in the back, right?
It may actually just not be needed at all.
On page 35, I don't really think all the (cont'd) are necessary next to Warren's name. Firstly, they aren't supposed to be used anymore according to updated format, however, it IS still used. But, I only use it if a character's dialogue is split up because of an action, Like:
Jon
I just don't get why-
Jon opens the door and climbs in.
Jon(cont'd)
-she left me.
I mean, Warren is the only one talking, the lady is obviously dead and Warren finishes all his thoughts, then he starts a new one. I just think (cont'd) is just unnecessary.
I read through to page 45, when Terry and Clint get captured and we find out the background on how Terry knows Warren. I like that. I knew in te beginning when Warren's name is mentioned and Terry ressponds oddly to it that he knew the name, I was waiting to find out how.
I also like how Allen's Sears story and everything really was all made up to lure the cops to Warren.
I'll read the rest when I get a chance, can't tell you win though.
Jeff- thanks for the suggestion. But by "(Into mic)" I intended to show that Terry was simply not responding to Clint, but just cutting him off by continuing into the CB mic.
Also, I know that (CONT'D) is said to be out-of-use now, but I'm a firm believer that it aides in a steady read. Whenever I read a screenplay and a character continues speaking through action lines but there isn't any (CONT'D)s, I have to check over the scene again to make sure there weren't any other characters speaking. I think it helps, but that's just me. Might be a pet peeve of mine or something.
Thanks for continuing to read. Really, really appreciate it guys. I promise the ending is worth it! Lol.
I'll get to both of your scripts here soon.
I re read from the beginning because it was a while ago I did read this.
I still think sometimes its a little hard to follow. With their not really being a main character as such untill you get to just Warner and Randall a lot later
And personally I think you shorten some of the sentences down a little too much.
I.e on page 51. where you say .... SAME one Terry bought... instead of The same one Terry bought.
Top of 52
He exits the vehicle. Enters the store.
He exits the vehicle and enters the store.
I think its just the way that you write, and I guess we all have our own styles.
Page 62.
Parathentics is on the same line as dialogue? (to terry)
Page 65
You mention unmarked police vehicles, wouldn't it be better better to say just cars.. as that is all you would see.
Page 68
You also jump from Kathy (VO) to just Kathy, think it could be a mistake.
I feel really sorry for Terry hanging out of the window. How cruel are they.....?
Warner as a character really stands out from normal criminals, he is intelligent. I just don't know what made him turn yet? maybe I missed it..
Page 73.
You say 'reading one clipping' should it not be reads?
Ah ha... Now Warner has a motive!! glad I finally got to know something solid as to why he started all this.
Page 75
action in amongst dialogue... (she looks outside)
Page 80
Allen is kneeled should be Allen kneels.
Page 85
action amongst dialogue...
Harriot is a great character, her sense of humour really made me laugh, and she wasn't afraid at all to challenge Warner, good for her...
Page 94
Does Sharp stutter? maybe a typo there to to .... also action in dialogue line.
Page 96 typo dispatch... second time you say dispath...
I kinda feel sorry for Warner ya know, he aint such a bad guy after all. yeah he does some ad things... but i suppose as children we are all scarred by things. People react differently to things... we are scared differently.
Page 104
Warner's dialogue should read But you can't, can you?
Also be aware here of over using ! they can be a little off putting. I know that the dialogue is heated, but the actors will put their own efforts into the speech you don't have to always end it with a !...
Now I really feel sorry for Warner, Terry is an ass.... twisted cop or what, and I thought he was the good guy.
I really don't like Terry now sniffler... begging for his life via any means. If he knew all about this before why did he let Warner take it so far, why did he not get it off his chest earlier would have saved everyone the bother... Stupid man...
Lol at me sorry just my thoughts pouring out here...
Page 108
Typo should be Warner shoots Terry with the shotgun. THE not He....
I like the way he traces over Terry's face then his own. That's real personal on a very deep level. Something a blind person does to see.
Page 111
You use sliding and rolling. Would read better as slides and rolls.
Kinda have tears in my eyes over Randall, poor guy. ....
Finished it....
Oh my what an ending... how could you.... ??? lol... No really A.T it was good.
I enjoyed the read, your characters are engaging, and their speech is unique to each one.
It could do with a good polish and read through but I know you are just glad to have finished it.
I wish you luck with this one, and get it in the post to someone...
What's next on the agenda...
Dawn
Keep writing
Dawn
Sounds like the first 40 pages might feel a little slow for you as well. That's good. I'm getting the feeling that I need to tighten it up, make it quicker. Also, hopefully the sentence structure for the action lines doesn't make it too hard to read or too disracting, it *is* kind of a style choice. Just to give some flavor or originality to the basic mood/voice of the piece.
Again, thanks for the read. You've helped a lot. I need to read over TSK and TSK 2 real soon.
you defiantly have style there, and yes I did really enjoy it. As for the first 40 pages or so, yeah could do with a little tightening, but not too much, don't want you distracting from the set up of the film.
Don't worry about reading TSK unless you really want too, its been posted now. if you read the sequel there is a plot breakdown at the top for info...
Anyway hun, I wish you loads of luck. You have a good inner voice, listen to it.
Dawn
I think that if the first 40 pages before the "trigger incident" were boring, then yes, you need to make it happen sooner, but, since the stuff that happens before hand is funny and interesting it really doesn't matter that it happens almost an hour into the movie because I was still interested in the story.
About the confusion with "into mic":
See, I didn't get that AT ALL. I think an action line stating "Terry ignores Clint" would work better.
Just take that line, and make it sound more interesting, you know, make it sound more "A.T. like". : )
Honestly, I understood that Terry was ignoring his son, but, at the same time, at leat for me, it wasn't really that clear. Saying "into Mic" just insinuates that Terry is, in fact, talking "into the mic". Understand?
The Ninth was my Bday and I am still celebrating. Pretty wasted right now, actually...
