Search Results for: the wall

I Died a Thousand Times

Posted on April 12, 2010 | by admin

Hmm, this week is going to be a little crazy. I’ll be contrasting today’s huge fanboy review with something tomorrow that’s so independent, I’m not even sure I know about it. And I read it! The good news is, the script was great. As for the rest of the week’s reviews, it’s still up in the air, so anything goes. But to ease the pressure of Uncle Sam’s ridiculous monetary demands this Thursday, I’ll be making a big announcement that should get all of you amateur screenwriters in a frenzy. So stay tuned because that opportunity will be coming before the end of the week. Right now, buckle yourselves up for another Roger review…

Genre: Crime, Prophetic Horror, Action
Premise: A former Pinkerton detective is resurrected as a Sifter, a bounty hunter tasked with going after people who have skipped out on destined meetings in Hades. When he’s ordered to hunt down a young artist, his past literally comes back to haunt him. He’s forced to team up with his deceased wife, now one of heaven’s operatives, to stop an impending apocalyptic event known as The Awakening.
About: “I Died a Thousand Times” is Aaron Drane’s sophomore screenplay. Drane went to film school at UCLA, where this script won the UCLA Samuel Goldwyn Award. In 1997, the script yielded a million dollar payday when it sold to Arnold Kopelson. He sold a couple more scripts to 20th Century Fox and most recently wrote and produced the FEARnet web series, “Fear Clinic”, which stars iconic horror movie actors, Robert Englund and Kane Hodder.
Writer: Aaron Drane

Ironically, I never heard of this script until my friend let me wander around in his mystical script vault, which turned out to be kind of like the warehouse from Raiders of the Lost Ark, except the relics on these shelves were unproduced and forgotten screenplays. I got lost among the shelves of scripts, overwhelmed and paralyzed by the paradox of choice. Four hours later, I finally escaped the labyrinth with brass brads in my hair and paper cuts on my fingers, armed with a copy of Aaron Drane’s “I Died a Thousand Times” (not to be confused with the 1955 remake of High Sierra), a spec that purportedly sold for a million bucks back in 1997.

