Genre: Comedy (Stoner)
Premise: After accidentally losing her company’s mascot, an uptight junior food scientist reluctantly enlists the help of her pothead building superintendent and together they battle against a relentless vermin exterminator to recover the missing ferret before her career goes up in smoke.
Why You Should Read: With marijuana being legalized all over the place, it’s a topical subject, plus it has a fresh twist with the ferret angle. Stoners and ferrets go together like macaroni and cheese! I’ve directed several short films featuring ferrets, including a short called DUDE, WHERE’S MY FERRET? that is meant as a teaser for the feature version, featuring Bubbles from The Trailer Park Boys. I also directed THE MAGIC FERRET, which was Jacob Tremblay’s (Room) first leading role. I like working with ferrets because it’s something different than what most people are used to seeing – and I know something about them because I have one as a pet (used to have two, R.I.P. Falcor the Ferret). I think this is a great recipe for a stoner comedy – but we need some help to get it to where it needs to be. I say ‘we’ because I’m the director but not the writer – I found someone to write this for me while I learn the craft. We could highly benefit from a review by Carson and our peers. I’m smishsmosh22 and promise to participate in the comments if we get chosen!
Writer: Tim McS
Details: 93 pages

Dude, where’s my ferret?

It’s fun to say, right? Go ahead, try and say it without smiling.

Like a talking ferret, it’s impossible.

Unless, of course, you believe in talking ferrets. And in that case, you’ll like this script. In fact, one of the first things you’ll realize when reading today’s script is that Tim McS really likes ferrets. No, I mean like really really really likes ferrets. And while we’ve always supported the mantra, “Write what you know,” at what point has that philosophy gone too far???

26 year old Laura Frye is a junior food scientist. That means she designs food to taste better, last longer, or look more interesting. And her latest project is improving the lifespan of a pet food company’s ferret food line. As you might imagine, the CEO of the company, Peterson, is none too pleased with this development. The faster ferret food goes bad, the sooner the customer has to buy more ferret food. So Laura’s invention will lose the company money.

After dropping a couple dozen F-bombs on her, Peterson punishes Laura by assigning her to watch the company ferret (lovingly named “Ferret Bueller”) for the evening and bring him to his big ad photoshoot tomorrow. Ironically, Laura doesn’t even like ferrets. But she waltzes back to her apartment with the ferret and somehow ends up in 25 year-old All-Star stoners, Spoke and Noodle’s apartment.

After accidentally eating their pot cookies, Laura inadvertently lets Ferret Bueller loose. With her job on the line, Laura desperately enlists the help of Spoke and Noodle to find Ferret Bueller, who has since crawled into the walls and is running around the insides of the apartment complex.

Laura and Spoke team up, following the screams from apartment to apartment, while Noodle heads down to the basement, which he seems to think is the best place to find stray animals.

I should mention that Noodle lost his memory in a terrible accident years ago and has no idea who he is. So, of course, he starts seeing hallucinations of Ferret Bueller, who begins talking to him, revealing pieces of his past, from which he finally starts putting together his identity.

Meanwhile, unlikely sparks are flying between Spoke and Laura. She’s educated, driven, and organized. He’s jobless, dumb, and addicted to pot. But if you’re both high, none of that matters. And you can never predict how the search for an elongated rat-animal-thing can bring two people closer. But will they capture that little minx before it’s too late? Dude, read the script to find out!

Hey, I got a joke for you. How did one ferret receive money from another ferret? He inferrited it.

Haha. You get it?

Right.

Anyway, Dude Where’s My Ferret is a surprisingly well-constructed screenplay considering the subject matter. Typically when I read these kinds of wacky comedies, there is zero effort or even understanding of how to add structure to the story. The scripts are usually a series of loosely-connected sketches.

We’ve got some great GSU here (goal, stakes, urgency). Goal – find the ferret. Stakes – Laura’s job. Urgency – the photo shoot. So we’re always clear on what needs to happen and where we are in the story. That’s important. A lot of writers don’t know how to do that, causing their scripts to wander.

