Genre: Thriller(?)

Don’t worry you Twit-Pitch fanatics.  I haven’t forgotten about you.  In fact, I was so excited about bringing a Twit-Pitch script back for a review, that I’m posting it a day early!  How bout them apples?  I figured since we dealt with some American history yesterday, why not extend it into a 48 hour American history marathon?!  Scriptshadow Textbook Reviews?  Coming soon!

I remember when I originally picked this up.  The writing was so crisp, so clean, that I wanted to replace my bedsheets with it.  I mean, the script starts out with some of the best descriptions of Civil War battle I’ve ever read.  Karpala can detail a battlefield kill like no other.  And then for us to realize that it was all just a reenactment via a Lady Gaga ringtone going off?  Brilliant!

Now, before going forward, I should point something out.  When I picked this up yesterday, I’d completely forgotten the logline.  Which turned out to be a good thing because it meant reading the script clean.  That lack of context allowed me to identify a huge issue that needs to be dealt with in the next draft.  So, grab your Confederate flags Scriptsoldiers, it’s time to take a trip back in time…for the second day in a row.

During Reenactment’s opening reenactment, we meet 45 year old Doug Abbot, a fearless leader on the battlefield, but your average Joe with an ex-wife and a teenage son off it.  You get the feeling that Doug’s life didn’t turn out the way he wanted it to, and these reenactments are the only moments of joy he has left.

So when he’s invited by another re-enactor to a secret reenactment known as the “Battle Of The Wilderness,” Doug is in.  In fact, in order to salvage his deteriorating relationship with his son, Will, he invites him to come with.  Will isn’t exactly keen on reenacting, but the fact that he gets to shoot guns, even if it’s with fake ammunition, is enough to get him onboard.

So Doug and Will, along with a few hundred other participants, are bussed into the middle of some nowhere forest where they’re introduced to their commanders and where they get ready for battle.  They march through the forest, encounter the opposing army, and engage in the first volley of gunfire.  But strangely, nobody from the Confederate side falls.  Per the rules of reenacting, at least a portion of the other side is supposed to “die.”  Nobody does.

And that’s when the Confederates fire on them.  Which is when they figure out something is very VERY wrong.  Dozens of men fall to the ground in a bloody pulp.  These guys are using REAL AMMUNITION!  Let the slaughter begin.

Once Doug realizes this, he grabs Will and a few others and hightails it into the forest.  They’re getting the hell out of here. The problem is they’re so deep in the middle of nowhere that there’s nowhere out.  At a certain point, Doug and his son get split up, and now it’s not just about escaping these crazy psycho REAL Confederates, but about Doug finding his son amongst this endless battlefield.  Will he able to do it in time?  And even if he does, how the hell do they plan on getting out alive?

Like I said, the writing here is pretty great.  It’s that perfect mix of powerful description and lean paragraph packaging – the way screenplays are meant to be written!  I mean check out this opening line: “A maze of white oak trees, holding up canopies of rich, green summer leaves.  There is an early morning light, bringing with it an early morning stillness.” I know a lot of writers who would turn that opening description into 4 to 5 paragraphs!  All we need is one here and the scene is set.

However, once we get into the meat of this story, some cracks, not unlike the cracks in the Confederate army, start to show.  The first issue was simply what the hell was happening!??  I couldn’t for the life of me figure out if we had gone back in time or if this was occurring in the present day.

Here’s why.  Karpala makes a huge deal out of how “similar” all the Confederate leaders look to their real life counterparts.  Eerily similar.  To me that meant we’d gone back in time and were dealing with the real versions of these people.  Also, there were numerous references to how things weren’t where they were supposed to be on the map, which was another hint to me that they were 150 years in the past, where the landscape was much different.  So for about 75% of the screenplay, I thought we were in the past, which is of course a completely different kind of movie.

