2013 has been an okay year for movies. Not great. Not terrible. But decent. For me, the year was marked with high expectations on a few choice picks that crashed upon viewage (which, funny enough, rhymes with “sewage”). I was preparing for movies like Elysium and Pacific Rim to be great. When they were only okay, I sat in the theater stunned, dogged by memories of The Phantom Menace premiere, when I learned that fateful lesson that movies can crush your dreams if you expect too much from them. Oh well, we can’t win them all, right?
I’m sure my picks today will, in some cases, stun you. That’s because I don’t conform to the reviewing consensus. I never look at Rotten Tomatoes before I see a movie. I want to form my own opinion, something fewer and fewer people seem to be doing these days. Just because something was made by an acclaimed filmmaker doesn’t mean that filmmaker will succeed. And just because an Oscar marketing campaign says a movie is great, it doesn’t mean you’re wrong when you think it isn’t. Like what you like, hate what you hate, and don’t be apologetic about it.
I should note that there are a few movies I haven’t seen this year yet. Those include Her (can’t wait to see), Walter Mitty (very excited to see), 12 Years A Slave (do not like this director so probably won’t see), Dallas Buyers Club (maybe DVD), American Hustle (will probably see), so factor that into these choices. Can’t wait to hear your reactions as well as what you guys liked. Oh, and some of these movies may have come out in late 2012. Hope you have your “Carson, you’re insane!” comments prepped and ready to go. Let’s begin!
THE 10 WORST MOVIES I SAW THIS YEAR
10) Drinking Buddies – No script? No problem! Who needs a script when you can have four actors mumble endlessly about really boring shit? Oh, don’t forget to record the audio with bad microphones so the ambient noise drowns out 20% of the dialogue. Speaking of dialogue, this movie was a freaking advertisement for why we need writers. Without them, dialogue is general, cliche, rambling, and dull. I guess it shouldn’t be surprising that a movie without a script made a screenwriting site’s “10 Worst” list, but come on, I mean this is basic knowledge. A movie needs a screenplay.
9) All is Bright – Wanna watch a holiday movie this Christmas? Don’t rent this one! I’m not lying when I say at one point, I thought the writer was purposefully trying to make the most boring choices possible for some sort of social experiment or performance art. There wasn’t a single interesting moment in this script. Not one! The two main characters were beyond dull. The dialogue was on-the-nose and boring. The story was way too basic. And everything was laced with this over-the-top depression that sucked any and all energy these two great actors could’ve provided to save some percentage of this film.
8) The Hangover 3 – I thought that the prerequisite for doing comedy these days was that you had to be funny. Who wrote this again? I wish people would’ve seen this poster before they walked into the theater, read that tagline at the top, assumed it literally, then left. That’s the only thing that would’ve saved this film – people not seeing it and imagining funnier versions of the scenes that actually happened. I mean, I’ve seen cash grabs before, but it’s been awhile since I’ve seen one this blatant. Nobody working on this film seemed to care AT ALL.
7) The Counselor – Rule number 1 when writing a movie: Make sure it makes sense! Rule number 36: Don’t write 10 page scenes that don’t have a point. Rule number 95: A movie should build in momentum until it reaches its climax, not slow down until nothing’s happening. The Counselor could’ve been a cool movie if it had a professional screenwriter come in and rewrite this vague treatment of an idea Cormac McCarthy came up with. This was never a script to begin with, so it serves everyone right for not dealing with that problem ahead of time.
6) Iron Man 3 – I don’t know what to say about these superhero sequels anymore. It’s not like they didn’t know they were making Iron Man 3 as they were making Iron Man 2. So wouldn’t you take advantage of all that time, get a writer to start writing the third film, and that way have a decent script by the time production started? Iron Man 3 was so damn MESSY and so tonally off, I could never get into it. This movie, with its juvenile humor, was so obviously made for ten year olds, they might as well have had everyone get slimed by Kenan Thompson at the end. And hey, I have no problem with films made for 10 year olds. Just don’t sell it as a film for adults, conning us out of our money.
5) Man of Steel – Okay, so maybe Superman doesn’t deserve to be so high on this list. In a vacuum, it’s probably mediocre (as opposed to “terrible”). But I had such high hopes for this one, I was devastated by what unraveled. The number one problem with this film? Melodrama. Scenes (Clark hiding in closet, Clark’s dad getting swept up in a tornado) were taken so over the top, milked so far beyond their saturation point, that you threw up a little each time they happened. It was also too long and too messy (why spend so much time on a planet that isn’t a part of the main storyline?). I wanted this to be so awesome, and it so wasn’t. I’m devastated.
4) Escape from Tomorrow – The only escape you’re going to find in this movie is the exit door you’re looking for ten minutes into it. Such an amazing idea flattened by the thinnest script this side of Michael Cera’s biceps. Literally, the plot was: follow the teenage girls. That was the plot! Two young girls in a park and a guy follows them for 90 minutes. Random things happen for no reason. Writer wraps it up ambiguously, even though it’s clear he did so because he had no idea how to wrap it up because, OH YEAH, there was NO PLOT!
3)Movie 43 – I really only need to say one thing here. Hugh Jackman has giant testicles hanging from his neck in this movie. Whoever wrote this needs to be shipped to a far away island with no return ferry.
