You’ve got about an hour left to vote for the best scene in the First Scene Showdown. It’s a close race so every vote counts! For those of you who already voted, though, it’s time to get your Scriptshadow Newsletter on. This is a goodie! I teach you about two secret unknown pages in your screenplay along with their super powers. I’ve got a brand new interview for you from a Scriptshadow reader who got his passion project turned into a TV show. I’ve got a great book recommendation. I’ve got a script notes deal! And of course I give you my hot takes on all the latest trailers, each peppered with plenty of screenwriting tips.
Make sure to check your spam and promotions folders if you don’t see it.
If you don’t receive the newsletter within 2 hours of 9pm Pacific Time, or you want to be on the list, e-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com with the subject line “NEWSLETTER.”
What I liked most about this showdown was that every time I opened an e-mail submission, I would read the logline and think, “Ooh, this sounds good!” You can’t even begin to understand how amazing that feeling is when you compare it to what I usually go through, which is that I have to repeatedly read ten submissions to find a single decent logline.
With that said, if I’m being 1 million percent honest, there were no standout first scenes here. Which isn’t the end of the world. It’s hard to write a great first scene. Heck, it’s hard to write a great anything.
One of you posted a published top 10 list of the best agreed-upon opening horror scenes of all time and even that list starts to get weak towards the bottom. The 11 thru 20 best that you also posted made me realize just how rare it is to find a strong first scene.
But I think there’s a clear best scene in this bunch. Curious to see if you guys vote it to the top. I will reveal which one I thought was the clear winner at the end of the weekend. You can vote until Sunday, 10pm Pacific Time.
If you’ve never voted in a showdown before, it’s easy. Read as much of each scene as you can then use the comment section to cast your vote for your favorite scene. I’ll review the winner after the weekend.
And since I know this question will be asked, there were 62 writers who submitted their first scene for the showdown.
Good luck everybody and have an awesome screenwriting weekend. It goes without saying: Write your asses off!
TITLE: Karoshi: The Drive
Genre: Horror
Logline: A reporter investigates the stories of people who are literally working themselves to death, then realizes she can’t eat or sleep or rest either, she must keep working on the story, hoping to undo the curse before it kills her too…
Full Scene: LINK HERE
Title: CLEAVE
Genre: Horror
Logline: At a couples retreat for failing marriages, a husband and wife face an extreme form of therapy that requires purification through pain. As the therapy grows increasingly brutal, it becomes clear that their hosts have no intention of letting them leave alive.
Full Scene: LINK HERE
Title: The Devil in 5D
Genre: Horror
Logline: A woman begins to suspect the man living in the floor above her is actually Satan, and the building itself a portal to hell.
Full Scene: LINK HERE
Title: Immolation
Genre: Horror
Logline: Haunted by her husband’s fiery suicide, a young widow infiltrates a trauma-support cult connected to his death only to find herself seduced by its charismatic leader, who promises spiritual liberation through self-immolation.
Full Scene: LINK HERE
Title: Bite to Bite
Genre: Horror
Logline: From bite to bite, we follow the zombie infection as it spreads – each victim’s story unfolding from the moment they’re bitten to when they pass it on.
Full Scene: LINK HERE
Title: The Zakim
Genre: Horror – Monster in a Box
Logline: A group of motorists become trapped when a monster intended to be the ultimate killing machine gets loose on Boston’s Zakim Bridge and the military won’t let anyone off until the beast feeds.
Full Scene: LINK HERE
Today’s script feels like the movie Tarantino was writing as his final film before abandoning it. That script was called “The Critic,” about a movie critic. I can imagine today’s antagonist being exactly who Tarantino envisioned for his own critic.
Genre: Dark Comedy/Thriller
Logline: A long-suffering sous chef seeks revenge after a chauvinistic food critic’s zero-star review destroys her debut restaurant – and everything is on the menu.
About: Today’s review has more storylines than the Bible. The script comes from amateur screenwriter Michael Wightman. It was originally entered in the Mega Showdown. It did not make the finals. So I recently put it up with four more scripts in the Second Wave Showdown, which gave a chance to screenplays that didn’t make the Mega Showdown cut. What I didn’t know until today is that Michael Wightman is the same writer who wrote “The Best and the Brightest,” another script that didn’t make the finals of a contest but would win some readers over and eventually go on to get sent all over Hollywood. Here’s that logline if you forgot it: “After the president of the United States is poisoned aboard Air Force One, a no-nonsense Secret Service agent reluctantly teams up with a hotshot White House staffer to investigate a flight of high-maintenance VIP suspects and solve the murder before the plane lands.” So now Michael is back writing the opposite of high concept. Let’s find out what that looks like.