Another issue for me was the tone.  The non-battlefield stuff had this light, almost goofy family movie quality to it.  Oh, there’s the goofy but annoying new boyfriend of the ex-wife.  Lady Gaga ringtones.  A boy and his dad trying to find common ground together.  Yet once we got onto that battlefield, people’s heads are decapitated by cannon balls.  Bodies are exploded into a dozen pieces by land mines.  And there’s more blood in your average battle scene than in an entire Quentin Tarantino movie.  I don’t know about you guys, but I couldn’t marry those two extremes together.

Also, once I started thinking about the story, there were certain things that didn’t make sense.  Apparently these REAL reenactments were put together once a year.  And during each of them, somewhere between 400-500 men were killed.  Now I’m not a math major, but doesn’t the FBI start getting suspicious when 500 men who went on a reenactment trip don’t return?

Story-wise, the one thing I felt needed strengthening was the father-son stuff.  If the central objective of the script is for the father to find and save his son, we have to really care about that relationship.  I didn’t NOT care about that relationship, but there was nothing exceptional about it  either.  Therefore I was only mildly interested in whether Doug would find Will.  Since that’s pretty much the whole movie, that area needs to be beefed up.

I think Karpala needs to create more of a divide between Doug and Will.  Something more deep-seated that’s been at the core of their relationship for awhile.  For example, maybe Doug bailed on his wife, and Will’s never forgiven him for it.  Now that we have a strong unresolved issue between the two, we as an audience will be rooting for them to reunite so they can finally resolve that issue.

So yeah, the writing in this one was great, as I expected it to be after those first 10 pages, but there were too many little issues that added up.  Not bad, but not good enough to get me all smiley and happy.  :(

Script Link: Re-Enactment

What I Learned: Beware the forced plot point!  Readers know!  Look, we all WANT things to happen in our screenplays to move our story along the way we want it moved along.  But it still has to make sense!  If it doesn’t, it feels forced, and we readers shake our heads in quiet dismay, muttering to ourselves, “That would so never happen.”  Clearly, Karpala needed to split Doug and Will up so Doug could be looking for Will the whole movie.  The problem is, it makes absolutely NO SENSE WHY THEY SPLIT UP.  Doug says something like, “You’re going to wait here while I go do this thing.”  So wait, this father who loves his son more than anything is going to leave him alone in this insanely dangerous and unpredictable battle zone instead of take him with him???????  No way.  Come on guys.  Make sure all your plot points make sense.

Genre: Historical/Action
Premise: George Washington must lead a dying army to fend off a band of British mercenaries intent on destroying America.
About: A couple of interesting things about this one.  First of all, Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan) is set to direct it.  Now THAT could be interesting.  Also, the writers here are traditionally comedy writers.  Their credits include the Olsen Twin classic (heh heh), New York Minute, the college comedy, Accepted, and I believe they wrote the original spec for the tonally strange Tower Heist.
Writers: Adam Cooper and Bill Collage
Details: 115 pages

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  Scripts about the birth of America are boring.  I don’t know if it’s the cheesy wigs.  I don’t know if it’s the fluffy clothes.  But there’s something about Washington and Jefferson and Adams that just screams…BORING!  There, I said it.  I let the bayonet out of the bag.  But it’s true!  Lots of speeches about happiness and liberty.  Declarations of independence.  Hey, it’s all great for history.  But for entertainment purposes, I’d rather watch a weeping willow grow.

Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that we, as Americans, hold these men up as flawless heroes.  Washington couldn’t even tell a lie!  But if you want us to care about your characters, you HAVE to show us their flaws.  Flaws are what make them real.  Nobody’s perfect.  And nobody should want to be perfect.  Perfect people are BORING!

So the only way anyone’s going to write a good story about this period is if they dare to challenge our heroes.  They have to stop idealizing them and show us the things that made them human.  Well, we finally have a script for that.

When we meet 46 year old George Washington in The General, he is not yet the president we know.  He’s the Commander In Chief of the American army.  And the American Army has their hands full.  They’ve lost Manhattan to the British, and they’re losing many more territories by the day.

Worst of all, the army’s about to get a lot smaller.  They only have like 30,000 troops as it is, and many of those are the walking wounded.  But higher on the Suck Chart is the fact that the deadline on those soldiers is running out.  Their tour of duty is about to end.