2)Upstream Color – Aha! You guys thought this was going to be my number 1 most hated movie of the year! You were wrong! Yes, yes, I didn’t think it was possible I’d find something worse than Upstream Color either. But lucky for Shane Carruth, a woman named Stephanie Meyer exists. Here’s my issue with Upstream Color. If there was a poster boy for pretension, Shane Carruth is on that poster (Wait a minute, Shane Carruth IS on that poster!) This work wants to be taken so seriously and exudes such a false claim of depth and complexity, that it’s impossible to take it as anything but a joke. I would love to see the version of this movie where Shane simply tells a story as opposed to trying to impress the uber-snobby independent film scene. I’m guessing it wouldn’t be half-bad.
1) The Host – Okay, I’m actually laughing as I write this because this movie was sooooooooooooo bad. I mean it is so bad. And I don’t know what the heck happened to Andrew Niccol, who I’m pretty sure penned Gattaca before he had a cinematic lobotomy, but how could he not see that there was no way this movie would work? We have a girl running around having valley-girl like arguments with an alien, who’s fluent in English mind you, stuck inside of her. A girl is having arguments WITH HERSELF the whole movie! And it’s not a comedy! And it’s an alien! And we’re supposed to take it seriously! And someone thought this was going to work! It’s just so bad, you have to see it to believe it. Grab a case of beer beforehand. Trust me, you’ll need it.
THE 10 BEST MOVIES I SAW THIS YEAR
10) You’re Next/The Call/Admission – Expectations work both ways! There are some movies you’re sure will be terrible, yet end up being way better than logic dictates. You’re Next is the best B-horror film you’ll see all year. The Call was the tightest written thriller of 2013 (it’s “Taken” for the world of 9-1-1 operators) and Admission has some really great character development wrapped in an unexpectedly fun story.
9) Oz The Great and Powerful – Expectations definitely played a part in this one as well. I thought this was going to be horrrrrr-ible. But James Franco found a role that fit him perfectly and ran with it (or floated on a balloon with it). I just remember sitting there at the end of this film and feeling happy. No, there wasn’t as much imagination as its sequel, which premiered 74 years earlier, but there was enough to feel like your money was well spent.
8) We’re The Millers – We’re The Millers surprised the comedy space this year by beating out its much more heavily-hyped counterparts like Hangover 3 and The Heat (as the best comedy – I don’t know if it beat them at the box office). Every once in awhile, the actors understand the material so well and have such amazing chemistry together that if you do your job as a writer and guide them with a great story, they’re going to deliver for you. That’s what happened here. Especially with Will Poulter. I mean this guy tore it up. Can’t wait to see what he does next.
7) The Great Gatsby – Dream scenario for a producer: Get some great source material and a director with vision who wants to take that material to a new place, and you got a shot at making something special. See this is the problem with this book. It’s too old fashioned. It doesn’t translate well to modern audiences. But Baz Luhrmann seemed to know all the little nooks and cracks the film could’ve fallen into and went about filling them with his genius caulk beforehand. He focused on the glitz, the glamour, the drama, the betrayal, the scandal, the anger – the things that get people’s blood flowing no matter what decade they’re in. A nice early-year treat!
7) The Spectacular Now – I’m not sure this movie is as great as everyone wants it to be, but it’s good. And I think what makes it good is the honesty of the performances. This is the funny thing. This script and Drinking Buddies essentially tried the same approach, to “let its actors go” and create these “honest performances.” The big difference is that THE SPECTACULAR NOW ACTUALLY HAD A SCRIPT. It had lines for its leads to speak, which they could then improvise off of, instead of having to make up everything on their own. The difference was quite spectacular.
5) Don Jon – Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s smile kinda creeps me out sometimes. But it didn’t bother me here. With so much on his soldiers, he knew this was going to be a pivotal role in his career, and he nailed it. This is a great film for writers to study when it comes to character transformation. We see Don’s character arc, but not in that obvious in-your-face amateur screenwriter way. It feels natural and real. Add a story that never quite goes where you think it will, and that’s why this film cracked my top 5.
4) Mama – Mama! I don’t know what it was about this movie that got me but something about it was just… different from other horror films I’d seen. Not only did we get a creepy ass ghost in this Mama character, but we saw a superb character piece about the intense bond between a mother and her daughters. Note to horror writers – focus more on your characters than your scares! Oh, and freaking Jessica Chastain tore up this role as a reluctant girlfriend who gets stuck with two girls she doesn’t want after her boyfriend goes into a coma.
3) World War Z – World War Z and Lindelof haters — LOOK AWAY NOW! This is two Lindelof scripts in my last two Yearly Top 10s. From everything that I’ve heard, this man SAVED this movie from being a total disaster. Ironic since it was a disaster movie! Not only did I love this film, I loved how the producers got it right. I read the early draft WITHOUT the urgency (everything was being investigated AFTER the zombie infestation was over) and it was so not going to work. They brought another writer on, added that immediacy, and we got the best blockbuster of the year. Thank you, Brad Pitt, for saving me and the rest of the world.
2) Gravity – Could they have made Sandra Bullock’s character more interesting? Sure. Were there some aspects of this script that were repetitive? Sure. But once you put on your 3-D glasses and sit down to watch Gravity, none of that really mattered. This is pure GSU. It’s ticking time bombs on top of ticking time bombs. If you want to write a great screenplay, start by putting your character in a situation that’s IMPOSSIBLE to get out of, then keep throwing things at them to make it impossibler. That’s what they did here and dammit if they didn’t execute it flawlessly.