Writer: Michael Wightman
Details: 107 pages
In a perfect world, I would only review screenplays from the writers of this site. The reason I don’t do that is because I need at least SOME positive reviews. And whenever I read an amateur script for the site, 95% of the time, it isn’t worth the read.
So, if you want more homegrown scripts reviewed, you gotta bring the heat. You have to be able to play with the big boys, write on par with the professionals. I liked today’s idea. I tend to always like dark scripts about chefs, mainly because that job is one of the most pressure-intensive in the world. We all saw what that looked like in the first two seasons of The Bear.
I’m hoping that this latest amateur script is good because it will allow me to review more amateur scripts on the site.
Chef Kat Winnick is at the culmination of years of hard work. She’s opened her own restaurant. And the first night is going well until 55-year-old New York Times food critic Jonathan Croxton shows up in disguise. He’ll be grading the food on the restaurant’s very first night.
It does not go well. Jonathan’s voice-over of his review plays over shots of the first night’s struggle. And as the review continues, we realize he’s eviscerating the place. After the scene ends, we cut to months later and the restaurant went out of business due to that review. Kat is devastated.
Kat must grovel to get a sous chef job at another restaurant and, by coincidence, Jonathan shows up there too. He doesn’t like the way Kat cooked his steak and so he gets her fired from that job as well. This dude is relentless!
But Jonathan’s life isn’t going perfectly either. The New York Times tells him that he’s close to being a fossil in this business, which doesn’t appreciate written reviews anymore. All food reviewing is online now, a place that Jonathan despises. They tell him he needs to step down.
Jonathan drifts through a series of encounters with the world – a book tour, a mentorship, and eventually partnering with a wealthy backer to open a restaurant.
He’s later poisoned by raw carrots at a random restaurant and presumes it was Kat. He gets the sense that he’s being watched wherever he goes in the city. He comes home to his apartment one night to find his precious bird has been let out of its cage with the apartment window open. And he even comes home another night to find that dinner has been made for him (his favorite, foie gras).
When Jonathan is finally invited to dinner by an elusive ‘pop-up’ chef he’s been desperate to try, he goes there expecting to experience the best culinary night of his life. And he experiences exactly that. Unfortunately, he experiences so much more.
Starcrossed is a strange script. But it’s strange in so many good ways!
There are a lot of unique choices here that help this script stand out. And I want to go over some of the more prominent ones because if there’s one big lesson to learn from today’s script, it’s to make creative choices that don’t always line up with what you’re “supposed to” do. The reason this is important is because the choices that are “wrong” are also the choices that make your script different from others. There’s still the challenge of getting those “wrong” choices to work. But, if you’re a good writer, and today’s writer is, you can make it work.
The first bold choice was to primarily follow Jonathan, the villain of the story, as opposed to Kat, our “good guy.” 99 out of 100 writers would’ve followed Kat. So, just by doing the opposite, the script already has a different feel to it.
The problem that I’ve discovered in the past when writers do this is that we so dislike the villain that we don’t enjoy being around them. But Michael has crafted a really interesting character in Jonathan. He is this pompous a-hole who believes he walks on water and yet he’s also being phased out of the business. So he’s having to face his career mortality head-on.
For many people, especially men, they tie their identity to their profession, especially if they’re successful. So, being told to step down from that profession forces the character to evaluate who they are (if they aren’t their job). And I loved that contrast here. Jonathan is an arrogant self-important prick who believes he’s god’s gift to food criticism who’s terrified that, in a year, he’ll be jobless.
What that contrast does is it creates a level of unpredictability when Jonathan interacts with others. In one scene he’s gleefully tearing down some new restaurant’s signature dish. And in the very next scene he’s watching from afar as the cool new kids at the paper talk about the hot new mysterious pop-up chef they’ve all experienced, a chef that Jonathan can’t seem to get an invitation to no matter how hard he tries.