So instead of going out there and fighting battles, which is what Washington wants to be doing, he’s stuck touring the nation, begging Congress and rich people for money to keep the defenses strong.  It’s not going well.  Many people are just like, “Fuck it, let the British have their country back and let’s just be done with this war.”  Washington is becoming the lone voice in a sea of surrender.  This man will die trying to keep this nation free.

And he almost does.  When the British attack the very fort named after him, Washington is nearly killed, and carried away onto a row boat to begin what would easily be the best pre-20th-century chase scene ever put on film.  Washington and five men in a row boat are chased by three giant British war ships down the river.  This is the kind of shit you need if you’re going to write a movie about the birth of our nation – shit that’s actually cool!

Another great decision the writers made was not focusing on the redcoats themselves as the enemy, but the MERCENARIES the British hired to invade America.  Wait a minute.  Did I just say we have mercenaries in a Wigs and Whistles costume pic?  Yup!  A heartless German gun for hire named Johann Rall and his Hessian army do not play by the rules.  They pillage.  They burn.  They kill civilians.  They just don’t care.  And these are the men Washington is going to lose his country to.

Whereas the British believe that securing land is the key to victory, Rall has a different opinion.  He believes you don’t win this war until you kill “The Virginian,” until you kill Washington himself.  So that’s all Rall cares about – chasing Washington down and turning him into bayonet stew.  His obsession, however, becomes a little unhealthy, and in the process he becomes blind to the unthinkable – that Washington might actually come after him first.

LOTS of cool things about this one.  Where do I start.  First, the character flaws!  Yes, Washington has some actual flaws in this screenplay.  He’s arrogant.  He’s stubborn.  He’s even a little jealous.  This is not the Washington we know, and thank God.  Our first president becomes a million times more interesting under the guidance of Aronofsky.

It’s got a great bad guy!  This Rall bastard is the real deal.  Such a great idea to focus on the mercenary angle.  Also loved how they made Rall’s pursuit of Washington PERSONAL.  Remember, you’re always looking to specify conflict.  If it’s too general, the audience won’t connect.  But if you focus on one person’s obsession with taking down another person, now we have something clear to latch onto.  We actually care what’s going to happen because what’s happening is SPECIFIC.

The writers even brought in a ticking time bomb!  Yes, I loved the focus on the army’s soldiers about to end their tour.  It instantly adds stakes.  You could feel that if Washington didn’t make his move now, he’d lose his army and America was done for good.  I love when writers tackle these tough period subject matters but still fall back on sound storytelling principles.

Yet another smart move was constantly reminding the audience how impossible the odds were.  When you think of that time, you assume that with all our land and us defending our own country, that we were probably going to win no matter what.  But the writers constantly reminded us how many of our soldiers were injured, how low morale was, how amazing the Hessian army was.  This created a sense of desperation, of America being the huge underdog.  And who doesn’t root for the underdog!?

There was really only one problem in the script for me, and that’s when Washington and army camped out across the river from Rall for 30 pages.  I hate hate HATE when characters just sit around for extended periods of time in scripts.  It means they’re not being active.  It means they’re not doing anything.  Sitting around is almost ALWAYS boring unless you have a ton of conflict to deal with inside the protagonist’s party.  And they didn’t really have that here.

Also, the ending wasn’t as good as I was hoping for.  I didn’t really understand what Washington was trying to do.  He was trying to cross the Delaware River and take over a town called Trenton, but I had a hard time figuring out if Rall was there or someone else.

That was the thing.  The writers did such a good job setting up that personal showdown between Washington and Rall, that, in the end, that’s all I really cared about.  It does happen but, I don’t know.  It just felt like it could’ve been done better.

Still, this one surprised me.  And I think Aronofsky is going to do something really cool with it!