1) Searching For Sugar Man – Okay, if you don’t know anything about this movie, I’m begging you, DON’T READ ANYTHING ABOUT IT (including the rest of this mini-review) and go see it. I know some of you are like, “Artsy documentaries. No thank you, Carson.” You guys know me. I hate artsy for artsy’s sake. I hate pretension. The reason why this is different is because it isn’t so much a documentary as it is a STORY. It evolves. It grows. It surprises. It’s both tragic and uplifting. If it doesn’t make you cry, you are not a real person. Not only is this film number 1 on the year for me. It’s NUMBER 1 by 50,000 miles! Sandra Bullock and Imaginary George Clooney weren’t even close to it. Come on, jump in my Scriptshadow Van and go search for Sugar Man with me! I promise to give you lots of Scriptshadow candy!
MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!!!
This actor dropped 50 pounds to get ready for his role in my favorite script of the year!
It’s the end of the year, which means it’s time to reflect on the happiest moments of 2013. Like Kim Kardashian getting engaged again. And N’Sync reuniting on stage for all of 43 seconds. I still remember where I was during those moments. You?
Okay let’s be honest. I don’t pay attention to anything unless it has a .PDF extension at the end of it. If I’m not reading, I’m sleeping. So truthfully, I don’t know who Kim Kardashian is (although I was recently told she waxed her baby’s eyelashes, whatever that means).
During all that reading, I found ten scripts that I haven’t been able to forget. Whenever I do these lists, my ranking doesn’t always reflect my Top 25. That’s because some screenplays, just like some movies, improve with time – they dig into you like a tick and stay with you. So with that piece of knowledge, here are my 10 favorite scripts of the year. Afterwards, let me know your favorites!
(Note: The lack of review links is due to most of these scripts being reviewed in my newsletter. To get future reviews not posted on the site, make sure to sign up!)
NUMBER 10
Title: Transcendence
Genre: Sci-Fi Thriller
Writer: Jack Paglen
Premise: An epic love story set in a time where a dying scientist is able to upload his consciousness into the internet and, facing its global implications, must fight against the forces who are actively working against the existence of a singularity.
Thoughts: Loved this because it felt like a good old fashioned blockbuster. It didn’t carry all the baggage your typical IP comic book or childhood toy does. The story and the mythology came solely from the writer, Paglen, and he knew how to have fun with it. This script taught me that once you have your high-concept idea, make sure to mine it for all it’s worth. Anything less and you’re cheating yourself (and your chance for a sale!).
NUMBER 9
Title: Marshal of Revelation
Genre: Western
Writer: Jon Favreau
Premise: The story of a deceitful town marshal who saved the town of Revelation, Wyoming with the help of a mysterious Jewish gunman.
Thoughts: Wow, what a surprise this was. Here’s the thing about Westerns. Despite having one big advantage over their present-day counterparts (the lawlessness, which creates tons of drama), they’re potentially boring as hell. Because the world was so slow back then, Western screenplays can move at a glacial pace, which is where most wanna-be Westerns go to die. How do you prevent this? Character character character character, then character again. Just like its distant screenplay cousin, Django Unchained, Marshal of Revelation has two unforgettable characters. We have the talkative car salesman-like Isaac, and the cool as a cucumber gunslinger, “The Jew.” Sometimes as a writer, you hit on two characters who complement each other so well (so as to provide the most conflict, drama, and entertainment) that the story actually takes a back seat to them. Favreau achieved that here.
NUMBER 8
Title: Shut In
Genre: Horror
Writer: Christina Hodson
Premise: A young woman who takes care of her comatose teenaged son at home begins to believe she’s being visited by the ghost of a young runaway boy.
Thoughts: This script was just spooky. No, it was more than that. It was uncomfortable. I think whenever you write a script, you’re trying to make the reader FEEL something. The problem is, readers read so many scripts, they become numb to feeling. So you have to hit on something so intense, the reader can do nothing BUT feel it. Hodson did that with this ongoing feeling of discomfort. When the mother is bathing her teenage son and he gets an erection, I got that icky chill all over. And while it may not have been a feeling I was thrilled to have, it was A FEELING nonetheless, and it kept happening again and again in this screenplay. If a writer can make me feel something that consistently, they’ve done their job.
NUMBER 7
Title: Peste
Genre: Horror (found footage)
Writer: Barbara Marshall
Premise: A young suburban girl documents her family during the outbreak of a deadly virus that turns its hosts into monsters.
Thoughts: They say that the best horror scripts/films revolve around family (and that family trying to stave off a threat). There’s something about keeping the family unit in one piece that’s easy to root for. Peste proves how effective this approach can be when done well. There are a few truly terrifying scenes in this script, such as our family needing to steal food from the neighbors, who have already transformed into “pestes,” and also the sounds of a transformed daughter eating her mom behind closed doors. This script starts too slowly for its own good, but once it gets going, it really gets going. I don’t meant to be a pest, but read this if you can.
NUMBER 6
Title: Chef
Genre: Drama/Comedy
Writer: Jon Favreau
Premise: A talented chef loses his job after a bad online review, leading him to open a food truck.