I love that. I love when a character is unpredictable. It keeps me on edge. The most boring characters are the ones who you know exactly what they’re going to say every scene before they say it.
Another choice Michael made – this one plot-related – was something nobody else would’ve done because screenwriting books tell you not to. Yet it was incredibly effective. He gave us the big scene in the beginning where Jonathan’s review destroys Kat’s restaurant on its very first day.
But then, months later, Kat has to swallow her pride and become a sous chef at another restaurant. And it just so happens that Jonathan comes there for a meal. Kat cooks him a steak. He gets mad at the way the steak is cooked, complains to the restaurant owner and gets her fired.
Wow.
Imagine ruining someone’s career and then additionally ruining their sad Plan B career as well. Normally, screenwriting teachers would say this second ruining was unnecessary. The first one did the job. You’re just repeating a plot beat, which you’re never supposed to do. But this scene was a pivotal one in pulling me into the story. It turned Jonathan from an annoyance to a verified a-hole. An a-hole that I now wanted to see go down.
Once you can pull a reader in emotionally, such as the case here with me wanting to see Jonathan taken down, you’ve got them. That’s one of the most effective ways to connect with a reader.
Finally, I loved the Máximo mystery chef. Because Michael has a tough job for himself here. There isn’t a big narrative engine driving the story forward. Jonathan doesn’t technically have a goal. We’re essentially waiting for the next big strike by Kat. That’s a story engine in a way, but it’s not usually one that can drive an entire movie. You need more.
Michael recognized this and looked for other ways to complement the story engine. Máximo was the perfect way to do this. He’s this culinary mystery man who carefully curates his guest lists and his moving restaurant never pops up in the same place twice. Jonathan becomes obsessed with making the list. And that becomes a sort of minor story engine.
By story engine I just mean anything that creates page-turning momentum. If the reader wants to keep turning the pages to find out what happens, he’s doing so because the writer has created either one powerful, or a series of medium to small, story engines. So, I thought that was really clever on Michael’s end to recognize that issue and plug something in there to make sure we remained invested.
So, if this script is so good, you’re probably wondering why it didn’t do better in the contest. It didn’t even make the main Mega-Showdown. It only made the more recent Second Wave Showdown.
I know the answer to this.
The first scene was not good.
Michael makes a classic mistake which was to use that first scene (where Jonathan’s review of Kat’s restaurant plays over her opening night) as information.
Don’t get me wrong. The scene does a good job setting everything up. But that’s only half of what you’re supposed to do with your opening scene. The other half – and arguably the more important half – is that you have to entertain us.
If I’m your average reader, I am not entertained by this opening scene. I’m more trying to keep up. Trying to keep tabs on who’s who. I’m trying to figure out what this voice-over is about, which wasn’t clear at first. It feels like work. And that’s just a script killer right there. If your opening scene feels EVEN A TEENSY BIT like work to the reader, they’re probably not going to continue reading. And that’s what I suspect happened with the site members who gave this a shot.
Because for those first ten to fifteen pages, I was already thinking about the negative things I was going to talk about in the review. And then everything started to come together and the script got significantly better as it went on.
This is apropos since we have the big First Scene Showdown for the Blood & Ink participants coming up. So those writers need to keep in mind that you don’t get points for your well-written setup. Setup should be a given. It’s the entertainment part that matters most.
This script was excellent overall, though. It kept getting better. And it has a really fun ending.
Script link: Starcrossed
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[x] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: I don’t know what kind of process Michael went through where he came to the conclusion to follow Jonathan over Kat. But it was the right decision. And I think what aspiring writers need to take away from that choice is that you should always consider following the best character that you’ve written, even if doing so is nontraditional. Jonathan is simply a more interesting character than Kat. If we had followed Kat in her pursuit to take down Jonathan, this script isn’t nearly as interesting. So if a supporting character that you’ve written is unexpectedly awesome, at least ask the question to yourself, “What does this script look like if I make them the main character?”
I’m swamped today but didn’t want to leave you hanging. And there’s actually Scriptshadow-relevant movie news since yours truly may possibly be – nothing has been confirmed yet but there are multiple witnesses testifying as such – obsessed with Star Wars.
Quick side story: Getting my rackets strung today, I ask the stringer her name and she says ANAKIN. I kid you not! Anakin is stringing my rackets! There’s a 30% chance my rackets will turn into lightsabers the next time I play.