What I learned: Make it difficult for characters having an argument to have their argument.  Remember, straight up arguments with people yelling at each other are boring.  You need ways to make them different or interesting.  A great way to do this is to place people around the arguing party that prevent them from being able to argue.  In the opening scene of The General, Washington is raising money at an event when a congressman challenges his approach to the war.  Washington is furious and is readying to scream at the guy – but everywhere around him are potential financial contributors, so he must have his argument in a quiet restrained manner.  I just always find these confrontations more interesting than the blatant, “You scream at me, I scream at you” arguments.

Genre: Biopic
Premise: While growing up, a young boy gradually learns that his father, who’s his hero, is the world’s biggest deadbeat.
About: Adapted by A-List screenwriter Steve Zaillian (Schindler’s List, Gangs of New York, Moneyball, Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) back in 2000, from the memoir, “Duke Of Deception: Memories Of My Father,” by Geoffrey Wolff.  The movie never got off the ground, probably for story issues I get into here in the review.
Writer: Steve Zaillian based on the novel by Geoffrey Wolff
Details: 133 pages

This has to be one of the stranger screenplays I’ve read in awhile.  First off, there’s no real story to speak of.  It’s just watching a kid grow up with this weirdo deadbeat of a dad.  Despite that, either because Zaillian is such a good writer or because of the perverse need to see how bad this dad gets, I kept pushing through.  And because I wanted to keep reading, I wondered if I should give this a “worth the read.”  But a lot of what we read here is so disturbing, and we hate this father so much, that we’re kind of thrilled when it’s over.  Yeah, I wanted to know what happened.  But thank the heavens above that I never have to revisit this story again (except through this review – darn it!).

So what’s Duke of Deception about?  Well, it’s about a guy named Duke who’s, um, deceitful.  The bulk of the movie takes place in the 60s (I think – there was a hell of a lot of jumping around in time – if only 2000 Zallian had been able to read my Clarity article!), where, I guess, people just trusted each other more.  You could walk into a big department store, open up a line of credit, buy $3000 worth of merchandise, then tell them you were going to pay later.  And they’d allow it!

So Duke took advantage of this.  Oh boy did he take advantage of it.  See, here’s the thing about Duke. He’s never had a job.  In fact, he’s never accomplished anything in his life.  He’s created this whole pretend life where he went to Princeton and fought in the war, but it’s all a lie, just like everything about him.

But anyway, Duke uses this “credit” ruse to buy anything he wants and NEVER pays.  And I mean NEVER.  He never pays a single bill in his life.  If the bills start becoming too much, he moves to another store/vendor, or just moves the family out of town.

Oh yeah, the family.  We’re actually telling this story through Duke’s son Geoffrey’s eyes.  Geoffrey, unfortunately, is brought up by this lying bastard, and, as a result, becomes his biggest victim.  That’s not to say Duke doesn’t love his son.  Actually, Duke loves Geoffrey more than anything in the world.  But Duke makes Geoffrey think he’s this amazing special person who can buy 50,000 dollar cars at the drop of a hat, when all he really is, is a giant deadbeat con man who’s stolen money from every person he’s ever met.

So while Duke spends his life running from the men he owes money to, he puts on a show for Geoffrey that they’re all wrong and he’s the one who’s right.  Therefore, while everyone else catches up with Duke’s con, Geoffrey obliviously goes through life believing his dad is perfect.

Duke’s constant need for things gets so bad, in fact, that after his first wife leaves him because of the tremendous amount of debt he’s put them in, he marries a woman just to pillage her bank account, which will allow him to keep buying things.  As Geoffrey grows up, he keeps seeing fights between his father and his wives, but always assumes its the wives’ fault.  His father is perfect.  He could never do anything wrong.

It isn’t until all his women leave him and Duke moves in with Geoffrey as an adult that Geoffrey finally gets a first-hand look at what his father’s been doing.  Duke starts taking money from his own son and not paying it back, simply because there’s no one else to take money from.  Duke even goes to jail for all the creditors he owes, allows Geoffrey to bail him out, then never shows up for court, forcing Geoffrey to eat thousands of dollars in bail fees.

