Genre: Horror
Premise: Three women attempt to climb a dangerous mountain only to learn that a giant of a man hunts anyone on the mountain down.
About: This rare script was written all the way back in 1975. John Carpenter was writing the script for Bob Clark, who directed, “Black Christmas.” Clark was skittish about doing another horror film so, as the legend goes, “Prey” became a spiritual prequel of ideas for what would later become Carpenter’s most famous work, Halloween.
Writer: John Carpenter and James Nichols
Details: 97 pages
Old horror movies are funny.
Recently, I re-watched Phantasm. That movie haunted my dreams when I was younger. So I was curious to see how it would affect me today. Haunt me it did not. Instead, I got caught up in how ridiculous the plotting was.
It was a reminder that tons of horror movies in the 80s didn’t care about an overarching narrative. All they cared about was piecing together scenes in such a way that they got the movie to the next big scare.
For example, there was this ridiculous subplot where the hero’s younger brother is obsessed with him. “I don’t know what’s wrong with him,” the hero says to a friend. “He just follows me around.” And then we literally cut to the little brother chasing his brother throughout the neighborhood. Like, his big brother is driving a car and the kid runs after him, for miles at a time, to wherever he goes, lol.
I realized this was the “writer’s” way of getting the younger brother around all the scares. Because if he wasn’t following his brother around, he couldn’t encounter all the horror. All I I could think was, “Why not just come up with a separate storyline and give him his own objectives?” I guess writers didn’t think like that back then.
Anyway, John Carpenter is a cut above whoever wrote Phantasm. So I’m not expecting the plotting to be that bad. But who knows? This is a 40+ year old script!
Newswoman Elaine Macavie, archer Rose Helm, and obsessive jogger Kathy Briggs, are going to attempt something that’s never been done before. They’re going to climb Mount Tobias in 72 hours. How badass is this girl crew? They’ll be the first women to climb the mountain PERIOD.
The locals don’t like it, though. They warn the girls that up there on that mountain, strange things happen. But our crew shrugs them off, thinking they’re climb-shaming them cause they’re women. After they get an okay from the local sheriff, off they go!
Meanwhile, we cross-cut to some giant man lugging a huge log through the forest. He uses the log as a bridge whenever he encounters big drops he has to cross over. This guy is ginormous, almost 7 feet tall. On the very first night, the girls see him deep in the forest. Or they see someone. A second later and he’s gone.
As they get higher up, Kathy stumbles upon an old civil war canteen. That’s never good. The three have fun with trying to figure out its origins but you can tell they’re starting to have second thoughts about climbing this mountain. And they should. Because late at night our 7 foot log-puller, Otis, and his father, a gray-bearded man named Swain, capture the girls while they’re sleeping by simply zipping up their sleeping bags all the way (so they’re stuck in there) and throwing them over their shoulders. Like logs!
That can only mean one thing. Especially since this was written in 1975. Yup. A Texas Chainsaw Massacre situation. Once the girls are safely tied up in Otis and Swain’s remote cabin, a grandma lady comes up and explains that the Civil War killed off all their women, see. So they don’t have any way to breed. Which means these three ladies will be doing the breeding!
They’re all like, “no thank you,” but Otis and Swain and Grandma don’t seem to be taking no for an answer. Still, an escape attempt is made that Rose doesn’t survive. Elaine and Kathy are thrust back onto a mountain they don’t understand and must outwit their pursuers, who have lived on this mountain their whole lives.
The best part of this script was originally thinking, “Wow, this is such a current script! We’re following three women who are trying to climb a mountain together. This is so timely, I could totally see someone buying this tomorrow!”
And thennnnnnnnn…. Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2. Once you have Old Man Swain ripping womens’ clothes off to rape them, there goes your 2020 buying potential.
To me, this is a lesson in influences-of-the-time and how they can negatively impact your story choices. Texas Chainsaw Massacre had come out a year prior to this. Deliverance had come out a couple of years prior. What that did was majorly influence Carpenter and Nichols to make story choices similar to those films. As a result, something that had a lot of promise at the start turned into something cliche and not very interesting. It’s a good reminder to not use story choices from recent films. Find your own choices.