I finish reading soon, just can't promise you when... Sorry
Page 7 - Terry responds to dispatch about the factory discovery - "That's horrible." Again, it's just a minor thought... Terry's a seasoned cop. Would he say 'that's horrible?'
Page 8 - Terry's last line in the scene - "I Know. Don't worry about us..." I'd take out the "I know."
Page 10 - I like the dialogue/interaction between Allen and the pawnbroker.
Page 13 - EXT. RIVER - NIGHT - "manning a crane" (not maning)
Page 24 - Terry's response to Clint asking if this was a joke... I'd take out the "No, son. Now..." and start the reply with "Settle down..."
I stopped at page 24 - the diner. Will pick up later. Still like this first act,
DJ
On pages 47-49, the conversation between Warner and Terry in the police cruiser comes across a little too preachy. I like what's being said. I think Warner's point of view is dead on for his character. I think you can achieve the same result with far fewer words. Basically, Warner is finding numerous ways to say the same thing over and over. Choose your favorites and go with them. Cut the rest. (IMHO) :} - And I like the way you end the scene - "Be smart to get some rest, I got no intentions of going easy on you, you fuck."
Page 50 - love the scene with Manitow and the old woman.
Page 59 - HOSPITAL EMPLOYEE 1 - "Looks like a shotgun wounds to the stomach..."
I'm at page 60 where they reach the motel. Will pick up more later.
I think this script could go somewhere.
Chad
Chad- That's a good question. Thanks. The steel plant isn't very close to any other buildings or busy areas. That would become apparent visually as they leave the plant. And, I mean, it *is* a steel factory. It's extremely noisy anyway, and those noises don't reach anyone, so gunshots aren't going to either. As for security guards, I suppose I could add in that one is shot in the Main Office area with the other employees. Thanks again.
Dawn
On page 67, you introduce a new character - Harlashin, who kind of comes out of nowhere. But that's okay, because he's a cop among other cops in the story, and he's following up on a lead. But then on page 70, he's having his conversation with Kathy (she seems to be the focal point with regard to all the cops - Manitow, Phelps, Harlashin), and there's so much backstory about their relationship within that conversation that it pulls me out of the story about Warner.
Page 75 - I think "lute" is spelled "loot." And I think you can compress a lot of the theorizing that's being done between the three cops in these pages. I don't think you need to spell it out for the audience that much for them to get the connections.
Page 78 - 80 Officer Palmer seems a little too gullible to me. And on page 79, he's already taking down a license number outside after having left Allen's room. The timeframe seems off. And I had to reread that section to get it... Maybe when Allen says he needs to "think," he could reach for a bed pan or something.
Page 85 - 87 - Quite a surprise ending to the scene! I see where Harlashin might be more important. But I still think you can compress the information that the three cops discuss to get to their conclusions. And in light of how this particular scene ends, maybe we need a glimpse of Harlashin earlier in the script? Just to introduce us to him sooner?
Page 92 - I like the hold up scene a lot. Am a little hesitant to believe that Allen could pull it off given his wounds, but am willing to suspend my disbelief because of the way the scene plays out.
Page 100 - I think asphault is spelled asphalt.
Page 103 - Allen commenting on Kathy's voice. Again I think you've given too much attention to the relationship between Manitow and Kathy. I think you can touch on it just a little and keep the essence of its significance without drawing us away from the main story that we're invested in at this point.
I'm at page 104 - Wilted Passing trail - sunset
The entire scene between Warner and Terry at the cliff's edge is very powerful. And a nice twist/reveal.
Page 121 - I think "pirch" is spelled "perch".
Powerful ending. And I still think this piece deserves its high rating.
BUT... :}
I think you should aim for a shorter page length, between 100 and 115, if you think you can. If you cut down on the theorizing between Harlashin and the cops, like I mentioned before, I think that will help. The part of the story revolving around Harlashin, Manitow and the love triangle only partially worked for me. But I recognize its connection to the main plot. I think you have to introduce and develop that subplot a little earlier.
And I like the ending. I love the ending! But I think that the sequence prior to that (between Terry's fate and Warner's fate) runs a little too long. Again, maybe it's because the subplot involving Manitow and Harlashin is developed so late in the story.
Overall, though I think you've done extremely well on this, A.T. I expect to see it on the indie screen one day.
And I look forward to patting myself on the back when you prove I have an eye for talent... ;}
Good luck with it (even though you don't really need it).
DJ
I have a question though. If you do break this down to a three act structure, then act 1 should be about 30 minutes long, act 2 about 60 minutes, and act 3 about 30 minutes as well. But in this story, act 1 ends at about p. 45, which seems to have a rippling effect throughout the story. Should I shorten act 1 at all? If I do, then that would help to shorten the overall length, as you were saying.
The script itself is 123 pages long, that's only three pages off from 120, which would follow the 30-60-30 format.
So even though act 1 ends at 45, it doesnt have THAT much of a ripple effect, because it seems the other two acts are shortened to compensate, otherwise your script would be around 140m pages long, you know?
If you really really wanna follow the 30-60-30 forma, then sure, try and shorten act 1, but like i've stated on here numerous times, I really don't think the script suffers from it. granted, I havent finished yet, (on page 80) but, so far, it doesnt seem like it.
Honestly, I didn't feel like the first act dragged at all, so from a gut feeling I agree with Jeff. It's not the first act that draws the page length out. The scenes I did mention felt too long as scenes, and I think paring them down will make a difference.
I'm also coming from a totally different viewpoint with regard to length - when I typed in Spike by hand on the Zhura site, a 100+ page script on Final Draft became about 85 pages on Zhura. So, with that personal experience at the back of my mind I have to wonder if 123 pages isn't actually longer...