Thoughts: Well shucks, Mr. Favreau. I wasn’t so sure about you after Cowboys and Aliens. But it turns out Favreau has a little self-awareness left in him. This upcoming writing-directing effort, while tackling a sell-out celebrity Chef who goes back to his roots and starts a food truck, is clearly an exploration of the mistakes Favreau’s made as a director. This is an incredibly talented writer we’re talking about here and what I really love about him is he doesn’t seem to follow the traditional three-act structure everybody else does. He’s got his own mysterious formula that steers each of his stories into an unfamiliar kalediscope of time and space where you don’t know which way is up or down or sideways. Okay, maybe that’s an exaggeration. But there’s something different about his stories that makes you feel like you’re always reading something fresh. For example, the food truck stuff here doesn’t happen until the final act! I don’t know many writers who would’ve made that choice as the food truck is the hook here! Why would you ignore it for 75% of your story? But Favreau does. And it works!
NUMBER 5
Title: Draft Day
Genre: Drama/Sports
Writers: Rajiv Joseph & Scott Rothman
Premise: A football GM finds his personal and professional life falling apart on the biggest day of the year, draft day.
Thoughts: I love love love when writers recognize that the genres they’re writing in are hard sells, and so curtail their screenplay in some way to negate that. If this would’ve been about a long drawn out season where the General Manager evaluates his life through his team, we would’ve gotten, no offense, Moneyball 2 (which, come on, in retrospect was pretty boring). But instead, they focus on a single day, one of the most important days for a football organization, the day they draft six players who will determine their future as a team. Because it all happens in a single day, there’s a sense of urgency that you’ve never seen in a sports movie before. This is such a great script!
NUMBER 4
Title: The Story Of Your Life
Genre: Sci-Fi
Writer: Eric Heisserer (based on a short story by Ted Chiang)
Premise: When alien crafts land around the world, a linguistics expert is recruited by the military to determine whether they come in peace or are a threat.
Thoughts: I love this idea so much that I’ve forgotten about the problematic climax. I guess you could say I’m looking at “Story of Your Life” through rose-colored glasses. But I just love what Heisserer did with this story. He took what could’ve potentially been a very slow script, with a linguist chatting with aliens, and turned it into an intense pressure-cooker (via a race between all nations to get a super-weapon from the visitors). No surprise that a Scriptshadow favorite term – ticking time bomb – is the key ingredient for making this and Draft Day so good. Whenever time’s running out for your characters, everything’s ramped up a level.
NUMBER 3
Title: Monster Problems
Genre: Insanity
Writer: Brian Duffield
Premise: In a future where the world has been overrun by monsters, a young man risks his life to get to the woman he’s fallen in love with.
Thoughts: I don’t get star struck. But I would probably get star struck if I met Brian Duffield. As soon as one of this guy’s quirkier scripts hits the big screen, I think his voice is going to help define this generation of screenwriters. Monster Problems is the embodiment of that. It’s a John Hughes-like approach to a monster movie. I love how Duffield is so casually able to jump back and forth between personal dramatic moments and big huge actions scenes, never once losing control of his tone. Very few writers can pull that off. I just loved this script.
NUMBER 2
Title: Where Angels Die
Genre: Drama/Thriller
Writer: Alex Felix (based on the novel “In the Place Where Angels Die” by Richard Seal)
Premise: A suspended inner city social worker tries to protect a young girl and her mother from the girl’s father, a psychotic killer who’s just been released from prison.
Thoughts: I’m not sure I can say anything more about Angels than I already have. But I will say that Alex and I recently discussed the difficulty of writing drama specs in today’s spec market, and how, knowing that, he emphasized the crime/thriller element of his story to give it a better shot. If you want to write a dramatic character piece, like Alex has, look to explore genre elements in your script, even if it’s only partially. This is the exact same approach Ben Affleck took with The Town. He wanted to write a love story, but knew nobody would see it if he did. So he emphasized the heist genre element to make it marketable. – Anyway, some great things are happening with Angels. If only I could tell you what’s happening behind the scenes, you’d be so excited! But I have to let the process play out.
NUMBER 1
Title: Nightcrawler
Genre: Crime/Thriller
Writer: Dan Gilroy
Premise: A Los Angeles drifter with big dreams finds himself drawn into the world of “nightcrawling,” a practice where independent videographers search out violent crimes and sell them to news shows.
Thoughts: This script has stayed with me more than any other script I read in 2013. Why? Put simply, it had the best character I’ve read all year. I think if there’s a lesson here, it might be that instead of always coming up with a story concept first and trying to infuse characters into that story, maybe you should come up with a great character first, then build a story around him. I know this is how Wes Anderson works, for example. I don’t know if that’s what happened here or not, but the protagonist is so amazing in Nightcrawler, he essentially becomes the concept anyway.
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.
Newsletter Update: There will be no newsletter this week, just a quick Christmas Gift e-mail that you’re going to want to open IMMEDIATELY. This is a special kind of gift, the kind that if you open late, there may not be anything inside. So be on the lookout tomorrow. I’ll be doing posts on Monday and Tuesday, but no major posts for the rest of Christmas Week. However, as I am wont to do, I may throw something up on a whim. If you’re not on the Newsletter, GET ON IT NOW. Here’s last week’s newsletter to see what you’re missing.