If you think this logline sounds a lot like that short-lived Fox television show, Brimstone, you’d be correct. If it also reminds you of the short-lived CW show, Reaper, or the long running Vertigo comics series, Hellblazer, you’d be correct as well. This script melds two of my favorite things, noir and horror, and if it didn’t skimp on the fantasy aspect, we’d have the kind of mash-up trifecta Roger Balfour loves to endorse.
Isn’t this about a Pinkerton?
Yep, and that’s a detail that separates it from the rest of the pack and plants it firmly in a Ross Macdonald-esque detective sphere.
We meet our man in a seedy hotel room, where old Untouchables re-runs are playing on the television. A body lying still on a bed suddenly arches into the air, as if it’s being jolted by electricity. He starts to breathe, whispering, “Back in flesh.”
He stumbles to the bathroom and pukes, taking note of the bloody syringe on the floor. He studies himself in the mirror. He’s a junky. To make matters worse someone is banging on the door to his room. It’s the police.
He exits the bathroom and looks to the wall, where he sees a dead woman, nylon stockings wrapped around her throat.
Thus begins the voiceover, “The name: Sal Lorredo. In 1926 I was a detective employed by the Pinkerton Detective Agency –- hunting down wanted criminals. When I died my soul went to hell. And when I got there…they gave me my old job back.”
For most of the last century, Sal has been resurrecting in freshly dead host bodies to hunt down people for The Company, AKA Hell. Apparently, Sal’s new host body recently strangled a woman and possibly OD’d, so he exits via fire escape and is pursued on foot through the city until he dives into a cab.
He’s dropped off at Elmo’s Videos, housed in a former liquor store. It’s here he meets his handler, Doghead. He’s a bald man with a deformed face covered in burn scars, and he sits behind a barrier of chicken wire.
They bicker.
We learn a few things about the rules of this world. Sal has to hunt down John Seymor Hamby, a deathrow inmate who failed to die on his prescribed expiration date. Instead, he was paroled on a technicality and his talents have become a burden to The Company.
Doghead warns Sal, “Better not fuck this one up, Lorredo –- you haven’t been utilized for a while. And that host body doesn’t make you immortal.”
Sal discovers that Hamby has taken up his family’s profession as a butcher, and we’re treated to a Se7en-esque romp as Sal discovers that Hamby is a nasty serial killer with a penchant for human flesh. There’s a horrific fight to the death as Sal has to get Hamby to sign a contract before sending him on his way to Company HQ.
So basically, the way Sal recruits for The Company is by murder. We learn, “There’s only one rule in my profession: Above everything. At all costs…stay alive. Dying on the job isn’t allowed. Expire before the job is completed and you’ll burn. The Company doesn’t give second chances.”
Sounds like a cool and atmospheric setup sequence. So what’s the main plot?
It is. I really enjoyed the first fifteen pages. It was grim, mysterious, darkly humorous, and I liked the never-say-die attitude. It reminded me of both Dark City and Se7en.
Sal takes a quiet moment to visit his wife’s grave at Parkview Cemetery. Her name was Helen Marie Lorredo. Via flashback, we learn that she was a nurse who got infected while caretaking the ill during the Tuberculosis Outbreak of 1926.
Their story: On the day Sal finally gets his Pinkerton promotion, Helen, on her deathbed, sadly tells Sal it’s time for him to fulfill the agreement they made. It’s never something that’s entirely spelled out, but for reasons I didn’t really understand, Helen would rather die by bullet than tuberculosis.
Sal helps Helen lift a .45 to her head, but apparently she releases her grip on the gun right as Sal pulls the trigger. Her final words: “Forget about me.”
But eight or nine decades later, Sal can’t. He feels like he’s lost without her.
Back at Elmo’s, his handler informs him he’s been reassigned. It’s a big one. Doghead tells him, “The Company has decided to offer you a full pardon. A chance to reclaim the life that you lost.”
It’s time sensitive.
Within the next seventy-two hours, Sal must locate and expire Emily Wharton, a young restoration artist who has missed her incept date.
What else is happening in the world?
Dovetailing with Emily’s disappearance, is a growing situation involving a charismatic leader named Robert Skinner and his cult known as The Devil’s Brigade. Whatever they’re up to, it seems to be ground zero for what is going to become an apocalyptic event.
A dark ceremony in a warehouse shows us Skinner’s Disciples. They’re being branded with a symbol called a Kern, which represents The Eye of Awakening.
To compound the plot, there’s stirrings in the Sifter community that a heaven-sent operative has arrived on Earth. They’re pejoratively called Joy Boys, because supposedly they always die with a smile on their faces, “Joys existed as nothing more than superstition. Fairy-tale angels created by Sifters hoping for a happy ending…but never got one.”
So what’s up with Emily?
Sal follows the trail to Dr. Neumeyer, where we learn that Emily had an abortion. Not only that, but she has developed a rapidly spreading cancer caused by unremoved fetal tissue in the uterus. The last time Neumeyer saw Emily he was prescribing her painkillers, and he believes that she died from the cancer.
OK. So if Emily’s supposed to be dead, how can she be alive when Sal finds her?
Sal arrives at a winter carnival on the pier, where there is a dance he found a flyer for in Emily’s apartment.
Yes, he discovers Emily alive.
He also discovers that Helen has resurrected in Emily’s body, part of the heaven-sent operative to stop The Devil’s Brigade from completing The Awakening.
The magical winter dance is intercut with flashbacks to Sal and Helen dancing together in the past, when Sal proposed to her. It’s a sad and lyrical sequence, saturated in regret and melancholy.
I liked it, but for reasons I’ll get into in a moment, I was confused by Sal and Helen’s sentiments.
Does Skinner need Emily for The Awakening ceremony?
Maybe. Perhaps that’s why an operative from Heaven has been sent to occupy her body, to stop Skinner’s plans.
When Sal discovers a lost chapter from the Judeo-Christian Bible (something also not in the apocrypha or other scriptures), he has a linguist decipher the tome:
“The Book of Revelations in the Bible mentions Four Horseman: Death. Disease. Famine. War…this Book also includes a Fifth Horseman –- a Dark Messiah. Who will open an Eighth Seal and herald in some kind of Dark Resurrection called the Awakening.”
All bets are off when Sal decides to help Helen and heaven’s operatives to stop The Devil’s Brigade. Of course, The Company isn’t too happy with Sal’s decisions and they put a bounty on his head, releasing the other Sifters on him. Not only that, but Skinner’s Disciples also put Sal in their sights, along with some detectives who follow Sal’s trail of violence.
Sounds like an intriguing actioner spec. Did you like it?
You know, I did. But not as much as I wanted to. It was certainly better than End of Days, if anyone remembers that Schwarzenegger vehicle. I enjoyed the supernatural crime world, and I liked how it set out to be original, consciously trying to avoid the same ground as something like Rosemary’s Baby, which is what most prophetic horror movies mine from.
The detective trappings of the plot are very Ross Macdonald, which is a quest to solve a mystery, with an A to B to C find and interrogate character itinerary, but then of course it turns into an actioner we-gotta-save-the-world third act.
The hardboiled prose falls somewhere between Chandler and James Ellroy, but for some reason begins to feel overwrought once we pass the mid-point. This probably has more to do with my frustration over some of the choices the writer was making. I wasn’t emotionally involved with the story because I was confused by Sal and Helen’s relationship, which is revealed mostly through flashbacks and cryptic dialogue and melodrama in the present.
I thought Sal longed for his lost wife Helen, but then when he’s reunited with her, he kind of wants nothing to do with her. Why? I didn’t understand the emotions here. Also, here’s a dude that euthanized his wife. That decision felt like a mistake. It didn’t so much feel as a mercy killing, or ‘good death’, than as a “Huh? Why the fuck did he shoot her?” moment.
When there’s already so much darkness, it’s a little too much. I feel that it not only muddles the tone, but it alienates the audience and keeps us from empathizing with Sal. My heart wanted to be involved, but instead I was just confused.
It’s a lot of doom and gloom for one man to endure.
But you know, I think it’s something that could be fixed. I think people would eat this up if it was ever made into a movie, particularly fans of dark fantasy and crime stories.
Hell, it could even be a supernatural Chinatown.

[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[xx] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius

What I learned: You know, I’m in a position where I get to help my screenwriter friends with their pitches. If they’re pitching to me, and I get confused following all the character connections, then chances are the plot and backstories might be a little too complicated for a screenplay. This isn’t always the case, but as I was trying to explain the plot of “I Died a Thousand Times” out loud to one of my friends, they got confused. I thought, do I suck at describing things? Or are the plot and character connections too Byzantine? I decided that the connections in the script were complicated, perhaps to a fault. More specifically, I didn’t understand the emotions between Sal and Helen. Sal longs for the wife he helped euthanize, but when he finally gets a second chance with her, he sort of wants nothing to do with her. I didn’t get that. If I said at my euthanized wife’s grave, “I’m lost without you,” and I suddenly got a second chance with her, I wouldn’t spend a lot of time running away from her. It didn’t feel consistent. For clarity’s sake, make sure that your character’s emotions are consistent, and logical in a narrative sense.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Ticking Man

Posted on March 4, 2010 | by admin

Don’t forget to check in Sunday, where I’ll be doing some live but potentially unentertaining Oscar blogging. Opinions will be made. Anger will be expressed. And absolutely no good will come of it. I say if we can get through the broadcast without Steve Martin getting another facelift, we can call the Oscars a success!