And structurally speaking, you can almost argue that act 2 begins on page 22 or 24. The first act is all about stealing the wheels. That's pretty much over and done with by page 22, and Allen has indicated to Terry by this point that there's something else going on, something more, or else Warner wouldn't have set up a meeting with him so late after the job was done. There's a change in the course of the story at this point, it's just subtle. Your structure isn't necessarily standard, but if the script were written in a more linear fashion, maybe that "first act moment" would have fallen closer to a standardized page... (IMHO) That having been said, I'm not recommending that you adhere to a more linear method to tell the story - I think that would be suicide. I like the overall development of the story as is - except for the Harlashin thing :}
I love this so far, very intriguing. I put it on the Word View, got a lot of extensive sentence fragments first 10 pages. In here it says you got 124 ppg But the viewer says its 158 to the end.
Page 9.
TERRY
Will do, Dispatch. Any further speculation as to the suspects. Any names?
KATHY (V.O.)
We’ve got nothing but we'll update as the word comes in. Keep those eyes peeled, six-oh-one.
Like on page 10
KATHY (V.O.)
Okay. They're all employees. Four of 'em. We've got Farris Landon, he’s twenty-six, and Claremont Ramsey he’s twenty-seven. Says here, he's got an extensive record.(*Which one of them?) Petty crimes to felonies. Then there’s Randall Perch, Warner Shaw both twenty-four. No priors but a DWI, it looks like.
(* Again which one has the prior? Also you can’t say it looks like. Because it’s like contradicting yourself. You can say... except Shaw has a one prior DWI for example)
I got more corrections but these are 2 examples.On here(viewer) you can see where the mistakes corrected were changed to undo your sentence fragments but email me I'll send you the attachment (jccwofc@ecite.com)
Its like a book you read that you can't put down because you want to see what happens next. It it were me I would do a book and a movie deal this is good.
Word of caution when using a word like goin' or somethin' I think you should like the director or whoever editors clips decide to drop the "g"
it shows poor penmanship. My 8th grader tried that in drama and they marked it wrong bad grammar/improper writing structure what? he lost 15 points on his paper. So if the teacher in a private school said its wrong its wrong English.
Dee
I just wanted to comment on Radena's comment about dialogue. It's not a criticism, it's just what I've learned from my own experience - screenplays are a strange undertaking in the creative writing world. In the industry, what we're taught in school about bad grammar doesn't always apply to a screenplay. Dropping your g's in dialogue shouldn't be a problem here.
In fact, I've had a produced writer by the name of Bill Lundy actually teach that 'bad writing style' is actually good in screenwriting! It applies to some cases in dialogue, and it applies to some basic sentence structure (like, "He throws the balls and laughs when his sister misses the catch." - bad line in screenwriting. "He throws the ball. Laughs when his sister misses the catch." - okay line in screenwriting.").
Just thought I'd throw that bizarre rule of screenwriting out there for all to see :}
Surely, as a screenwriter, you shoud be capable of forming complete, eye-pleasing sentences. But when writing a screenplay, you should both be *aware* of the rules and *break* the rules at the same time. Screenwriting is almost an exercise in breaking the rules, it seems. Just taking chances, and exploring the possibilities.
Also, part of the choppy sentence structure that you see in screenplays is a result of the need for a quick read, or a quickly flowing story. Screenplays differ from other forms of literature/writing in that they require a lack, or minimal amount, of detail to ensure the quick read already mentioned.
So there's a quick overview, Radena. If you can, you should look up some of your favorite movies online and see if you can't find a free online-copy of the screenplay. You'll very likely find an abundance of the mistakes you're noticing. Both in dialogue and description. Good example would be Brokeback Mountain (which I don't think is available online). The screenwriters Diana Ossana & Larry McMurtry nearly make an artform of dropping Gs from words... and they won an Oscar for their effort.
Thanks for the comments. Both of you. I do appreciate it.
Thing is you guys want to be told what's wrong, but then sometimes don't fully want to accept what you're handed. I know the rules and like to break them as well. I remember being told otherwise in my scripts comments.
What makes your script above the same rules?
I didn't exactly mean to stir up heat on a little letter. As writers(old/new) we write the way we know or the way we been doing it old habits are hard to break. I do it myself but when the Viewer throws a red under line it is saying that something is wrong with the line fix it.
If it tosses me a underscore hummmm its got something on the line that doesn't fit properly. The most common error I see is "fragmented sentences" True you know what you're saying or trying to as writers but the grammar is missing something to push it out.
My thing was I always presumed if I wrote it like such and such the reader get where I'm coming from or I meant. However that might not always hold true. I got my books kicked back for leaving off letters, I have a screenplay I got kicked back not that they didn't like it, they loved it. So why did thy kick it back? Grammar. I said what's wrong with my grammar that's the way they spoke back in the 50-60's or the 1800's and couldn't spell.
They weren't about to play that rule with me. Maybe some producers will but it really depends on who picks up the pitch also. IF they say fix it or keep walking until you do fix it. So I'm still fixing it yeah I'm mad I have to waste time fixing my lines. Every script we see we have to think about if I could have my pick of a leading man/woman to play so and so is that honestly how they talk?
Well at least that's what we were told with our futuristic movie. Fix the lines so to me personally we all heard it before, what sounds or look good to you may not be to the ones who read it.
#2.
Do it right the first time because you may never get a second time to make a good first impression.
When I wrote my first book I had so many fragmented sentences that didn't really compliment the line I had to correct half the book so now I'm in re-writes on one for this grammar issue. I was just hoping to spare a lot of writers time and energy. If they want to leave it off when they're sending it to possible leading actors/actresses my opinion is let them do it and roll with the punches.
In my new screenplay I had so many slang words like they use to talk and it got kicked back. I was told to just write it in normal words, tones my attitude was whatever rolling my eyes.
That's how the south talked back then, so this isn't (not this ain't) the south its 2008. So I snatched my pages and said I'll re-write it. Have I done it yet? NOPE but I will because they loved it and working with me to get it done. So if we fail to listen now we'll all pay for it in the end.
Another tip is when you finish a page try placing it on Word Doc let it also show you spelling errors or if the sentence is fragmented, it'll say consider revising, or consider using a comma. If you place the mouse on it, sometimes where you placed a comma it should of been a semi colon. You should of ended with a ? instead of a . Whichever the case catch it early saves time, and less corrections.