It’s a clever little plot too. The fact that we get to chase the ferret through the building allows us to go into the apartments of a varied cast of characters. It was basically a license to go crazy with character, and as anyone who writes comedy knows, crazy/weird/outrageous characters are key. Melissa McCarthy’s character in Bridesmaid’s. Mr. Chow in The Hangover.

I also liked the technologically sophisticated pest exterminator. An exterminator who uses drones to search for his prey – I’d never seen that before. But more importantly, McS was employing a classic storytelling technique. Figure out what your main character wants, then put as many obstacles in front of that “want” as you can. The more creative the obstacle, the better.

So with all this good, why didn’t I love Dude, Where’s My Ferret? Well, to put it plainly, I thought the comedy was too standard. One of my big red flags when it comes to comedy is excessive swearing. It’s not that swearing can’t be funny. With the right character, it can be hilarious. But usually it’s a sign of the writer not being creative enough. A guy who swears a lot (in this case, Peterson, who says “fuck” every other word) tells me, “I’m not willing to put in the effort to come up with genuine thoughtful comedy.”

I mean look at one of the movies this was inspired by – Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. Hilarious movie. Not a single swear word.

If it’s an organic part of the character (for instance, the character has Tourette’s), that’s fine. Otherwise, it’s a signal that you may be reading something where the comedy’s not going to rise above “swearing is funny” level.

Another issue with the comedy here is that it feels dated. These stoner characters could’ve been transplanted right out of a 1980s film. They talk, sound, and act exactly the same as the characters from those movies used to sound.

It’s fine to be inspired by movies from your past. But the difference between creating a movie that’s inspired by old films and movies that feel plain old is taking what worked in those old films then ADDING SOMETHING NEW.

Where’s the “new” in Spoke and Noodle? How have you made their stoner schtick different from past stoner schticks? I’ll give you an example – the movie, “Friday.” That was a movie about potheads, but told in a completely different cultural setting from where we were used to seeing potheads.

So all the spaced-out jokes were crammed up against new environments and fresh problems. In the past when a stoner got high, he ate cereal. In Friday when Ice Cube got high, he ate cereal with water cause they were too poor to buy milk.

That’s what I mean by fresh, and it’s something I discuss here all the time. It doesn’t stop with comedy. You have to ask yourself, “What am I bringing that’s new to the table?” I’m guessing McS would say that the ferret is the new element. But typically the “fresh” component has to be represented by the characters somehow, and that’s not happening here. These characters are exact replicas of 1980s stoner movie characters.

That’s why I read this with an occasional smile, but never laughed out loud (okay, that’s not entirely true. I did laugh at them trying to figure out if the exterminator was actually an “ex-Terminator”).

So moving forward, my suggestion to McS would be to add fresh angles to both Spoke and Noodle to bring them into the year 2016. I don’t know if you need to change their culture, their race, their ages, their sexual preference, but it has to be something. 25 year old white stoners is the most “first choice” of choices a writer can make, and therefore shows a lack of creativity.

Next, push yourself with the comedy. A lot of these jokes feel safe, and a bit dated to be honest. Again, it seems like you’re writing a comedy spec from the year 1988. You’ve got to modernize this somehow. Make it feel current. Or else I’m afraid people are going to label you with the dreaded “dated” tag like I just did.

With that said, losing a ferret in a building is funny. And while I’m not the biggest fan of stoner comedies, this is a prime situation to add pot to. So I think you have a foundation to build on. Oh, and I agree with that commenter who said you should change your title. You don’t want to use a variation of a mildly successful 10 year old movie title. Distinguish yourself. Show that you’re original by coming up with an original title. Good luck!