Another reason this lost 2020 street cred was that, while it had an all-female cast, the character work on that cast was weak. Not a single woman had anything going on outside of this mountain trek. Nobody talked about anything other than plot points (“How much further?” “There’s supposed to be a tree up this way.”).
When readers give you the criticism that your script has no character development, this is what they mean. If characters only have the plot to talk about, you’re going to have a really bored reader. We only connect with stories when we get inside the heads of the characters on some level. We have to know things about them, preferably things that they’re struggling with in life. We want to know what’s holding them back from overcoming those things. And we want the journey to test that part of them so that, by overcoming those obstacles, they can finally overcome the obstacles holding them back in their day-to-day real lives.
You may have heard me say, characters sitting in a room talking about their problems is boring. Which is true. However, when your characters are physically on the move, you can give them some of these same conversations and they’ll work. That’s because at least one of the two lines of progression is being met – the physical line. They’re physically moving forward towards the top of the mountain. So readers don’t mind character-based dialogue during that time.
But when you don’t do the research of your characters’ lives, you won’t know how to write those conversations because your characters’ backstories are invisible to you. How can a character explain the frustrations she’s having trying to get a promotion at work if you don’t even know what she does for work?
And it’s not like Carpenter doesn’t have the capacity to achieve these things. Check out how he describes two women in a cafe during breakfast. “At the counter sit CADY and PRICE, two locals. They are both middleaged with the peculiar kind of hostility that pervades the consciousness of mountain people.” I know EXACTLY who he’s talking about. I know I’m dealing with a good writer when they can describe someone perfectly. And the description of these two was downright perfect. But he didn’t put that same thought into our three leads for some reason.
Despite that, I loved how much SHOWING as opposed to TELLING was going on in the first 20 pages. In that first act, there’s a lot of meeting people while they’re doing things. Nobody’s standing around talking. If someone’s talking, it’s because they need something. That ‘show don’t tell’ skill probably comes from his directing. He knows that characters standing around talking is death. Still, he put SO MUCH focus on it early on, and it was so effective in creating a mood, that I’m reinvigorated for showing. It’s so much more powerful than telling.
It’s too bad this script went south so fast. I think if these women would’ve gotten picked off one by one and the final girl had to outwit and defeat the bad guys, I would’ve liked it a lot better.
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: John Carpenter once said, “To make Michael Myers frightening, I had him walk like a man, not a monster.” In our eternal struggle to create memorable monsters and villains in our horror script, we try to come up with all these gadgets and overtly creepy things to shape them. When, sometimes (not all the time, but sometimes), the scariest thing is for the monster to be as human as possible.
Genre: Comedy
Premise: Borat comes back to America to improve relations with his country, Kazakstan. But when the stupid daughter he never knew he had hitches a ride, he’s forced to find a way to use her in the plan.
About: This was going to be released in theaters, but then when Covid came around, Amazon Prime bought it for 120 million dollars!
Writer: Sacha Baron Cohen, Anthony Hines, Dan Swimer, Peter Baynham, Erica Rivinoja, Dan Mazer, Jena Friedman, Lee Kern.
Details: 95 minutes
Between murder hornets, Kanye West saying his favorite Star Wars line is, “It’s over, Anakin, I have the high ground!” And the fact that I’m starting to see people wear Speedo goggles on the street, I feel like I’m losing my mind. So thank god we had some some genuine comedic entertainment this weekend.
BORAT!!!
Or should I say, BORAT’S DAUGHTER!
Is the actress who plays Borat’s daughter the biggest comedy find since Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids? Methinks yes.
And what’s with Borat using character arcs in his movies now? Am I living on another planet?
Borat Subsequent Moviefilm follows, well, Borat, 14 years after his last American adventure. His Kazakstan president hates his guts for embarrassing the nation but is willing to give him a reprieve. In an attempt to secure a friendship with America, the president wants Borat to deliver the most famous person in Kazakstan (who happens to be a monkey) to Donald Trump.
