Genre: Comedy/Action/Supernatural
Premise: A mother moves her family into the house of her recently deceased father, who was convinced that a portal to hell was opening up at a nearby mountain.
About: Ghostbusters Afterlife finally came out and pulled in 44 million dollars. For a little perspective, 2016’s all-female Ghostbusters had a 46 million dollar opening with bigger stars and no pandemic. So I think that’s a pretty good first weekend for the film. Then again, who knows anymore. A little side note about this film. It was directed by Jason Reitman, who is the son of Ivan Reitman, who, of course, directed the original Ghostbusters.
Writer: Gil Kenan & Jason Reitman (original characters by Harold Ramis and Dan Akroyd)
Details: 2 hours
It’s hard to talk about Ghostbusters Afterlife without talking about the 2016 Ghostbusters reboot. Because, in most ways, Afterlife is a response to that film. And, actually, you can’t talk about Ghostbusters Afterlife and 2016 Ghostbusters without talking about The Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker, since Rise of Skywalker was a correction movie in the exact same way that Afterlife was a correction movie. In both instances, the previous films alienated their core audience in search of new audiences, only to see that strategy fail. They didn’t bring new audiences in AND they lost legacy audiences in the process.
Ghostbusters 2016 was such a strange film in that the cast was great. Melissa McCarthy is great. Kristin Wiig is great. Kate McKinnon is great. The problem lay more with the Sony executives who greenlit the film. They decided to lean into the current trend at the time (female driven comedies) at the expense of what everybody loved about the original film, which was that great cast. It didn’t help that Paul Feig had no feel for the Ghostbusters universe whatsoever. He made so many bad creative choices that it, at times, felt like he was sabotaging the franchise. I mean why would you cast Bill Murray in a role that wasn’t his role in the original Ghostbusters? That would be like casting Arnold Schwarzenegger in the role of a concerned accountant in a Terminator sequel.
Now I’m not going to lie. I didn’t have high hopes for this latest Ghostbusters iteration. Reitman hasn’t had the best career after Juno. Even, arguably, his best movie since Juno, that Clooney flying movie thing, wasn’t very good. If you don’t believe me, I dare you to go back and watch that movie and have a more positive reaction than, “Eh, not bad.” Since then, he’s had Young Adult, Labor Day, Tully, and The Front Runner. Raise your hand if you saw any of these.
In that respect, Afterlife could easily have been seen as a metaphor for Reitman’s career, since it was pretty much dead. Yet he somehow convinced Sony to give him a shot at a Ghostbusters movie and here we are. As I sat down to watch this, I did a little prayer for this movie to be good. Being in California, they practically make you take a medical exam to get inside the theater so it was an exhausting ordeal. I needed the next two hours to be worth all the drama of getting in here. Let’s find out if they were.
Afterlife follows single mother Callie, who cares for her teenage son, Trevor, and pre-teen weirdo daughter, Phoebe. The three must move into her recently deceased father’s house (who she never knew) because she has no money and it’s her only living option. Phoebe immediately starts exploring the old house and realizes her grandfather was some sort of weird scientist.
Long story short, her grandfather was Egon Spangler, one of the famous Ghostbusters. By the way, kids in 2021 don’t really believe that the 1984 Ghostbuster event happened for some reason. I think because it was easier on the story if they didn’t. Anyway, Phoebe realizes that Spangler came here because a nearby mountain showed supernatural signs of opening up a portal to hell and wanted to stop it. And since he’s no longer around, that job will be up to Phoebe, Trevor, and their new friends from school.
Let me start off by saying my favorite new actor is the kid who played Podcast. I laughed at every single line of his, no exagerration. I understand why Sony needs to promote McKenna Grace as the breakout of this film but I mean, come on, if you’re being honest? It wasn’t even close. This kid was as good as Cory Feldman in his Goonies prime days.
I would say that Ghostbusters Afterlife is the breakout summer movie of the year (I think that’s when it was originally supposed to come out). Don’t believe me? Here is its competition: Black Widow, Shang-Chi, Venom 2, F9, A Quiet Place 2, No Time to Die, Eternals, Free Guy, Jungle Cruise, Dune, and Godzilla vs. Kong. I would say it’s better than all of those movies. Maybe Free Guy beats it in a death match but it would be close.
It certainly has all the ingredients for a great film. It’s got great characters, the comedy is genuinely funny, it’s got fun action sequences (I’d put the ghost car chase through downtown up against any set piece this year), it’s fun, it’s got heart, it has a few surprises along the way. And as much as I dog Reitman, there’s one thing he’s great at – getting good performances. He gets such great performances out of everyone. I mean I never understood why everyone loved Carrie Coon so much (the actress who plays the mother) until this film. She’s so great in this as a dumpster fire mother who uses her dark sense of humor to hold her family together.
I think detractors would point out the script is formulaic. But what you have to understand is that every studio movie that isn’t angling for an Oscar is going to use formula. It’s going to use the 3 act structure. It’s going to give its characters fatal flaws and inner demons that must be overcome by the end of the story. The challenge, then, is writing a great movie within that formula. You do that by being as creative as you can within those boundaries. The movie falls apart when you shrug your shoulders and say, “Well, it’s formulaic so I shouldn’t even try.” Embrace the formula then do as much as you can within it.
For example, they made this little ghost creature called “Muncher” that the kids had to hunt down early on. They called him that cause he was always munching on poles and metal. They eventually catch him in a ghost trap, but then that trap (and their proton backpack) get impounded by the police. They need that proton backpack for the final showdown so they break into the police station, only to find that the backpack is behind bars and, therefore, there’s no way to get it. Podcast then sees that the ghost trap is there as well and gets an idea. He reaches in, presses the release button, and Muncher pops out. What do you think Muncher then does? He eats his way out of the cage and flies off, giving the kids entry inside so they can grab the proton backpack.
That’s the kind of creative setup and payoff that a lot of writers won’t put the time and effort into. I know this because I read scripts ALL THE TIME where characters have to do stuff like this and the writers invariably use the old, “Do you have a hairpin” trope which they then pick the lock with. You can do it the creative way, in which case your movie will be cool. Or you can do it the lazy way, in which case your movie will be cliche.
(Spoilers) We do get into some heavy nostalgia at the end of the film. The original Ghostbusters do come back. I realize this will infuriate people who hate nostalgia. But not only did I think it was tastefully done (even Bill Murray had some classic Peter Venkmen lines that gave me goosebumps). I think it was necessary. You needed to course correct after the disaster that was 2016 and getting the Ghostbusters ghostbusting again was the only way to do it.