Genre: Action/Sci-fi
Premise: A bomb expert must prevent the human nuclear bomb he created from getting into and destroying Moscow.
About: The Ticking Man sold for 1.2 million dollars back in 1990 (2 million dollars today). Although never made, it was famous for the creative way in which the script was marketed. Each script was sent out with a ticking alarm clock attached. The story (of how it was sold) gained so much traction, that for awhile, creative attempts at getting scripts read was all the rage in Hollywood. The result? A lot of exciting script deliveries. A lot of bad scripts. — One half of The Ticking Man’s writing team is screenwriting superstar Brian Helgeland. Since this spec, he’s written L.A. Confidential (for which he won an Oscar), Mystic River, Man on Fire, and most recently, Green Zone, starring Matt Damon. Manny Coto, the other writer, is probably best known for the show 24, where he’s worked as both a writer and Executive Producer (surely, the ticking time bomb angle helped him get that job). Bruce Willis was tapped to star as Hockett, the lead in the film. Of course, Bruce Willis was tapped to star in every action movie between 1990-1996.
Writers: Manny Coto & Brian Helgeland
Details: 126 pages

boom.

Hurt Locker? Who needs The Hurt Locker! Fuck realism. You know, I have to say, I enjoyed Hurt Locker. I thought it was a good movie. But it’s scary the way these studios hype their movies leading up to the Oscars. In order to keep them in the spotlight, they actually have to promote the film as the single greatest film ever made. And hearing over and over again just how great Hurt Locker is only makes me cringe and scrutinize the movie even more. It was a pretty good movie but great!? Let’s jump down from the crazy train shall we?

The Ticking Man introduces another rebellious bomb defuser altogether – anger-management candidate Lloyd Hockett. Hockett, who blew up his teacher’s car with a homemade bomb after losing the school science contest AT AGE 9, has become LAPD’s number 1 bomb expert. Hockett not only defuses time bombs, he’s an explosion waiting to happen himself. Cursed with a hot head (he blew up his science teacher’s car! At age NINE!), you could say that he has a tougher time managing his temper than managing bombs.

What Hockett’s most pissed off about though, is that they don’t let him go in and defuse these bombs anymore. They use those stupid Short Circuit robots with cute names like F.R.E.D. But when FRED is unable to detect that a child is still in the building of a local school they’re supposed to be securing, it’s Hockett to the rescue, running in, saving the boy and defusing the bomb just before it turns them into a bowl of sashimi.

Strong-minded reporter Meg, a whipping girl for a local newspaper, is assigned to do a story on this bomb defusing stuff, and gets a whiff of the boy-saving cover-up job the LAPD is trying to pull at the school. So she searches out Hockett, asking for the truth and nothing but the truth, only to be told, in so many ways, to fuck off.

Brian Helgeland

Meanwhile, at a military base in Nevada, we meet The Ticking Man, a human-looking robot who’s capable of carrying a 20 kiloton nuclear payload in his chest cavity. For reasons unknown, The Ticking Man decides he doesn’t want to be stored on a shelf anymore, and pulls an Andy Dufrane, busting through the wall and marching off into the desert .

Hockett is then kidnapped by the military because, surprise surprise, Hockett BUILT The Ticking Man. Since he’s the only one who can understand why the Ticking Man would want to leave, they need his help to stop him. But they better hurry up, because the fancy schmancy computer programs at the lair are saying that the Ticking Man is following an outdated mission to walk into the middle of Moscow and blow up the entire city! On a more selfish note, I wouldn’t mind an updating of some of the architecture there. Not a big fan of the Kremlin building. Just an observation.

Because they’re not letting Hockett physically chase The Ticking Man, he escapes the military so he can go searching for him himself. Unfortunately, the extremely annoying Meg joins him, still pressing him for that stupid interview about the school bomb. But soon she realizes there’s a much more pressing issue at hand, and that she may be sitting on the story of the century. The two run, skip, and jump after the Ticking Man as he scurries across the country, avoiding the military and delving deeper into Hockett’s anger issues. Will the Ticking Man evaporate Moscow? Will Meg get her story? Will Hockett get really really mad at people who don’t deserve it? You’ll have to read The Ticking Man yourself to find out.

Willis to play the lead…in every movie ever!

The Ticking Man lands its long hand somewhere between fun and ridiculous. It wears its 90s’ness on its sleeve, and while it coaxes some nostalgia out of you, it just as often coaxes you to check slash-film.com for the fourth time that hour. This 90s vibe can be seen loud and proud in The Ticking Man’s not so subtle attempt to create another type of Terminator franchise. The Ticking Man is essentially a slightly-more confused terminator, and you can imagine a new robotic-type actor – someone who you’d normally never want in your movie – fitting into the role and turning himself into the next Schwarzenegger or Keanu Reeves.