Borat heads to America but when the monkey crate arrives, the monkey is dead. Borat’s 15 year old daughter, Tutar, who wanted to be with her father, came here and ate him along the way because she was hungry. Borat wants nothing to do with his daughter because all women are second class citizens in his country, but she refuses to leave.
So he comes up with an idea. He’ll give Tutar to Donald Trump instead. Which is Tutar’s dream come true because all she wants is to live in a golden cage, just like Melania. When that plan fails, they go to Plan B. Give Tutar to Donald Trump’s best friend, Rudy Giuliani. But that means making her look pretty. So they give her a complete makeover.
In the process of meeting other Americans, Tutar starts to realize that, in America, women can be anything they want, and when she confronts Borat about this, he refuses to accept these ‘lies.’ What’s next? The Holocaust was real?? So Tutar runs away in pursuit of her new dream. To be a journalist. She’s able to pull some strings and get a big interview with Rudy Giuliani. But will it be enough to save her father from a beheading back home? We shall see!
First off, let me say that I laughed more during this movie than any comedy I’ve seen in a long time. The thing I’ve learned with comedy is that humor is often found in saying the things you’re not supposed to say. Like Bill Burr’s rant on white women hijacking the planet in his recent SNL stint. It was a risky bit but those are the avenues you have to be willing to go down if you’re going to make people laugh. They won’t always work. But they’re better than the safe middle-of-the-road “comedy” late night hosts spew.
Well, Borat takes that premise and changes “say” to “do.” He does the things you’re not supposed to do. There is a father-daughter dance at an upscale ball where the daughter informs Borat that she’s having her period and he says, that’s fine, we need to do the dance anyway. And let’s just say what we see next is both horrifying and hilarious all at once.
The scene where Borat goes to buy a cage for his daughter and openly talks to the salesman about making sure an average sized woman can fit in there – that was hilarious. When Tutar stays with a babysitter and the babysitter drives her into town and Tutar starts having a panic attack because “it’s impossible for women to drive!” Then the whole special Kazakstan book for girls that explains that if your hand gets anywhere near your vagina, your vagina will bite it off. Complete with detailed drawings. It was all so wrong yet so hilarious.
You could tell that something happened during the filming that messed the story up though. It was probably Covid. But it might have been that they couldn’t get a few of the people they wanted on-camera. Because, the next thing we know, Tutar is interviewing Rudy Giuliani and she’s a completely different person. She’s not acting at all like she was before in the movie. She’s got a different accent. A different demeanor. We’re not clear what the interview is about or how she was able to secure it.
And then there’s the talked about moment where, after the interview, Giuliani lays down on the bed supposedly to remove his microphone but some people are saying it was to masturbate. I don’t know. I was expecting a lot more after all the online talk. But I’ve seen enough reality TV to know there was a ton of audio snipping going on. They were clearly muting parts of the conversation that would’ve given more context to what was happening. And once you do that, I can’t trust that what you’re showing me is accurate.
Either way, Borat 2 is hilarious. Of all these former comedy characters who try to come back after a long time (Dumb and Dumber, Bill and Ted), Borat runs laps around them. It doesn’t catch the lightning-in-a-bottle perfection of the first film. But the daughter was so freaking good that she, alone, elevated this into a must-see film. Imagine trying to match, line for line, one of the greatest comedy characters ever created. As a nobody actress!! That’s insane. Yet she pulls it off.
What did you guys think?
[ ] It was great! NOOOOTTT.
[ ] This is Urkin, the town rapist. Naughty, naughty!
[xx] niiice
[ ] very niiiice
[ ] My wife is dead? High Five!!!
What I learned: What Borat Subsequent Moviefilm taught me is to not worry about writing funny. Don’t worry about writing funny moments. Don’t worry about writing funny dialogue. Worry about WRITING FUNNY CHARACTERS. If you write funny characters, they will naturally say funny things. They will naturally find themselves in funny situations. That’s what we had here with Borat and Tutar. After you come up with them, the funny writes itself.