As you know, I’m a big proponent right now of movies that make you feel good. Movies that make you forget the pandemic for a couple of hours. This movie WILL make you feel good. And, honestly, I think the only reason it’s at 60% on Rotten Tomatoes is because there’s a certain subset of reviewers who don’t like that they’re trying to course correct from the previous movie. I honestly believe that 20-something percent was stripped from the score for that reason. In other words, don’t believe any negativity about GBA. It’s the most feel-good of feel-good movies you’re going to see all year.
[ ] What the hell did I just watch?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[xx] worth the price of admission
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: You can get around story problems with a little creativity. I noticed that Reitman wanted a teacher character in this script (to play the love interest for Callie). He wanted Phoebe to go to school so she could meet friends there. There was only one problem. The movie takes place during the summer. So what do you do? These sorts of logistical issues pop up in screenplays all the time. You want to do something but, for whatever reason, the story doesn’t allow it. Just remember, you’re God. You get to create the situation. So just be creative about it. Reitman got his school by introducing summer school into the story. And it actually helped the movie because it was a lot more laid back than normal school, which allowed Reitman to get a lot more comedy out of it. For example, Paul Rudd’s character is a teacher who throws on inappropriate 80s horror movies for the class to watch instead of actually teaching.
As you all know, the Black List is a mess. The way the votes are tallied is a highly flawed process. Scripts that were only seen by 20 people are going up against scripts that have been seen by 100 people. There are certain genres that get preference over others. Politics has started to influence voting in recent years. All this results in a bunch of vote tallies that are almost arbitrary at this point.
Which is why you’re lucky to have me. :)
Because I’ve read most of the scripts on the list which means I can give you the TRUE RANKINGS. And yes, I accept the disclaimer that taste is subjective. I am not the end all be all. But I’m pretty close! And I’m guessing all of you want to know which scripts from the list you should be reading anyway.
A couple of things to note before we get started. The way I’m going to be ranking is by memory. I’m not going to go strictly on my rating at the time. Scripts that got ‘worth the reads’ but lodged themselves in my brain will get graded higher than scripts that got ‘impressives’ which I’ve since forgotten.
Also, there are still a chunk of scripts from the list that I haven’t read yet and so those will not be appearing on the list. They are If You Were the Last, Enemies Within, Gusher, Bikram, Borderline, What If, Annalise & Song, Viceland, May December, Horsegirl, Fish in a Tree, Mouse, State Lines, Good Chance, Here Come the Bandits, Occupied The Sauce, Frenemy, Get Lite, Suncoast, Handsome Stranger, Margot, Tin Roof Rusted, and Yom Kippur.
If it makes you feel any better, I know I won’t like the large majority of those scripts (I still want to read Angela’s script and a couple others) which makes these 50 screenplays the real list. You ready to get started? Let’s go!
50 – REWIRED (10 votes)
Logline: Harvard. 1959. A young Ted Kaczynski is experimented on by Dr. Henry Murray during a secret CIA psychological study that may have led to the creation of the Unabomber.
Writers: Adam Gaines, Ryan Parrott
Reason: This script just isn’t my subject matter so that definitely played into the low rating. But even then, I felt that nothing much happened in the script. They didn’t choose an angle to best take advantage of this person’s story.
49 – DUST (7 votes)
Logline: A young mother in 1930s Oklahoma is convinced that her family is threatened and takes drastic steps to keep them safe.
Writer: Karrie Crouse
Reason: An entire script… about dust. Dust is the main character, the antagonist, the plot, the twists, dust, dust, and more dust. I have disliked some scripts before but this one got under my skin for some reason. I wanted things to happen and they just didn’t.
48 – MY DEAR YOU (11 votes) (Can’t find the review)
Logline: Based on a short story by Rachel Khong. A love story set in the afterlife about our struggle to let go of the past, even when our present is heaven… literally. Tess keeps searching for the love of her life without realizing he’s right there next to her the whole time, helping her look.
Writer: Meghan Kennedy
Reason: I know I read this script but I don’t remember anything about it. I think when the logline focuses more on feelings than what the actual plot is about, the script is in trouble.
47 – CHANG CAN DUNK (28 votes)
Logline: A young Asian-American teen and basketball fanatic who just wants to dunk and get the girl ends up learning much more about himself, his best friends, and his mother.
Writer: Jingyi Shao
Reason: There may be no script on this list that frustrated me more than this one. When you see this many votes, you’re expecting something special. But this was just some goofy little comedy with a kinda funny concept. I feel like there are 100,000 writers out there who could’ve written this exact same script.
46 – EMERGENCY (21 votes)
Logline: Ready for a night of partying, a group of Black and Latino college students must weigh the pros and cons of calling the police when faced with an emergency.
Writer: KD Davila
Reason: A tonal mish-mash of epic proportions. Is it a comedy? Is it a drama? No one knows!
45 – THE WOMEN OF ROUTE 40 (7 votes)
Logline: A struggling single mother must confront dangerous forces – and sins of her past – when her world collides with that of a serial killer. Inspired by the true story of Delaware’s only serial murderer, the Route 40 killer.
Writer: Erin Kathleen
Reason: I think the writer felt really passionately about the subject matter, which ultimately blinded them from writing an entertaining story. You have to learn to separate yourself from the material in order to come up with the best plot.
44 – CRUSH ON YOU (10 votes)
Logline: Summer on a secluded campus takes a dark turn for three college girls when a supernaturally sexy mystery man begins haunting their dreams.
Writer: Shea Mayo
Reason: You know I came across another review online of this script and the reader really liked it. So maybe I’m the crazy one. But this script felt half-baked in its best moments. A very lazy narrative that never intrigues or scares.
43 – EARWORM (9 votes)
Logline: A former music therapist is recruited to use a mysterious machine to dive into the memories of a serial killer on death row.
Writer: Austin Everett
Reason: Definitely one of the more interesting concepts on the list which is why I think it was one of the first scripts I reviewed. But it fell apart quickly. You could sense that the concept was too complicated and the writer wasn’t quite sure what to do with it.
42 – GABI SEEMS DIFFERENT (7 votes) (can’t find review)
Logline: After spending several years recovering from a devastating car crash that pulled her out of the spotlight, Gabi, a famous pop star, gets ready to perform again for the first time. But with the pressure mounting and her memory failing her, the young woman begins to doubt who she really is — and if Gabi really survived the crash at all.
Writer: Victoria Bata
Reason: This script exists like a fuzzy dream in my head. If I remember correctly, it was one of those “what is and isn’t real” type scripts, which, if not executed with a deft pen, can quickly get away from you.
41 – BLOOD TIES (10 votes)
Logline: Based on the New Yorker article by Nathan Heller. A true-crime thriller based on the story of two brilliant college lovers convicted of a brutal slaying. An obsessed detective investigates the true motives that led to a double homicide, and the decades of repercussions that follow.
