Genre: Action/Drama
Premise: When a terrorist group takes hundreds of hostages captive in the Empire State Building, a fearless CIA agent sneaks into the famous landmark and climbs 66 stories to take down the bad guys.
About: Today we get a script from S. Craig Zahler, who STILL holds the #3 spot on my Top 25 List (look over to the right side to see the Top 25). Zahler’s recent foray into directing has finally gotten him enough clout to get Brigands of Rattleborge made. Park Chan-wook, the director of one of the best movies ever, “Oldboy,” will steer the Western. Matthew McConaghey is almost a go to star. A little known fact about Zahler. He’s a metal head and scores his own films!
Writer: S. Craig Zahler
Details: 121 pages
Zahler is at an interesting point in his career. For an entire decade, he was one of the most successful unproduced screenwriters in the business. Maybe even THE most successful. He sold a ton of scripts. But his heavy-handed novelistic voice was both an ally and an adversary. It helped him stand out from the pack. But people weren’t sure his scripts would translate to the big screen.
At some point, Zahler had enough. If you’re not going to make my movies, he said, I’ll make my movies. And he made Bone Tomahawk. Then Brawl in Cell Block 99. And most recently, Dragged Across Concrete. Perhaps his ten years in waiting was a predication of what was to come after all. His movies have been received fairly well from critics. Hard core cinephiles also enjoy them. But the jury’s still out on if there’s a mainstream audience. This is one of his most commercial scripts. So maybe it changes the conversation.
Rhett Westermark feels guilty every day for not being there when his older brother died. The two were firefighters when 9/11 went down. While he eagerly waited to be called in, he heard over the radio that the building his brother was in collapsed. Twelve years later, Rhett, now a CIA agent, finds it tough to open up to anyone. He’s so detached from his relationship with his girlfriend, Danielle, in fact, he tells her she can go out with other men while they’re together.
New York City is already on heightened alert when terrorists take over the Empire State Building. The president is in town, deflecting heavy criticism for America’s participation in the Breznian war. The terrorists secure floors 66 and 67, huddling up 500 hostages, then announcing their demands. The government is to deliver them the president of the United States by 5pm or they will start throwing one hostage out of the building every half hour.
The city calls their bluff and, sure enough, they toss someone out with a noose around their neck. When the rope goes taut, the hostage’s head snaps off. These guys are nothing if not dramatic. The city then sends in a SWAT team. But the terrorists easily take care of them. They subsequently announce a punishment for the SWAT team. Now TWO people will be thrown off the building every half hour.
Westermark tells his coworkers that there’s no conventional way to handle this situation. He has an idea. He’ll go in, all by himself, then use an elevator shaft to pull a bin full of weapons to the 66th floor. He’ll then arm the hostages and make it a fair fight. Before they can agree with Westermark, he’s off. He’s not going to wait around for people to die this time.
But people do die. As Westermark painstakingly moves up the Empire State Building one floor at a time, he keeps encountering terrorists. And when these terrorists report up to their boss, more hostages are tossed off the building. But Westermark eventually gets to the hostage floor and meticulously arms the hostages one by one through bathroom breaks. Finally the signal comes in and it’s an all out war between captives and captors!
One of best ways to find a big idea, something that’s going to attract producers, is to take a famous movie and find a fresh way into the idea. Here, Zahler has basically created a fresh take on Die Hard – which is: what if we did the serious/realistic version of Die Hard?
The problem with looking for fresh takes on popular ideas is that there’s still no guarantee that the idea will be interesting to people. In other words, just because you have a new take doesn’t mean it’s going to be a good take. Is a serious version of Die Hard something people want to see? I don’t know, to be honest. I’m lukewarm on the concept. But that doesn’t mean others won’t be into it.
The strange thing about “Breaking” is that it spends a lot of time setting up its characters and yet I didn’t feel like I knew any of them. Westermark, in particular, was relegated to “guy who lost his brother in 9/11.” There wasn’t anything deeper than that. And since the 9/11 survivor thing is used so often in storytelling, you need to bring more context to it in order to overcome the cliche.
A big issue was that Westermark never spoke. The only time he said anything was to take care of logistics (“I’m going to go here and then you can meet me there.”). His character was very introspective and the problem with introspective characters is that they emit very little personality on the page. So it’s hard for the reader to connect with them. And this could pretty much be said for all the characters.
The one character I felt like I knew the best was Danielle, the girlfriend. Which was ironic because she had nothing to do with the main plot. She just leaves lots of voice mails for Westermark opining about the state of their relationship. This goes to show that how much a character speaks has a big influence on how well the reader feels like they know them. I shouldn’t feel after this script that I know Danielle better than the main character, but I did.
Another issue with the script is that there’s a ton of jumping around in the first act. We meet Westermark, the girlfriend, the bad guy, the agents, some people in China, several other bad guys, hot dog vendors, a few more people who I didn’t even know what they had to do with the story. When you jump around that much early on, it becomes very easy for the reader to lose focus. Since we’re not sitting down and getting to know any one character, we don’t feel like we know any of the characters. I had to keep reeling myself back in to focus.
You can still create memorable characters within this format. But you have to give them a really strong introduction. Westermark’s introduction is waiting to hear if he’s going to the World Trade Center and then realizing his brother is dead. Again, dying in 9/11 is not an original backstory. Is hasn’t been for 18 years. So unless you can find a way into that scenario that’s unique and memorable, it’s probably not going to leave much of an impact. When you couple that with a dozen quick ambiguous character introductions, you’re making it really hard on the reader.
The thing is, I like the central plot here. Painstakingly moving up a skyscraper one floor at a time to kill terrorists. That’s good. And the hero’s plan is a unique one. He’s going to arm the hostages once he gets there. Also good. But this is a great example of how important the first act is. If we’re not intimately connected to your main characters after the first act, then even when they’re involved in a cool plot like this one, we’re not going to be emotionally invested.
And all of this is rather baffling because it’s not like Zahler isn’t putting attention on the characters. You get the feeling he thinks about them a lot. But the combination of an introverted non-emoting hero and a scattershot never-ending introduction pattern prevent us from knowing them as well as he does. That’s a mistake we writers make all the time. We assume that the character is just as clear in the reader’s eyes as he is in our own heads. But a reader only knows a character from what they say and what they do. So if the writer doesn’t pick the right scenes to highlight those qualities, we’re (the reader) seeing a different character than you (the writer).
Not a bad script at all. But the lack of a hero to connect with left me wanting more.
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: 9/11 is a tricky topic. It hasn’t led to a single strong movie or TV show (a couple of minor successes, but let’s be honest, nothing great). I think it has something to do with the inherent melodrama that comes with the territory. It’s almost too sad to write about. And whenever people try and incorporate it, it feels try-hard, maudlin, cliche. I would stay away from it unless you have the greatest can’t miss 9/11 idea ever. But if you’re like, “I have this great idea about a brother and sister trying to pick up the pieces after their dad dies in 9-11”… uh, yeah, don’t write that.