Genre: Horror/Sci-Fi
Premise: Trapped on a remote North Dakota farm in the middle of a bone-chilling winter storm, a deaf 12-year old girl must try to survive her murderous foster parents, who’ve been influenced to kill by a mysterious radio signal from deep space.
Why You Should Read: Deep came about from my desire to write a story putting the most vulnerable type of person in the most terrifying situation I could imagine. A very early draft of Deep made this year’s Page Quarterfinals. After feedback, it’s since gone through a strenuous rewrite. At 87 pages, and tightly structured, it’s a lean, electrifying read. Looking forward to any critiques from the Scriptshadow Community.
Writer: Dean Brooks
Details: 86 pages
I’m still looking for a good professional horror script to review in the Halloween Newsletter. You guys don’t want me stressed out looking for a script until the last second or I’m going to eat all five bags of Halloween candy that are in front of me. This candy is for the kids! Yet you would have them starve?! You would have them knock on my door only for me to say, I’m sorry, but I don’t have any? Go blame the Scriptshadow readers for not sending me a horror screenplay. Off the top of my head I’m looking for M3GAN and the Jamie Foxx vampire script Slamdance Contest winner, Day Shift. Or if there’s anything else, e-mail it to carsonreeves1@gmail.com.
On to last week’s WINNER! Congrats to Dean Brooks. He not only won Horror Shodown, beating out a couple hundred submissions, but he survived a glitch whereby it was difficult to download his script! I heard some people were never able to download it. So good job to Dean. Now let’s see if his script is all that.
Makayla Brenna is 12 years old and deaf. But her lack of hearing is the least of her problems. Her parents are hardcore meth addicts and extremely abusive. In the opening scene, Makayla sees a cop car outside who’s stopped someone for speeding. Feeling like this might be her only chance to escape her parents, she makes a run for it, just barely evading her shotgun-wielding father.
A few months later, she’s introduced into a new home with foster parents Joe and Adele. Of the two, Adele is more skeptical that they can pull this off. Whereas Joe is excited to finally have a kid to raise. He’s so excited that on their first full day together, he introduces Makayla to his backyard amateur observatory shack where he can watch and listen to the stars. Makayla thinks it’s pretty cool and likes Joe immediately.
The next day, Makayla is enrolled in school and makes a couple of friends right away. However, that night, Joe goes into the observatory and never comes out. The next morning, he’s acting distant and weird. He then has a seizure. Adele takes Joe to the hospital and drops Makayla off at school.
Joe comes home happy and healthy but after going into the observatory again, he comes back acting weird. That night, Makayla hears Joe violently going after Adele in the other room then taking her outside, presumably to the observatory. Sure enough, the next morning, Adele is acting weird and distant as well. It appears that some evil alien entity has found its way into their consciousness and is now controlling them.
Makayla isn’t quite sure what to do. At school the next day, she decides to make a run for it. But Adele, doing her best Robert Patrick impression from Terminator 2, tracks her down, kills the person who helped her escape, and brings her back to the house. It is here where both Joe and Adele will attempt to “make her listen” to the space sounds in the observatory. But Makayla can’t listen. She’s deaf. So what lengths will the parents go to to overcome this problem?
I went on a complicated journey with this one. At times I loved it. At times I doubted it. I’m still not sure where I land on it but it’s definitely worthy of being reviewed so I think you guys made the right choice.
The first scene is a cut above. And that’s saying a lot since I’ve read a TON of first scene Contest entries lately. I think a couple of factors helped it out. Opening scenes with characters in danger is par for the course with horror screenplays. But what “Deep” does is it sets up an EMOTIONAL dilemma as opposed to just a VISCERAL dilemma. This isn’t some random girl being held by a random psycho. This is two parents who have imprisoned their daughter. So, right away, there’s an extra emotional kick to the scene.
Next, the heroine is deaf. Deafness can be cliche but here it was believable. And it made it so the evil parents weren’t just imprisoning a regular girl. Their daughter is disabled. So there’s some extra nasty added to these villains that made us want Makayla to escape even more.
I thought the integration into the new home was also well done. Whenever I’m reading a script, I’m looking for authenticity and specificity. If everything is too familiar, I get bored. I need those differences that make the story unique. So the wife being Native American, for example. It was a nice detail that told me the writer had put more effort into this than the average person.