Writer: Aaron Katz
Reason: Remember when True Crime was all the rage? What happened? I think the bar has been raised so when you get a script like this one that tackles a rather mundane true crime story, it doesn’t feel like it’s doing enough.
40 – RIPPER (15 votes)
Logline: London, 1888: When their friends begin dying at the hands of a brutal killer, an all-female crime syndicate, The Forty Elephants, must work together to take down the predator stalking them – Jack The Ripper.
Writer: Dennis MaGee Fallon
Reason: Another Jack the Ripper script. Is this number 82,567 for the decade? The logline sounds exciting but the script itself was rather tame. When you play in sandboxes that thousands of other writers are playing in, you have to bring something groundbreaking to the table.
39 – MURDER IN THE WHITE HOUSE (9 votes)
Logline: The President is murdered during a private dinner, and Secret Service agent Mia Pine has until morning to discover which guest is the killer before a peace agreement fails and leads to war
Writer: Jonathan Stokes
Reason: You gotta have the discipline and cleverness of Agatha Christie to write these whodunnits. If you take your foot off the gas for even a second, all the plates fall to the ground. The messiness in the plotting here was too much to overcome.
38 – THE NEUTRAL CORNER (13 votes)
Logline: Logline: A Nevada court judge who moonlights reffing high-profile boxing matches must face his demons when he’s assigned to the Olympic fight of an ex-con he’d previously sentenced for murder.
Writer: Justin Piasecki
Reason: I had to dig deep into the recesses of my mind to remember this one. From what I can recall, I was disappointed due to the fact that it’s a good concept that the writer didn’t exploit enough.
37 – FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE (19 votes)
Writer: Emma Dudley
Logline: On the way to her father’s wedding, a young woman still stuck in the closet hooks up with a female flight attendant, only to later find out she’s her father’s fiancé.
Reason: 19 votes? Come on. This is a standard concept that we’ve already seen before. It has a few nice moments but never rises above average.
36 – SATURDAY NIGHT GHOST CLUB (17 votes)
Logline: After being haunted by a terrifying entity, a twelve-year-old boy teams up with his eccentric uncle and three other misfits to form their own ghost club, investigating all the paranormal sites in town so that he can find and confront the ghost that’s tormenting him.
Writers: Steve Desmond, Michael Sherman
Reason: For one of the more fun-sounding premises, it was a bummer to read this and find out it didn’t deliver. Execution was sloppy. Not imaginative enough.
35 – RUBY (7 votes)
Logline: After her husband is attacked, assassin Ruby is lured into the open to hunt down those responsible, leading her back to the boss who wants to keep her in the fold at any cost.
Writer: Kat Wood
Reason: This is yet another Jane Wick script with average execution but it’s certainly more entertaining than half the scripts on the Black List, which is why I rated it number 35.
34 – NANNY (9 votes)
Logline: Aisha is an undocumented nanny caring for a privileged child. As she prepares for the arrival of her only son, who she left behind in her native country, a violent supernatural presence invades her reality, jeopardizing the American Dream she’s carefully pieced together.
Writer: Nikyata Jusu
Reason: This script has some good character moments between the nanny and the fractured rich couple. But it never quite figures out what it’s trying to do.
33 – THE BLACK BELT (15 votes)
Logline: Eighth grader Simon Paluska dreams of being a Taekwondo Black Belt, but he’s not allowed to take lessons. So he buys a Black Belt on Amazon for twenty-five bucks. Then, he has to use it.
Writer: Randall Green
Reason: This logline was funny but the execution never pushed the envelope. Be careful of “just good enough” execution. It’s a script killer. Push yourself!
32 – THE PEAK (7 votes)
Logline: A troubled young surgeon travels to a desolate peak to climb the mountain where her father suffered a mental breakdown years earlier, only to realize halfway up the rock wall that she might be subject to the same fate.
Writer: Arthur Hills
Reason: Maybe it’s because I’d read a couple of better versions of this idea already, but this never found a plot beat to elevate it above what was, for the most part, a tame idea. Great ideas need good execution. Decent ideas need great execution.
31 – HIGH SOCIETY (9 votes)
Logline: A depressed, progressive woman stuck in a conservative small Texas town starts micro-dosing the entire town with marijuana to make them all get along.
Writer: Noga Pnueli
Reason: Starts off promising then goes smoky. A little weird to have the main character actively drug an entire town. In a script that’s trying to make a morally superior political point through its main character, I’m not sure that was the right move.
30 – TWO-FACED (25 votes)
Logline: A high school senior attempts to get her principal fired after observing racist behavior, but she quickly learns he won’t go down without a fight.
Writer: Cat Wilkins
Reason: This is a pretty serious subject matter that’s dealt with so lightly I’m not sure the script ever found the proper tone. It just wasn’t as good as it could’ve been.
29 – COSMIC SUNDAY (9 votes)
Logline: A small percentage of the population is stuck in a time loop and have had to create a society that functions within the same day, repeated day in and day out. One man struggles to find himself for the first time in ages amidst a society clinging to a sense of normalcy.
Writer: MacMillan Hedges
Reason: I liked that it took an overused trope – the loop movie – and found a new way into it. Unfortunately, there are too many rules to this loop world and, as a result, the script became too messy to save.
28 – REPTILE DYSFUNCTION (11 votes)
Logline: A chemical leak in a local water supply in Central Florida wreaks havoc on the invasive population of pythons, leading a family to the fight of their life to survive.
Writer: Creston Whittington
Reason: The one thing I’ll say about this script is that it has a really fun setup. The problem is the execution isn’t good enough. Writer seemed too new to the game. Had so much potential!
27 – EMANCIPATION (8 votes)
Logline: Based on a true story, a runaway slave has to outwit bounty hunters and the perils of a Louisiana swamp to reach the Union army and his only chance at freedom.
Writer: Bill Collage
Reason: This one starts out really good then gets harder and harder to digest. Not light subject matter by any means. Have to be in the proper head space to read.
26 – THE BOY WHO DIED (10 votes)
Logline: A young girl creates a robot version of Harry Potter while her father simultaneously is treating Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe for a terminal disease.
Writer: Monisha Dadlani
Reason: I will just say this. This is one of the WEIRDEST ideas I’ve ever come across. And it almost works. But the weirdness becomes so overly weird that it can’t rebound from all the weird.
25 – NEITHER CONFIRM NOR DENY (26 votes)
Logline: An adaptation of David Sharp’s book The CIA’s Greatest Covert Operation that chronicles the clandestine CIA operation that risked igniting WWIII by recovering a nuclear-armed Soviet Sub, the K-129, that sunk to the bottom of the ocean in 1968.
