Search Results for: scriptshadow 250
Hope everyone’s enjoying their weekend. Just one week away from the 250! Writers who made it into the coveted top quarter-thousand will be notified by the end of next Saturday. In order to distract you from that looming announcement, here are some amateur script entries to get your bloody analytical hooks into. As always, let’s find something good! Scriptshadow points to the first person who guesses my favorite logline of the pack (if you’ve been a longtime Scriptshadow reader, this should be easy). I’ll reply to the winner. :)
Title: She Wants to Have My Babies
Genre: Rom-Com
Logline: A perfect couple’s relationship becomes a rollercoaster when she wants a baby and he flat-out refuses to start a family.
Why You Should Read: The baby conflict. Now who doesn’t know a couple that struggle(s/d) with this issue? You – yes you – who answered “me”, go back to your cave. Now you, in-touch people, do you think such an emotional topic can be dealt with humorously considering the stakes? No, don’t answer. Can’t you recognize a rhetorical question when you see one? Now after you read “She Wants to Have my Babies”, and only then, will you be allowed to answer my question based on your experience of the read. You will be welcome to in fact. I know, I’m a prince.
Title: Shotgun Wedding
Genre: Action / Comedy
Premise: A timid guy from a small town gets cold feet on the eve of his wedding and incurs the wrath of his bride’s unhinged religious family.
Details: 91 pages
Why You Should Read: I love fun, quirky movies with plenty of silly jokes and cool action scenes, and Shotgun Wedding is chock full of both! It’s tone and sense of humor has been compared to films like Raising Arizona and Hot Fuzz. It’s a light, entertaining read and would definitely be a crowd pleaser on the big screen. Thank you for your consideration and I hope you enjoy my script.
Title: Game of 72
Genre: Sci-fi
Logline: In a future where robots run grisly human-fighting rings for sport, any human who survives 72 matches is given 72 minutes to win their freedom–or die.
Why You Should Read: I moved to Los Angeles to specifically pursue a career in waiting tables. I was originally gonna write a biopic about Nikola Tesla’s chef, but figured this would be more interesting. This script has such a big fat concept, that when it took a selfie, Instagram crashed. Do not read it if you hate: space, hyper loops, nihilism, invisible architecture, and futuristic theories. FULL DISCLOSURE: I’m an alien that’s trying to blend in with everyone.
Title: #uCantMakeThisUP
Genre: Psychological Thriller
Logline: After a sour exchange online, a military wife must protect herself and her daughter from an anonymous poster’s offline threats.
Why You Should Read: I wanted to explore a section in horror without the supernatural bent, thus UCMTU was born. I’d pitch it as a character-driven piece that’s grounded in realism. I believe it checks off the list of things needed to sale: Female Protag; Thriller; Present-Time; and Few Locations (HELLO BLUMHOUSE!!!). Any feedback to help strengthen the script is appreciated.
Similar films: Catfish, Unfriended, Ex Machina.
Title: EXTRACTION
Genre: Action/Sci-Fi
Logline: Two military veterans with PTSD scan an abandoned war zone for technology that will remove their war experiences. But other forces are at play…
Details: 108 pages
Why You Should Read: I’ve been destined since I was in elementary school to write screenplays. It was a combination of watching kung-fu flicks with my grandfather, and writing 90 paged graphic novels that were side-sequels to the movie “Twister.” Since studying screenwriting in college, I’ve been hammering away at the craft for almost ten years now, and 24 scripts later I can say I’m closer than ever to finding my voice, and the feedback has been consistently good. I’ll be taking a trip to LA soon to meet film industry friends, and feedback from scriptshadow will certainly let me know what I need to get to the next level. I hope you’ll find something to enjoy here! Love the site.