Script link: Dude, Where’s My Ferret

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

What I learned: One of the best ways to avoid cliche characters is to ask yourself, “What kind of person would never be this cliche?” What this does is it places you on the other end of the spectrum as far as stereotyping, opening up new avenues to create unique characters. Stoners are one of the most cliche character-types out there. So ask yourself, “What kind of person is never a stoner?” A businessman with his shit together. An intensely religious person. A police officer. You don’t have to choose any of these but they’re great starting points for going against the grain and coming up with somebody original.

One of the most important skills in a screenwriter’s tool bag is being able to convey a character’s attributes through action. So if you want to show that a character is a dick, show him kicking a dog. If you want to show that a girl is kind, show her holding the door open for an old lady.

Where this skill becomes truly powerful, though, is when you use it to highlight a character’s fatal flaw. This combination not only has the power to tell the audience what kind of person your character is, but also highlight the thing that’s holding them back in life, and therefore the weakness they will need to overcome by the end of the movie.

Weak or inexperienced writers try and sell these flaws through dialogue. So if their hero’s flaw is that they don’t believe in themselves, they’ll make sure that character utters the words, “I just don’t think I’m good enough.” Or “I don’t believe I have what it takes.” Not only is this on-the-nose. It’s lazy. If you want to be a power writer, find an action to sell that flaw. A good example is Neo in The Matrix. Whether he’s fighting Morpheus in the dojo or about to jump between buildings, his demeanor is fear. He’s not sure he can do it. That action (or non-action) tells us he doesn’t believe in himself yet.

I’ve figured out a few things about conveying flaws over the years. In comedies and animation, we’ll see flaws expressed through action right when we meet our hero. The first moment we meet Stu in The Hangover, he’s being pushed around by his wife. The first moment we meet Joy in Inside Out, she’s obsessed with everyone being happy. Because these genres tend to celebrate the extremes, being more “in your face” with actions is acceptable.

However, once we get into more dramatic films, writers tend to take their time, exposing flaws gradually and subtly over a series of scenes. Going back to The Matrix, we don’t know that Neo doesn’t believe in himself for awhile. We spend some time getting to know his daily life first, and the Wachowskis drop hints here and there, but we don’t really know that that’s his issue until we get to his training.

I’ve also found that certain flaws are more “actionable” than others. For example, selfishness is a popular flaw in modern cinema at least partly due to how easy it is to convey through action. All you have to do is show Han Solo decline an invitation to do something for the betterment of the group and we know he’s selfish. Ditto with arrogance or stubbornness or envy. These are very “actionable” flaws.

The REAL writers out there can express even the toughest “non-actionable” flaws through action. And that’s today’s challenge. I want you to write a scene – it can be about anything – but you must convey the main character’s fatal flaw through an action. What’s the flaw in question? The character is emotionally distant. They don’t make emotional connections with anybody. Oh, and did I mention that the scene had to be entertaining? Yeah, that’s the thing with screenwriting. Just pulling off one thing in a scene isn’t enough. You have to do it while entertaining the audience.

Hey, I warned you this would be hard. So write out your scenes in the comments. Upvote your favorites. I’ll give a shout-out to the winner tomorrow. Good luck!

Guys, the submissions have to get better. I cycled through 75 submissions in a row at one point and not a single idea showed promise. Ideas either weren’t big enough, had no inherent stakes attached, or were unfocused to the point that I didn’t understand what the movie was about. If you’ve submitted to Amateur Offerings in the distant past and never got picked, it may have been because you got lost in the shuffle, not that your premise was rejected. So re-submit (carsonreeves3@gmail – include title, genre, logline, why we should read, and a PDF of the script). We need a better pool of scripts to choose from. P.S. If your script isn’t getting chosen, feel free to post the logline in the comments and ask for help. Just remember that the primary duty for today is to read and vote for your favorite script. Good luck.