Genre: Action/Adventure
Premise (from writer): When contact with an expedition on the trail of a mythical treasure is mysteriously lost, a paratrooper, a gentleman thief, and an archeologist must join forces, or risk losing them forever to sinister forces bent on the same prize.
About: Okay, a little background on this one. We didn’t have an Amateur Offerings two weeks ago, which left today’s slot open. Now it just so happened that Mikko, the writer of today’s script, e-mailed as I was trying to decide what to review, and reminded me of his screenplay, which had the unfortunate duty of going up against “Where Angels Die” in a previous Amateur Offerings post. I looked back at the post, saw that some folks liked it, and said, sure, let’s go with this one. And this is why it never hurts to politely remind folks about your script. You never know when someone’s going to have a free moment to pop your script open. But they won’t do it if they’ve forgotten about it. Of course, don’t go overboard. Just a polite nudge every once in awhile will do the trick. – Note: This is an updated draft from 6 months ago. Mikko took many of the notes he received from that original post and applied them.
Why You Should Read (from writer): It received a 8/10 paid review on the Black List, but more importantly it was your post promoting the Tracking Board Launch Pad screenwriting competition that got me to enter that competition. I ended up making the Top 25 semis, but I didn’t make the cut to the Top 10. I was hoping you might give my script a go and share some insight into how to make it into a script that would’ve cracked the Top 10.
Writer: Mikko Tormala
Details: 119 pages
The Jaguar’s Fang was pitched as an adventure movie in the vein of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Now on the one hand, that’s exciting. We’ve been looking for the next Indiana Jones for 30 years now. On the other, it’s a bit of a death trap. By saying your script is like Raiders, you’re asking the reader to compare it to Raiders. And that’s what happened here. I was constantly comparing the two scripts. And how do you think you’re going to fare against the best action adventure movie of all time?
Exactly!
But that’s not to say The Jaguar’s Fang is bad. I totally see why this finished Top 25 in The Tracking Board contest. It’s a solidly written adventure film with plenty of GSU and a professional polish to it. But there is something missing here. Something that’s keeping it from reaching the next level. I’m not sure I know what it is yet. But as I talk through the reading experience, I’m sure I’ll figure it out.
The Jaguar’s Fang is set in 1945, and focuses on a World War 2 paratrooper, Quentin Riley, who lost his best friend in battle while defending a bridge from the Germans. It’s been a year and Riley’s taken to the drink. When he learns his friend’s father has disappeared on an expedition to the Yucatan, he vows to find him and give him a letter his son wrote him before he died.
Joining Quentin is sword-fighting thief George McAllister, who gives everything he steals to the needy, and Mary Bronstall, a stowaway whose father was also on the missing expedition. Mary was supposed to stay away but the gal’s too darn feisty to obey orders.
The Expedition was looking for an ancient relic known as the Jaguar’s Fang, which is not only worth millions itself, but is supposed to contain some sort of map that will lead to endless treasures. Of course, it just happens to be located amidst the never-ending jungles of the Yucatan where many an explorer has gone to never see the light of day again.
But our crew gets lucky. They find a lost city where the expedition last camped and follow their trail (spoiler) to an underground Mayan society that is still in existence! Ruled by a barbaric king, they will need to snag the expedition members TONIGHT before they are sacrificed and get the hell out of there or have this underground city become their underground tomb.
Okay, so like I said, there was a lot of good here. We have the goal of finding this lost expedition. There’s a nice mystery. Where did they disappear to? The motivations are all there (Riley needs to get this letter to his dead friend’s father. Mary needs to save her father). And some urgency starts to kick in when another group chases them.
All of that seemed textbook to me.
So then what was missing?
For me, something was lacking on the character front. Riley felt a little bland. He was certainly active, which is good. That’s how you want your hero to be. He was selfless (doing this for his friend), so he was likable. But he lacked definition as a character. I couldn’t peg what kind of person he was (Luke Skywalker, for example, can easily be pegged as a kid with big dreams who wants to take down the Empire). And he didn’t have any personality. He wasn’t funny. He wasn’t sly. He wasn’t unique or unpredictable or roguish or selfish. He was a normal guy trying to get something done.
This is one of the scariest things about screenwriting. You can get a whole hell of a lot right. But if we’re not on board with your main character, it won’t matter.
Similarly, I didn’t know what was going on with George McAllister. At times, I wasn’t sure if this was a two-hander (two protagonists) or if he was just a sidekick. Regardless, he was too soft. He starts off as this sword-fighting thief, but then quickly fades into the background, offering occasional humorous quips. Again, we have another character who’s lacking in definition and personality. If you want to create a Jack Sparrow character, McAllister’s gotta be WAY bigger on the page. If not, I’m not sure you even need this character. I struggled to figure out what he was doing in the story.
In addition to these problems, there wasn’t anything in the script that felt new or fresh. In fact, for 75% of the story, we’re moving along a rather mundane repetitive path. We’re in the forest, we discover something minor, we hear the bad guys are getting closer, we keep moving. The underground Mayan city was the one big “Haven’t seen this before” moment, but it was too little too late. By that point, I hadn’t seen anything fresh enough to keep me invested.