Writer: Dave Collard
Reason: It’s an interesting story but gets bogged down by a lack of urgency. I don’t remember exactly what happened, but I remember that the thing takes place over like ten years or something. If this script could figure out its lack of urgency issue, it could be good.
24 – THE U.S.P.S. (11 votes)
Logline: Following in his murdered mother’s footsteps, Michael Griffiths enlists in the United States Postal Service… only to discover a mail route full of surprises and a job that means maybe, just maybe, saving the world.
Writer: Perry Janes
Reason: This script was way over the top. And I didn’t like the mix between the postal service and a secret agency. It felt unnatural. But it’s being made by Amazon so maybe I’ll eat my shorts in the end!
23 – I.S.S. (7 votes)
Logline: At any given moment in time there are roughly six astronauts living on the International Space Station (ISS). The station itself is divided into two segments one half Russian, one half American. When a world war event occurs on Earth, America and Russia find themselves on opposing sides. As such, both nations secretly contact their astronauts aboard the ISS and give them instructions to take control of the station by any means necessary. The six astronauts must each secretly choose between their friendships with each other and their allegiance to their country.
Writer: Nick Shafir
Reason: I’m such a sucker for sci-fi that I’ll basically read anything in the genre. This script doesn’t deliver for reasons I get into in the review. But something about it stayed with me enough that when I was ranking the scripts, I remembered it.
22 – A SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE (9 votes)
Logline: Journalists race to expose how Boeing knowingly misled regulators, pilots, and airlines to cover up a problematic flight software system on the 737 MAX, leading to two major airplane crashes and the deaths of 346 people. Based on real events.
Writer: Terry Huang
Reason: Ugh, it crushes me so much to prop up true stories. I want original stories, dammit! But, as far as true stories go, this one’s pretty interesting as it investigates how Boeing tried to pass blame on its own screw-up, which killed a bunch of people.
21 – A BIG BOLD BEAUTIFUL JOURNEY (14 votes)
Logline: After both attending the same wedding solo, David and Sarah embark on a big, bold, beautiful journey with a little help from their 1996 Passat GPS and a little bit of magic for the road trip of their lives.
Writer: Seth Reiss
Reason: This script has problems but I give it points for taking chances. If you like non-traditional love stories like 500 Days of Summer, you’ll love this
20 – ST. SIMMONS (11 votes)
Logline: When a very fat and possibly gay boy from New Orleans is visited by an angel called Barbra Streisand, he sets out on a holy crusade in daytime television to touch and save the soul of every obese person in America before his demons consume him – if only to make his daddy proud. It’s the true gospel of Richard Simmons.
Writer: Greg Wayne
Reason: Free Richard Simmons! This follows one of the most fascinating characters to ever become a celebrity. Does a good job delving into some of Simmons’s secrets and demons.
19 – 1MDB (10 votes)
Logline: The incredible true story of the multi-billion dollar Malaysian government corruption scandal which led to the conviction of Prime Minister Najib Razak and almost $5 billion in settlements paid out by Goldman Sachs.
Writer: Scott Conroy
Reason: To be honest, I just liked learning about this weirdo imposter who stole all this money and posed as a big shot… only to get away with it.
18 – BRING ME BACK (22 votes) (can’t find review)
Logline: When a woman on an interstellar voyage falls in love with someone during a cryosleep simulation, she attempts to discern whether the man is a real passenger on the ship or just a figment of her imagination.
Writer: Crosby Selander
Reason: Bring Me Back is probably the most high concept script on the list. And I certainly was intrigued by it. The problem is that it spans so much time and tries to do so much that it never quite finds its groove.
17 – BUBBLE AND SQUEAK (21 votes) (review no longer up)
Logline: Two newlyweds traverse a fictional country on their honeymoon but slowly realize they’re yearning to take separate journeys.
Writer: Evan Twohy
Reason: As someone who reads a lot, I appreciate when writers give me something different. And, holy cow, is that the case with Bubble and Squeak. This script is really weird. I’m not sure it all comes together in the end. But you can see why people remembered it enough to vote for it.
16 – WAR FACE (7 votes)
Logline: A female U.S. Army Special Agent is sent to a remote, all-male outpost in Afghanistan to investigate accusations of war crimes. But when a series of mysterious events jeopardize her mission and the unit’s sanity, she must find the courage to survive something far more sinister.
Writer: Mitchell Lafortune
Reason: I really loved the setup for this script. It gets a little crazy towards the end. But the ride getting there is fun.
15 – HEADHUNTER (29 votes) (review no longer up)
Logline: A high-functioning cannibal selects his victims based on their Instagram popularity, but finds his habits shaken by a man who wants to be eaten.
Writer: Sophie Dawson
Reason: I think Mayhem (Sophie) is a revelation. All of us love her here on Scriptshadow. She’s always delivered weird totally bonkers scripts. Headhunter is no exception. A bit too much like American Psycho for my taste but a killer (no pun intended) execution.
14 – THE MAN IN THE YARD (14 votes)
Logline: When a dangerous stranger shows up at her front door, a depressed widow must confront her own past in order to protect her two children.
Writer: Sam Stefanak
Reason: This one probably shouldn’t be as high as it is. But I can’t get this image out of my head of this guy whose features we can’t quite make out standing in the back of the yard, unmoving. That’s one of the most terrifying things I can imagine. Not the best execution but I would like to see this movie.
13 – EXCELSIOR! – 9 votes
Logline: The true story of the meteoric rise (and subsequent fall) of Marvel Comics and the star-crossed creators behind the panel: Stan Lee & Jack Kirby.
Writer: Alex Convery
Reason: When I die, make sure that they do a study on my brain to find out why I included a biopic in my top 20. But in all seriousness, come on, it’s Stan Lee! And the story behind his fallout with Jack Kirby is really interesting. This was an unexpected treat.
12 – PLUSH (8 votes)
Logline: Sex, money, and one schoolyard fad that took a nation by storm. Based on the true story of Ty Warner, the enigmatic entrepreneur behind a ‘90s toy craze that sparked madness, murder, and a billion-dollar empire.
Writer: Alexandra Skarsgard
Reason: I’m not Mr. True Story Guy by any means but the main character in this script was odd enough that I wanted to know more. And, of course, there’s the cutesy irony of becoming a billionaire by making tiny little stuffed animals.
11 – UNCLE WICK (8 votes)
Logline: An action comedy wherein Benji Stone, a lovable but deeply unpopular sixteen year old, is pulled into an international assassination plot by his uncle, a retired undercover assassin charged with babysitting Benji for the weekend.