Get Your Script Reviewed On Scriptshadow!: To submit your script for an Amateur Review, send in a PDF of your script, along with the title, genre, logline, and finally, something interesting about yourself and/or your script that you’d like us to post along with the script if reviewed. Use my submission address please: Carsonreeves3@gmail.com. Remember that your script will be posted. If you’re nervous about the effects of a bad review, feel free to use an alias name and/or title. It’s a good idea to resubmit every couple of weeks so your submission stays near the top.
Genre: Comedy
Premise (from writer): Two brothers-in-law who hate each other must get along when their wives become pregnant and the couples are forced to move in together to save money before the babies arrive.
Why You Should Read (from writer): Having this kid is expensive. More than I even calculated for. And believe me, I calculated. I wonder if there is a simple solution to cut costs and release the worry and anxiety I feel about making all this work. My wife suggested moving in with her sister and her husband during the pregnancy. Smart. But I don’t care for that guy. Can’t stand going to dinner with him. Living with him for nine months? Nah. But my wife. My wife is persistent and she makes a good case. What if we all moved in? What if…
Writer: Emmitt Webb
Details: 104 pages
So I’ve come across “Pregnant Pals” a few times when picking Amateur Offerings scripts, and I’ve always passed over it. Why? To be honest, it felt contrived. I have trouble getting on board with the idea that two people who hate each other’s guts would willingly move in together. Even if you bring the wives into the equation. What wife, wanting her first pregnancy to go as smooth as possible, would bring into her home two warring husbands? It doesn’t feel realistic.
With that said, it’s a comedy. And comedies don’t have to make as much sense as other genres. So when Pregnant Pals won a spot in Amateur Offerings via “Random Picks” Week and then edged past the competition on a day when most people were focused on finishing their SS250 scripts before the deadline, I threw my preconceived notions to the curb and put my hope in the power of pregnancy.
So the plot is pretty much identical to the logline. On the one side we have Pete and Katie Gurley. Pete’s a super-confident guy who’s pumped that he just got his wife pregnant. On the other side we have Langford and Darla Winston. Langford’s a wet blanket serious type. And Darla is Katie’s sister. It just so happens that on the very same day, Langford got Darla pregnant.
What could be better than two sisters with the same due date, right?
Well, there’s a problem. Pete and Langford hate each other. Like more than Donald Trump and Mexico hate each other. And that wouldn’t be a problem except for that Langford just ran out of money, which means he can’t support his family.
Darla hints about their financial woes to Katie, and the next thing you know, Katie asks if they’d like to live with her and Pete during their pregnancy. Pete and Langford are strongly opposed to this, but when the wives insist on it, they have no choice. What follows is 9 months of a lot of anger, conflict, frustration, and, of course, shenanigans.
It took me awhile to understand what kind of movie I was reading here. At around page 40, I got it. This is Stepbrothers, the unofficial sequel. And when you look at it that way, you can kind of see it working. Because Stepbrothers wasn’t a movie that really worked on paper. It was an overly simplistic idea that got the perfect actors to play the two main parts.
So if this was cast well, maybe the things I’m about to say don’t matter as much. But I always subscribe to the theory, “Fulfill the potential of your script yourself. Don’t hope others see the potential and fulfill it for you.” To that end, there are some issues that need to be addressed here.
Let’s start with the first two scenes in the script. Both scenes are sex scenes between our main couples where the sisters get pregnant. In the first scene, Pete looks for positive reinforcement from Katie after the sex. It’s a chipper fun scene. I don’t have any complaints. However, in the very next scene, after Langford and Darla finish their sex, Langford ALSO looks for reinforcement about his performance.
Now their approach in seeking reinforcement is different, but this is the key moment in the story where you want to establish just how different your two main characters are. These are the characters who are going to be driving the conflict throughout the screenplay. By showing them essentially acting the same way, you’re telling the reader they’re similar. When you’re writing comedies, this moment needs to show how extreme the differences are between the characters.