And the set pieces. I mean, when you’re competing against Raiders, you’re competing against the king of set-pieces. And until the big finale, which was admittedly good, all the set pieces were tame. I’m not saying it’s easy to come up with stuff we’ve never seen before, but you have to try. You have to take chances because we readers read every day. We see the same imaginations come up with the same scenarios over and over again. You have to throw out and rewrite a lot of stuff to find those rare ORIGINAL moments. But it’ll be worth it, because your script WILL stand out when you do.
But it all comes back to the characters. If I were Mikko, I’d do a major character overhaul here. Ask yourself, if I didn’t have this wild adventure to put my characters in, would they still be interesting? Would they still say or do things that an audience would want to hear/see? Right now, the answer is no.
I was just reading the Marshal of Revelation (Wednesday’s review) and THAT script is character. Those are memorable people. I think part of the problem here is that everyone in this script is so squeaky clean. They’re so nice and cuddly. Even our thief doesn’t keep his money. He gives it to orphanages! Between Riley and McAllister, I would look to make one of these two a lot more edgy. By doing so, you’ll not only have a more interesting character, but you’ll have more conflict between your main characters (as they’ll want to solve problems in different ways), which should provide some more entertaining scenes.
Structurally, The Jaguar’s Fang is great. But until the character issues are solved, it’s going to be stuck just below “worth the read” level.
Script link: The Jaguar’s Fang
[ ] what the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: I think this genre of movie needs a protagonist with more edge. This isn’t It’s A Wonderful Life. It’s is a down-and-dirty adventure film. The hero needs a darkness to him, something that manifests itself negatively. Whether he’s self-destructive, manipulative, a womanizer. Something that gives his character SOME PERSONALITY. I think Mikko tried to do this with Riley’s drinking, but it became a non-factor as soon as they went on the journey, so it never felt like a true character vice.
Genre: Drama/Family/Fantasy
Premise: An ambitious man watches his life pass him by while sacrificing his dreams to help others. Feeling like a failure later in life, he tries to commit suicide, only to have an angel show him what the world would’ve been like had he never existed.
About: Directed by the great Frank Capra and starring the amazing James Stewart, It’s A Wonderful Life had quite the interesting life of its own. The film didn’t do well initially at the box office, but later became a staple on television networks leading up to Christmas, where audiences eventually fell in love with it. Director (and co-writer) Frank Capra had a fascinating career as a director. He won 3 (count’em THREE) Oscars as a director in the 30s. However, after World War 2, his optimistic endearing films didn’t play to a world whose mood had turned cynical. In fact, “It’s A Wonderful Life” was considered by many critics (at the time) to be the film that signified Capra was no longer in touch with the public. Amazingly, Capra made his last movie nearly 30 years before he died, a rarity for directors.
Writer: Frances Goodrich, Albert Hackett, Frank Capra, Jo Swerling, Philip Van Doren Stern and Michael Wilson
Details: 130 minutes
Gotta admit, this one always gets me. Things get a little emotional at the Scriptshadow compound when the end of It’s A Wonderful Life plays. I mean, I’m not confirming any tears here. The so-called “visual evidence” of drenched tissues reported on some websites is completely fabricated and/or tampered with. But as each year passes, and Christmas seems less like a magical experience and more like a government-driven holiday to make us open our wallets, Frank Capra and James Stewart remind me just how sweet and nice the holiday can be.
Yeah yeah, emotions and all that. This is still a screenwriting site, so when I popped “Life” in this year, I still needed an angle to explore the film from. It came to me rather quickly. I realized I wanted to know what made a story timeless. What makes something worthy of coming back to year after year? Because, as you know, the majority of movies we watch leave our brains by the time we’re back in the parking lot. If we could discover even a piece of what makes a screenplay timeless, we could all become better writers.
For those who haven’t seen It’s A Wonderful Life, it’s set during the 20s, 30s and 40s, and centers around an idealistic dreamer named George Bailey. George lives in a tiny town called Bedford Falls that he can’t wait to leave. If there’s a country George isn’t planning on travelling to, it isn’t on the map yet. And so when he hits his 20s, he readies himself for that life of adventure.
But then his father dies, who happened to be the president of the family business, an old Building and Loan that is the only respite the town has from the evil Mr. Potter, a dastardly old weasel who holds the town hostage with crippling loan terms that leave him rich and everyone else desperate. Since the Building and Loan is the only thing standing in the way of him controlling the town completely, Mr. Potter will stop at nothing to take it down.
In order to keep the town out of Potter’s hands, George is forced to take his dad’s place, and thus begins a series of events over the years where the timing is never right for George to get away. Soon he’s married with five children, barely getting by, wondering what his life would’ve been like had he followed his dreams instead of helping others. On the night he plans to commit suicide, an angel appears and gives him a spectacular gift: He shows him what the world would’ve been like if George Bailey had never lived.
Watching It’s A Wonderful Life this time around, it didn’t take long to realize why it’s the gift that keeps on giving. It’s all about universal timeless themes, things that man had to deal with a thousand years ago and things that man will still be dealing with a thousand years from now.