Writer: Gabe Delahaye
Reason: Best pure comedy on the list. Great concept. Can see this movie being a hit tomorrow!
10 – POSSUM SONG (16 votes)
Logline: After discovering his secret songwriting partner dead, a country music star struggling to record new material makes a Faustian bargain with a family of possums who have taken up residency within his walls.
Writer: Isaac Adamson
Reason: This script took me back to the old Black List days, when every other script was dominated by animals! This one is bizarre in mostly a good way. Expect yourself to go through a lot of “WTF” moments with Possum Song, but, afterwards, being glad that you took the journey.
9 – SHARPER (17 votes)
Logline: A chain of scam artists goes after one wealthy family with the perfect plan to drain them of their funds. But when love, heartbreak, and jealousy slither their way into the grand scheme, it becomes unclear whether the criminals are conning or the ones being conned.
Writers: Brian Gatewood, Alessandro Tanaka
Reason: Okay, this one’s a little messy but as far as con scripts go, it’s the best one I’ve read in a while. The cons are fast and furious all the way til the last page!
8 – LURKER (11 votes)
Logline: An obsessed fan maneuvers his way into the inner circle of his hip hop idol and will stop at nothing to stay in.
Writer: Alex Russell
Reason: I started off rolling my eyes. I finished eagerly ripping pages away to find out what happened next. A great stalker story that feels very 2020.
7 – FLIGHT RISK (9 votes)
Logline: An Air Marshal transporting a fugitive across the Alaskan wilderness via a small plane finds herself trapped when she suspects their pilot is not who he says he is.
Writer: Jared Rosenberg
Reason: I love scripts like this. Tight quarters. Multiple secrets. High stakes. Twists and turns. This is a great little screenplay that contained enthusiasts will love.
6 – THE CULLING (10 votes) (newsletter review only – sign up at carsonreeves1@gmail.com!)
Logline: When a former priest returns home after an extended absence, he encounters the demon who killed his mother and must kill it before it possesses him.
Writer: Stephen Herman
Reason: This is a cool little horror film that uses a physical monster as a metaphor for the main character’s alcoholism. A good example of how to write a low budget single-location horror movie.
5 – GENERATION LEAP (7 votes)
Logline: After a global pandemic causes NASA to send a crew of astronauts into deep space to find another habitable planet, the crew is unexpectedly awoken from hypersleep and must survive a mysterious new threat that comes from the future generations they sought to save, and the one place they never expected – Earth.
Writers: John Sonntag, Thomas Sonntag
Reason: I probably shouldn’t have liked this one as much as I did. But I did. The concept is really clever, and once you realize what’s going on, you can’t help but anticipate who’s showing up next. Best pure sci-fi script on the list!
4 – THE GORGE (8 votes)
Logline: A brazen, high-action, genre-bending, love story about two very dangerous young people, who despite the corrupt and lethal world they operate in, find a soulmate in each other.
Writer: Zach Dean
Reason: This script isn’t perfect but I’ve never seen a setup like it before. And then it morphs into a love story, before morphing into a sci-fi horror adventure. Weird and uneven, but highly memorable. Writer Zach Dean, of course, just wrote Amazon’s biggest original movie, The Tomorrow War.
3 – MAGAZINE DREAMS (9 votes)
Logline: A Black amateur bodybuilder struggles to find human connection in this exploration of celebrity and violence.
Writer: Elijah Bynum
Reason: Dark. Very very dark. Not for the faint-hearted, that’s for sure. However, if you like scripts where you go deep into the psychosis of very unstable people, this one is a truthful portrayal of a warped mind. Uncomfortable but powerful.
2 – TOWERS (8 votes)
Logline: A businessman’s obsession with his competitor leads him down a rabbit hole of self-discovery, fantasy, and delusion.
Writer: Aaron Rabin
Reason: This script did an amazing job of keeping me guessing. It was offbeat, unexpected. The world we were in was weird and unpredictable. For writers trying to understand what a unique voice looks like, you’ll want to read this script.
1 – BIRDIES (16 votes)
Logline: When Tabitha, a struggling foster kid, wins a contest to become part of the BIRDIES, a popular daily YouTube channel featuring the radiant and enigmatic Mama Bird and her diverse brood of adopted children, she soon learns that things get dark when the cameras turn off.
Writer: Colin Bannon
Reason: The most original script on the list. The most timely script on the list. It was quirky but in an endearing way. The main character was so easy to root for. The villain was unique and interesting. This script hit all the marks and should’ve been voted as the top script of the year!
Final note: Have you read any of the scripts that I haven’t reviewed yet? Were they good? Should I review them next? Let me know in the comments!
Today’s script is 500 Days of Summer meets La La Land meets Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind meets A Christmas Carol
Genre: Romantic Comedy/Dramedy
Premise: After both attending the same wedding solo, David and Sarah embark on a big, bold, beautiful journey with a little help from their 1996 Passat GPS and a little bit of magic for the road trip of their lives.
About: This script finished with 14 votes on last year’s Black List, putting it in the vaunted Top 20. It comes from Seth Reiss, who wrote for the Seth Meyers show. But I’m more interested in his last feature screenplay, which was one of my favorites of last year, The Menu. There is a caveat on that one though, which is that Reiss wrote it with another writer (Will Tracy). On this one, he’s going solo.
Writer: Seth Reiss
Details: 128 pages
Today’s script has 500 Days of Summer like aspirations, mixed with some song and dance numbers, a la La La Land. That sounds to me like something Hollywood would love. But it also sounds to me like it could get stuck in quirksand. Ahh yes, you know what I’m talking about fellow readers – that irritating slushy sand that so many aspiring quirky screenwriters have drowned in. Let’s find out if the quirk reined supreme or the quirk was reined in…
37 year-old New Yorker, David, heads downstate for a wedding, in a 1996 Volkswagen Passat which includes a special GPS feature. At the wedding, David runs into Sarah, also in her 30s, and the two strike up a conversation. Sarah has developed a very tough exterior as a means to protect herself, making it hard for David to figure out if she likes him or not. At the end of the night, she couples up with one of the groomsmen so I guess that answers that.
The next morning, when David is about to drive home, his GPS asks him if he would like to go on a “big bold beautiful journey.” David’s a little creeped out that his GPS is talking to him but sure, why not. The GPS drives David to the nearest Burger King where, low and behold, he sees Sarah! The two enjoy a couple of whoppers and then David asks Sarah if she would like to join him on a big bold beautiful journey. She shrugs and says, sure, why not.
The GPS first brings them to a lighthouse museum that is, in itself, a lighthouse, and as the two watch the sun set at the top of the lighthouse, they realize that they kind of like each other. Next stop is David’s high school, except 20 years ago, during a pivotal moment his senior year. Present David, who’s embodying High School David, plays the lead in the school play. Before their performance, he tells his girlfriend that he loves her. But instead of saying it back, she dumps him for a college freshman. David is devastated.