CAPS when new characters enter the room,scenes not after that, just say Peters vs PETERS said... I'm still learning but I aim to get that Sci Fi produced we worked hard and done what they said. Oh, if you don't have Final Draft get it its awesome so is StoryView 2.0 or 2.2 by the Write Brothers.
Dee
I'm surprised your script got kicked back for those kinds of dialogue preferences... Maybe you could post it on Zhura and see if the writers here pick out the same problems. I know it's not completely the same, but it might be a good experiment for you.
Whatever your choice, good luck with it. Keep writing!
I'm good, every director/producer has their own preferences. If you want it out on the screen you just have to go along with it.The good thing is if you don't argue with them and prove you will listen they will give you one of their own teams to help you smooth out the rough edges.
I have a contract so I'm bound by it otherwise I would put it in here. I started to in the private locked section but had to stop until I check with if I can at least work on the script off the side to practice on my scenes some more. Right now I have been laughing my head off as my daughter takes me through the beginning of the movie phew! This is something I got to go and see in the movies theater.One thing one man told me is they get tons of things in gangster slang some never get any further some go well its grammar or formatting. I'm cool
Thanks for the comment though *S
Dee
No Problem, glad to help where I'm able.Another thing that is useful is a micro cassette recorder. if you get a scene can't write it down before you lose it. Do what my 20 yr old does record it then write it later. Plus she is acting out the scene so its pretty neat.
Dee
I've got some story notes for you and will mail them or post another comment once I get my thoughts more together.
Nice work though
Choppy action lines ARE the way to go. Period. Dee and I have had this same discussion personally. Her software found the same mistakes in my scripts as well. Leaving off the G in ING words is completely normal and also acceptable, IN DIALOGUE. NOT IN ACTION LINES. Action lines need to be grammatically correct, but sentence structure is another story.
Writing incomplete sentences is something that MUST be done in screenplays. It helps the flow and also makes for much quicker read which is important.
Like AT has stated, along with DJ, these rules can be bent and broken. But Dee is a novelist, and of course, her first instinct says "Oh incomplete sentence", typo, misspelled word, etc..." when the fact is, sometimes (and most times) this is the way to go when writing a screenplay.
And then of course, there is just plain old personal preference. Don't wanna follow the same rules? Then don't. Do what you wanna do.
Okay, with that being said, I've found some time to put in ten more pages from my last comment, so, now I'm on page 90. Getting there, AT just very
slowly...
pg 81:
"He looks down at himself. An oversized belt barely holds his XL dress pants on his waist. Even his sunglasses are too big for his face."
I say lose "...for his face." It gets rid of three words, plus, I think it reads better. Since 'waist' and 'face' kind of rhyme, it just doesn't read very smoothly to me. Maybe it's just me. Also, we know sunglasses are worn on one's face, so I don't think it's necessary to tell us where they are at, ya know?
Pg 82
warner
Understandable.
(Sighs)
Look. Marshall, is it?
(No response)
I had no intention of hurting...
Why the "..." and not a " - "?
pg 83
Marshall
-Respect? 'Stead a barkin' at me, how 'bout you quit playin' nice and bark at the man that made him dead?
I understand why you use the ' where you do, but, you don't ever use it when you spell "fucking" "fuckin". I don't really thing they are necessary here. I find it kind of distracting, almost as if those phrases are in quotations, even though I know they're not. I don't know, but if you are going to use them, I'd use them for all instances, you know? If it were me, I'd just spell the words regulary. As always though, this is just my opinion, which I know you know that : )
Thats really about it for those ten pages. There are other instances where what I already covered above pop back up: the use of "..." when I think a slash is fine and also what should always be used.
Taking off the g's in words, replacing with a ', but not doing this with ALL words missing the g's. I think it needs to be consistent, unless, of course, you feel that some words dont need but others do, I dont know, you're the English Major. Maybe you know something I don't. Who knows.
I'll get to 90-100 sometime. Dont know when though. So far so good. I'm liking what I'm reading storywise and yet again, I will say that the pacing, at least for me, is fine and doesn't seem out of wack at all.
Jeff
Glad you liked it so much, Carol. I suppose this would make an interesting read on Halloween night. A bit spooky, but still realistic.
Douglas, I appreciate you taking the time to give it a good read. Looking forward to hearing some of your thoughts.
And thanks for continuing to read, Jeff. This is a pretty long screenplay, but you're still chugging along. I really appreciate that. You make some good points. I've actually been editing the "..."s and "in'"s out. But I just haven't gotten all the way through. Thanks for catching that. I'm thinking the same thing as you in that regard.
I'm honored to be the first writer you've read on here. Hopefully you'll stick around and put up some work of your own. And if this *is* ever made into a film, I'll certainly look you up and let you know...
Logline: Villian/Hero Warner Shaw kills his co-workers at a steel manufacturing plant, stealing two million dollars in the process. But he has one last score to settle, the murder of his parents at the hands of a crooked cop.