Helping others versus helping yourself is the main theme that plays throughout “Life.” There’s also the theme of sacrifice. There’s the theme of the underdog. There’s the theme of struggle – trying to make it through each day, despite the countless obstacles we face. We have a villain who stands for corruption and greed, something every town, city, and country experiences on some level. We have the power of love. We have the importance of family. These are things that every human being knows. Contrast that with, say, Green Lantern. What, if any, part of that movie connects with audiences on a deeper level? What timeless themes does it explore? Of course, just covering these bases isn’t enough. You still have to do it in an entertaining way. You still have to construct a story that’s dramatically compelling. And Capra and his 200 screenwriters achieve that in spades.
One of the biggest reasons It’s A Wonderful Life works is because you freaking LOVE the main character. I mean, could you design a persona more lovable than George Bailey? The man is the ultimate selfless human being. He sacrifices all his dreams to keep the Building and Loan from folding. He sacrifices them again so his brother can go to college. He gives his OWN money to people if the money from the bank isn’t enough. As a kid, he sticks up to the villain, Mr. Potter (heroes who aren’t afraid of villains are always likable)! Even in death, George Bailey is still giving. When he decides to commit suicide, it isn’t out of selfishness. It’s because he knows he’s worth more dead than alive, and that the money his family will get from his life insurance policy will allow them to survive.
It is through all this giving that I began to notice something. These days, screenwriters only make their characters “good” at the beginning of their script, in the form of a “save the cat” moment, designed to make you “like” them. The problem is, the audience has become keen to this device and aren’t as easily tricked. They know when you’re conning them, and therefore a save the cat moment can actually backfire. The reason George Bailey is so damn likable is because his acts of kindness never end! They happen again and again and again. That consistency makes us trust him, makes us believe he’s a good guy. And that’s why we like him so much.
Capra also understood that a great hero is nothing without a great villain. We need someone to root against just as much as we need someone to root for. Mr. Potter is almost as memorable as George Bailey, and I think it’s because of one clever choice. Putting Potter in a wheelchair. Making Potter a “cripple” distracted us from the fact that Potter is essentially a caricature. He is mean just to be mean. But dammit if that wheelchair doesn’t distract us from this truth. Villains aren’t supposed to be in wheelchairs, we say. And so, like a magician’s misdirect, it makes us think that Mr. Potter is indeed, a real person.
Capra is also wise enough to know that if a bad thing is going to happen to our hero, the villain must always be a part of it. What good is having a villain if they aren’t orchestrating your hero’s downfall! So there’s a key scene late where Uncle Billy, George’s bumbling second-in-command, misplaces 8000 dollars, which will ultimately lead George into the tailspin that results in his attempted suicide. I mean sure, you could’ve stopped there. That was enough to get the story where it needed to go. But Capra took that one extra step and made Potter realize Uncle Billy’s mistake, and snatch the erroneously placed money when he wasn’t looking.
Then of course, there’s the ending, where everyone comes to George’s house and gives him money to bail him out. You know this moment because you’ve seen it in dozens of movies. However, this is the ONLY FILM IN HISTORY where it’s actually worked. Why? Because, of course, it’s SET UP. Actually, it’s born out of a thousand set-ups. We’ve seen, over the past two hours, as George has personally helped all of these people. So the fact that they would help him back in his time of need goes unquestioned. Nobody who’s ever used this copycat ending seems to realize this, which is why every subsequent attempt has been a disaster.
It’s A Wonderful Life is about characters. It’s about struggle. It’s about holding true to your values. And it’s about good versus evil. What’s more universal than that??
[ ] what the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[x] genius
What I learned: Have your hero KEEP being good instead of just giving him a contrived “save the cat” scene early on. This consistency will lead to an authenticity in your character, which will result in us trusting and rooting for him.
Genre: Western
Premise: The story of a slimy town marshal who saved the town of Revelation, Wyoming with the help of a mysterious Jewish gunman.
About: Jon Favreau (director of Iron Man) wrote this script while editing the film he’s still probably best known for, Swingers. He and Vince Vaughn really wanted to make it but could never find financing. It’s considered a relic of the past. But maybe Favreau wasn’t right to give up on it. Maybe, just maybe, this is his best script.
Writer: Jon Favreau
Details: 115 – pages (12/17/96) draft
Jon Favreau
I FINALLY understand why Favreau directed Cowboys & Aliens! I didn’t know why anybody would want to make that film. But it’s obvious now he regretted never being able to make “Marshal of Revelation,” and realized this would be his only shot to make a Western.
So what’s going on with this mysterious script you’ve probably never heard of? A script that had no business being good (I mean seriously, are there more boring words to open a screenplay to than “Wyoming, 1877?”). Well after those words disappear, we endure a horrifying scene where a gang of mixed nationalities swoop in on a family home, kill a father, brutally rape and murder the wife, and then wait hours for the hiding son so that when he emerges to run away, they can murder him too. Hmm, maybe Wyoming 1877 isn’t so boring after all.
Jump forward a couple of years and we meet Isaac Meek, the 1880 equivalent of a car salesman. He’s rough around the edges. But he’s handsome enough and he’s got the gift of gab, which allows him to bed many ladies and talk his way out of any situation. That is until he bangs a business associate’s wife. A Chicago bigwig. Isaac realizes that his life is now in danger so he does what he does best – runs.
He eventually bumps into a Jewish cowboy searching for a Russian man. The Russian man turns out to be the same leader of that gang who massacred the family in the first scene. Apparently, he’s been doing this to many families, and started with the Jew’s. So the Jew’s out for a little revenge. And much like Inigo Montoya, he’s been training his ENTIRE LIFE for this meet-up. As a result, he’s the BEST shot in the country (even better than Buffalo Bill – who makes an appearance later!).