What sucks is that the script is so predictable. And I have my suspicions as to why. I remember at that time, the only book out there about screenwriting was Syd Field’s “Screenplay.” So pretty much any new screenwriter in the business was following that book to a tee. The Ticking Man, I believe, is a victim of this unfortunate reality. Acts break exactly when you expect them to. Twists come right on schedule. Not a single change or deviation from the universally accepted 3-Act structure was taken. And that’s too bad. Cause there were some cool places this could’ve gone. So as Randy would say, 5 times in the same show, “I don’t know dog. I just wasn’t feeling it. I don’t know, I don’t know. What do you think E?”

But before I leave, there’s one quick thing I wanna get off my chest. Am I the only one who thinks these “gotta get the story for the paper at all costs” female sub-plots are worthless? I always feel like, “Who gives a shit if they get the story or not?” Yet this is one of the most common sub-plots in all of film. Am I alone on this? Do I have brothers and sisters represent’n?

In the end, The Ticking Man = A fun premise, but a little too much cheese in the dish. :)

[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius

What I learned: Can a gimmick help you sell your script? What I’m about to say may surprise you, but I actually think that, yes, it can. There are so many distractions in today’s world, you gotta do something to stand out, to get noticed. Creatively packaging or selling your script may get you noticed in ways traditional routes would not. And it’s been so long since it was done, it may just seem fresh and new. Just make sure that the script lives up to your packaging. Cause I don’t care if you deliver me your script from a helicopter. If it’s unbearable by page 3, I ain’t gonna keep reading.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Scriptshadow Contest Winners Announced!

Posted on February 8, 2010 | by admin


When I put together this whole Logline/Screenplay Contest idea, I knew it was going to be a learning experience. Choosing 100 loglines from a field of 1000 seemed like a logical move after my previous contest. In that contest, 6 out of every 10 scripts I read contained subject matter that I had little interest in. I gave every one of them an equal shot, but as any reader knows, if you’re not interested in an idea, the script is much harder to read. I figured if I could pick 100 loglines that I knew I might like, that a key weakness in the contest structure would be eliminated. Although I’d probably take this same approach again, I’d also listen to what some of the savvier readers suggested, which is to give more weight to the “professional” loglines. People who understood how to craft a “proper” logline were usually better writers (not always – but usually). Not because crafting a “professional” logline has any bearing on writing a screenplay. It just means that that writer has probably been at it longer, and was therefore more experienced.

After that stage, the top 100 logliners sent me their first 10 pages (or a one page synopsis). For the most part, this worked, although I was disappointed with just how many writers had a really good first 10 pages, and then couldn’t back them up. And I think this might be due to the biggest flaw of my contest. People were using the contest to force themselves to write their script. As a result, many of the scripts in the Top 25 felt rushed. I suppose writers rush any script they’re trying to finish for a deadline, but because of the specific structure I used – giving writers only a month between the announcement of the 10-Page winners and when they had to get their full script in – my entries were more rushed than usual. I’d like to figure out a way to fix this for future contests. It may be as simple as lengthening the contest. Though a six month contest is a hell of a long time to wait.

As for the ten page test itself, for the most part, it works. While writing a good first ten pages doesn’t guarantee that the rest of a script will be good (a lot of these scripts dive-bombed in the second act), if your first 10 pages are bad, it’s almost a guarantee that the rest of the script will also be. The only exception is slow-moving understated character pieces, which take awhile to get going. But those are few and far between.

Another thing I learned is that comedy loglines are the hardest to gauge. Although there were a few funny ones, by and large, a funny comedy logline did not translate into a funny script. Also, I’ve noticed that, in general, comedy writers seem to care less about character development than other writers. They believe if they can string a bunch of funny scenes together, that they’ve done their job. Since the second act is pretty much all about the characters, this is where a lot of comedies went to die.

In the end, I was able to find one “impressive” script, which I’m a little disappointed about, because I was hoping to find at least three. Every other script had things I thought could’ve been improved. But all three of the top scripts were good reads for their own reasons. Without further ado, let’s get to it. As announced at the beginning, all three winners will receive 3 pages of free notes from yours truly (E-mail me if you’re interested in rates). And the number 1 script will be reviewed this Friday. If demand is high enough, I’ll also review the second and third place scripts next week.

3RD PLACE

VOLATILE (Thriller) by William C. Martell (Los Angeles) – Eddy lost everything: his job, his house, his wife. Spends his final unemployment check drinking, wakes up with fresh stitches. Stolen kidney? Implanted bomb. Anonymous caller gives him six one hour tasks: Steal a car, steal a suit, steal a gun… assassinate executives from the company that fired him!
E-mail: wcmartell@scriptsecrets.net

THOUGHTS: The thing I liked most about Volatile was just how focused it was. Watching so many screenplays lose sight of what they were about was disconcerting. You always knew what the protagonist in Volatile’s motivation was. You always knew what the stakes were. It makes for an exciting ride.

2nd PLACE

KILLER PARTIES (Comedy) by Ben Bolea and Joe Hardesty (Los Angeles) – In the frozen Alaskan tundra, where the sun rarely rises, four best friends struggle against the most terrifying experience of their young lives…graduation.
E-mail: BenBolea@gmail.com

THOUGHTS: Killer Parties almost won the competition. While it wasn’t the best script of the competition, it’s probably the one I enjoyed the most. I love how a high school comedy is set in a place completely unfamiliar to high school comedies – Alaska. Also, this is the most authentic feeling high school script I’ve read in a long time. I think with a couple of rewrites and some guidance from the kind of manager who likes and understands the material, this could end up becoming a classic film about high school.