Synopsis: Warner and cronies kill off steelworkers, take two million dollars worth of metal/tires. Allen sells a ring to the pawnbroker, a fake for the money he got. He gets caught by two cops, a father and son team. Terry and Clint. Allen has information about the killers at the Steel plant. Terry makes a deal, Allen will take them to meet Warner and Terry and his son will nab him. Meanwhile Warner, Randall and two others drive away the four semis of loot, get it transferred, kill their accomplice. They drive to the docks where Randall and Warner kill off they're other two accomplices. Warner and Randall go to an Old ladies house, Warner ices her, she did something to piss him off. They get a gun and wait. Allen, Terry and Clint beeline right into a trap, courtesy of Allen and Warner. Terry gets caught, Allen gets shot, Clint gets dead. Warner sets out on a road trip, Terry in tow. Allen survives and gets himself to a hospital. A Detective named Manitow picks up the case first he finds the blood of the dead accomplices on the dock, he sees if dispatch has anyone checking in with gunshot wounds. Yep- Allen. Allen escapes narrowly from the hospital, two cops at his heels. He robs a store, Manitow checks it, trying understand, it doesn't make sense until Allen puts a gun to the back of his head. Allen wants his cut. Manitow wants to catch Warner and Allen knows where he's going. Warner, Randall and Terry get a hotel room. The killers try to get a decent nights rest, Terry tries the great escape, fails. Luther gets killed in the process. Subsequently Warner kidnaps the couple that run the motel. Marshall and Harriet. Warner makes her retrieve his money and they head out to they're final destination. Meanwhile another cop, Harlashin, tries to piece together what Warner was up to. The other three deputies figure it out carefully and without a seconds hesitation he kills two of them. I think cause he wants the money. Warner, Randall, Terry, Marshall and Harriet arrive in the forest. Warner takes Terry at gunpoint and questions him about the murder of his parents. Terry confesses the truth to Warner. Warner kills him. He lets the Marshall and Harriet go. In a bonehead play, marshall decides its his duty to stop him. He gets Randall and even shoots Warner, but Warner kills him. In the parking lot, Warner is at first confronted by Harlashin and his deputy and the Manitow and Allen. Turns out Manitow is getting busy with Mrs Harlashin. Warner says take the money and discuss it between you, they let Warner walk, they are all here for the money. Then theirs the surprise ending. Reminded me of Layer cake.
A few notes.
A.T. I hope you won't be offended by what I have to say. With a few strokes you could focus the story and cut the fat. The story is with Warner, Randall and Terry. What if Allen died when he was shot, then and there. What if you cut out the Manitow/ Harlashin story lines. I don't think there is much holding them close to the Warner /Terry story line. I think the reason they are there is to show the evil/good in everybody. But I think the Terry confession scene does that nicely, I also thinks it comes across when Warner lets the couple go. It will also allow you to expand the warner/ Terry story line.
The three cops, one, two, three. They are expository tools. They tell us very important things. But they are not important. Not important enough to have names.
Randall is a blank slate a tabla rasa, we know everything about Warner and nothing about Randall. Because of that I sometimes forget that he's there, except when he's holding a gun on someone. Why does Warner keep him around. You don't have to answer this question. But it is viable. Warner kills just about everyone else.
I had trouble connecting with Warner. Even after the truth is revealed about his parents. At the end of the day he killed all the people and the steel factory. For nothing. The truth of the matter was that he and his friends could have stolen the same stuff and killed four people. But what they did was in essence a school shooting.
You don't need the voice over. It appears at the beginning and never again. Its good VO but I don't think you need it. I think it should be something Warner says to Terry or better yet to Clint right before he puts the bullet in his head.
Some of the characters say a little too much. You know what i mean I won't beat you over the head with this.
I don't think anyone will agree with me on this. But I thought Terry was the dumbest man alive when he bought Allen's story. It was incredibly timed. I'm sure he's met guys that will lie about anything to get out of trouble. Then he lied about losing Allen. Now the benefit is grand, his son set for life. But he's also a rookie and his son. They are walking into a gunfight with people who've murdered in the double digits. His son couldn't even handle Allen.
If you want Allen to live, I don't think he should get a shotgun blast to the stomach. Maybe he takes a few more from the silencer. Then he could live. But shit, that guy gets around after he gets shot.
Why doesn't Terry try to kill Randall or Warner? Why does he try to escape. They did kill his son.
Do you think it would be funny if Warner got in the car with the groceries from the gas station. Sighs gets back out walks back in and kills the cashier.
I like the scene when terry gives up thinking it is all over. They release him from the handcuffs.
Warner is a lot like Anton from No Country. But Anton's ideology only comes out when he is asking people what he thinks are logical questions. But Anton is crazy. I think at times you want us to think Warner is crazy and other times no. Maybe he should be nuts but completely unaware of it. He does crazy and evil things through the script. I can see the human side, but its hard for me to care. Which is a good thing. Challenging.
A.T. I think this thing is great. I read the thing all the way through. One sitting. I think it needs some work but you are more than capable. I hope I helped. Take it with a grain of salt.
Max
I'm going to try to change the story, as you were on the verge of pointing out, so that Warner is easier to relate to. Possibly, the four steel workers don't kill everyone at the steel plant, but they gas everyone with the intent of hurting no one, but Claremont takes it upon himself to kill an employee who escapes the gas... and Warner subsequently kills both Claremont and Farris because they're liabilities... and from there, Warner kills only Clint, Terry, and Marshall. This way, he's somewhat more redeamable for the audience.
Anyway, I'll be changing some other things, but that's a major part. Thanks again for the read. I really do appreciate it.
If this came out in theatres or even on video I would recommend it to anyone I know... pending the quality of direction I suppose, but still...
Thanks a lot for compliments. You have a point... I'm not sold on changing Warner just yet. But I'm going to hold off on any changing until I have more time to spare.
So, any opinions on the subject- Who's for leaving the plot alone and who's for changing the plot to portray Warner as more moral/humane?
There is a scene in "once upon a time in the west" At the begining when a whole family is killed. A young boy of five or six sees his sister brother and father dead. The villians arrive and survey the scene. One villian says to another. "What do we do with this one Frank?" Frank glares at the Man. "Well, now that you mentioned my name." Frank takes out his gun and blows the kid away.
But were just here to spout our opinions.
Max
All in all -- the story is solid, the characters are strong (save for Randall), and the structure is great. The writing makes for an easy read, and that really is the ultimate goal as a screenwriter. I have suggestions for some major and not-so-major revisions which I'll map out in the email. If you take them I believe this would be much stronger. However, if you don't this could probably stand up on its own without much difficulty. But you still need a good polish. So, I'll give it a 4. If you can make it any stronger, I'll probably step that up to a 4.5 or so. You have a great plot, good twists, good suspense, great major characters, promising minor characters, good dialogue, and a wonderful mood/feel. I enjoyed reading this, A.T. Look forward to my email.