But then we reach the observatory stuff and that didn’t sit well with me. For starters, it felt like a different movie. We’re going from a deaf foster child escaping abusive meth-head parents to a guy with his own space observatory? Who then, the DAY AFTER THEY ADOPT OUR HEROINE, gets infected with an alien virus?? What are the odds of that happening?
I get that it’s a movie and, to a certain extent, what happens in the first act is excused from being a coincidence. But you shouldn’t try to cram more than one huge event into your first act. And I felt that this deaf girl escaping her terrifying abusive parents was the hook. Getting introduced into a new family was the hook. To then add this secondary hook – I’m not going to lie – it took me out of the script for the next 30 pages.
Then I started to see what Dean was doing. With the mom and dad becoming possessed by the alien entity, Makayla is essentially right back in the same situation. The problem is, when you do that, you want to construct a scenario by which, with the previous situation, there was a choice to succeed and the hero took the easy way out. That way she can learn and when presented with the same choice again, this time she makes the heroic decision.
This is what The Invisible Man did. She always cowered to her abusive husband. But, then, later in the movie, she chooses to stand up to and kill her husband. In this script, because the main character is so young, you can’t really do that. And, to be honest, Makayla already was a hero by escaping her parents in that opening scene. So there wasn’t anything else to do with her character except repeat what you did in that opening. If a character is repeating stuff they’ve already done, they’re not evolving. They’re not arcing.
But then you’d get these great scenes like when Makayla was at school and her mom is now possessed and she’s picking Makayla up afterwards and Makayla knows if she goes with her, she’s dead meat. So she tries to run away after school and her mom chases her down. It’s a really intense well-done scene.
I just don’t know if this weird deep-space alien virus possession thing can work. It never felt organic to the story. It’s almost as if Dean had two scripts. One about an abused deaf girl and another about an alien virus and then randomly decided one day to combine them into a single script. Cause that’s how much these two concepts were fighting each other.
Early on in the script, when Makayla first sleeps in her new room, there’s a moment where she thinks she sees the spirits of her parents in the corner. I wonder if there’s a version of this where her birth parents die in a police shootout after Makayla is rescued and then their spirits follow her to her new home, and their goal is to try and take over the bodies of her new parents. Makayla tries to tell her new parents this is happening but they, of course, think she’s just traumatized. I’m not sure if that has the same sex-appeal as this concept or if Dean would even want to write a story like that. But the biggest reason this did not get a ‘worth the read’ from me is that I could never marry these two worlds – the alien possession and the abused deaf child. They never felt like the same movie to me.
Script Link: Deep
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: I’m all for moving the story along quickly. But you have to be cognizant of the situation and construct your timeline accordingly. One of the problems with this script is that Dean tried to cram the entire story too closely together, with no time passing in between major plot beats at all. Makayla shows up on Day 1. And on Day 2, she’s already enrolled in school and her new father is possessed by an alien! lol. These plot beats need time to breathe. It’s okay to throw a montage in there of the first week where Makayla is getting used to her new parents and home. It’s okay, after she’s enrolled in school, if we give a montage of her getting used to that environment as well. As much as screenwriting is about moving the story forward quickly, it still needs to feel natural. And if you’re cramming major plot beats too close together, it will feel anything but natural.
In my attempts to finish all the Last Great Screenplay Contest entries by my target date of October 31st, I’ve found myself reading a lot of bad dialogue lately. But not normal bad. Bad in a specific way. A lot of the dialogue I read in amateur work is STILTED. There’s no life to it. It reads rote, logical, robotic.
Which makes sense if you understand screenwriting.
When a writer goes into a dialogue scene, they often have a preconceived notion of how the dialogue is going to go. For example, if Margaret and her husband, Darryl, need to discuss selling the house, you have a sense of what that conversation is going to look like before you’ve written it. Therefore, the dialogue is just a matter of dictation. You place down on the page what’s in your head. “We need to get the house up on the MLS before the end of the month.” “I know.” “Well, then we need to take pictures.” “We have pictures.” “The ones that Joan took? She took those on her iPhone. We need professional pictures.”