Does that make me… a tennis jedi???
Anyway, The Mandalorian and Grogu trailer dropped today and it’s not trending. Not even a little bit. Which is frustrating cause there’s a lot of littleness going on in this trailer. While I know we’ve beaten the Lucasfilm dead bantha 10,000 times already, neither Celine’s nor my heart will let this franchise die. Near. Far. Wherever we are. Our Star Wars hearts WILL go on.
I said in my Rise of Skywalker review that I wanted Babu Frik to have his own movie. He basically gets that here! He’s the real co-star, seemingly in every adventure with Baby Yoda. And I have absolutely no issues with that. Babu Frik’s brother is in this movie and his name is Keeto. KEETO! Without a doubt, the most adorable name ever invented. Keeto is my new Jesus. This movie’s going to be hilarious.
But the big criticism against Mandalorian and Grogu is that this feels like a slightly bigger episode of The Mandalorian. Why are people saying that? You guys should know! You’re screenwriters. You follow my site. I talk about it constantly. Think hard! Why doesn’t this feel like a big movie?
The answer? No stakes. Movie stakes need to be high. Movies are chronically larger-than-life scenarios. And in a Star Wars movie, the demand for high stakes is even bigger. Characters just hopping from planet to planet getting into shenanigans won’t cut it for a movie.
To be fair, Jon Favreau hasn’t given us the full story yet. I’m hoping when he does, it will have very high stakes.
But here’s what worries me: Mandalorian and Grogu have yet another use of AT-AT Walkers! And not just use—they’re the trailer’s climax. This reiterates Star Wars’ primary problem: they’re not being inventive anymore. They keep relying on old crusty ideas. How about creating some cool NEW vehicles every now and then? Just a thought.
Let’s end with a screenwriting tip. Figure out what your script does best and LEAN INTO THAT. Favreau knows people love Baby Yoda. He’s the only thing that’s worked in Star Wars in a decade. So what does this trailer do? It leans heavily into Baby Yoda.
You need to do the same in your script. If you have a character who’s working amazingly, feature them as much as possible. Maybe Ken had a smaller role in Barbie’s original draft. But Greta Gerwig realized he was working, expanded his role, and he became the best thing about the movie. It’s HARD to come up with anything that works in a story. Most things are boring. So when you strike gold, mine as much of that gold as you can!
You are going to be SHOCKED at the movie I endorse at the end of this post
A lot of people in Hollywood are asking the question: how did A Big Bold Beautiful Journey bomb? It’s the follow-up film for THE STAR OF BARBIE, one of the biggest hits in movie history, a movie that made $635 million at the domestic box office. Yet Big Bold couldn’t even squeak out $4 million. What is going on here? Make it make sense!
This is actually a multi-faceted answer, so I want you to pay close attention. Because I really wanted this movie to succeed. It’s unique. I like the genre. I think this director is a visionary. And when movies like A Big Bold Beautiful Journey do well, it opens the doors for Hollywood to take more risks.
This is a big reason Hollywood is so reluctant to give up the superhero genre despite its deteriorating quality and increasingly lackluster box office. It’s because on the other side of that is darkness, is uncertainty, and A Big Bold Beautiful Journey shows you what can happen with that risk. It can go south quickly.
But there’s a lot going on here, so let’s get into it. The first reason this didn’t do well is obvious. Margot Robbie has been gone for two years since Barbie took over the world. All that buzz she created got swallowed up into a black hole of stagnation. If this would’ve come out six months after Barbie, it would’ve made at least $20 million.
Big Bold’s failure is also a reminder that concept matters. It used to be that it didn’t matter what the concept was for movie stars. Arnold Schwarzenegger could literally appear in the dumbest movie idea ever – Kindergarten Cop – and people would still show up because it was Arnold Schwarzenegger. But these days, the concept’s gotta be good. Actually, before the concept can even be good, it’s gotta be clear. What is the actual movie? I’m not sure people knew what this movie was about.
That brings us to the screenplay, what we here at Scriptshadow are experts at assessing. And I read this one back in 2021. To me, it felt like, if not a writer’s first screenplay, their second or third screenplay. Let me explain.