And Jeff -- sorry I haven't been around for a while. I'm actually working on a new project called Urbanity, which is nearly finished (first draft, anyway). So, I'll be putting that up very soon. Thanks for the comments.
Theres a load of comments so I probably couldn't say much that hasn't been said, and I'm only going on story anyway, so the beginning is pretty cool, and it looks like a lot of people agree
Yes there is a lot of violence in here, and some killing, but in the subtext there are reasons behind it.
Bob obviously never read deep enough into it.
I think this def does have potential to be made, and it is in fact one of the better scripts here on zhura.
P.S. this is one of my favorite scripts on here, A.T. Any creative mind could see that it's good, raw, and has potential... hm...
Bob: there’s one more secret I feel I have to share with you. I did not care for STEALERS.
Zeke: What!
Bob: Did not care for STEALERS.
Zeke: Uh!
Dawn: How can you even say that Bob?
Bob: Didn’t like, did not like it.
Zeke: Bob, it’s so good, it’s like the perfect script.
Bob: This is what everyone always says, whenever someone says…
Dawn: Farris Landon, Randall Perch…
Bob: I…
Zeke: You never see… WARNER SHAW!
Bob: Fine, fine character, did not like the script.
Kevin: Why not?
Bob: Did not… couldn’t get into it.
Zeke: Explain yourself, what didn’t you like about it?
Bob: It insists upon itself, Zeke.
Zeke: What?
Bob: It insists upon itself.
Zeke: What does that even mean?
Dawn: Cause it has a valid point to make, it’s insistent!
Bob: Cause it takes forever getting in, and you spend, you spend like six and a half hours, and then, you - I can’t even get through, I haven’t even read the ending.
Bob: You’ve never read the ending?
Kevin: Ah, how can you say you don’t like it if you haven’t even given it a chance?
Dawn: I agree with Kevin, it’s not really fair.
Zeke: Outrageous.
Bob: I’ve tried on three separate occasions to get through it, and I get to the scene where all the guys are in Tucky's bar…
Dawn: Yes, it’s a great scene, I love that scene.
Bob: It’s not a great scene, I have no idea what they’re talking about, it’s like their speaking a different language. That’s where I lose interest and fade away.
Zeke: The language they’re speaking is the language of subtly, something you don’t understand.
Bob: I love The Money Pit. That is my answer to that statement.
END :)
In response to Bob: really, without any examples or any proof that you've even read past the initial killing, I put zero value in your opinion. If you're going to read scenes with murder that SEEMS to be unmotivated then you shouldn't be reading any script classified as a Thriller. Clearly, the people that have read through Stealers in its entirety know that the entire story is a journey to discover WHY he has killed these people.
In response to Dawn: Thanks! ;) And you're right... Bob says there should be subtext... but there is subtext. LOTS of subtext. Probably TOO MUCH subtext... so he clearly hasn't committed to reading past the first act.
In response to Zeke: Here, here! Really appreciate the support. You seem to understand what I'm going for here, so that's great. Stealers masks a journey of self-discovery (for Warner) as an unjustified string of mindless killings... which the reader hopefully comes to understand with Terry's revelation near the end.
So in conclusion.... f*!@ off, Bob. "If you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all."
If you want to comment CONSTRUCTIVELY, then you're welcome to say anything you wish. But insults shouldn't be thrown around on Zhura.
A.T., you will never please everyone, so don't try. You will fail. The consensus is that this is a good script. Take comfort in that. Who cares what a rogue fly by night commentator thinks?
But I am working to create a different dynamic in the script. I've changed Randall to be Warner's younger brother... and Randall is the only Stealerthat doesn't kill an innocent person. So, this may create a character for the reader/audience to relate to and hopefully someone to root for.
And, no... Bob's comment is not to blame for the revision. I was working on some major changes before Bob's childish insults.
Funny shit!
Bob, you suck! Get off the stage!! <throws a tomato>
D
This place is a joke, you call for comments but can't take the end result.
While I'm on the subject, this script is a little thin along the fringes of the overall plot line.
Just try fleshing your characters out a little, before you indulge in mayhem.
No rating from me. It might upset a few people. So I'll just finish as saying:
"Got potential, but character history/motive needs fleshing out, and made a little clearer."
Hope that's not too harsh!
What does Zhura stand for again?
I thought it was collaboration?
Must have read the company FAQ wrong!
Read his comments again, asshole. This is for constructive criticism and collaboration. Do you know what collaboration even means? It has nothing to do with INSULTS. Your suggestions for A.T. aren't helpful, either. Give specific examples. You're commenting like you ARE a producer looking at his script.
critique - an article or essay criticizing a literary or other work; detailed evaluation; review. A detailed evaluation... hmmmmm... I only see complaints without direct examples. Is that any good? Not on Zhura. Maybe if you're the big dog in the studio.
You did read the FAQ wrong, because you obviously don't know what collaboration means, either.
Let me help you out. Related terms:
Co-operation
Coordination
Collaboration is a recursive process where two or more people or organizations work together intersection of common goals.
What is Bob's goal in his comment? It doesn't look like its very constructive. What is your goal in your comment? I'm not sure. You look more like a CRITIC than a COLLABORATOR. Zhura is a community that helps other writers in getting closer to the ultimate goal we all have. Telling someone that their piece of work sucks or isn't good enough is not collaboration or critisism. You're just taking shots at people. And as I said to Bob, now you've got to live up to very high standards, because since you think STEALERS is no good, I'm very interested in seeing what you classify as good. Continue to spectate, whatever, "Blunt". And if you think this place is a joke, then leave. We don't like comments like yours and Bob's anyhow.
Man up and put your real name...
What the friggin frick is that?????
It's Cowardly, is what it is!
No Links, No Websites, No Scripts, No Essays, NOTHING...
Just a quick in and out, like little ninnies... battin' 'em down off the home page and out of the top rated list like Big, Dumb Bullies.