Notice how this is logical information being exchanged (and bland information at that). There’s a reason for that. As a writer, you see the scene BEFORE IT’S HAPPENED. But real people experience moments AS THEY’RE HAPPENING. This fundamentally changes how words come out of peoples’ mouths.
As a writer, all you’re thinking about is conveying the information properly so you can get from point A to point B. As such, your dialogue will reflect this. It will almost feel like Character B knows what Character A is going to say before he says it. And that’s because she does. You, the writer, are Character A and B so you’re subconsciously setting up questions and answers that the other character already knows.
Meanwhile, in real life, Character A doesn’t know what Character B is going to say. They might have an idea. But they don’t know exactly what they’re going to say. This is why real-life conversation tends to have more energy than movie dialogue. It’s alive. It’s evolving second by second. Therefore, you want to try and capture truthful exchange in your dialogue by any means possible.
One of the ways to do this is through a “free dialogue pass.” This is where you erase all of the artificial motivations that you, the writer, are imposing on the scene, and think of the scene more as how it would occur in real life. In other words, Character A doesn’t need an overt goal going into the scene. There shouldn’t be any time restriction on the scene (most dialogue scenes are about 2 and a half pages long. You’d get rid of that). And, most importantly, don’t have any preconceived notions about what the characters need to say to each other or where the scene needs to go. It’s going to go WHEREVER THE CHARACTERS TAKE IT. That’s a scary thought for a lot of writers. They want to control what the characters say. But your need to control the dialogue is what’s resulting in it being so stilted. I mean, when has anything that’s overtly controlled ended up feeling natural?
Your “free dialogue pass” can last as long as you want it to. It can last 20 pages. The idea is to get a natural flow of dialogue that you can then mold into something more structured. If you find a six-line exchange between two characters that’s really clever in your “free dialogue pass,” and that’s the only part of the exercise that makes it into the final scene? That’s a win. Because the other option is only having the boring structured exchange of information that comes from controlled dialogue.
In order to get the most out of this exercise, I want you to understand just how many options are open to you when Character A says something to Character B. Because I think that most writers believe there are only a couple of responses. And, usually, those responses are responses they’ve seen characters say in other movies. If you really want your dialogue to feel fresh, you need to open your mind to the fact that there are thousands of potential responses to every line of dialogue. And if you’re only going with the two or three most obvious ones, I got bad news. Readers think your dialogue sucks. You need to get out of your comfort zone. You need to take more chances.
So, I’m going to give you a single line of dialogue. Character A says to Character B, “What’s your favorite color?” Okay. Now. What’s the first response that comes to mind for that question? Well, let’s see just how many ways another character can respond to this.
1 – The character can simply answer the question. “Blue.” This is usually the least interesting answer.
2 – They can reject the question. “None of your business.”
3 – They can respond with a question of their own. “What if I like more than one?”
4 – They can ignore the rules. “Blue, Yellow, Aqua Green, and the Rainbow.”
5 – They can flirt. “The color of your eyes.”
6 – They can flirt better. “That’s personal information you’re requesting. What do I get if I tell you?”
7 – They can choose not to answer at all.
8 – They can lie. “Orange.” (Knowing that the other person’s favorite color is orange)
9 – They can make an assumption about why the other character is asking the question. “Ooh, are you psychologically evaluating me? You want to know my sign next?”
10 – They can call the other person out. “Really? That’s the best question you can come up with?”
11 – They can answer with a song. “Blue mooooooooon. You saw me standing alooooone.”
12 – They can get irrationally upset. “Why the f%#@ would you ask me that?”
13 – They can be playful. “Well that’s offensive.” “Why?” “Cause I’m colorblind.”
14 – They can make a demand. “You tell me first.”
15 – They can tell a story that leads to their answer. “Earlier this year I was driving up PCH at sunset and it had just rained. The clouds were parting right as the sun was setting and it caused this filtered orange-purple glow to settle over the coast for all of 30 seconds. It was the most beautiful thing I’ve ever seen. Whatever that color was? That’s my favorite color.”