Title: The Ballad of Will Scarlet
Genre: Action/historical
Logline: An older Will Scarlet leads the woodsmen of Sherwood Forest, protecting the lands from the sociopathic Robin Hood. Their frayed bonds are tested when the Sheriff of Nottingham hires a legend to rid history of Robin once and for all.
Why You Should Read: I’ve written and directed some short films and standalone TV projects, directed some commercials, got some moderate festival play, in all likelihood nothing you’ve seen. Professionally, I know just enough to tie my own noose. I also teach filmmaking on occasion, and as some of my students are now making features that are getting decent buzz and international distribution, I don’t feel my path is idly travelled. I have no complaints about being a Mr. Holland. — So, with all this on my mind, I figured I’d take a big ol’ swing for the bleachers with the first feature-length screenplay I’ve written in quite a few moons. Also, I’m deeply concerned about the dwindling supply in the National Strategic Reserve of Robin Hood spec screenplays and figured I should do my part.
Two things I’ve long found fascinating about the Robin Hood mythos are the elasticity of its timeframe before it was codified as being of the era of King Richard I, and the extremely brutal nature of some of the early Robin Hood ballads. This was the starting point for what I hope is an involving and idiosyncratic spin on the Robin Hood story.

Title: The Wrong Stuff
Genre: Family Comedy
Logline: A terminally uncool Dad accepts a mistaken invitation into NASA’s astronaut training program, believing it will redeem him in the eyes of his son, but sadly unaware of how much it will test him.
Why You Should Read: I think this will be a good example of the power of a great, simple concept. In the comments for Carson’s review of Pale Blue Dot, Scott Crawford jokingly suggested the title, The Wrong Stuff. I think it’s a brilliant title, but for another story. Why? Because it says so much in just three words. It immediately conjures up images of space flight training and daring test pilots, but the juxtaposition created by the word ‘Wrong’ suggests the irony of a trainee who is totally unsuited for the training. We can immediately picture some scenes: Imagine the G-force training centrifuge with a shit-scared passenger screaming his head off. — So the title leads to the concept which easily lead to the premise in the logline above. — And that ease continued into the planning and writing. I had way more material than I could use, so it allowed me to keep just the good stuff. (Hopefully I’ve done the material justice.) But I can say that though this is an early draft, it is easily better than anything else I’ve ever written.

Title: Dude, Where’s My Ferret?
Genre: Stoner Comedy
Logline: After accidentally losing her company’s mascot, an uptight junior food scientist reluctantly enlists the help of her pothead building superintendent and together they battle against a relentless vermin exterminator to recover the missing ferret before her career goes up in smoke.
Why You Should Read: With marijuana being legalized all over the place, it’s a topical subject, plus it has a fresh twist with the ferret angle. Stoners and ferrets go together like macaroni and cheese! I’ve directed several short films featuring ferrets, including a short called DUDE, WHERE’S MY FERRET? that is meant as a teaser for the feature version, featuring Bubbles from The Trailer Park Boys. I also directed THE MAGIC FERRET, which was Jacob Tremblay’s (Room) first leading role. I like working with ferrets because it’s something different than what most people are used to seeing – and I know something about them because I have one as a pet (used to have two, R.I.P. Falcor the Ferret). I think this is a great recipe for a stoner comedy – but we need some help to get it to where it needs to be. I say ‘we’ because I’m the director but not the writer – I found someone to write this for me while I learn the craft. We could highly benefit from a review by Carson and our peers. I’m smishsmosh22 and promise to participate in the comments if we get chosen!

Title: Hard Copy
Genre: Drama
Logline: In 1994, a narcissistic co-host of a tabloid news show struggles to keep his job and life from unraveling as a young challenger emerges touting a new form of media, the internet.
Why You Should Read: Look, this is a bit of a tough sell based on the logline, I know that. It’s my eighteenth script, and I’ve been writing for eight years now, so the pressure is starting to mount, especially with this one. I wanted to write a drama that was big enough for the screens I hope to see it on. I wrote it the way I felt it needed to be written, and I took chances whenever possible. Honestly, it was time to stop writing handcuffed and just trust that I know what I’m doing. Hopefully, you’ll enjoy this, and I look forward to all the notes. Good luck to everybody and thank you!