I think that We, The True Zhura Community, should fail to respond to ANYONE who does not have the guts, decency, and Honesty to share their own creations, blood, sweat, tears, time away from their families, dreams, skills, mistakes, bruises, balls, with the rest of us before Rifling Off At The Mouth.
Just a thought, love this place.
-H
A.T. , sorry man we didn't mean to take up your wall with all this. I'm done with it. Sorry again.
Heather, I know what you mean... not even a script on here from 'Blunt' for us to see. I will use your name in ' ' all day, sir. I'm not a fool.
I wouldn't say Blunt is entirely wrong though. I mean I do agree that the script is lacking in character depth... but shouldn't we all realize that these are DRAFTS... not finished products. We're all working TOWARD something, here. For anyone to try to put someone down for absolutely any script they've written is just malicious. We're here for HELP and TO HELP... that's it and that's all. If you're not willing to do either, then think about moving on somewhere else.
That, or the aliens creep in with absolutely no work of their own on display and mar what others have the guts to put out there.
There's a reason why the "views" number is always Way higher than the "comments" number... it's called class.
If it isn't your thing, or you just can't stay interested, or you realize that the writer is struggling and new but you have no advice to give, you move on.
There are scripts that I am actually too intimidated to comment on, just because I can clearly see that Nothing I have to say can improve the artistry of the piece.
PS- the final 2 comments that Blunt left were absolutely NASTY, aimed toward Zeke and myself... they were deleted and I think he was too.
But really, completely uncalled for and raunchy.
Good Luck A.T., not that you need too much of it with talent like yours,
-H
Firstly I will attempt to dissect the first ten pages then in due course return to leave feedback on the rest.
For the first three pages we seem to be stuck in the workings of a steel factory with not much happening in the way of enticing us into your story. All I get is that through your V/O with Warner Shaw you are proposing that your character is bored by his mundane life and his dreams have sunk to the depths of despair...at least that's what I get.
So time to ask yourself this question. What could I do other than narrate to clarify my characters feelings? As screenwriters in general live to the rule of show don't tell wouldn't it be better to show show some sort of conflict that pushes your character to the edge? Then you would have fleshed things out by showing us and not telling us!
As I previously stated we have 3 mins of mundane forbearing upon the initial scenes which could ideally be condensed into a single MONTAGE, thus freeing up valuable page count with expression and not monotony.
REDUNDANCIES:
The initial slugline reads:
INT. STEEL FACTORY - DAY ? This should be substituted for-
INT. STEEL FACTORY - CONTINUOUS -- The explanation for this would be that we are progressing through one single building, so in effect we need to establish this from the outset.
Following the scene heading you then write-
An oily steel manufacturing plant ? This is redundant as we already know where the scene is taking place so there would be no need to establish this again. Then on from there we enter the workings of the factory. As I said before, this would read better as a montage and leave more scope for adding character dimension as I suggested previously.
The cafeteria scene is then drawn out for almost another page. Ideally this should represent about 20 secs of action. So there should be about 2 paragraphs there, not much more to explain what we see. Again, you are creating space for depth and reasoning to the scenes which lie ahead.
Then from there we are back in the factory showing nothing but silence. No need for an extra scene heading there just condense this into one sentence which ends the previous scene and move on. (Elimination of superfluous information creates space which we can use to entice our audience with back story or action.
Next scene, the slugline reads:
EXT. BARGE - SUNSET (LATER)
It would always be best to stick to the basic rules when constructing a scene heading. For eg. Replace SUNSET for DAY and show an elapse in time through a statement of action. "The setting sun glows as....etc."
This will provide continuity to to the reader.
Your dialog is cool, pretty much natural, good work there. Just remember show don't tell. Maybe pull in flashbacks or something and narrate over the top.
Anyway, that's it for now, I'll be back sometime.
NOTE. Most people who commented on this just said..."Good job, loved it" or there abouts. Does this sort of feedback really help a writer...NO. Why? Because there is no such thing as a perfect script, and always room for improvement.
By merely saying flesh your characters out, in my view, lends to be more constructive than a mere thumbs up. Just my view.
OH by the way, I did delete some other graphic text due to respect to your wall. It was merely a shock tactic that had the appropriate effect at the time. Being called an impostor or an asshole isn't exactly a warm welcome...hope you're cool with these comments which I left with a more constructive tone to them.
I learned to write in the most hostile of environments. Seems like this site lends more to the nature of molly coddling, by bumming up each others work.
Good luck anyway. Let's see what the Zhura gods think of this..Haha!!!
Oh by the way. Follow Max Harveys excellent notes. One thing I always do is read comments that others have previously made. Now that would lend insight how to flesh your project out.
What's the point of repeating what others have said?
Zmail me anytime if you need further help with formatting...and by the way, drop all your directive language, such as camera directions etc. Save them for the shooting script.
Don't know if I covered the whole ten pages, but there you go!!
Good luck.
CONTINUOUS is still a done thing. Why wouldn't it be?
Would it be better to follow on through a script with a load of redundant scene headings...or follow on CONTINUOIUSLY?
I think the obvious would be the way to go.
Clarity from the outset, establishing directional input through the simplest terms!
There is no such thing as the perfect script, it's all about clarity and entertainment value!!
Who told you and when. Seems like that statement is pretty much useless in itself unless the authentication of its roots can be established!
Or did you mean that it can be frowned upon by the professionals when a novice script is presented to a production company?
CUT TO has not been in use by the modern day screenwriter, but there are still people who use it, and probably always will be.
I think this is a Zhura ideal. Rules and regs for every community, maybe this is yours...amongst others!
Clarity dude, clarity!!
Anyway shape or form!
So who told you man? The president of Universal pictures?
Who makes these rules anyway?
Answer -- Screenwriters, and the people with enough foresight to move the industry along!