The next issue was dialogue. I never got the sense that Emmitt obsessed over the dialogue. Partly because the jokes weren’t as clever as they could be, and partly because a lot of lines contained mistakes. Take this exchange between Pete and Katie. In it, Pete doesn’t want to have dinner with Langston and Darla: “I’ll give you one thousand dollars if I don’t have to attend tonight,” Pete pleads. Katie replies: “You don’t have one thousand dollars to bet.” This exchange doesn’t make sense. Pete never brought up betting. He said he’d GIVE Katie a thousand dollars. It’s a small thing but it’s a red flag. As a reader, I’m now, in the back of my mind, wondering if the writer has the chops to write good dialogue.
Later in the screenplay, there’s a scene where Katie forces Pete to text Langford. Langford gets the text, but doesn’t know who it is, so he asks. Pete writes back: “It’s Pete.” “Who?” Langford replies. “You mean whom?” Pete shoots back. The problem with this exchange isn’t the exchange itself. It’s that Emmitt would constantly misuse “your” and “you’re” throughout the screenplay. How can I trust characters correcting characters’ grammar when the writer himself can’t use the correct words?
And then there are basic lines of dialogue, like, “I don’t see what’s your issue with him,” which literally reads out as, “I don’t see what is your issue with him.” By itself, a reader can forgive this. When it’s surrounded by other dialogue issues, however, it becomes one more piece to add to the “Can I start skimming now?” puzzle.
And this is a script built around dialogue. It’s going for that quippy rom-com or bro-com fire-back-and-forth dialogue. In these types of scripts, you can be a little weak in the concept department. You can be a little weak in the plotting department. But the one area you can’t be weak in is the dialogue department. That department is your star. Under that reality, lines like, “I don’t see what is your issue with him” become script-killers.
If I were giving notes on this as an executive hoping to get the studio excited about the project, I’d come up with a setup that was much less convoluted. Have Pete and Katie living the dream. They just bought a new house, they’re successful, they got pregnant. They’re at the pinnacle of their lives. Use the first few scenes to establish that.
Scene four, the doorbell rings. It’s Katie’s long-lost estranged sister and her deadbeat boyfriend/husband (he refuses to use “labels”). They ran out of money. This is the only place they had to come to. Katie can’t turn her sister away. Of course she lets them stay. Of course, one week turns into two, two to four, etc.
In this new version, it’s not just Pete and Langford who have issues with each other (they’re from two completely different worlds), but also Katie and her sister, who need to resolve some life-long issues. They’re also both pregnant, which complicates matters. But the experience ends up bonding them, and everyone leaves happy.
Doing it this way would also allow you to do more with the story. One of the problems with the script now is that the husbands already hate each other when they move in. So there aren’t a whole lot of places to go with that. If the husbands didn’t even know each other, then the script starts off with them trying to make it work, realizing they come from two different worlds, going to outright hatred, eventually finding common ground, and finally becoming friends. In other words, there’s more of an ARC to the storyline, which tends to be more pleasing from a storytelling perspective.
But the point is, I think the setup here is more complicated than it needs to be. Simplify it. The great thing about Step-Brothers is how invisible the setup is. Right now, the setup for Pregnant Pals is one of the most convoluted I’ve seen all year! And like I always say: Convoluted is evil. Destroy all convolutedness!
Script link: Pregnant Pals
[ ] what the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: I find that writers needlessly overcomplicate concepts or plots to the point where they’re so convoluted, they don’t make sense. Always take a step back and look for ways to simplify the concept. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about screenwriting over the years, it’s that the simplest solution is usually the best one.
Okay so we’re going to try something different this week. Now usually, I filter the submissions and give you only the ones that I feel are good enough to handle the intense scrutiny of Scriptshadow Nation. Even when I do this, I still read replies like, “These are the best options?? Really??” In order for you to make a more accurate assessment of this process, I’m including five COMPLETELY RANDOM SUBMISSIONS. I literally closed my eyes and pointed to the screen. Whatever I was pointing to when I opened my eyes, that entry was included in this week’s Amateur Offerings. That’s not to say one of these can’t be great. But I just wanted to include a “Random Week” to give you a better feel for the average submission. Enjoy!