16 – They can make a joke. “The color of money, of course.”
17 – They can be preoccupied with something else. “Did I leave my wallet in the car?”
18 – They can misunderstand. “Your favorite color? Why would I know your favorite color?” “No, YOUR favorite color.”
19 – They can opt out of the conversation. “Can we talk about something else?”
20 – They can become Movie Trailer Voice Guy. “IN A WORLD OF ENDLESS COLOR, ONE WOMAN MUST KNOW HER DATE’S FAVORITE FOR SOME REASON.”
The idea here is to break out of the logical thinking trap that is required to map out a screenplay. We’re often in “structure” mode when screenwriting and that’s the last place you want to be with dialogue. Allow yourself to be free. And when you’re inside of those scenes, stay away from common answers. Dialogue tends to get the most interesting when something unexpected is said. I’ll give you the perfect example because it happened last night on The Bachelorette.
It’s early on in the season so the Bachelorette, Clare, doesn’t know anybody yet and one of the guys, Brandon, sits down with her for the first time. These carefully orchestrated sit-downs are usually boring because the conversations are decided upon ahead of time. So I was falling asleep, not really paying attention. Then Clare asks, “So why did you want to meet me?” And Brandon says, in a completely sweet and innocent manner, blushing as he says it, “Well, I thought you were gorgeous.” And there’s this pause before Clare’s eyebrows furl and she says, “That’s the only thing you’re interested in? How I look?” In a split second, a boring conversation became contentious, with Brandon trying to dig himself out of the hole he’d just dug.
That’s what you’re trying to do with dialogue. You’re trying to find those lines and those moments that bring an energy to the conversation. You can’t do that if you already have pre-established conversations in your head or your characters are always responding to each other with expected responses. Dialogue will always be difficult. But it becomes less so when you stop trying to control it. Try these suggestions out and watch your dialogue come alive!
Carson does feature screenplay consultations, TV Pilot Consultations, and logline consultations. Logline consultations go for $25 a piece or $40 for unlimited tweaking. You get a 1-10 rating, a 200-word evaluation, and a rewrite of the logline. They’re extremely popular so if you haven’t tried one out yet, I encourage you to give it a shot. If you’re interested in any consultation package, e-mail Carsonreeves1@gmail.com with the subject line: CONSULTATION. Don’t start writing a script or sending a script out blind. Let Scriptshadow help you get it in shape first!
Genre: Sports/Period/True Story
Premise: (from Black List) A law school graduate devises a betting system that exploits the glamorous, high-stakes sport of Jai Alai in 1970s Miami. Based on a true story.
About: (from his IMDB page) In 2008, Zachary Werner founded Bodega Pictures with Josh Ackerman and Ben Nurick. Together they produced over one hundred hours of television for top channels such as HGTV, Spike TV, and Food Network, as well as branded content. Zachary left Bodega in 2016 and partnered with his sister, Katharine Werner, to pursue scripted TV and film projects. This script finished in the 25th slot of the 2018 Black List.
Writer: Zachary and Katherine Werner
Details: 113 pages
A sports movie is one of those things that should always work. The goal is clear (win the game!). The stakes are easy to figure out (lose the game, lose everything). There are rules in each sport that provide clarity in what the characters are trying to accomplish. And there’s a structure to sports that intertwines pleasantly with the structure of screenwriting.
And yet, so many sports movies are AVERAGE. They’re never horrible (well, a few are). But they’re never amazing either. I mean, when’s the last great sports movie? Has there been one this century? Top contenders include The Blind Side, Million Dollar Baby, The Wrestler, and Creed.
I mean, you can make the argument that any one of those movies is “good.” But I don’t think anyone’s throwing them into the VCR for a repeat viewing in 2020.
Your lone defense against the cliche nature of sports movies is finding an angle that hasn’t been done before. And today’s script throws a sport at us that I hadn’t even heard of until I read this logline. So it has that going for it. But does it embed that sport inside a strong narrative? That’s what we’re going to find out.