Sensing he needs protection, Isaac promises to help the Jew find the Russian if he becomes Isaac’s bodyguard. The two soon find themselves strolling into the town of Revelation, a once thriving city that’s since been overrun by criminals. After a dazzling display of gunmanship and a few dead bad guys (all done by the Jew but orchestrated by Isaac), the town begins to rally around Isaac as a savior, and makes him the Marshal.
As they continue to clean up the town, Isaac’s legend grows, with no one realizing that it’s the Jew who’s doing all the killing here. However, when the Jew realizes Isaac’s been lying and hasn’t done a thing to find the Russian, he leaves. Finally, Isaac will have to prove his worth on his own, a challenging proposition since he’s grown so fond of his legend that he no longer knows what’s real and what’s fable.
Favreau wanted Vaughn to star. Would he have played Isaac?
Damn, this script was good! It feels Django-like, albeit reigned in. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Quentin read this back in the day and was inspired by it. The Jew very much feels like Django (discriminated against, stoic and quiet) while Isaac is the more flamboyant personality-infused of the two.
Speaking of personality, this script taught me a lot about it. I NEED personality in at least ONE of my major characters. I’ve brought this up quite a bit lately because I continue to read a ton of material with forgettable characters.
We focus so much on things like flaws and backstory and character actions, we forget those only do so much. If a person doesn’t talk in some sort of interesting way, they usually lack personality, which makes them boring. Han Solo, Hannibal Lecter, Lloyd Dobler, Juno, Jack Sparrow, Tony Stark. Give me someone who lights up the page!
Well, you can now add Isaac Meeks to that list. Isaac is a salesman. He’s a con man. He’s a selfish swindler. He can talk himself out of ANYTHING and while we may hate the guy, we sure enjoy watching him work. For example, early on in a whorehouse, Isaac’s confronted by two men. Rather than fight, he plots a more… “Isaac-like” solution:
ISAAC
I can see where this is headed. As you can see, not only is it two on one, but I am without my pistol. Now, if you don’t share General Lee’s yellow streak, you’ll wait for a moment while I go to my room and fetch my revolver.
SOME GUY
Here, Meek, use mine…
ISAAC
I’m afraid that won’t do. A gunfighter’s tools are as unique as his personality…
WHORE
I’ll fetch it…
ISAAC
I’m afraid that won’t do. A gunfighter organizes his belongings in a way as unique as…
SAM
(fed up with the stalling)
Fetch your iron!
Of course, Isaac pretends to do just that, but when the gunmen rush to his room, all they see is an open window and a pair of blowing curtains.
But here’s the reason I really liked “Marshall.” Favreau not only created a great character who oozes personality, he created a great character with zero personality – the Jew. The Jew was all about action. He was all about looks. Where as Isaac sought the spotlight, the Jew basked in the shadows.
Characters like these (quiet ones) are tough to write because the lack of dialogue dims their light on the page. They don’t pop as much. But because the Jew was SO DAMN GOOD at his job and so driven (he’d stop at nothing to kill the Russian), we enjoyed him just as much as we did Isaac.
This script used a lot of Scriptshadow principles as well. The character goals were clear and strong (clean up the town, kill the Russian). The motivation was high (the Russian killed The Jew’s family). We had two very interesting main characters that actors would want to play. And due to the stark contrast in personality of our leads, there was tons of conflict. One couldn’t shut up. The other never said a thing. One was a coward. The other was brave. One had principles. The other stood for nothing. When you have a two-hander like this, you’re really writing THREE characters. You’re writing Character A. You’re writing Character B. And then you’re writing THE DYNAMIC BETWEEN CHARACTER A AND CHARACTER B. If you haven’t given thought to that third character, your two-hander’s probably missing something.
The failure of this film to get made probably comes down to trying to find financing for one of the least bankable genres in Hollywood. You saw what happened with Cowboys & Aliens. You saw what happened with The Lone Ranger. To get these made, you probably need a top ten director on board, who will pull with him a couple of major stars. So it’s too bad that The Lone Ranger tanked. It means a resurgence for The Marshal of Revelation is unlikely. Still, this is a really good script. Nice job, Jon!
[ ] what the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[x] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: In my book, I talk about the advantage of using “scene agitators” in your scenes. This refers to a third element that occurs outside the primary action/dialogue that gives the scene a little more kick. You use them because oftentimes, having only two people interacting is boring. So in “Marshal,” there’s this great scene where Isaac is playing poker against some dangerous locals. The pot has gotten huge, and the leader believes Isaac is cheating them. As Isaac and the leader keep raising the pot, a man walks in the bar (who we’ll later find out is the Jew). The leader, who doesn’t like Jews, tells him to leave. The Jew ignores him, sits down, and orders a drink. The leader continues to raise the pot, but is agitated by the fact that the Jew is ignoring him. So between exchanges with Isaac, he keeps turning to the Jew and telling him to leave. The pot increases and the tension with the Jew increases until finally the leader storms over and confronts the Jew. This is exactly how you want to use a scene agitator. The poker scene by itself was good. But the agitation the Jew adds makes it great.