Title: Guilt
Genre: Drama (100 pgs)
Logline: After witnessing a murder, a crack-smoking, loser lawyer tries to redeem himself by vindicating the teen prostitute wrongly accused of the crime.
Why You Should Read: I cannot imagine a more vital time this story needs to be told. With all that’s been happening in the news over the past year— the shooting of unarmed suspects, and stories of inherent racism and corruption in our justice system— this script is about as relevant as they come.
Title: TENT CITY
Genre: Drama/Gangster
Logline: Arizona. Tent City. Joe Arpaio. 2013. Bunkmates at the infamous outdoor jail start a successful prescription pill drug ring while on work furlough.
Why You Should Read: Along with getting an inside look on the prescription pill epidemic plaguing America, you witness the development of a truly remarkable bond between a black man and white man that they haven’t seen since Brian’s Song. You will never root harder for two drug dealers and will absolutely cringe at the impending doom closing in at the end. — Joe Arpaio is the most hated Sheriff in Hollywood. TENT CITY quietly makes a mockery out of Arpaio and addresses issues such as overcrowded jails, illegal immigration, human rights violation and income inequalities. I carefully crafted this story for liberal producers. — It’s a man’s movie at the core; love triangles, graphic violence, sex, ASU college girls, gangs, drugs and a bromance between two alpha males.
Title: Pregnant Pals
Genre: Comedy
Logline: Two brothers-in-law who hate each other must get along when their wives become pregnant and the couples are forced to move in together to save money before the babies arrive.
Why You Should Read: Having this kid is expensive. More than I even calculated for. And believe me, I calculated. I wonder if there is a simple solution to cut costs and release the worry and anxiety I feel about making all this work. My wife suggested moving in with her sister and her husband during the pregnancy. Smart. But I don’t care for that guy. Can’t stand going to dinner with him. Living with him for nine months? Nah. But my wife. My wife is persistent and she makes a good case. What if we all moved in? What if…
Title: The Ghost
Genre: Action / Thriller
Logline: After being left for dead, one of the most feared assassins must overcome brutal odds,
to bring down the head of the Japanese Yakuza known as, The Barbarian.
Why You Should Read: My name is Gavin from England. I’ve been a big fan of your reviews for a long time. I currently have two scripts under option, one of them being with Bafta winner Noel Clarke. I know you are extremely busy, and I wouldn’t want to waste your time, so I’ve worked on different scripts, but I’ve only just felt ready to send you my work. I currently work two jobs that keeps me busy 11 hours a day, and then I write for 3 hours a day after my shifts, so hopefully you will see that I’m dedicated to the cause my friend, and I’d love for you to review my work (as would most writers).
Title: Clownskill
Genre: Horror/Dark Comedy
Logline: An uptight USDA inspector and her new recruit investigate mad cow disease in a town where clown school alumni with a beef plot grisly revenge.
Why You Should Read: Nothing goes along with grief like beer, banana nut muffins and a really dark, funny screenplay. Something grimly hilarious that lays it all out there – fear and dread and sadness – in ways that your therapist and loved ones would strongly disapprove of or possibly have you committed for. Sometimes you gotta laugh before you can cry. — I was already working on an entirely different script – romantic, grand, tragic, lovely – when life turned a corner and got real. It stayed that way for quite a while. Finally, there was a funeral and a heavy New Orleans goodbye lunch. I drove home, consumed the aforementioned beer and muffin, told “tragic and lovely” I would come back for it later and got to work conferring with a few demons. They were alarmingly eager to oblige. — I really shocked myself that I could think up so many awful ways to kill people. I guess the repressive Southern upbringing has finally paid off. This beast is so far out of my wheelhouse/comfort zone that, honestly, I don’t even know what to make of it. If it weren’t for the funny parts, I probably would lock it away in the attic with my crazy, semi-dangerous aunt. — If the script does make it to Amateur Friday, I can’t wait to get feedback. I took some risks (personally and craft-wise) that may or may not pay off. At the least I hope it entertains a few of you and at best I hope it doesn’t give any potentially homicidal clowns food for thought. Thanks for the consideration and potential reads! And good luck to everyone in the ScriptShadow250!