Two of the things that a lot of beginner screenwriters write are quirky coming-of-age-ish romantic stories and magical realism. Both genres are like threading a needle in the dark – there’s this incredibly narrow target you have to hit to make them work. Magical realism, in particular, is tough because it’s never entirely clear what the rules are. How magical are things allowed to get? And when the writer starts deciding those rules on the fly, the reader/viewer starts losing trust in the story quickly.
That’s what I remember from reading this. The writer was playing fast and loose with the rules of his world. It’s 20 years ago and we’re in high school and the adult version of the character is in the play instead of the high school aged version of the character and everyone just goes with it while we’re sitting there thinking, WTF.
When you look at something like A Christmas Carol, that story did a great job setting up its rules. It laid everything out for us. Ghosts of the past, present, and future are coming. Once we were in these different times, we could only watch, not participate. That’s how you do magical realism. You can’t just roll with it or things start to feel very loosey-goosey. We don’t understand what’s happening.
And I would argue that when you watch the trailer for this movie, that’s what you see. You sort of understand what you’re looking at. But you don’t totally get it. And that’s a big deal when you’re trying to sell a movie. It needs to make immediate sense to the potential audience member what the movie’s about!
Finally, you’ve got the cast. And this is probably the reason that trumps all of these reasons. There was no chemistry here. You can see the actors doing their best to force the chemistry. But that’s exactly when you know there is no chemistry. Chemistry between actors either happens or it doesn’t. And you saw that here. And if the chemistry doesn’t work in a romantic movie, you’re done.
Which is too bad. Because I love Kogonada as a director and I know exactly why he picked this movie to make. His talent lies in his visual aesthetic. He read this script and realized how much he could do in that area. And there’s also this underlying sadness to the story, which I know he also loves. But if you’ve got a quirky script that feels try-hard and you’ve got two actors whose chemistry feels try-hard, you can’t salvage that.
The news wasn’t all bad for Black List scripts over the weekend. “Him,” with its odd pairing of sports and horror, made $13.5 million to finish in second place behind Demon Squabble: Zanzibar’s Revenge. But all is not touchdowns and playoff appearances for this film, which is getting murdered by critics and audiences alike. The word of mouth seems to be so bad that, after some nice Thursday preview numbers, they were thinking the movie could make $18 million. But word got out that it was worse than a Chicago Bears draft night and receipts plummeted quickly.
I reviewed the script when it was called Goat and I saw these issues in big shiny flashing letters back then. In some ways, the script is similar to A Big Bold Beautiful Journey in that it contains magical realism as well, just a more “horror” version of it.
But what I remember most about the script is that it was sloppy. And even though this director is the real deal – he added a ton of style to the finished product and made this movie look interesting – you can’t overcome a) lack of effort in writing, and b) sloppiness in writing. And “Goat” had both. And all of the complaints about the movie are in line with these issues. You can see it in the trailer as well. In the same breath as you say, “That looks cool,” you say, “But it also looks like a total mess.”
Which brings me to our final movie critique of the day. And folks, it doesn’t happen often. But once every 20 years or so, I’m wrong. I am here to admit that I was wrong about a film. I’ve been hard on this film ever since it was announced, ever since it came out with its first trailer, ever since the publicity tour leading up to the movie. I’ve been extremely hard on this writer-director. I’ve given one of his scripts a “what the hell did I just read.”
But look, we all get it wrong every once in a while. And I got this one wrong. How wrong? I can confidently say that this movie will end up in my Top 10 of the year.
The film?
Eddington.
That’s right. I said it. Ari Aster’s movie. I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say it’s genius. But it has genius-ness within it.
I originally watched this movie last week but, because I had already read the script, I wasn’t giving it my full attention. As the week progressed, I noticed that I kept thinking about the film and, once the weekend rolled around, I decided to watch it again. And I’m very glad that I did because this is a movie that deserves a lot more attention than it’s gotten.
For starters, I thought Joaquin Phoenix was spectacular. He plays a very difficult character, this sort of simpleton spineless sheriff who decides to run for mayor despite being way in over his head. And he’s captivating to watch. Because, despite him being a total moron, he’s the only person in town who is being rational about Covid (which plays a big part in the story). Everyone else is yelling at him and recording him in the supermarket when he won’t wear a mask.