It finally becomes clear to Geoffrey that his father is one giant fraud.  A loser.  A deadbeat of the highest order.  The question is, what does he do about it?  Does he keep enabling his addiction?  Or does he finally grow up, accept his father for who he is, and leave him?

Yeah, so like I said, this is one odd screenplay.  I mean the first thing that comes to mind when finishing it is: How could anyone consider this a movie?  Because it’s not.  It’s just a man being a total fraud douchebag for two hours.  I mean, it’s fascinating in a way.  To see how in denial he is.  But there’s no story here.  There’s no plot driving a story.  There are no goals – no purpose.  It’s just, Duke fucks over one person after another.

That’s the script’s biggest fault – its repetition.  It never really evolves into anything more than where it began.  Okay, he gets things and doesn’t pay for him.  And then he gets more things and doesn’t pay for them. And then gets MORE things and doesn’t pay for them.  At what point does it become, “Okay, that’s enough things he gets that he didn’t pay for??!”

Having said that, the script has a couple of strengths.  Zaillian is a master at popping in the occasional great scene.  There’s a great sequence, for example, where Geoffrey falls in love with the trash man’s daughter.  So he goes to his father and asks, “Could you make sure you pay the trash man?  Because I like his daughter.”  Duke assures him that he will, and yet a few days later, the trash man comes by and dumps every bit of trash from Duke’s house back onto his lawn for not paying.  The daughter stands there proudly, and tosses a gift that Geoffrey gave her onto the lawn as well, as if to put an exclamation point on how worthless she sees Geoffrey and his father to be.

The script also has a really intriguing final act, when Geoffrey comes face to face with his father’s lie.  When his dad starts taking advantage of his own son, Geoffrey’s forced to take the blinders off, and it’s not pretty what he sees.  Because it’s not just that his dad’s taking advantage of him in this moment, it’s that he now knows this is how his dad has always been. That there’s never been a single authentic thing about him.  Imagine that for a second.  You’ve always looked up to someone as your hero.  Then you learn that everything about them is a fraud.  I had this same experience when I found out the truth about Milli Vanilli.

So in the end, I don’t know what to make of this odd script.  It almost feels like a backstory for a story to come later.  I could say this is “worth the read,” because there are parts of it that are entertaining in their own odd way, but I’d be betraying the need for…I don’t know, class in a script, which the character of Duke makes sure there is none of.

I feel so dirty after this one.  I think I need to take a shower.

What I learned: You need MOVIE MOMENTS in your script.  Zallian is great at this!  He makes sure there are 5 or 6 scenes in every script that are genuine bona fide moments that EXPLODE off the page.  Besides the trash scene I mention above, there’s also a scene, when Geoffrey is told to stay home for that day’s game by his baseball coach, where Duke angrily speeds into the middle of the game, demands that the current batter take a hike, and insists that the coach put Geoffrey in RIGHT NOW!  The whole game awkwardly stops as an unwitting Geoffrey is forced to bat.  It’s just a tense fun scene, and it reminded me that sometimes you have to step back from the macro and make sure your script has a group of memorable highly entertaining scenes as well.

Genre: Sci-Fi/Drama
Premise: A terminally ill data cruncher is tasked with crunching the company’s most unsolvable job, the mysterious Zero Theorem.
About: If there’s ever been such a thing as a dream geek pairing, Terry Gilliam (12 Monkeys) and Christoph Waltz (Inglorious Bastards) would be somewhere in the top 10 (okay, let’s face it, Terry Gilliam and any actor would be in the top 10).  Right now, The Zero Theorem is in pre-production.  Gilliam has been trying to get this movie going for awhile, with Billy Bob Thorton attached at one point.  This will be writer Pat Rushin’s first produced credit.  He was an English professor at the University Of Central Florida and has had his work published in a number of magazines and newspapers.
Writer: Pat Rushin
Details: 95 pages

The more I read, the clearer this whole “voice” thing becomes to me.  Let me explain.  Almost all the scripts I read follow the same exact pattern, make the same exact choices, have the same exact sense of humor, have surprisingly similar dialogue.  There’s nothing in the script that stands out as unique.  And when there isn’t a single unique thing about your script, how do you expect it to stand out?  Why would you expect anyone to remember your screenplay an hour after they’ve finished it?