Title: The Odd Symphony
Genre: Comedy
Logline: An aspiring conductor who’s fallen on hard times starts a revolution by uniting New York’s various street performers into a misfit symphony.
Why You Should Read: This script was on the top of the blacklist for a long while (not the main blacklist but the web version). This is a funny, sad, uplifting, overly ambitious romantic, slightly expensive…independent film. A number of directors have courted this project and right now Trish Sie who directed all those wonderful OkGo viral movies is the latest suitor.

I recently submitted one of my TV pilots. I have written a ton of stuff over the years. I developed, wrote, and sold an adaptation of Kurt Busiek’s award winning comic book Astro City a few years back to Working Title. I am now back on the market with another comic book adaptation for Johnny Depp’s company. I have written 13 films and 5 or 6 pilots. The Odd Symphony is one of my favorites.

Today we’re going to explore one of the most important components in the craft of screenwriting – visual storytelling. If you can master this part of the craft, you’ll have seriously leveled up. That’s no joke. The best writers tend to be the ones who consistently convey things visually.

Why is this? Because ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. The action of an unexpected kiss will always be more interesting than two lovers talking about how much they like one another. The action of a character turning his gun away from his enemy and towards his friend will always be more interesting than him telling his friend he’s betraying him.

Visual storytelling can be broken down into four components.

Action
Framing
Choice
Creativity

The heart of the visual scene is action. Instead of a character saying something, see if you can achieve the same thing with an action. So instead of a character saying, “You look cold,” have him take his coat off and hand it to the other character.

Framing is the process by which you re-frame what would typically be a dialogue scene and turn it into something that can be conveyed through action. So let’s say you’ve thought up this big blowout break-up scene outside of a night club. To write this same scene visually, why not put it in the night club? The noise will force you to show the breakup through actions.

Choice is like action on crack. You give your character a choice (or a series of choices) and those choices give us insight into the character (as well as push the scene forward). At the end of Nightcrawler, Jake Gyllenhaal’s character comes upon a murder where the victim is still barely alive. Does he call an ambulance or get the footage that’s going to net him his biggest payday yet? That choice is what makes the scene so compelling.

Creativity is the final piece of the puzzle. Come up with a neat or inventive way to visually tell your story. I’ll never forget one of the commenters bringing up Ben Kingsley’s movie, You Kill Me, where Kingsley played an alcoholic. To show this, the movie opens with Kingsley shoveling snow while drinking a bottle of vodka. He’d toss the bottle a few feet forward in the snow, shovel to it, take a drink, toss it a few more feet, shovel to it, take another drink, and so on.

999 out of 1000 writers would’ve shown the character in a bar getting cut off at the end of the night, or waking up on their couch with an empty liquor bottle nearby (and a bad headache). This writer’s desire to push beyond the obvious, to be creative, led to a way more interesting visual scene.

Now what you may notice is that a lot of great visual scenes have dialogue in them as well. The climactic scene of Luke blowing up the Death Star isn’t dialogue free. We see him make the choice to use the Force instead of his targeting system, but it still contains some discussion with the base. And that’s fine. Dialogue and action are teammates, fighting the same opponent, trying to win the same game.

All I’m saying is that scenes tend to be more interesting when they’re first approached visually. And if the scene still feels incomplete after that, you can always sprinkle dialogue in where it’s needed. If you only ever see a scene through the words the characters speak, you’re probably writing a lot of boring scenes.

Okay, now time for today’s scene challenge. In this pretend movie, our main characters, Claire and Nick, are a married couple who have been together for 20 years. But that’s not where we start. We start on the day they met, where Nick spots Claire on the street and is instantly smitten with her. I want you to show us, in a single scene, how Claire fell in love with Nick that day. Not just, “Oh, he’s cute, I’ll go on a date with him.” She has to FALL IN LOVE with him right then and there.

You don’t have to use anything I taught you today. You can make up your own visual rules. The only stipulation is that the scene can’t have any dialogue. Write your scene in the comments below and make sure to up-vote your favorites! Winner gets a shout-out tomorrow and Scriptshadow brownie points. Good luck!

Congrats to Paul Schellens! Who yesterday won the “Introductory Character Scene” Contest. Really good scene – did everything I asked for. Was even clever enough to use a scene I’d previously suggested, which always gets you points. :) Nice job, Paul!

Genre: Horror, Thriller
Premise: After accepting a gig to craft a demon mask, a makeup effects artist must protect her and her daughter from her abusive husband and the sinister forces that stalk them.
Why You Should Read: I’m not a mother but I want to be (eventually). I also want to be a paid screenwriter, proficient Japanese speaker, dog owner and in another life, Cirque du Soleil performer. What most people know (especially in this industry), is it’s really hard to find balance and sometimes you must sacrifice something to get your heart’s desire.
Besides that idea, I wanted to pair movie horror with the real horror of domestic violence. I researched, googled and trolled forums to craft my story. It wasn’t until after a reading when a woman approached me that I realized I was telling her story. It hurt to hear her share her accounts of abuse that she’d mostly kept to herself. I hope if anything this story inspires people to take control of their own lives.
Details: 103 pages (updated draft from last week)

Let’s get Emily Blunt in here for this one!

Guys, I’ve been doing this for awhile now. So please stop. Stop trying to game the system. It’s not just a bad idea here at Scriptshadow. It’s a bad idea for your pursuit of success in this business. If your script didn’t get the requisite number of votes to win a review, read the comments and figure out what the problems were. This is one of the only places on the internet where you can do that. So take advantage of it.

I love self-promotion. It’s a huge under-talked-about element of this business. But self-promotion cannot prop up subpar writing. You have to get the writing part down before you blitz the world with your work. But how do you know when you’re ready, you ask. That’s a bit harder to determine. But Scriptshadow is a great place to start. If legitimate people aren’t voting for your script and if those same people are agreeing on common issues, accept that you have some work to do and then go get the work done. There are no shortcuts here. So stop trying to create them.

Okay, I don’t want to take away the spotlight from the true winner the week, Devil’s Workshop, so let’s get to it! Note that I’m reading a newer draft than the one you guys read, I’m guessing because Katherine incorporated a few of your suggestions.

Serena Berkin is in an abusive relationship in every sense of the word. At the center of the abuse is her husband’s, Isaac, desire to have a child, something Serena has been secretly preventing by taking birth control pills.

But when Isaac discovers her secret, he eliminates that problem and the two end up having a daughter. Flash forward nine years where the bulk of our story takes place. Serena is now a struggling make-up artist secretly using the money she makes from jobs to save up so she and her daughter, Charlotte, can get out of this dungeon of a marriage.

So Serena takes a job on a low-budget film that needs a demon character quickly. As she starts creating this demon, strange things start happening around the house, such as Charlotte talking to people when no one is around and waking up with strange bruises on her body.

At first Serena assumes that the culprit is Isaac. But when Isaac is sent to jail, Serena notices that Charlotte’s strange behavior and mysterious injuries continue. In comes Isaac’s mother, a rich old hag who would stick up for her son if she found out he was one of the 9/11 terrorists. She’s convinced that it’s Serena abusing the child, and begins proceedings to gain custody of Charlotte.

In the meantime, as Serena continues to create this monster, stranger and stranger things begin happening, such as the actor cast to play the demon taking on the persona of the monster when he wears the suit. Is he just method acting? Or could this be something more?

Serena holds off on the assumption that this suit could actually be demonic until the evidence is too strong to ignore. But by that time, there are so many people closing in on her, trying to steal the daughter she, ironically, never wanted in the first place, that this demon may be the least of her worries.