This is probably one of the reasons this movie didn’t get pushed more by the industry. It definitely puts a mirror up to the absurdity with which the industry was acting at the time. But I would argue that one of the great things about this movie is that it doesn’t take a side. It expertly maneuvers right down the middle politically, always choosing dramatic impact over message. For example (spoiler), a big plot point at the end is that Joaquin’s character is compromised because he catches Covid due to the fact that he walked around without a mask the whole movie.
The movie does a great job capturing the chaos of that time. And maybe people don’t want to revisit that. I get it. But from a screenwriting perspective, it’s good stuff. He keeps the drama taut throughout. And he DEFINITELY improved the draft that I reviewed on the site.
This is an incredibly complex story. There are lots of moving parts, both on the character end and the plot end. When you have that much complexity in a script, you have to rewrite the shit out of it. I would argue that scripts like that have no end point. You literally can ALWAYS improve them because you can always better set something up or better connect Plot Thread #13 with Plot Thread #6. Which I saw Aster do. The draft he shot was a lot cleaner and more cohesive than the earlier draft.
With that said, Aster made a critical screenwriting mistake that all of us make and it’s something that’s very hard to avoid as writers. But conquering it ALWAYS makes the script better. And I’ll explain by going back to another Joaquin Phoenix movie, this one his first official leading role, where he played the older brother in M. Night Shyamalan’s “Signs.”
In that movie, which is about a family privately dealing with an alien visitation, M. Night got some feedback about his script from a producer friend. And the producer friend said, “You know, the script is great. And I thought the one scene with the family trying to get the alien radio signal from their transistor radio was interesting. Too bad it will never make the movie.”
And M. Night said, “What are you talking about?” “Oh,” the friend said, as if obvious. “You know. It’s one of those scenes that’s fun to write but never works in the movie. It’s the first scene the studio always has you cut.” If you haven’t seen the movie, it’s this scene where this rural family is trying to get a signal from the aliens and the baby monitor is giving too much noise so they have to reach the monitor up higher into the sky to get the signal but it’s still not getting it so they get on top of their car. But it’s still not getting it. So they all start climbing on top of each other and creating this small little human hill on top of the car in order to get the radio up as high as possible until they finally get the signal.
M. Night was miffed by this critique and because he had carte blanche with making movies at the time, he put the scene in his movie anyway. And it was… not good. It was exactly what the friend said. It was forced, it was try-hard. It didn’t make real-world sense. And the most important detail: It could’ve been axed and nothing would’ve been lost from the movie. In fact, the movie would’ve had a much faster pace without it.
As writers, we fall in love with certain scenes and plotlines, usually early on in the screenplay’s life. And then when the script evolves into something slightly different, we hold onto those initial scenes and plotlines, even though they don’t really make sense in the story anymore.
The Emma Stone Austin Butler weird wife cult leader plotline in Eddington is one of the worst plotlines I’ve ever encountered in a movie. It didn’t connect with anything at all. It didn’t make sense. Why is this nationally known young handsome charismatic cult leader who can literally have any woman in the world, falling in love with the weirdo half-comatose 40 year old crazy lady in the middle of nowhere town Eddington, New Mexico???? There’s literally nothing about that that makes sense.
It’s your job as a writer to kill those storylines when they’re not working. Because you know they’re not working. You know it! Every time you read your script, you feel the awkwardness and the clumsiness of those sections. But you keep convincing yourself that you’ll figure it out in the rewrites. Some things can’t be figured out! You gotta kill your babies sometimes.
Had Aster been honest with himself about this and cut this storyline, he could’ve cut 20 minutes out of this movie, which would’ve massively improved the pacing and the running time, which was too long. And now, every plotline we would’ve cut to, we would’ve been interested in, as opposed to before when, sometimes, we had to endure this boring plotline.
And the thing is, he still could’ve salvaged it if he’d ditched the whole cult stuff. If it were just about his wife potentially being sexually assaulted by the mayor when she was younger, that could’ve worked. But Aster reached too far and got lost in a plotline that didn’t work.
With that said, I’ve found that the best movies often have some messiness to them. They’re imperfect. So, maybe this is just the price you pay to get a movie that’s so inventive and thoughtful and different and unexpected. It’s not going to be for everyone. But I’m more than happy to admit that I was wrong about this and that Eddington may low-key be the best movie of the year.
I have another screenplay consultation deal available! $150 off full price. If you want it, e-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com