1ST PLACE!!!

OH NEVER, SPECTRE LEAF (Comedy) – By C. Ryan Kirkpatrick and Chad Musick – After a freak plane crash, an awkward teenage boy must enlist the help of a sexually frustrated dwarf, a smokin’ hot cyborg, and an idiot in a bunny suit to defeat the Nocturnal Wench Everlasting and restore sunlight to the bizarre land of Spectre Leaf.
E-mail: flanagancrk@aol.com

THOUGHTS: It’s rare I read a script where I’m just blown away by the writer’s talent. Kirkpatrick and Musick’s are those kinds of writers. Their writing was by far the best in the competition. It reminded me a lot of when I first read Fiasco Heights. These fucking guys took a totally out there bizarre concept and did what so many writers fail to do, they made it work. From cover to cover, these two knocked it out of the park. Can’t wait to tell you all about it. Tune in on Friday for the review!

SPECIAL MENTIONS…

JUST MISSED

LOUISIANA BLOOD (thriller) by Mike Donald (Oxfordshire, UK) – When five victims of JACK THE RIPPER turn up in a swamp more than a century after their deaths, thousands of miles from the crime scene, an English Detective and a Louisiana Sheriff form an unlikely duo to unravel the ultimate conspiracy and reveal the Rippers true identity.
E-mail: touchwoodpicturesltd@hotmail.com

THOUGHTS: I was juggling between Louisiana Blood and Volatile for the Number 3 slot. The twists and turns in this script were a lot of fun, and it’s just a great premise. The only problem was that it was a little slow. If a producer or manager were to work with Mike on this, up the stakes, inject a little adrenaline, this script could sell.

COMEDY THAT WAS ALMOST THERE

FRANK VS. GOD (comedy) by Stewart Schill – When his home is destroyed by a tornado, and the Insurance Company informs him that the claim falls under the ‘Act of God’ exclusion in his policy, David Frank decides to sue God himself for damages, beginning a hilarious and soulful odyssey to a surprising final judgment.
E-mail: stewartschill@att.net

THOUGHTS: Schill came close. Frank Vs. God is a fun well-written screenplay, but I feel like he misjudges the tone in places, going too dramatic in some spots, and too broad in others. Still, I like high-concept comedies and this is one that almost got it right. Even though it didn’t win, I enjoyed it.

BEST FIRST TEN PAGES

HYPOXIA (thriller) by Daniel Silk – A woman under Witness Protection awakens on a 747 to discover the pilots and passengers unconscious, the plane depressurized and masked men hunting her. With oxygen and fuel rapidly depleting, she must grapple with surrendering herself to save the 242 people on board.
E-mail: danielsilk85@gmail.com

THOUGHTS: The fight for the Best First Ten Pages wasn’t even close. Hypoxia had me on the edge of my couch with my jaw on the floor for its first ten. Just a great action sequence. The script was a little uneven in places, which is why it didn’t place higher, but if I need an action-centered rewrite, I’m calling Daniel.

WRITERS I’D MOST LIKE TO DEVELOP IF I WERE A MANAGER

Donnie and Clint Clark for their script – Roanoke Jamestown: American Patriot (comedy) – The untold story of one of America’s founding fathers, Roanoke Jamestown, and how he got deleted from history.
E-mail: dclark0699@gmail.com

THOUGHTS: I don’t think these guys are there yet. But I think they will be. I’d actually read another script of theirs under different circumstances, and they have this unique offbeat humor that you can’t teach. I never quite know what to expect when I’m reading a Clark script, and they didn’t disappointment me here. Their intricate knowledge of our nation’s history is a little freaky. Though that may have something to do with the fact that they’re both teachers.

FINAL THOUGHTS
If I were giving advice to any screenwriters thinking about entering contests, I’d say, don’t rush your script. If you’re rushing to *polish* the script, that’s one thing. But if you’re rushing to get a first draft done in time, I can guarantee you it’s not going to do well. They’re just so easy to spot. Also, while I was happy to make this contest free, I feel like a lot of writers used that as an excuse to throw anything at the wall to see what stuck. With nothing lost by entering, maybe I didn’t get the best of what writers had to offer. I’ll probably change that next time. Overall, this was a fun experience. It was long, it was hard, and there were a few streaks where I ran into some…shall we say…difficult to read material. But I want to thank all of you for making this happen. Without your appreciation for the site, nobody would be interested in finding out who won this contest. So thank you all. Let’s do it again soon. :)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Romantics

Posted on January 28, 2010 | by admin

Gonna wrap up my not-so-comprehensive Sundance Week here. Just the other day we had my review of the Sundance film, “The Company Men,” and now we’ve got another one for you called “The Romantics.” To read some past reviews of this year’s Sundance crop, check out my posts for HappyThankYouMorePlease, Nowhere Boy, and of course, Buried.

Genre: Drama/Ensemble
Premise: Seven friends from college reunite when two of them get married.
About: Starring Katie Holmes, Anna Paquin, Malin Ackerman and Josh Duhmal, this was one of the films playing at Sundance. Nierderhoffer has quite a history behind her. She’s been producing small independent films for over a decade, focusing on dramatic offbeat fare such as Lonesome Jim (Casey Affleck) and Saving Grace (John Cusack). During that time, she’s also written a few novels, such as The Taxonomy of Barnacles, and The Romantics, which she adapted into the screenplay herself. She will now become one of the few people who can claim to be an author, screenwriter, producer, and director, as she has directed this movie as well. I hear next year Galt will be up for the part of Mary Jane in the Spiderman reboot.
Writer: Galt Niederhoffer
Details: 113 pages


I always wanted to get back together for one weekend with six college classmates that, because of time and space and distance and life, I wasn’t able to keep in touch with. I wanted an unlimited supply of beer and to be out in the middle of nowhere and have seven sunsets a day so the lights’ always perfect and sexual tension so thick even the walls couldn’t stop it and music from ten years ago that makes you both cringe and smile at the same time, and unfinished business and decade old drama. But most of all, I just want to put life on hold for a few days and enjoy the company of people I spent four intimate years with, but don’t know anymore. I want to catch up and make out. I want to see where we all ended up.