This is why “voice” is so important.  If you can do anything differently – if you have a part of your writing that only YOU can add – people are going to remember you.

That’s the feeling I got right away when reading The Zero Theorem.  It was unlike any script I’ve read in awhile.  It’s sort of 13 Monkeys by way of Midnight Cowboy with a splash of Eternal Sunshine with a sprinkle of The Matrix? Original enough for you?  We’re introduced to a strange man named Qohen Leth, a 40-something gaunt hairless fellow, presumably in the near future, working for an obscure data-crunching company.

Qohen is one weird dude.  He’s tired, distant, and hates to be touched.  He also thinks he’s dying.  And the only thing he cares about is a big call he assumes he’ll be getting soon which will tell him what he needs to do with his life.  See that’s the thing.  Above and beyond everything, Qohen feels like he doesn’t have a purpose.  And that whoever’s calling him will finally give him that purpose.

So Qohen applies for a medical exception which will allow him to work from home so he can be around at all times just in case that call comes.  He gets the exception, but on one condition – that he tackle the biggest number-crunching job the company’s ever had – The Zero Theorem.  Nobody’s been able to figure out The Zero Theorem.  No matter how many times they’ve tried to crunch the numbers, they won’t stay crunched.  Qohen is their last shot.

The kicker?  If he solves Zero Theorem, management will make sure Qohen gets his phone call.  That’s one of the weird things about this script.  We’re existing in this slightly “off” universe where the boss at a company can make sure a Fate phone call can get to one of his workers.  I’m not sure how Rushin pulled this off, but it somehow makes sense.

Anyway, Qohen soon finds The Zero Theorem to be as impossible as it’s hyped to be.  The numbers just don’t work.  When he complains to management, “Management” sends his 15 year old boy genius son, Bob, to help him.  Bob is as eccentric as Qohen is bizarre.  For example, he calls everyone else “Bob” so he doesn’t have to waste brain space on remembering new names.

Qohen and Bob develop a unique friendship and together find out what The Zero Theorem reveals – the meaning of life!  Yeah, that’s a pretty big deal – and it’s something Qohen in particular wants to find out, especially because he’s been stuck in this paralyzed state ever since his wife and son died in a fire.  He craves meaning.  He needs a reason to go on.  So Qohen and Bob give the theorem everything they’ve got.  Will they solve it, especially once they learn management is working against them??

A main character who refers to himself as “We.”  A 15 year old boy on life-support who refers to everyone by his own name, Bob.  A buxom blonde infatuated with virtual reality.  A manager who never shows his face in public.  Heck, this script had me when it introduced a rapping virtual psychiatrist on CD-ROM.  There was nothing about this script that was ordinary.  I had NO idea where it was going.

A lot of times, that can end up in disaster.  If you get too random, your story falls off the rails.  But this script managed to stay random yet still incorporate a clear story with a clear goal (Figure out Zero Theorem so Qohen can get his phone call).  Cool!

I think that’s what really stuck out to me here – that the script managed to feel so different yet incorporate a lot of the most basic storytelling tools.  Take, for example, the creation of a sympathetic character.  Qohen is lonely.  He’s an outsider.  He doesn’t relate to anyone.  Characters like these are really easy for an audience to sympathize with.  People naturally root for lonely people, people who are misunderstood.  From Edward Scissorhands to Elliot in E.T.

On top of that, Qohen lost his family in a tragic fire.  It’s something that’s completely destroyed him emotionally.  Again, people will ALWAYS root for characters who have experienced personal loss.  So we’re rooting for this guy HARDCORE from the get-go.

And I just liked the contrast and conflict within the script.  I loved how Qohen was just about the most anti-social creature in the universe, and we pair him up with a love interest who’s the most outgoing person in the universe, the buxom force of nature, Bainsley.  It’s decisions like these (a pairing similar to Eternal Sunshine) that ensure tons of conflict between the characters, which results in the dialogue writing itself (whenever someone says, “The dialogue practically writes itself,” that usually happens because the conflict in the scene makes the dialogue really fun/easy to write).