In response to your note: I agree 100%.. I'd rather have an extended critique on what needs work and what someone just hates than to have someone throw me a 5-star rating with an "I loved it!" However, "Flesh out your characters" actually doesn't do me much good (no offense). Without any clear examples or good reasons as to why you feel the way you do, I can't really take the criticism and use it constructively... hence making it not constructive.
-------------------------
I do have some QUESTIONS for you, though:
"For the first three pages we seem to be stuck in the workings of a steel factory with not much happening in the way of enticing us into your story." --- From every screenplay and every screenwriting book I've read, you've got 5 pages to entice the reader/viewer into your story... and nearly 50 ppl are carelessly murdered in a matter of minutes... is that really not enticing?
I agree with your point about the voice-over... I haven't been sure about it for a long time, but I'll leave it until I've changed a little more of the story, or until I'm comfortable with the rest of the story.
"INT. STEEL FACTORY - DAY ? This should be substituted for- INT. STEEL FACTORY - CONTINUOUS"
--- Here's an excerpt from the highly regarded Screenwriter's Bible....
"If it is already obvious that one scene follows the other continuously without any time gaps or lapses, then it is not necessary to use CONTINUOUS... When in doubt as to what to do, always opt for clarity. Make it easy for your reader. Thus, I recommend that you always include all three parts of the master scene heading" (p. 131). -- Thanks to Mr. Synyster for that!
"Then from there we are back in the factory showing nothing but silence. No need for an extra scene heading there just condense this into one sentence which ends the previous scene and move on." --- I'm not sure where in the script you're referring to...
Also, I agree with the comment about using SUNSET in a slugline. You're right... I pick on ppl for that and there I am doing it...
"and by the way, drop all your directive language, such as camera directions etc. Save them for the shooting script." --- Are there camera directions? If there are, I'm missing them...
-----------------------------
Okay, so there's a response... I don't in any way mean anything argumentatively... I'm sure with your Alias being "Blunt" you're probably open to rebuttals, sooo... there you go.
I'm running on time right now so I'll get back to you soon with a more detailed account, but for now I'll just say that every screenwriter has their own particular style, so as far as the SWB goes, well it's a book full of ideals.
Write it anyway that suites your needs as long as clarity is paramount.
In my opinion the factory scene would read better as a montage. The scene could be condensed by probably 2/3rds, which would free up some pages for you to draw in some character exposition, or something. Character involvement is always best, rather that the V/O. I my opinion actions read louder than words.
Yeah there's a slaughter, but not much in the way of enlightenment. Draw on this, well, my advice anyway.
Camera actions: Page 2
a young man removes his hardhat and wipes the sweat from his brow.
"Hold on him." He is worn. He is tired. He is WARNER SHAW.
Your telling the us to concentrate on him, in effect this is directing. The camera would focus on him!
Also, you tell us thing about the characters that we don't need to know such as: Page one-
FARRIS LANDON heaves wheels to be loaded onto a pallet. He's 25, his braun readily on display. An eyepatch adorns his face -- "the result of an on-job injury."
We don't need to know what caused the disfigurement unless it's absolutely necessary.
Look, I'd like to edit this for you in my own time. I'll work on a few pages at a time, what do you say?
No hard feelings toward that shit last night!
I'm only into defending my own corner!
Zmail me your answer. Just for the record...I ain't no pro. But I know how to edit!
-B-
INT. MALL - CONTINUOUS as a scene heading after an initial scene heading
of:
INT. MALL - DAY
You say this "Would it be better to follow on through a script with a load of redundant scene headings?"
But wouldnt a bunch of scene headings of: INT. MALL - CONTINUOUS also BE REDUNDANT?? All you are doing is replacing "DAY" with "CONTINUOUS". Still redundant, isn't it??
Just thought I'd ask because I don't understand your reasoning.
He means I could do this...
INT. STEEL FACTORY - DAY
Then...
INT. HALLWAY - CONTINUOUS
And then...
INT. LOCKER ROOM - CONTINUOUS
Back to...
INT. HALLWAY - CONTINUOUS
And then again...
INT. CAFETERIA - CONTINUOUS
And when we're finished here...
EXT. RIVER - DAY
... because we've cut out some time.
-----------------------------
I understand what Blunt is getting at. This used to be a widely used technique for slug lines. But it really is the same as using "CUT TO:" after every scene... it's just not necessary. There's nothing wrong with it... it works... it indicates that we're still in the present and following the same sequence of events... but as David Trottier puts it... "If it is already obvious that one scene follows the other continuously without any time gaps or lapses, then it is not necessary to use CONTINUOUS." -- that seems to make a lot of sense to me.
In the same way that "CUT TO:" is not needed because it is IMPLIED that indicating a new scene heading means that we are naturally going to be CUTTING TO that scene, so is CONTINUOUS unneeded because it is IMPLIED that one scene follows another unless otherwise indicated in description (like saying "It is much later" or something-- which you'd need to say even if you were using CONTINUOUS anyway)....
But whenever I read through some of it, now and again, it always reminds of something that Scorsese would make... not the Coens. In fact, this doesn't seem like a Coen-ish story at all, to me.
I just listen to music like "Gimme Shelter" when I read the opening sequence, and it seems to fit like it did in The Departed.
And right after Warner (V.O.) says "this world does not support dreams..." I started playing "Gimme Shelter" while reading it, and it just seemed to fit so perfectly.
It's excellent however you look at it, though. I'll try "Martha's Dream" while reading it, too, to see what you mean. Because music can really change the way you see something... so it'll probably change the image in my mind if I read it like that. :)
...I like 'em, keep up the good work!
http://www.mediafire.com/12916studios
But I've been editing this in Final Draft 8 recently and it's changed a lot. More polished and well-rounded. Randall is more of a central character and he and Tessa have a love-interest thing that is much more central to the plot. And I changed the title to "Red All Over"... mostly just because I really like the sound of that.
I'll be posting Red All Over on here soon for anyone that is interested in seeing how the script has changed or for anyone who never read Stealers to begin with. So look out for that very soon.
Again, thanks for the comments. Very glad you enjoyed it.