Next they head to the Chicago Museum of Art, near where Sarah grew up, and one of the museum guards opens up one of the paintings for them to go inside. The painting is set in Paris so the two are now in Paris. Well, the painting version of Paris. After they explore the city, they head to a hospital circa a decade ago, where Sarah finally says goodbye to her mother, who previously died alone. Here, she gets a chance to correct that mistake.
The GPS eventually takes them on a trip to the future, where they are now married and mildly happy together. We then jump back to the present where the trip ends, and both David and Sarah, two souls who heavily guard their hearts, will have to decide whether to continue their journey together in the real world, or leave and never speak again.
It’s a good sign if you can make me laugh on the first page of a script: “We are in a cheap, bland, depressing looking car rental agency on 243rd street in Manhattan. Overhead florescent lights give the place a feeling like, if you took someone’s picture in here, the photograph would look like that person’s been dead for 3 days.” I laughed because those places really do make you look like you’re dead!
With that said, Beautiful Journey didn’t tickle my fancy so much as scratch a few itches. It’s a bold script where the writer makes some unique choices, but those choices are ultimately overrun by its try-hard style. This script wants so badly to be the next great talked about script, and that’s exactly what’s holding it back. If we can tell you’re trying to be talked about, we’re not going to talk about you.
For example, one of David and Sarah’s later stops is at the F.D.C.C.F.W.W.H.D.A.W.T.C.D.A.A.T.D.K. Center. What is that, you may ask? It’s The Formal Dating Complaint Center For Women Who Have Dated And Wish To Complain Directly About And To David Kimmel. It’s a bit too quirk overload for me.
And therein lies the challenge of screenwriting. You’re trying to create these memorable lines and scenes and moments and terminology, and yet it must all be presented invisibly, as if there was never a writer behind it. This is what sank Cameron Crowe’s career. He became obsessed with trying to create these zeitgeist moments and as soon as that became the driving force behind all his screenplays, his movies became unwatchable.
You can’t force this stuff. You have to write what you feel – what is true – and if it captures the world’s imagination, it captures their imagination. But the second you start force-feeding it, the audience can tell, and they’ll rebel against you.
I still liked some things about the script, though. For example, I thought Reiss made a good decision when David and Sarah did not sleep together at the wedding. The second your leads kiss or have sex, you lose one of the most valuable forms of conflict there is in a romantically driven story, which is sexual tension. That sexual tension is GOLD. So hold onto it for as long as you can. If you ever have any doubts about this, compare any sitcom before the lead romantic couple got together and after. Cough cough – Jim and Pam – cough cough. The couple becomes exponentially less interesting after they get together.
The script is also a breeze to read due to all the dialogue. Normally when I see 130 pages, I want to take the world biggest fork and jam it into my eye sockets. But there’s so much dialogue here – not to mention the dialogue chunks are rarely over three lines – that your eyes whip down the page. It’s a secret weapon for rom-coms, since, if the reader’s eyes never have to leave the middle of the page, they’re going to read that script so much faster. Which makes them feel good! You feel like Superman when you down in a script in 45 minutes.
And, to the writer’s credit, this is a different way into a relationship story, which is one of the harder things to do in screenwriting – come up with a delivery method that’s different from what we’ve seen before. You have this GPS person taking these two characters on a journey, which offers up several unique scenarios. And it’s fun wondering where it’s going to take them next. Every destination is a mystery.
Normally, I’d nitpick the fact that the main characters are passive in this experience. But because we’re in a car and we’re always moving towards a new destination, the story doesn’t feel passive. If the movie took place in one location and the characters were acting on someone else’s orders, then yes, I would call out the passiveness. But here, it’s not a problem.
I feel like this script will gain some fans. But, for me, I was too aware of the gears underneath the pages. I could feel the writer trying to be quirky. These types of stories only work when the choices feel invisible and there are very few writers who can pull that off. Charlie Kaufman comes to mind.
Will be curious to see what you guys think of this. Let me know in the comments!
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: I know writers are terrified of doing stuff that’s “wrong” in screenplays because they fear it will be a “tell” to seasoned readers. While that’s true to an extent, you don’t know what you don’t know. So you can’t avoid all of these mistakes right out of the gate. It takes time to learn them. The good news is, if you write a good script, a few of these mistakes won’t matter. For example, in Beautiful Journey, Reiss writes out “End of Act 1” at the end of the first act, as well as “End of Act 2” at the end of the second act. This is such a beginning screenwriter “tell” because nobody does it. However, as you can see, it didn’t matter. The script still got on the Black List. So just focus on writing a good script. If you succeed at that, readers will overlook these other, less important, mistakes.
Genre: Action/Crime
Premise: After a small time criminal tries to make a big time score, his drug deal goes massively wrong and he becomes the most hunted man in the city.
About: Today’s script comes from The Raid director Gareth Evans, who just signed a deal with Netflix. This is the first film on his slate and will star Tom Hardy.
Writer: Gareth Evans
Details: 117 pages
Wooop wooop. Wooop Wooop (these are alarm sounds, by the way). We have a ‘strange screenplay text’ alert. If anyone knows the name of the text in this script, please tell us in the comments. Because I can confirm this text is so scrunched together, the script is probably closer to 200 pages than 118. Not that Evans cares. Netflix seems to have given him carte blanche to do whatever he wants. But to all readers out there, this is a visual assault on the eyes not unlike the brutal ass beatings Evans’ movie characters put on each other. Make it stop!
We start off following 22 year old Charlie Beaumont and his girlfriend, Mia, a Bonnie & Clyde duo who have just stolen a bunch of cocaine-filled washing machines (yes, you read that right) and only escape the pursuing cops by throwing one of those washing machines out the back door of their truck, where it collides with the cop car’s windshield, nearly decapitating the policeman in the passenger seat.
Cut to Charlie and Mia entering the dark fortress of Tsui in Chinatown. Tsui practically runs the city. Just as Charlie and Mia are going to sell him the cocaine they stole, three dudes in hockey masks run in and kill Tsui and his entire gang. Charlie and Mia barely escape, having no idea that it was Tsui’s second-in-charge, Ching, who orchestrated the hit.
When the cops show up to the crime scene, including our hero, Walker, they check the limited security footage and see Mia and Charlie running away. It just so happens that Walker knows Charlie. And he knows he couldn’t have killed all these people. Doesn’t matter. All the cops think he did it. And the remaining members of Tsui’s Triad gang think so too, which means everyone is now out to either capture or kill Charlie and Mia.
Walker immediately heads to Charlie’s father, big time politician Lawrence Beaumont. Lawrence has so much dirt on Walker that he can put him in prison for life if he wants to, which has made Walker his lap dog for years. Lawrence tells Walker that if he doesn’t find and return a living Charlie to him before he’s slaughtered by either the cops or the Triad, then prison is exactly where Walker will be going.
Things get even dirtier when Tsui’s mother flies into town with her own personal army. She is going to find Charlie and Mia and make them suffer worse than any human being has suffered in all of history. Of course, Charlie and Mia didn’t kill Tsui. Ching did. Which is why Ching is also, secretly, running around town trying to find Charlie and Mia, so he can kill them and, in the process, bury his secret.
Eventually, Walker catches up with Charlie and Mia. He’ll need to escort them back to Lawrence while, seemingly, every person who’s ever committed a crime in this city is after them. Will any of the three survive???
You know, I didn’t like this one at first. It’s sort of one big action scene, which can be hard to read since you’re not really getting to know the characters that well. You could feel the reluctance bleeding through the page when Evans had to include some phone calls back to Walker’s wife, just to provide the tiniest bit of character development to the story (more on character development in a sec).
But as the script goes on, and you muscle your way through the intricate setup, you realize that the setup is actually pretty clever. And it’s clever because nothing is easy for anyone. If you want to quickly improve your screenwriting, make things more difficult on your characters. However difficult it currently is, make it more difficult than that. And not just for your main character. But for your villain. For your side characters. Everyone.
You have Charlie, who of course is being hunted by everyone even though he didn’t kill Tsui. You have Walker, whose boss wants him to capture Charlie. But he can’t capture Charlie because Lawrence has forced him to retrieve Charlie. You have Lawrence, who isn’t just trying to save his son, but also trying to hide the fact that his son stole drugs from one of *his* secret operations, which means Lawrence is on the hook if they discover where the cocaine originated. You have Ching, who secretly orchestrated all this, but now must outmaneuver Tsui’s more ruthless mother to kill Charlie so that Charlie doesn’t give up his secret. It feels like everybody’s goal is complicated. There’s nothing clean about each pursuit, which is how you want it.
Also, Havoc reminds us that a MacGuffin doesn’t always have to be a thing. It can be a person. In this case, the person is Charlie. For those of you who don’t know what a MacGuffin is, it’s the thing in the movie everyone is after. The great thing about MacGuffins is they create INSTANT ACTIVITY. Every single character becomes active since they’re all going after the MacGuffin. If you don’t have a MacGuffin, you’ll have to come up with individual goals for each character, which is a lot harder.
Another thing you’ll want to consider with action screenplays is to do what Evans does here, which is to focus on character interactions rather than character backstory. I think most writers believe that backstory = character development. They think characters have to monologue about some big event or death that happened in their past to truly convey who that character is.
But you don’t really want to do that in an action screenplay because action screenplays have to move. For that reason, you want to explore character through the conversations people have and let the reader fill in the backstory gaps themselves based on what those characters say.
For example, when Walker argues with Lawrence about capturing Charlie, you can throw in little bits and pieces of past between the two (“I’ve been covering for you for years”) without going into long-drawn out melodramatic exposition drops. In an action script, this passes for character development because we are learning about the characters through these interactions.
You can, of course, throw big long monologues in there. You can throw every writer’s favorite device in there – the dead kid backstory. But these moments are going to feel weird in an action movie because action movies need to move. And stopping everything to talk about some tragedy that happened 20 years ago is the opposite of movement.
Havoc takes some initial investment to appreciate. But once you’ve done the hard work of tracking all the main players in the first 30 pages, the script opens up and starts to have fun with everyone, zigging them and zagging them all over the city, throwing in the occasional twist and turn to keep you on your biggest and smallest toes. This is going to be a cool movie for Netflix.
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[x] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: Make things difficult for your characters, especially in action-crime movies, where cliches abound. For example, if all Walker had to do was catch Charlie and bring him into the station, that’s too standard. You need to make it more difficult. So, instead, Walker has to capture Charlie behind the cops back, then sneak him to his politician father without anyone knowing. That’s a lot more difficult than cuffing him and reading him his Miranda rights.
This weekend I watched two movies, Shang-Chi and Red Notice. Although I don’t live and die by Rotten Tomatoes scores, I did check the two RT scores for these movies and saw that, for Red Notice, it got a 40%, and Shang-Chi a 92%. I’m going to use today’s post to make an argument why those scores should be reversed. The problem with Red Notice, in my opinion, is that people (critics, in particular) didn’t realize what it was trying to do.
First, it’s giving you an alternative to big fun superhero movies. The superheroes in Red Notice are the outsized personalities of its three leads. Everybody is funny, everybody is charming, and everybody, of course, has a ten gigawatt smile. Second, everybody involved in this movie wanted only one thing: to make audiences feel good. We’re living in a tough day-to-day environment with a lot of polarization and a lot of anger. These guys said, “Let’s make everyone forget about that for two hours.” And, for the most part, they succeeded.
The film, which I’d pitch as Rush Hour meets The Da Vinci Code meets Raiders of the Lost Ark, follows FBI agent John Hartley (The Rock) as he tries to capture the most notorious art thief in the world, Nolan Booth (Ryan Reynolds), who is attempting to steal three bejeweled eggs that belonged to Cleopatra, the entire set being worth 300 million dollars. As the story unfolds, Hartley and Booth must work together to stop a third thief, The Bishop (Gal Gadot) from obtaining those three eggs.
Red Notice got me thinking about a Hollywood movie mainstay: The “Turn Your Brain Off and Just Enjoy Yourself” movie. A lot of cinephiles haaaaaaaaaayte this type of movie. They want their Moonlights. They want their Spotlights. Anything that doesn’t challenge the mind is a waste of their time. But you have to remember that the large majority of moviegoers don’t watch those movies. They just want to be entertained. Which Red Notice does.
Now all “Turn Your Brain Off and Just Enjoy Yourself” movies are not created equal. There are good versions and there are bad versions.
Good Version: Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Bad Version: Geostorm
Good Version: John Wick
Bad Version: 6 Underground
Good Version: Shazam!
Bad Version: The Do-Over
The question is, what is the difference between the two? If you’re setting out to write one of these movies, how do you make sure you write John Wick and not 6 Underground? And I think I know the answer. Laziness. The bad versions of these movies always seem to have more cliches in them. Always seem to have less thoughtful plot beats in them. They seem to be less creative in all the key areas. For example, the whole Continental Hotel thing in John Wick really helped set that movie apart because it built a bigger mythology into the assassin world than your garden variety spy flick.
To put it more succinctly, the bad versions of these films feel like they never got past a second draft. For those of you new to screenwriting, the second draft of a screenplay is where you’re still figuring out how your story comes together. You’re using the second draft, mostly, to fix all the sloppy stuff in the first draft. Then, once you’ve painted a lot of that dry wall, you can start to decorate the interior. But you’re probably not going to finish those decorations until the sixth draft. There’s a whole lot left to figure out in the story.
(Random Star Wars reference ahead) This is why The Phantom Menace was such an oblong clunky experience with little good and a whole lot more bad. It’s because George Lucas famously only wrote one draft. Screenwriting doesn’t favor the lazy. It is a craft that rewards writers who challenge every scene and plot beat and character they’ve written and ask themselves, “Can I make this better in the next draft? And then the draft after that. And then the draft after that.”
Red Notice isn’t a perfect movie but it’s perfect at what it’s trying to do – which is give you 2 hours of pure entertainment. Get to the stuff at the end when World War 2 comes into play and tell me you don’t become giddy. It was like a comedic version of Raiders of the Lost Ark. I had a blast watching this and unless your heart is made of rock, I expect you to like it as well. It kind of has that old-school “line up around the block early 2000s Hollywood” vibe that’s been missing from the industry for a while.
Meanwhile, I checked out Shang-Chi because it was free on Disney +, and I can’t say I felt the same way about it. It started off strong. I loved that out-of-control bus scene inspired by Spider-Man 2. I was digging the main character, Shaun. He played the underdog role well and he was funnier than I thought he would be.
But the whole movie went to Garbage Town as soon as they traveled to the sacred forest. All of a sudden there were dragons and random big dog monsters and about 60 scenes in a row of people sitting around, talking in rooms about their daddy issues. It went from this really cool movie to the world’s most boring superhero flick (not including The Eternals, of course). They even brought back one of the most disliked characters in the Marvel Universe, that dumb Mandarin guy from Iron Man 3.
But the biggest problem with the film was that Marvel, once again, displayed its achilles heel, giving us a 200 million dollar CGI ending it paid 20 million dollars for. You had dumb dragons flying around, as well weird mini-dragons. And people trying to break into some giant cave door. It was so dumb and pointless. This same CGI overload was a problem in Black Widow and Black Panther. The difference is that those movies were good enough to withstand those endings, whereas Shang-Chi was not. They should’ve kept this movie back in San Francisco. That’s where it was working. A huge Marvel letdown.
On the TV side of things, I checked out two shows. The first was the Will Ferrell Paul Rudd Apple show, The Shrink Next Door. You know how when you start watching something and you can tell immediately that it’s not going to work? There’s either a shot or a scene or a character that lands with a big thud? Something about what you’re watching feels disjointed, uncalibrated, off.
That was this show.
We start off with this pointless behind-Will-Ferrell walking scene where he’s in a beekeeper suit and I immediately knew. “Here we go! Quirky for quirk’s sake opening!” And then we cut to Paul Rudd at a party playing this over-the-top persona he clearly isn’t right for. I knew right then that whatever they were attempting to do with this show wasn’t going to work. I kept watching but every subsequent scene only confirmed what those first couple of scenes told us – that this was going to be Lame City. It’s too bad because I really like both actors. But this show is not worth your time.
Which leads me to a show that IS worth your time if you love interesting screenwriting stuff – the show “You” on Netflix. “You” is about a more charming version of Christian Bale’s American Psycho character, a New York bookstore owner named Joe Goldberg. Joe falls in love with a girl who comes into his store, Beck, and starts stalking her, learning everything about her, and then strategically placing himself in situations where they’ll meet so as to, ultimately, become her boyfriend.
The reason this show makes me all slobbery for screenwriting is because it tackles two huge screenwriting pillars. The first is dramatic irony. If you don’t remember what dramatic irony is, it’s one of the most powerful storytelling tools a writer has in his toolbox and basically gives the reader more information than one of the main characters.
“You” is the most aggressive use of dramatic irony I’ve ever seen. I’m going to spoil a few things here, but nothing past the third episode. Joe clones Beck’s phone so that he has access to all her texts, all her social media, all her e-mail, all her calls. He knows everything about Beck as soon as she knows it. Joe is also a killer. He kills Beck’s hookup buddy so as to clear a path to become her boyfriend. And when her best friend starts getting in the way as well, he looks for ways to eliminate her too.
This creates one of the more interesting relationship shows you’ve ever watched because when Joe and Beck are together, we know that there’s this entire other world going on beneath the surface that’s paved the way for this relationship to happen. It makes every single one of their conversations exciting because there’s always an element of subtext involved (that’s a dramatic irony bonus – it automatically creates conversation subtext).
If you’ve ever underestimated what dramatic irony can do for you, check this show out. Because it’s dramatic irony on nitroglycerin. There is never a moment where there isn’t more going on in a scene than just a conversation. There are always several layers UNDERNEATH.
The other crazy thing about this show is it demonstrates just how far you can push a character and still make him sympathetic. Despite everything I just wrote, you will root for Joe and Beck to be together. How is it that a writer can make you root for a character who does such despicable things? Well, watch the show. Because it shows that, with several clever writing tricks, you can make almost anybody sympathetic.
In this case, the guy that Beck was hooking up with was the world’s biggest jerk. He was mean to her. Didn’t care about her. Said a lot of nasty things to her. Only called at 2 am when he was drunk. So when Joe kills him, we’re actually happy. We like Beck a lot and we didn’t want her to be with this guy. And then, with her friends, they’re bad as well. One of them, in particular is super-controlling and manipulative and uses Beck and also keeps her from chasing her dream. So we want Joe to get rid of her.
Another thing that really helps when you have a bad person is voice over. “You” has more Joe voice over than it does regular dialogue. Joe is always taking us through his thought process. Sometimes it’s creepy. But mostly, it’s motivated by good intentions. The more we hear someone talk about why they’re doing things, the more likely we are to understand them. Whereas, if there was no Joe voice over and we saw him kill people, we’d probably hate him.
And they do cheap ‘save the cat’ things as well. There’s a kid who lives in the apartment next to Joe whose step-dad is abusive and Joe helps the kid cope, always giving him books from his store and giving him a shoulder to cry on. It’s audience manipulation at its finest but, hey, it works. Who isn’t going to like a character who helps a kid living with an abusive family?
So from a screenwriting perspective, this show is worth checking out because it does things you’re not supposed to do and has figured out a way to make them work – mainly that the protagonist is a stalker-slash-serial killer and we still want him to end up with the girl. I haven’t run into too many movies or shows that have been able to pull something like that off. Which is why I’m so impressed. Check it out if you can!