Now the ending of the script starts to get a little wacky and hard to follow, not unlike Friday’s amateur effort, where there were simply too many variables to keep track of.  So if the story has a weakness, that’s probably it.  I’ve found that whenever you promise an answer akin to the meaning of life in your script, you’re usually not going to deliver, so it was a dangerous route for Rushin to take in the first place.  But outside of that ending (which was still pretty solid), this weird little story had me digitally dancing through the pages.

What I learned: If you do not have a distinct voice – and not every writer does – the only thing you have is your ability to tell a great story.  I look at a movie like Contact as a good example.  I don’t sense an original voice when I read that script, but the story is extremely well told.  That said, you should always be looking to see what makes you original as a writer and try and highlight that in your writing.  If you don’t have anything unique about yourself that stands out, it can be a tough road getting discovered.

Amateur Friday Submission Process: To submit your script for an Amateur Review, send in a PDF of your script, a PDF of the first ten pages of your script, your title, genre, logline, and finally, why I should read your script. Use my submission address please: Carsonreeves3@gmail.com. Your script and “first ten” will be posted. If you’re nervous about the effect 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.

You guys know one of my weaknesses is time-travel comedies.  Back To The Future is the responsible party.  I don’t know why I keep thinking I’m going to find the next Marty McFly.  Time travel is so difficult to get right.  Comedies are so difficult to get right.  So these sci-fi time travel comedies are NEVER very good, and nowhere close to the perfection that is BTTF.  And yet I continue my search!

Well, I finally found something.  Now I don’t want to get TOO excited here.  This isn’t BTTF quality (What is???).  But this Eternal Sunshine meets Adjustment Bureau comedy is the best time travel thing I’ve read in forever.  It’s really clever, really fun, and really well-written.  And best of all, it’s written by an amateur!

I knew I was in for something good right away when we see our hero, Charles, walk in front of a car, about to get plastered, then FREEZE to the title card: “48 Hours Earlier.”  Oh no, the dreaded “48 hours earlier” title card!  The thing Carson hates more than anything!  But then the “48 hours earlier” is crossed out and replaced with “48 hours later.”  Which is also crossed out.  And finally a title card appears that tells us that in the near future, time travel is a reality, and that for the right price, you can take care of hurtful past relationships that have turned you into a walking pile of sludge.

All you have to do is sign up at “Forget-Me-Nots,” the company our soon-to-be-road-kill hero, Charles, works for, and an agent will go back in time to make sure you and that guy who dumped your ass never meet in the first place.  And of course if you never meet, you never break up, so you never experience heartbreak.  Hey, sign me up!

When our story begins (or ends??), Charles is approached by a recently scorned woman, Julia, who wants to make it so that she and her ex, Tom, never meet.  Julia tells Charles how they met, and he heads back in time to make sure it never happens.  Now the rules of time travel are strict.  The governing body of time only allows people to jump for 48 hours, so Charles has to be efficient in his approach.  And he always is.  So far, he hasn’t screwed up a job yet.

But that’s about to change.  As Charles moves to prevent Julia from meeting Tom, a cute 22 year old spunky chick, Dora, bumps into him, unloading a cup of coffee onto his shirt.  She apologizes profusely as Charles tries to get away, but she insists on cleaning him up.  He fights and claws to escape, but in the end loses the battle and watches helplessly as Tom and Julia meet across the street.

No problem.  He’s missed first encounters before.  He’ll just prevent their first date from happening.  But what Charles soon finds out is that something keeps preventing him from executing his plan.  And there’s one common factor involved: Dora!  She ALWAYS seems to be around when things go south.

Charles finally confronts her and finds out that she’s a time traveler as well, and that she’s been sent here to make sure these two stay together.  Charles is pissed, but takes it as a challenge.  He’s been on dozens of trips.  This girl is a rookie.  He’ll be able to handle her no problem.