No Amateur Offerings this week, sadly. Next Friday I’ll be reviewing last week’s Amateur Offerings winner, Sessions of Lead Belly. The consensus seems to be that the writing’s a bit raw but that the unique voice makes up for it. You can download and read it here.
In the meantime, remember that there are just 19 days left to enter the Scriptshadow Screenwriting Competition. Feel free to use today’s talkback to discuss box office this weekend (Minions and Self/Less – a script I reviewed a couple of years ago) and any loglines you want to try out. As you know, if something’s not working in logline form, it’s going to be tough to make work in movie form. So make sure that logline’s solid!
Yesterday’s Irony Logline Winner has just been announced. Go back to yesterday’s post if you missed the competition. Please keep all reactions to the winners in the above linked post. All comments today are limited to Insatiable discussion. Thanks!
Genre: Horror
Premise (from writer): When a law student’s girlfriend mysteriously vanishes from a truck stop diner, he suspects a shady trucker is to blame. But as he races to save her life, he discovers that the only thing more terrifying than her captors is the reason she was taken.
Why You Should Read (from writer): I need the help of the ScriptShadow community! I like scary things and enjoy a good horror film. I’ve been writing for quite some time and have advanced in some of the more well known contests including Nicholl. INSATIABLE was a semifinalist in Austin in 2011. A revised version was a finalist in ScreamCraft last summer and a semifinalist in Page. It has received some positive feedback, yet here it sits on my laptop. My question is this — is the story worthy of a movie? Can it get over the hump? Is the script worth revising or should I consider it a building block, leave it on my laptop, and move on? Please help!
Writer: Michael Morra
Details: 110 pages
I’ve always been a big fan of Michael Morra’s writing. He’s a guy who I’ve felt has been on the verge of breaking through for awhile now. And when you open one of his scripts, you’ll see why. He knows how to pull you in (what a great opening scene!), he writes in a way that yanks your eyes down the page, his writing is descriptive but never overbearing. And he writes in one of the most marketable genres – horror, a genre he clearly knows well. I feel like if a guy like Jason Blum gave this guy a shot, he’d deliver.
So what about Insatiable? Does it live up to my high expectations of Michael? Let’s find out.
Insatiable starts out hot. And I mean literally. At a popular truck stop diner just outside of the Appalachian Mountains, a dilapidated pregnant woman stumbles into the station, grabs one of the pumps, douses herself with gasoline, and then sets herself on fire. Without even paying!
As we ponder whatever the hell THAT was, we jump a few counties over to 24 year-old Jake. Jake’s one of those lucky young men who won the genetic and financial lottery. He’s got a pretty perfect life, and he’s about to officially share it with his farmer’s daughter girlfriend, Brooke, who he plans to propose to this weekend during an impromptu vacation with their friends Austin and Claire.
When they stop to grab a bite to eat (at that, um, exact same truck stop), Brooke drops a bombshell on Jake. She’s got one of those human beings growing inside her. Yup, she’s preggies. Jake doesn’t take the news nearly as well as she expected, a fight ensues, and Brooke storms outside in anger.
Jake decides to let her cool off, until a bunch of time goes by and Brooke still hasn’t returned. He heads outside, looks for her, and finds scattered drops of blood instead. He calls in the cops, who key in on a well-known trucker named Winston. Winston looks all sorts of guilty but they can’t seem to find any evidence linking him to the disappearance.
Jake’s not so sure though, and decides to head up to Winston’s house to get to the bottom of this. Meanwhile, Austin and Claire stay local and snoop around, looking for clues.
Just when it seems like Winston might not be their guy, Jake discovers a deep dark secret. That Winston’s wife is… well, how do I put this lightly – A FUCKING MONSTER! A monster who feeds off the blood and guts of the living. It’s her who’s kidnapping pregnant woman, so she can finally have the baby her husband was never man enough to give her.
One of the ways you can spot a writer on the verge is that they’re not precious about their material. Newcomers will hold tight to even the most banal idea. Every character, every page, every sentence, is treated as if Shakespeare himself wrote it.
Seasoned writers want to know if something’s not clicking so they can stop wasting their time and move on to the next idea. Which is the question Michael has posed to us today.
Unfortunately, the answer isn’t easy but I can definitely see why this script has advanced over the majority of the competition only to fall short of the final prize. Michael’s clearly a good writer, but there’s something about this script that feels – I don’t know – too familiar.
Horror is really a genre where you have to bring one of three things…
1) A fresh idea
2) A fresh take
3) A fresh voice
This idea doesn’t feel fresh to me. A woman gets kidnapped. That’s common. And then there’s some scary creature involved. Also common.
As for the “take,” I suppose it’s a little bit unique (I’ve never seen a bat creature before) but even that brings me back to the winged creature in Jeepers Creepers.
And finally, while the writing is excellent, I wouldn’t say the voice is unique. When you read a script like, say, February, there’s a very distinct flavor to that writing that you haven’t experienced before. And I’m not one to say that your voice HAS to be unique to sell a script. I see scripts sold all the time from writers with no voice. But, like I said, the script does need to be fresh in one of these three areas: idea, take, voice, and while Insatiatble knocks on the door of a couple of those, it never breaks through.
Now as a pure script, the setup and structure are solid, which is why a screenplay like this – while not perfect – advances past 90% of the material in a screenplay competition.
We have a girl that goes missing. A girl in peril always works. This then gives our characters a clear goal – find the girl. The stakes and the urgency emerge naturally from that. We’re even reminded that if she’s not located within 48 hours, their chances of finding her alive are cut in half.
And we’ve got a solid mystery box too. Why would a pregnant girl set herself on fire rather than live? What was it, exactly, that was growing inside of her?
I guess the reason this perfectly sound structure didn’t work on me is a combination of a couple of things. First, this isn’t my type of movie. Unless a creature-feature is done flawlessly, I’m more into the “real life” horror variety. I’m much more afraid of, say, the family in Texas Chainsaw Massacre since, theoretically, that could really happen. I know that I’m never going to run into any bat people any time soon, so I’m not nearly as scared.
And two, there was nothing new about the story. As I read through it, all I kept thinking was, I’ve been down this road before. And it’s for that reason that I’d probably encourage Michael to move on to the next idea. Insatiable puts his solid writing skills on full display. But this isn’t English class, where you get marks for “solid.” The movie world wants to be WOWED. They want something they’ve never seen before. And Insatiable, at least to me, didn’t meet that criteria.
I still wish Michael the best and encourage him to keep writing. And also, don’t just go by my review here. I want to hear from people who like creature features and get their take as they’re more familiar with the genre. Good luck, buddy. ☺
Script link: Insatiable
[ ] what the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: The “sort of” ticking time bomb that’s still a ticking time bomb. You know I like ticking time bombs. Create a deadline for your characters to achieve their goal or else everything goes to shit. It’s a tried and true device. But sometimes, when you use an EXACT TIME DEADLINE, it can feel artificial. “Man has 37 hours to deliver the drugs or the world explodes!” A nice alternative are these “sort of” ticking time bombs where there isn’t an exact time, but an implied time. Michael does this here and they did this in Taken as well. The cop in Insatiable says, “If we don’t find her within 48 hours, our chances of finding her alive are cut in half.” In Taken, Liam Neeson’s CIA buddies tell him, “If we don’t find her in 72 hours, stats say she’s probably gone forever.” Again, this isn’t a HARD TIME – it’s just a baseline. But it plants that seed in the audience how important time is without creating a LITERAL ticking time bomb that can seem artificial.