But since none of this is likely, I wanted The Romantics to bring me as close to that place as possible.

Did it?

Holmes will play Laura.

The Romantics follows 7 friends from college: Laura, who we’re told is a “beauty,” Tom, who we’re told has “puppy-ish green eyes”, Lila, who has a “cascade of blonde hair,” Weesie, who’s “put together even in her pajamas,” Tripler, who sounds like a guy’s name but since there was no pronoun in his introduction, I figured out was a girl 60 pages later, Pete, who’s “handsome and athletic,” and then there’s Jake, who gets the only introduction that actually gives us a sense of who he is and what he looks like, described as a “shaggy haired modern-day Victorian poet,” despite the fact that he’s probably the smallest character of the bunch.

These 7 are the bestest of best friends. So best friends-ish in fact, that they’ve given themselves the nickname, “The Romantics.” There’s a lot of heavily implied history between the group, but unfortunately we don’t get any of it. The only piece of information that makes its way to us is that Laura and Tom are together and that Laura and Lila are closer than peanut butter and jelly. Waking up after a crazy night of drinking, the 7 realize that they’re all late for graduation, so they hurry up and get ready, only to run outside and see a sea of caps flying into the sky. The seven have missed their own graduation.

Duhmal will play Tom.

Flash-forward 10 years and we’re shocked to find out that Lila is getting married. No, that’s not the shocking part. The shocking part is that she’s getting married to Tom, Laura’s old boyfriend. The seven besties reconvene at Lila’s mansion, ready to reignite old times, with no one seemingly concerned about the fact that Lila is marrying her best friend’s boyfriend of five years. It’s as if no one thought this was going to be an issue. Laura pretends that everything’s fine. Tom bumbles around, rarely saying anything to anyone. It’s a really weird vibe and an awkward set-up to the weekend’s events.

Despite this triangle of non-fun, the rest of the group does their best to get drunk and live it up. There’s laughing, flirting, even a little bit of kissing. But it always comes back to Tom and Laura. How did they break up? Why would Tom end up with her best friend? Why is he marrying Lila??

Ackerman will play Lila

Apparently, the reason Tom and Laura broke up was because…well, actually I don’t know why they broke up. But the reason they’re not together anymore, according to Tom, is that he loves her too much. And they had such a great time together, he doesn’t want to screw it up. He wants their time together to remain perfect. Which brings us to his relationship with Lila. He hates Lila. For all intents and purposes, he despises her. Isn’t a single trait he likes about the woman. So obviously, he’s marrying her. Why? Um, I believe it’s because it makes him feel like less of a fuck-up. To complicate matters, Laura and Lila, who are still supposedly friendly with each other, have NEVER SPOKEN ABOUT THE FACT THAT SHE’S MARRYING THE MAN LAURA STILL LOVES. Am I the only one who thinks none of this makes any sense at all?

But that’s not the only problem with The Romantics. I never knew any of these characters. I was barely given a description of them in the first place so I had no idea what they looked like, and once we got to the present, I was never told who they are out in the real world, what they do, what their dreams are, what their problems are. And the person I’m told the least about, Tom, is probably the most important character in the entire story. And I know absolutely nothing about him. There’s vague notes thrown out like, “lawyer” and “married” but that’s all they are is notes. The lack of time you have in a screenplay prevents you from getting into a character’s autobiography, but if all I’m told about someone after 110 pages is that they’re “put together” and “married,” I mean… how can I root for that character. It’s like asking me to root for the stranger I watched cross the street the other day. And I probably know more about him than I do these characters, as I could at least take an educated guess about who he is based on what he was wearing.

I get it. This is a writer-director project. Not everything needs to be spelled out, as long as the director understands what she needs. But in leaving so much on the cutting room floor, in preventing us from truly understanding these people, all we’re left with is a bunch of pretty faces.

The script does some things right. We have an obvious ticking time bomb here (the wedding) and potential for a dramatically played out love triangle. The opening and closing images were perfect. But it didn’t matter cause none of it felt real. I was miles away from ever understanding where these characters were coming from.

What’s so odd about all this, is that the adaptation of her other novel, The Taxonomy of Barnacles, which I reviewed here, has some really nice character work in it. It was adapted by someone else but still. I came out of this one stumped.