So the two start an Adjustment Bureau-like battle where they each make moves to alter fate surrounding the couple.  And every time Charles seems to have a leg up, Dora outfoxes him.  But as this time battle escalates, Charles starts to see the Tom-Julia job as secondary.  He wants to know who this Dora girl is, and who sent her here.  All of this will come to a whopper of a conclusion when we finally catch up with the opening scene that has Charles staring down death in the form of a car seconds away from crushing him.

This one was good.  Really good.

Yesterday we talked about clarity and how difficult it is for some writers to write even the most basic scene.  Keeping Time jumps between the present and the past and has multiple versions of characters and yet I knew what was going on 95% of the time (the ending does get confusing, which I’ll talk about in a sec).  For example, instead of just assuming we’d get it, Nathan will stop the script to explain the difference between “Past Charles” and “Present Charles,” so we won’t be confused by their interactions.

What I also liked about “Time” was that it kept evolving.  Every time I thought I knew where the story was going, it took a left turn.  For example, when Charles misses the first Tom-Julia encounter, he  decides to use the information she gave him back in their interview to sweep her off her feet, keeping her away from Tom in the process.  I thought, “Uh-oh.  Now we just have another version of There’s Something About Mary.”  Except when Tom tries to use her secrets against her, she stonewalls him, which confuses the hell out of Charles and left me wondering – “Wow, what now??”

Likewise with the Charles-Dora relationship.  I thought for sure these two time-travellers would battle each other to change fate and in the process fall in love!  But that doesn’t happen either.  At that point I’m thinking, “Man, this writer really knows how to craft an unpredictable story.”

And pretty soon, I found myself obsessed with finding out who Dora was and why she was here.  I had about five theories, but was never sure which one it would be.

On top of that, I felt the dialogue, for the most part, was really solid.  It wasn’t great.  It had some clunky moments.  But Charles and Dora’s back-and-forth was almost always fun to listen to.  The two had great chemistry and I’d find that even in scenes where they were just sitting at the table chatting for five pages (a scenario I tell writers to avoid all the time – two characters sitting at a table talking), I’d always be entertained.

But you know what really put me over the top?  What really got me?  This script had a theme!  I can count the number of amateur comedies I’ve read that have a theme on one hand – that were actually trying to say something!  Here, the theme was about allowing people to have the experiences in their lives, whether good or bad, because those experiences end up making them who they are.  I thought it was really well executed.

And to prove it, when the ending came, and one of the final twists arrived, I actually found myself tearing up!  And I realized that doesn’t happen by accident.  It happens because the writer was doing more than simply throwing a cool story on the page.  He created likable characters we wanted to root for.  He created interesting backstories (and forestories!).  He used a theme to add layers and depth to the script.  That’s how you emotionally affect a reader.

The only reason I didn’t raise the script to “impressive” status was the ending.  It gets a little too confusing.  I liked the ambition behind it.  But either it tries to be one level more clever than it needs to be and gets too confusing in the process, or it’s not described clearly enough.  I’m not sure which but if Nathan can fix that and improve a bunch of smaller problems in the script, this could EASILY be an impressive and get snatched up by a production company.

How much do I believe in it?  I’m going to try and convince Nathan to let me hop on as producer and push it around town.  We’ll see what happens! :)

p.s. I believe the draft I sent out to everybody was the wrong one and wasn’t spell-checked.  The one I personally read was devoid of errors.

Script link: Link taken down due to increasing interest.  Will keep people updated on my Twitter feed, @Scriptshadow!  E-mail me to read!

What I Learned: Getting back to theme, I find that one helpful way of expressing theme is to include a  scene (sometimes two) where the main characters debate both sides of the theme.  Some writers think this is too on-the-nose, but in my experience, theme does need to be announced in places for it to really catch on with the audience.  Be too subtle about it and your audience might miss it completely.  Charles and Dora have a scene in the middle of the script where they debate just that – whether it’s okay to erase our mistakes, since those mistakes are an essential part of who we are.