It’s Miami, 1975. 26-year-old Ronnie Weiss has just graduated from law school and is ready to begin his life as a lawyer. But something’s bothering Ronnie about his career choice. Law is so boring.
Luckily, a new sport is taking over Miami – jai alai. It’s impossible to describe the sport but I’ll try. It’s like racketball meets Cricket meets a George Miller fever dream. But here’s the important part. Local bookies have started to accept bets on jai alai and since nobody understands the intricacies of the sport, that opens the door for a super-smart guy like Ronnie to exploit the numbers, allowing him to come up with a surefire way to win every time.
Ronnie can’t do it by himself so he recruits his crazy childhood best friend, Looney. He also enlists his new Cuban girlfriend to help, as well as a small army of bettors (so he doesn’t have to draw so much attention to himself). At first, Ronnie does this to pay off his dead father’s 250k gambling bet. But he takes care of that easily and now it becomes about making as many dollar bills as possible.
When there’s a fire at one of the betting boxes, the cleanup reveals how much Ronnie is raking in during these matches. That gets the Feds’ attention, forcing Ronnie and his core crew to flee to Connecticut, the only other place on the planet where you can bet these games. They start strong but Hartford doesn’t have the volume that Miami had and it isn’t long before the gig is up. And that’s pretty much it. End of movie!
This was a weird reading experience. On the one hand, you have this sport that we’ve never seen in movies before. On the other, you have a blatant Scorsese clone. From the main character narrating everything in that classic Scorsese-flick tenor to the voice over swap to the girlfriend happening at the exact same minute it happens in Goodfellas.
I don’t mean to get on my soapbox here but this sort of thing drives me nuts. Whenever you write in the exact same style as a famous storyteller with a unique voice – Tarantino, Sorkin, Diablo Cody, Martin Scorsese – the highest achievement your script can ever reach is a poor man’s version of that writer. A poor man’s Tarantino. A poor woman’s Diablo Cody. A poor man’s Scorsese.
This is not to say you’re incapable of writing well. But you have to realize that when you’re going up against the titans in the industry and trying to do exactly what they do BUT BETTER???? That’s a writing suicide mission. You can only do worse. Let me repeat that. YOU CAN ONLY DO WORSE.
If you sense my frustration, it’s because we all have this opportunity to write our own stories and tell those stories in our own unique voice. So why would you copy-paste the template of another well-known writer/movie to tell your story?
I get it. There have been 100+ years of movies. How much originality can we really bring to the table? I’m willing to have that conversation because I admit it’s difficult and one of the biggest challenges in screenwriting is bringing true originality to the page. But you have to TRY. Cause when you try, you come up with things like Parasite. You come up with things like 1917. You come up with the most heartbreaking movie of 2019, JoJo Rabbit.
So why do writers continue to write with the Scorsese template? Simple. Actors love playing these roles. You have two guaranteed “get a big actor” parts if these scripts are competently written. One for the flashy main character, who gets double the lines cause he’s narrating on top of leading the story. And two, the wacky friend, in this case, Looney. If you can get two big actors interested, you can get a huge director interested. And there ya go. So I get it. I get why writers do this.
But it’s a pet peeve of mine. I’m very much of the philosophy that you create things other people want to copy. Not copy things others have already created.
Despite that sidebar, the script wasn’t bad. It didn’t blow me away due to the aforementioned familiarity. But I enjoy stories where the main character has discovered a magic formula that nobody else has figured out yet. It’s why I liked the Moneyball script. Because you know the fall is coming – you know they’re going to figure you out sooner or later – and you have to keep reading to see how bad the crash is going to be.
Every once in a while, I’ll get behind a formulaic script. But only if the characters are amazing. And these characters were all characters we’ve seen before if you watched even one Scorsese film. So this definitely wasn’t for me.
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: In a tragedy, the main character does not obtain his goal at the end. He will often lose everything, up to and including his life (Uncut Gems). But if he lives, make sure he learns something about being a good human. When it comes to these specific tragedies that deal with greed, the thing the character often learns is the value of those closest to him in his life. The people around you are always more important than a giant bank account.