[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius

What I learned: I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Ensemble pieces are a bitch. And my advice is to stay away from them. Why are these films so hard? I’ll tell you why. Coming up with an interesting character that an audience wants to watch for 2 hours is one of the hardest things there is to do in the world. That is not hyperbole. It’s why studios pay half a million dollars for screenplays that get it right. It’s why they then back up that investment with 100 million dollars to put it on screen. In what other medium is such a huge investment made on something so tiny? – So when you essentially say, “I’m not going to just come up with one compelling character, I’m going to come up with seven!”, it’s like asking if you can enter your lottery numbers in a drawing that’s seven times bigger than the normal lottery. And that’s just the beginning of your problems. As I mentioned above, one of my issues with The Romantics was that we didn’t know anything about these characters. Well, when you spread your movie out between seven different characters, there’s not a lot of time to *go into* these characters, which forces you to have to do *more* in *less* time. So it’s just a really hard type of script to get right. I am not saying it can’t be done. It has obviously been done before. I like these types of movies and have even tried my hand at a couple myself. But you just have to know that you’re stacking the odds against yourself when you do it. My advice is, if you’re still in the early stages of your writing, try to write a script that has a single compelling character for 120 minutes. If you can do that successfully first, and you still want to tackle the ensemble, then go for it. God be with you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Kingdom Come

Posted on January 3, 2010 | by admin

Hip hip hooray! It’s the new year. I’m not much for resolutions but I have set myself a few big goals for 2010. The first is to post my plans for Scriptshadow – some changes I want to make, some additions, goals to get more of you working as professional writers. But it’s such a huge post that writing it feels like I’m tackling War and Peace. I’ll try to have it up some time in the next couple of weeks. If I don’t, feel free to give me a nudge. While I deal with that, let’s turn it over to Roger, who’s reviewing today’s very cool sounding script, “Kingdom Come.” Why they haven’t adapted Lord Of The Flies in 20 years is beyond me. Whoever has the rights, make it happen. Do it right and it would be huge.

Genre: Horror
Premise: When the entire staff of an isolated reform school disappears in the middle of the night, the rebellious students not only must survive each other – they come face-to-face with a much darker force lurking in the icy wilderness. Supernatural Lord of the Flies with echoes of The Shining.
About: Alex McAulay wrote the novels Bad Girls (MTV Books), Shelter Me, Oblivion Road, and Lost Summer. Chris Sivertson is the writer-director who adapted the Jack Ketchum novel, The Lost. He also directed I Know Who Killed Me (for which he won a Razzie Award – although I’m guessing that had more to do with Lindsay Lohan being in the movie) and Wicked Lake. The script made the rounds a couple of months ago but ultimately did not sell.
Writer: Alex McAulay & Chris Sivertson
Details: Draft dated 9/9/09

Do we get a reimagining of this classic tale?

The first time I heard of this script the person referring to it used the phrase, “Harry Potter on Acid”. I love wizards like Tiger Woods loves extramarital sex. Now imagine my demeanor, think of the lust in my geek loins when my eyeballs locked on that phrase. Harry Potter on Acid, holy fuck dude! I’ve never done acid before, but I understand it has Fuck Shit Up Properties. Of course I want to read about the world where boy wizards trip balls and where everything seems so psychedelically scary, that it’s like the writer’s pen is wielded with that specific Hallucinogenic Edge that men like Hunter S. Thompson and Alejandro Jodorowsky know so well.

