Genre: Horror-Comedy
Premise: (from writer) The most reviled teen in town has 96 hours to find her soulmate or become Satan’s new bride.
About: Every Friday, I review a script from the readers of the site. If you’re interested in submitting your script for an Amateur Review, send it in PDF form, along with your title, genre, logline, and why I should read your script to Carsonreeves3@gmail.com. Keep in mind your script will be posted in the review (feel free to keep your identity and script title private by providing an alias and fake title). Also, it’s a good idea to resubmit every couple of weeks so that your submission stays near the top of the pile.
Writer: Gary Rowlands
Details: 102 pages (This is an early draft of the script. The situations, characters, and plot may change significantly by the time the film is released. This is not a definitive statement about the project, but rather an analysis of this unique draft as it pertains to the craft of screenwriting).

Hey, what’s wrong with using the comments section to get me to review your script? That’s what Gary did with the help of longtime reader Poe. Of course that wasn’t the only reason I reviewed Mrs. Satan. As I’ve mentioned before, the amateur script is usually the last one I read during the week. Why? Well, because it’s usually the least goodest script I read all week. So I put it off til the last second.

I’m not the only person who does this. Most readers approach it this way. They have a stack of scripts to plow through and chances are they’re putting the amateur submissions at the bottom cause history tells them they’ll be the hardest to get through.

THIS is why industry people are constantly telling you: Low page count. Lean writing style. Thriller or a comedy. Go with things that make the read faster. You see there are “easy” reads (fun subject matter, easy to understand narrative) and there are “tough” reads (complicated period pieces, tons of characters, dramas without a clear narrative). You’re usually hitting your reader at his most tired, at his most impatient state. So you want to make the read as easy for him as possible. And all I had to do was look at the title (“Mrs. Satan”) and I knew Gary’s script would be an easy read.

True to form, there’s not that much explaining that needs to be done for Mrs. Satan’s plot. 18 year old goth-ish bully Angel (heh heh) is a great big meanie. She and her friends, Lizzie and Evelyn, spend the majority of their time playing pranks on people. In fact, the movie starts off with Angel dressed up as the Grim Reaper and walking through an old folks home, scaring the bejesus out of its inhabitants. I have to admit, it was pretty funny. My favorite part was starting on the Grim Reaper (who at this point we believe is the REAL Grim Reaper), who approaches the home dourly, reaches to grab a doorknob… and it FALLS OFF. He stares at it, pissed, and chucks it away. That’s when we realize it’s Angel.

But Angel does a lot worse than that. In fact, she fabricates an entire story about the local priest “touching” her inappropriately which sends him to jail! Which proves to be a lousy decision because the priest’s nephew, a fisherman who lives nearby, actually DIES, and his first mission as a ghost is to find the devil a bride. Doesn’t take long to decide who that’s going to be.

So the nephew starts haunting Angel, telling her that the devil’s going to make her his bride in a week. She thinks he’s joking but then sees his death reported on TV. Uh oh. This shit is for realz! After brainstorming how the hell (get it! “Hell?!”) she’s going to get out of this, she comes up with the plan of getting married. If she’s already married, Satan can’t marry her.

Problem is, everyone kind of hates Angel. And even the ones who don’t hate her aren’t keen on some psycho chick wanting to get married at the end of the first date. I mean talk about clingy!

Complicating matters is that the devil’s put a spell on Angel that’s created a really bad rash on her face, making her super ugly. This forces her to, in a last ditch effort, try to marry a blind guy. But just like the other guys, he gives her the Hellsman. I mean the Heisman (I’m on fire here!).

During all this, Angel and Marlon (the dead nephew of the priest) start to like each other and now Marlon’s not so sure he wants to help the Devil. However, the Devil isn’t too keen on that plan, and makes it clear that it’s either his way, or the highway. TO HELL!

Mrs. Satan is, indeed, an easy read. It’s got all the screenwriting staples in place (the GSU is rockin’). The goal is to find a husband before the devil makes her his bride. The urgency is she only has a week to do it. Stakes are if she doesn’t succeed, she goes to hell. Definitely something worth avoiding.

However, that knowledge only gets you through the door as far as the reader is concerned. It shows that you’ve been at this long enough to understand basic story principles. Now you have to show that you understand the nuances of storytelling – the guts that make a screenplay pop.

I think the biggest problem with Mrs. Satan is Angel’s age. Having her still be in high school feels wrong for some reason. This seems like it should be a story about a 24 or 25 year old, not an 18 year old who still goes to math class every day. “Sophistication” may be my issue. Since nobody except those kids on MTV reality shows gets married (and pregnant) at 18, it just felt like Angel was dealing with an unrealistic issue for her age group.

Another roadblock Gary battles is getting us to root for an unlikable protagonist. This is a bad person. The scaring old people sequence was kind of funny. But accusing an innocent priest of raping you? I don’t know. And that’s the challenge here. You have to make your protagonist bad enough so that she’d go to hell, but “good” enough so that we’ll like her (or at least root for her). Angel was funny enough that I was usually on her side. But she did enough bad shit in the beginning that, to be honest, I didn’t care whether she ended up in hell or not. And that’s a problem, since those are the big stakes of the movie.

Gary wisely combats this with a “save the cat” moment early on, having Angel beat up the town bully who’s picking on her younger brother, but I’m not sure she earns enough points to make up for all the other shit.

It’s also said in this business that while audiences are forgiving of unlikable male protagonists, they are NEVER okay with unlikable female protagonists. I don’t know how true that is. Bad Teacher just made boatloads of cash. But I know it’s something producers are afraid of (and when you think about it, Cameron Diaz is kind of “man-ish”).

I also had some problems with Angel’s attempts to get married. You’re a hot 18 year old girl. I think you can find someone dumb enough to marry you. So I didn’t believe she’d have so much trouble in that department (I was also unconvinced that this would really stop the Devil – I mean he is the Devil. Is a fake marriage going to stop him?).

As for everything else, I’d like to see more heart and character exploration in the script. We do get Angel changing in the end, doing all these good things for others, but it seemed tacked on. Up until that point, it was hijinx galore. I would love to know WHY Angel became this way – why she got so much happiness out of hurting others. It’s implied that her mom dying had something to do with it, but it’s all rather loosely explained. I feel this script needs to be about a girl learning to respect others and help others, and while there’s some of that here, it wasn’t enough for me to become emotionally attached to the material.

Not a bad script at all, but not enough punch to get my juices flowing.

Script link: Mrs. Satan

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

What I learned: I don’t know why I keep referring back to Karl’s script this week, but there’s something we were talking about there that I think is an important lesson. You can’t get hung up on one script. You have to keep writing new stuff. New scripts bring up new problems, which improves you as a writer. If you’re tackling the same old issues over and over again, you’re not getting better. This script is a great example of that. Sooner or later, you’ll write a script with an “unlikable” main character. The trials and tribulations that come along with trying to get an audience to root for an unlikable protagonist is one of the most important lessons in your education as a screenwriter. But if you never encounter it, you’ll never know how to deal with it. I think Sean was saying this yesterday as well. Keep writing new stuff guys. And if that first script really means something to you? Don’t worry. It’s not going away. You can come back to it a year from now. And you’ll be a better writer when you do.

A lot of people seem to want to talk about this so I thought I’d throw up a post and let you discuss.  We’ve reviewed the script twice on the site, once by Roger, who thought the script was genius, and then I reviewed it as well.  The script is also ranked as #1 by you guys, the readers of the site. It wasn’t quite my thing but I had to admit the writing was imaginative and detailed.  So what do I think of Tarsem directing the film?  Well, he has an interesting visual style that should gel well with the universe.  He hasn’t had a good script to direct yet though.  This would be the best one by far.  So maybe that’s all he needs to knock a film out of the park.  What do you guys think? 

A couple of weeks ago Sean O’Keefe sold his pitch, Riders On The Storm, to Fox for half a million dollars. The script is about a heist crew that pulls off sophisticated robberies during severe storms. I realized we don’t talk about pitching very much on the site, even though it’s a huge part of the business. Oftentimes, after you meet someone about your script, you’ll pitch them other projects you’re working on.  So I thought Sean would be the perfect person to ask, “What’s this pitching thing all about?”  Sean is also currently writing a film adaptation of “Apaches” for producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney Pictures about the NYPD along with writing partner Will Staples.  Enjoy the interview.

SS: Can you tell us how you got started in screenwriting? What was your background leading up to it? Did you do anything else film-related?

SO: I grew up between two isolated worlds – a cabin in Alaska with no running water and a draconian boarding school in England. As a result movies for me were always a way of feeling connected with the outside world. My final semester in college, I decided to write a spec based on Milton’s “Paradise Lost” and some family friends hooked me up with a meeting with veteran screenwriter Jay Cocks who had worked with Scorsese on “The Age of Innocence.” Jay told me I was crazy – Hollywood would never make it – so I let the idea go. Now, of course, Alex Proyas is making a film based on the material. It’s the same lessen I’ve learned a hundred times: follow your gut no matter what because it’s all you have.

After paralegalling in New York my first year out of school and writing two painfully bad scripts on my lunch breaks, I moved out to LA and worked in development first for Neal Moritz at Original Film then Michael Ovitz at APG, the film production arm of AMG. I then co-founded a film and video game production company called Union Entertainment with Rich Leibowitz.

Around that time, my father passed away and I spent a week in ICU waiting for the inevitable to happen. It turned out to be a period of reckoning for me. I realized you only have so much time to do what you want in life, so I made the choice to return to screenwriting.

SS: When was the first time you got paid to write? How many scripts had you written before you got that first paycheck?

SO: The first time I got paid was in 2003 with my former writing partner, Will Staples. We had gone out with a Mayan period piece spec (my fifth script at that point) that didn’t sell but was well received for the writing and two weeks later Sony called up and asked if we wanted to write King Tut for Roland Emmerich. We came up with a take, Roland and the studio liked it, and the rest is ancient history…

SS: I’ll be murdered if I don’t ask this question. But how did you get your agent?

SO: I was lucky in that in my capacity as a producer and exec I had dealt directly with a number of agents and managers around town. My agent, Nicole Clemens at ICM, and my manager, Brian Lutz, were both reps who were excellent at representing their clients when I was on the other side of the table. When it came time for me to devote myself to writing again, they were the first people I reached out to.

SS: In your opinion, what’s the most difficult thing about screenwriting, and what’s the best way to tackle that difficulty?

SO: Knowing that I am writing for an audience is the hardest aspect of the process for me. The moment I look up from the page and see the faces in the proverbial crowd – studio execs, agents, managers, other writers – I feel stage fright setting in. I start to second guess myself. I wonder if I have the right character for my story or the wrong story for my character. I fall into the trap of perfectionism. The trick is to write as if you are writing purely for yourself, but it’s easier said than done. Oddly, Donald Rumsfeld had some wisdom in this arena: “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want.” Eventually, you have to stop second guessing yourself and charge into battle.

SS: You’ve obviously been out there, talked to producers, have a beat on their needs. What do producers want these days? Are there some common genres they’re asking for? Do they want the “Next Twilight?” The “Next found footage” script? What are you hearing?

SO: Everybody thinks they want the thing that just performed at the box office but the truth is that they want the next great idea that walks through the door. Your job is to bring them that next great idea. I’ve never been very good at forecasting what the market wants and then tailoring my output accordingly. I run with the movie I most want to write and hope that others feel as excited about it as I do…

Disappointment, however, lurks around every corner in this process. That is why I have a personal rule of thumb, which is my ‘one in ten’ rule. That is for every ten swings at bat you connect with one ball. For every ten meetings or reads, someone connects with what you are trying to do. It’s fuzzy math, but it helps to keep your expectations in check. Not everyone is going to resonate with what you’re doing. But that’s okay – you only need one in ten to actually make real progress. Every studio passed on our Mayan epic, but one liked the writing enough to call us back in. That one call gave birth to our career.

SS: We were having this debate the other day on the site. Should an unknown writer try to break in with something heartfelt and personal to them – something that will bring out their best writing? Or should they write something high concept and marketable, even though they won’t be as emotionally attached to the writing?

SO: Stick with the cliché of writing what’s in your heart. It’s a cliché for a reason. But if it’s a big summer action movie that’s in your heart, then consider yourself lucky.

SS: If you could go back in time and give your younger screenwriter self some advice on how to get to the professional level faster, what would you tell him?

SO: Four things…

Write as much as you can. It’s all about clocking the hours and getting words on the page. In the Gladwellian sense you need to get in your 10,000 hours, so the sooner the better.

Write, rewrite, then move on. Don’t get stuck trying to overly perfect a script in the beginning. You will learn more from cracking a new story than you will from debating where to place your commas.

Avoid the Freshman Writer Trap. The problem is that in the beginning many new writers think they’re the next Robert Towne – and perhaps they will turn out to be – but it will likely take years to know. Don’t assume that you shit gold from the get-go. The likelihood is that your first few scripts will be abominations in hindsight (at least mine were). Humility will keep you open to constructive criticism and ensure that you are learning and progressing.

Run your writing career like a producer. Have a slate of projects – one or two that you are focused on at any point in time and the others that you continue to inch forward as the opportunity arises. Never have just one baby. This is Hollywood. There is no safety net. You need to have a Third World family of projects because sadly not all of them are going to survive.

SS: What is a pitch meeting and how does one go about getting one? Does an agent read your latest script and ask you to come in? Is it something your agent works to set up? Is it you having a previous relationship with the producers and saying, “Hey, I got this new idea I want to come in and pitch you?” How does a writer get one of these things!?

A pitch is a meeting where you make a verbal presentation of a story that you want to sell so that you can be paid in advance to write it as a script.

The three essential ingredients to a pitch are having a sample script that people already like, a story to pitch, and an agent to set the meetings.

Pitches can arise in two basic ways. First, you tell your agent you have a pitch you want to take out to the town and they set meetings with producers who then take it into studios where they have their strongest relationships. Second, a producer brings you an idea and you take it out to the town exclusively with them attached.

SS: With your recent pitch sale, were you going in to specifically pitch them this project – with both sides already knowing what you were going to pitch them? Or was it something that emerged during the course of the meeting?

SO: The pitch meetings were specific to this project, which is the way it typically goes down, but there are exceptions. For example, on “World’s Most Wanted,” a spy thriller we set up at Universal, the original pitch was about a Mexican drug cartel but the exec didn’t respond to the subject matter. He did, however, like the team-versus-team dynamic of the story and said if we could come with a new subject, he would be interested. So we did several weeks of research and found a real-life NATO team that hunts the world’s most wanted criminals. We went back in, employing a similar story with the new subject, and he bought it. It was proof that you can never tell which direction a project is going to break, but you’ll never know unless you try.

SS: Can you tell us how a pitch that leads to a sale works? Are they all different? Do they tell you right there in the room “yes, we’re buying this?” Or does it happen afterwards, once they’ve checked with their superiors?

SO: I dream of the ‘in room’ sale, and I know it has happened to others, but I haven’t been the recipient of that kind of spontaneous largesse yet. For me, selling a pitch has always entailed an agonizing wait – sometimes a few hours, sometimes a few days. Now that the studios have more leverage and they are more picky about what they buy than when I started in the business, they aren’t in the same real-time rush to respond that they used to be back in the glory days of the mid-90s spec market when high concept ideas with poor execution seemed to sell on almost a daily basis. Now execs seem more afraid of being left holding the bag on a project than they do being left out of a sale.

The truth is that very few people at the studio have the authority to buy a pitch without running it up someone else’s flagpole first. If you happen to be in the room with someone who can say ‘yes’ then you’re already doing something very right – in which case keep it up!

SS: People talk about different kinds of pitches. There’s the 5 minute pitch. The 10 minute pitch. And like the longer 20 minute pitch where you pitch the whole movie. I can’t imagine a busy producer able to concentrate for 20 minutes on any writer. Do you follow this formal time-specific pitch list or do you just do it your own way?

SO: I think it depends on where you are in your career as a writer and what the nature of the pitch is – i.e. are you pitching on a rewrite the studio has submitted to you, or are you pitching an original of your own. If it’s a rewrite, and your stock is high with the studio, you can get away with a more limited pitch – i.e. “Here are the three major problems with the existing script and here’s how I would address them.” Your presentation will then likely lead into a more informal conversation with the exec.

However, if it’s an original then your choice is more problematic and the decision to go long or brief depends on a number of factors… How established are you (i.e. how much does the studio already want to be in business with you)? If you are one of the lucky few hot scribes around town then you can probably get away with the ‘less is more’ approach. If not, you might want to incorporate more detail in your presentation. The risk is that you will lose the exec’s attention and give them more to pass on, but the upside is that if you do manage to hold their attention you want them to know that you have this story worked out in enough detail that you feel confident writing it.

Another factor to consider is what kind of story it is. If it’s a rom-com in a familiar setting like a wedding then you probably don’t need to sweat establishing the world in great detail. But if you’re pitching a sci-fi or action film that takes place in an original or arcane world, then you probably want to lead with an explanation of the setting of the story so the exec can better visualize what you are talking about and understand the consequences of your dramatic choices based on the rules of the universe you are drawing from.

However…if I had a gun to my head and had to give you an ideal pitch length, I would say 12 minutes. Beyond that any exec is bound to start wondering whether they’re going to have sashimi or the dragon roll for lunch.

SS: Can you give us any tips for nailing a pitch? It’s such a different art form from writing itself. What do you think the key is?

SO: You have to know your strengths and play to them, and by that same token know your weaknesses and try to avoid them or compensate for them. If you’re good with banter, then reduce the length of your pitch and put more weight on the Q&A with the exec where you respond to their questions and observations on the fly. If you feel more confident memorizing your pitch word for word and creating a more airtight presentation, then go for that. It’s a personal choice. No one size fits all.

In addition, try to get into the pitch itself as quickly as you can. Most execs are busy and under a lot of pressure. They’re only going to be able to listen to so much of you talk, no matter how enthralling you are. Dedicate as many words as you can in the meeting to your story, not how awesome your Cabo bachelor party was or that you just hit level 85 in World of Warcraft.

Lastly, make it personal. You’re trying to convince your audience that you have this story inside of you – that you’re going to burst if you don’t get it out, and that you’re the one person who can tell it. You have to walk into the pitch believing that you’re entering with a briefcase full of diamonds and that they’d be crazy to let you walk out with it. Only never carry a briefcase into a pitch…

Genre: Horror
Premise: A Hansel and Gretel for the texting generation, Into The Dark is about a homeless brother and sister who accept the help of an older upper class woman, only to get trapped in her penthouse of horrors.
About: I don’t know a lot about this script, however from what I understand, it went out wide but did not sell. Richard Tanne and Travis Baker are the writers of a web show called “Cinema Cool” where they look at, mainly, great horror writers and directors, occasionally diving in to pop culture films. Baker was a researcher on the original Hostel, which I guess means he researched interesting ways to torture people? Tanne most recently wrote and starred in an indie movie called “Worst Friends,” about a couple of childhood best friends who move back in with each other as adults.
Writers: Richard Tanne and Travis Baker
Details: 95 pages – undated (This is an early draft of the script. The situations, characters, and plot may change significantly by the time the film is released. This is not a definitive statement about the project, but rather an analysis of this unique draft as it pertains to the craft of screenwriting).

Talk about a roller-coaster ride of a script. I started off thinking this was one of the worst scripts ever. Everything was so loud and on the nose. People said exactly what they were thinking and there was nary a line of dialogue where one character wasn’t yelling at another. I was like, “Do these writers know the meaning of subtlety?” But then, as the script went on, I began to realize that I’d completely misinterpreted the tone. This script was SUPPOSED to be over the top. And as soon as I realized that, everything got better. Before I knew it, I was actually enjoying the generically titled “Into The Dark.” The question is, did I enjoy it enough to recommend it?

16 year old Virginia is mourning her immediate future. That’s because her new bitchy stepmother, Issy, is moving in. Issy is not good people. She’ll smile and coddle you when daddy’s around. But as soon as he’s in the other room, she morphs into the Wicked Witch Of The West.

Virginia’s only lifeline is her brother Ellis, who she loves more than anything. As long as he’s there to protect her, she can muscle through it. Well, it turns out Ellis has other plans. He decides to quit school, move to the big city, and pursue a career in music. Moving to New York with no money to become a musician is definitely a sensible thing to do so Ellis clearly has things figured out.

Virginia is so horrified at the prospect of being alone with Step Mommy Dearest that she joins her Bieber wannabe bro at the last second and they head for the Hotel Califor-no-money-ah. They try to get jobs but those don’t last long and soon they’re living on the streets eating out of dumpsters. That reminds me of an old friend of mine. Dumpster Danny. That guy could make a sandwich out of cardboard and raw eggs if he needed to. Good guy. I miss ya DD.

Well one night while wandering through a park, a mugger goes after our dumpster duo but the most awesomest old lady ever leaps out of nowhere and slams a bottle of wine upside the mugger’s head. High five for Granny! Granny, concerned for their safety, asks them if they’d like to come up to her place and call the police. Sure, they say. Where the hell else do they have to go?

It turns out Granny ain’t doing so bad for herself. She lives in some swanky uptown building and owns the entire like 20th floor or something. The grandmotherload. After some small talk, Granny tells them they just have to try her homemade Gingerbread. While Ellis gulps it down, Virginia is a little more cautious. Something isn’t quite right here. She wisely pouches the food and keeps an eye on her suspicious host.

Next thing you know, Granny is offering them a room for the night and Ellis is all over that because he’s suddenly feeling quite tired. Virginia doesn’t have much of a choice since her brother is staying but the warning signs are starting to beep bop boop like crazy. Once in her room, she realizes the door is LOCKED. And now her suspicions are confirmed. Virginia tries to wake her brother up as the conversation outside seems to be turning to “What’s for dinner?” if you know what I mean (I mean “they’re for dinner”). Virginia finds a secret passage that she drags her brother through just before the bad guys come in and now the chase is on!

But our succulent siblings are in for a big surprise. As they try running down the fire escape, they realize that Granny doesn’t just own the condo. She owns the ENTIRE DAMN BUILDING! Every single tenant is part of the game. And they’re all starving!

The entire first act of Into The Dark is a major problem. I would even wager that the reason this script didn’t garner more interest is because a lot of people never made it past page 25. I mean we have the nonsensically evil Issy, who’s maybe the most over-the-top character in screenplay history. When she enters Virginia’s house, it’s clear this is the first time she’s ever been there. Assuming that Issy and the dad were dating before they got married, wouldn’t she have been inside their house, oh I don’t know, at least once??

Then the next sequence has bro and sis racing off to New York to try and become famous or something. At that point I’m going, “What the hell is this movie about??” But I really began to check out when they became homeless. I mean what the hell is this story about??? Then finally – FINALLY – the old woman brings them back to her place and I understood what the story was. But man, that’s a lot of nonsense to go through to get to the actual story.

I think this is why some readers had trouble with Karl’s script the other day as well. We’re trying to figure out what the movie is about, and if no clear objective emerges from our characters – if they’re not going after anything important and/or clear, we start to lose interest. And even if a clear story does emerge in that second act somewhere, we’ve already started skimming by that point, so we’re no longer emotionally invested. You don’t want the reader to put you in the skim-cycle. That’s why EVERY part of your script needs to be interesting. Not just certain parts.

Luckily, Into The Dark’s situation was compelling enough to be one of the few screenplays that pulled me back in. Once we got inside that building, I was genuinely scared for Virginia and Ellis. I think because the goal seemed so insurmountable. I just didn’t see any way that they were going to get out of this alive. So I really wanted to see if they could.

Where I think these guys really shined though was in the old lady’s family. They did a great job creating this creepy unit that had perfected ways to lure kids into their building and bake them for supper. There’s a great nod to The Wicker Man in the script too where you think our characters are safe but then they get tricked at the last second. Again, I wasn’t completely certain that they were going to get out of this alive. It’s always good to include that possibility in your horror script. The more uncertain we are, the more eager we’ll be to find out what happens.

Only other thing I’d say is please change the title of this script. Every time I needed to refer to the title in the review, I had to go back and double-check it. That’s not a good sign. This script does not have enough fire to cook your entire Thanksgiving meal, but if you’re in the mood for some silly horror fun, it might be enough to take care of the stuffing.

[ ] What the hell did I just eat?
[ ] wasn’t for my stomach
[x] worth the later digestive problems
[ ] delicious
[ ] perfect meal

What I learned: I’m going to highlight something that commenter JakeBarnes said Friday because I think it’s the most succinct summary of a story: “A story happens when a protagonist has a clearly defined goal which he/she must achieve otherwise there will be terrible consequences (ie high stakes) and that protagonist faces clear and overwhelming obstacles stopping him or her from achieving that goal. The greatest obstacle, however, is the protagonist’s own flaw which stands in his/her way, and he/she must overcome that flaw to achieve the goal. Often the flaw is worked out in the relationship storyline.” Now here’s the thing. We usually don’t get to that goal until THE END OF THE FIRST ACT. BUT, your first act should still indicate a clear direction LEADING UP TOWARDS THAT GOAL. The beginning of this story gives no indication whatsoever what this movie is going to be about. I mean do Issy and the dad really matter to the story? No. Why not just start with Virginia and Ellis on the streets of New York? Maybe right after they lose their job? Or a day away from getting kicked out of their apartment? They discuss if they should move back home, agree they can’t live with their stepmother, and reluctantly decide to tough it out on the streets until they can get another job. Maybe we see a few “Missing” flyers with their faces on them that they rip down. Things get tougher for them. And that’s when the park incident happens. The first act would just be so much cleaner than the wandering wippy-dippy confusing all over the place set of circumstances that occur now. You know?