Wow, this was a good script!

I really only have one major complaint, and it’s the opening scene. The scene shows our main character, Serena, secretly taking birth control pills, her husband discovering her, and then him pinning her against the wall. We then see: “9 YEARS LATER.”

I bring this up because I see it a lot. The starting-off-with-a-flashback scene that isn’t big enough to necessitate a major time jump afterwards. Look, it’s a good scene. Our main character is discovered pulling off some shady shit by her abusive husband.

But that’s not a “CUT TO 9 YEARS LATER” opening scene. If you’re going to cut to 9 years later, you have to hit us with something huge in that opener. Somebody needs to die. Something utterly unforgettable needs to happen.

A couple of weeks ago we had “American Witch,” which started with a group of people carrying a witch into the caves and burying her alive as she stuck an acorn up her vagina which we then watched grow over the next 100 years. THAT’S a scene worthy of jumping forward in time after. This is just a normal well-written scene.

But after that, the script gets good. Katherine does a really nice job of building an emotional core into her story. Sure, this is about a demon suit that may or may not be associated with the devil. But it’s also about a woman who’s trying to protect her child from an abusive husband.

And what’s cool about The Devil’s Workshop is that it isn’t straightforward. It’s not black and white. I loved that this is a daughter Serena never wanted. And now, ironically, she’ll do anything to protect said daughter against the man who DID want her.

Another thing I want to touch on is originality. Look, we’re all trying to come up with that premise that nobody’s heard of before. That’s what turns heads in Hollywood. But it’s hard to find anything original when you’re competing against 100 years of film.

Lucky for writers, there’s a “next best thing.” Which is a world or a job that not many people know about. In this case, that’s a make-up artist. The reason this still works is because a lot of what you’re going to be writing about are things that the average person doesn’t know about. Which means your script is going to feel “new” and “fresh.” And that’s exactly how I felt here. Sure, we’ve seen plenty of horror films like this. But not from a make-up artist’s point of view. So that was fun.

Katherine wraps all this up by writing about something she cares about, that she’s emotionally invested in – abuse and the power of standing up to it, of getting out of it. Never underestimate the power of something you care deeply about. It comes out in the writing and it turns your script from just another horror flick or just another thriller flick, into something that hits people on a gut level. And that’s how you write a screenplay that stays with someone. You hit’em in the gut.

I really liked this. The only other change I’d suggest is possibly making Isaac more three-dimensional. You want to be careful not to make your villains too villain-y. Isaac coming home and calling his wife’s make-up work garbage is a bit on-the nose. What if that’s what he loved about her? Her artistry? That would make him even more fucked up that he’d be able to go from that to beating her.

Just a thought. But in the end, these problems were minor compared to the script’s strengths.

Script link (new draft): The Devil’s Workshop

[ ] what the hell did I just read?

[ ] wasn’t for me 

[xx] worth the read

[ ] impressive

[ ] genius

What I learned: Everybody says, “Write what you know,” but then you have writers who all they do is play video games all day, so they write about a character who plays video games all day. “Write what you know!” they defend their script with. Uhh, no not really.

So today, I’m going to make two addendums to this famous piece of advice.

1) Write about the most interesting thing you know.
2) Package your “write what you know” idea inside a marketable premise or genre.

Let’s say you’re a housewife. You could write a story about being a houswife because you know it well. But is there enough to work with there? Is it that interesting? Probably not. But being a make-up artist? That’s a pretty unique job with some potentially interesting avenues to explore. I’d pick that over a housewife in a second.

Next, create a marketable component around your “write what you know” subject matter. For example, Katherine could’ve written a drama about a make-up artist who’s in a custody battle with her child. But that’s not going to sell tickets. Instead, she placed her subject matter in one of the most marketable genres in the movie business – horror. And the result is something that could actually be a movie. Well done!