I read this script dressed in a cloak. A hand-me down from that tween tea party I went to at Barnes & Noble where I learned two things about myself: (1) I must really love J.K. Rowling and (2) The older I get, the more delicious teen girls in pointy wizard hats look.
I’m here to report one thing:
My wizard boner died in its attempt to copulate with this script. Why? There were no fucking wizards, man.
Which is to say, “Kingdom Come” is nothing like Harry Potter on acid. But it wasn’t trying to be. However, it is an actual line of dialogue in the script.
So, what’s it like?
Imagine a movie that has the story DNA of both Stephen King’s The Shining and Firestarter. Now cross-pollinate that double-helix with the nuclei of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies, and the chimera might turn out to be something like “Kingdom Come”.
Something about the first few pages of “Kingdom Come” really evoked the music video for Billy Idol’s “Cradle of Love”. I’m still trying to figure out why.
When we meet Ryan Cooper, he’s smoking blunts and stretching cunts. Okay, maybe he’s not a stoner, but he does attempt to get into the sweet panties of Emily Anderson. They’re both at that tender age of seventeen where the concept of true love has yet to be tarnished. Seventeen is a good magazine to spank it to (it also has good quizzes, if you’re so inclined), but it’s also the age where girls still willingly open their legs for Edward Cullen. After seventeen, girls stop believing in fairytales and instead of fucking Edward, they mace him or go all Buffy on him.
But I digress. Seventeen year-old girls have fathers. And ninety-nine percent of the time, these daddies are grizzled and protective and jealous cockblockers. And such is the case for Ryan, because when he’s caught by Mr. Anderson with his pants around his knees on top of his (presumably) only daughter, there’s fisticuffs. Mr. Anderson has an interesting cockblocking technique. Instead of horse-whipping Ryan, he slaps his own daughter in the face. When he slaps her, Ryan attacks.
In such matters, where teenage boys beat on the fathers of their girlfriends, there’s usually a form of justice required. In “Kingdom Come”, the narrative requires an interesting punishment for Ryan.
Ryan is sent to Briarcliff Reform School. Note that this all boy’s dungeon is located in the middle of the Colorado mountains during the strangest of winters, kinda like the Overlook Hotel in The Shining.
Incidentally, Ryan is also being sent to the same school that Emily’s bizarre little brother, Simon, has been sent to.
What’s wrong with this Simon kid?
We first learn of Simon when one the creepy oil paintings in Emily’s room catches Ryan’s attention. It’s of a man tearing his head open to reveal another man underneath. Francis Bacon, eat your heart out. The acrylic Matryoshka doll man watches Ryan try to fuck Emily.
Simon not only paints, but we’re told he’s the weirdest kid at Briarcliff. Why? Simon’s a sleepwalker, and it’s hinted that his dreams during these spells aren’t really dreams. You see, Simon knows shit about people he has no business knowing. How does he acquire this knowledge? I guess, like little Danny, he shines.
When Ryan gets to Briarcliff, he’s concerned with checking up on Simon. He his Emily’s kid brother, after all.
What’s the deal with Briarcliff?
Briarcliff is run by Father Cleary, who reminded me a little of the warden from The Shawshank Redemption and Sunlight Gardener from The Talisman. A creepy authority figure who might be a little corrupt.
Father Cleary’s muscle is Brother Grimes, and welcomes Ryan to Briarcliff much like Byron Hadley welcomes the fresh fish into Shawshank. He shoves him around, pretty much uses every tactic except ass-rape to make it clear that Ryan is in hell, and while in hell, he’s just gonna have to straighten out.
There are three nuns that work in the cafeteria. The most important is Sister Fiona, a figure so intriguing I was hoping this would turn into a nunsploitation flick, but no dice there. Fiona sympathizes with the boys. She’s the only authority figure that seems to know that there’s something wrong with Briarcliff.
Ryan quickly becomes friends with the nerdiest and most picked on kid at the school, Helen. Helen isn’t his real name, but the other boys have named him after Helen Keller because he wears a pink hearing aid.
The school bully is Jay. He’s not physically imposing, but like any bully worth his salt, he has a few cronies who laugh at his jokes and do his bidding.
And that’s pretty much the set-up for our microcosm. You’ve got the authority figures, who are mostly assholes, except for Fiona. And you’ve got the good kids and the bad kids. The good kids are led by Ryan and Helen. The bad kids are led by Jay.
Is Briarcliff haunted?
Not persay. But there’s something lurking out in the wilderness nearby that’s casting its strange shadow on the school.
At night, there’s a creepy howling whistle that keeps a sleepwalking Simon glued to the window. And that’s one of the most effective images for me, “There’s something disturbing about the image of this small boy framed by the vast wilderness.”
Helen has a theory about this whistling, “They say it’s the sound of dead souls trapped in the mountain.”
So what’s the hook?
When the boys wake up one morning at the beginning of the 2nd act, all the adults have disappeared.
The situation at the school quickly unravels. Reform school boys run amok. Jay attempts to assume leadership of the school body, but he’s gonna have to butt heads with Ryan.
Soon after, Simon disappears and Ryan must venture into the mountains to search for the boy.
Yes, he discovers the source of the whistling, and shit gets really complicated when Simon returns back to the school.
Changed.
And perhaps not in a good way.
Did you like it, Rog?
I wanted it to be as awesome as Dario Argento’s “Suspiria”. For this type of tale, that’s kind of the high-watermark for me. I mean, isn’t setting a supernatural tale in an all-boy’s school sort of the other side of the coin? It’s the testosterone-and-semen version of “Suspiria”. I’m surprised Victor Salva didn’t already think of this idea. Or maybe he already did with “Jeepers Creepers 2”. I don’t know. You be the judge.
I guess my main issue with the script is that we’re teased with a Lord of the Flies-esque potboiler. We’re presented with the fixings of a microcosm that will be used to explore the psychological nature of people. And unfortunately, this wonderful set-up is moved to the side and the story shifts gears to concentrate on Simon and his mysterious nature.
For example, the authority figures could have been more of a threat. When Grimes, Cleary and Fiona become really interesting, they’re taken out of the story and it becomes solely about the kids. Call me picky, but I think the situation could have been mined for more drama.
And the conflict between the good and bad children didn’t go the distance for me. It didn’t feel immediate and urgent. If Jay started hoarding supplies or something, really taking control of the school and putting the other kids in danger, then I would have been more involved with their plight. Instead, it never feels like real danger.
I would have liked to see more of a balance between the human drama and the supernatural elements. The best thrills and true horror come from people (their relationships with one another and their decisions) not just situations.
Final verdict: A creepy tale that owes fealty to The Shining. Some readers, especially horror hounds, might be turned on by the demonic images and the script’s various attempts to disturb them. But horror snobs might find that, in the end, although the script’s pieces are comparable to its influences, it ultimately lacks the emotional and psychological depth of its paternal precursors. The whole time I was reading it, I kept thinking of the wonders contained within Michael Grant’s “Gone” saga (another supernatural story about kids in a world where the adults disappear) and the intricate character conflicts explored in Stephen King’s latest, “Under the Dome”. Both are works that not only provide cool set-ups, but the microcosms they present don’t feel like flat worlds. Interesting characters inhabit these worlds, and we are allowed to know them. Sure, those are novels, but you can do the same thing in a screenplay. You just have to write the right screenplay.

[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[x] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius

What I learned: Don’t get so sidetracked with your supernatural and fantastical elements that you forget about your real story. Fantasy works best when it’s about people that feel like real human beings. And for this reason, I feel like “Kingdom Come” tells a situation, not a story. Stories are about people, not scenarios (or MacGuffins, or monsters, or portals to other dimensions, or explosions). Think of the potential for conflict when two people, who clash about everything, are put in the same room together. Now lock the doors. Your story is about what happens between these two people when they start to interact. It’s not about the walls of the room they’re in (even if the walls are closing in on them, about to smash them). In the same way, if you create a microcosm, focus on the human drama that arises between the characters. Not on that demon that lurks in the shadows, waiting to fuck shit up. Okay, maybe you can give him some of the limelight, just don’t let him take over the show. Unless it’s the Crypt Keeper.
He’s okay.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment