The short story sale only took 45 years to happen

Genre: Dystopian/Sci-Fi Adjacent
Premise: 100 teen boys participate in an annual event that forces them to do a death walk until there is only one left.
About: Okay, I’m cheating a little. This isn’t technically a short story. But it’s a short story in Stephen King Language, as the man is known for writing 700 page novels. Technically, he would call this a novella. King also wrote this under his fake author doppelgänger, which King invented once he became too popular and figured everyone was buying his books regardless of whether they were good or not. He wanted to challenge himself and see if he still had it as an author, which is why he invented Bachman. The Long Walk, which is 45 years old at this point, was purchased by Lionsgate and will have Hunger Games director Francis Lawrence direct. The film was almost made twice before, once by George A. Romero and once by Frank Darabont.
Writer: Richard Bachman (Stephen King)
Details: (1979) A little under 250 pages, hardcover.

I’ve decided that I’m going to do a Short Story Showdown at some point this year. I’m not sure when but it will probably be June or July. So start coming up with that short story concept because we can’t deny what the current trend is, which is short stories, short stories, short stories.

If I could give you one piece of short story advice, come up with a big idea. Think “high concept” even more so than you would a script. Cause a lot of these short stories are a quarter the size of a screenplay. So you don’t really have time to put your characters through some complex arc. It’s more about a sexy idea that’s going to generate interest in potential moviegoers.

The Long Walk is a great example of this. It’s all about the idea. Let’s see if it offers us anything else.

16 year-old Ray Garraty was chosen to be one of the contestants for The Long Walk, a yearly competition where thousands of boys enter their names in a hat for a chance to compete for the grand prize – all the money you need for the rest of your life. Only 100 names are chosen and Ray is one.

No sooner do we meet Ray than the walk begins! The rules are simple. You have to keep up a pace of 4 miles per hour. If you don’t, you get a warning. You get three warnings total. The fourth time, they shoot you. As in, THEY KILL YOU. The last remaining person to be walking is the winner.

Ray immediately teams up with a guy named Peter McVries. Whereas Ray is more of a wholesome chap, Peter’s got an edge to him. It feels like he’s hiding a few secrets inside that noggin of his. But Peter seems to be as supportive of Ray as he is himself. The two lean on each other a lot as the first contestants “buy their ticket” (Long Walk code for “shot dead”).

The story doesn’t deviate much. It leans into the long grueling competition of trying to keep walking when you’re tired, when you get a Charlie horse, when you get a cramp, when you’re bored, when you get blisters on top of your blisters, when your shoes come apart, when your body wants to give in. Many a contestant tries to game the system – run into the crowd to escape, thinking the guards won’t possibly shoot at them. But it never works. The crowd wants to see them die so they push them back to allow the guards a clear shot.

15 miles turns into 20. 20 to 50. 50 to 100. Days go by. 5 of them in all. Somehow, some way, Ray keeps going. At a certain point, it’s just Peter and Ray. (Spoiler) But then Peter can’t go on. He’s too exhausted. Which means Ray is going to win. When Peter is shot, that’s exactly what we think. It’s over. But did Peter lose count? Is there another player he must outlast? Or is that player death himself? Is Peter even in the game anymore?

A few of you are probably asking, “Why’d you pick this to read, Carson?” Here’s why. The Hollywood system is so obsessed with the word “no,” due to the fact that it keeps them from having to make a decision, that when they finally say “Yes” to something, it’s a really big deal. It’s so hard for any executive to say yes because they know, once they do, that project could go horribly bad and, if it does, they’ll be fired. It’s probably the best view into an exec’s mind you’re going to get. Committing to anything is so daunting that there HAS TO BE SOMETHING SPECIAL about that project for them to say yes to it.

But if I’m being honest with you, the real reason I chose to read this as opposed to a script that sold or a script that made the Black List, is that I knew it was going to be entertaining. King has his storytelling faults. But his stories always place “entertaining the reader” first. So I know I’m going to enjoy the experience of reading The Long Walk.

I’ve read too many scripts to know that most writers don’t prioritize entertainment when writing a story. They’re writing for their own egotistical reasons. Or they’re trying to write something that’s taken seriously. Or they think that readers will stay with them for thirty pages of setup to get to the good stuff.

All King thinks about is the reader. That’s why he’s the most well-known living author. If every writer could take in just a quarter of that desire that King has to entertain people, their scripts and stories would be so much better.

And that’s exactly what happened. I was entertained from the jump.

I mean, do you know how quickly we get to the walk here? Within the first ONE PERCENT of the story! That’s how determined King is to entertain. He knows why you bought this book and he’s going to deliver on that promise. This is especially important with short stories. Not only do you need a high concept premise. But you need to get into that premise faster than when you’re writing a script.

What’s interesting here is that the entertainment comes at us in an unorthodox way. I’m not surprised at all that George Romero was once attached to this because the deaths here aren’t fast and furious. They work more like zombie deaths, where they come slowly. The people involved realize minutes, sometimes hours, ahead of time, that their death is coming. This makes the deaths more realistic, intense, and emotional.

When one kid tells Ray that he’s got a cramp and he’s looking to Ray for help, Ray looks back at him like, “I can’t do anything for you.” And the realization this kid has that nobody can help him is devastating.

That’s the majority of the book. King introduces us to kids along the way, tells us just enough about them to get us to care, then kills them off later on.

Another thing I liked about this story was the rules.

As with any sci-fi (or sci-fi adjacent) story, you have to have rules. Where so many writers screw up is they make their rules too complicated. Or they have too many of them. Or both. Note how simple the rules are here. You have to keep up a 4mph pace. You get three warnings. On the fourth, they shoot you. That’s it! For some reason, writers think that they’re not getting enough out of their story if the rules are simple. So they invent all these complicated rules. But the opposite is true. When the reader easily understands the rules, all they have to do is enjoy the story. They don’t have to constantly rack their brain to remember a + z = q.

Another great lesson you can take from this story is how impossible King makes it feel. With every script you write, you need to make the goal as impossible-feeling as you can AS EARLY as you can.

Ray is not dead tired on mile 97 when there are 3 kids left. He’s dead tired on mile 20 with 97 kids left. That’s how to make the reader wonder, “How in the world is he going to last?” And if the reader is asking that question, I guarantee they’ll keep turning the pages. It’s only when there are no questions left to answer, or the answers to the questions are obvious, that the reader stops reading.

The story does have narrative limitations. It starts to get monotonous since there’s only one thing to do. And I thought that King could’ve done more with the Ray and Peter friendship. If he could’ve made us love this friendship, like he did the kids in Stand By Me, their final walk together would’ve been a lot more emotional. And then, the ending needs work. You could tell King didn’t know how to end this. Luckily, there are options here, starting with strengthening that friendship.

Overall, a solid story that should be a good, but not great, movie.

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

What I learned: A sound strategy for screenwriting is to see what the hot new trend is and go back through your finished scripts to see if you have anything similar. You can do this starting from scratch (writing a brand new script) as well. But trends are finicky. They can last a year. They can last five years. So any sort of head start is preferable. There’s no doubt in my mind that this story got purchased due to the success of Squid Game. And, to be fair, it’s been a while since that show came out. Regardless of that, the quicker you can move on a trend, the better. So if you have that old abandoned spec that is similar to the hot new thing, dust it off, give it a quick rewrite, and get it out there!

I tell you how The Beekeeper script sold for a million bucks and share with you some screenwriting lessons from Anatomy of a Fall and Self-Reliance

January is always a funky month in the box office schedule. It used to be a dumping ground for studio movies that tested terribly but, these days, if you have a marketable movie, fun things can happen. Which is why Mean Girls pulled in north of 30 million bucks this weekend.

A lot has been made of the fact that Mean Girls hid that it was a musical in order to get more people to show up. This strategy has always baffled me (they did it with Wonka as well). If you know people don’t want to show up to a musical, why did you make a musical?

Cause neither of these films needed to be musicals. They each would’ve worked as regular movies. I’m guessing in the case of Wonka, it was to get Timothee Chalamet on board. These vain actors are all about proving how versatile they are. So if Chalamet is offered ten common roles and one musical, he’s going to take the musical. Cause that’s the one where he gets to prove the most. So maybe they did it to get him and then began their crusade to convince the rest of the world that they weren’t actually making a musical.

Whatever decisions led to keeping Mean Girls’ dirty little secret, I’m not sure it mattered. Mean Girls is a classic film. It’s still referenced today. So it did well for the same reasons that most franchises do well these days – nostalgia.

The movie I was keeping closer tabs on was The Beekeeper. I reviewed the script last year and loved it. Kurt Wimmer is one of my favorite spec script writers. There are few screenwriters who know how to make readers turn the page better than him.

His process is a strange one, too. He writes 12 screenplays a year – a new one every month. And then he just keeps his ear to the ground on what people are looking for. If an opportunity comes up (his agent calls and says Gerard Butler really wants to make a helicopter film), he goes through his giant script database to see if he’s got a helicopter script.

The way this project came together – and I know this cause Kurt told me – is that Kurt had a previous relationship with Jason Statham and Statham had just gone through a major upheaval with his representation. He fired his agents and managers. He then called Kurt and said, “Do you got anything for me?” And Kurt had just finished The Beekeeper. Statham loved the sound of it and he was in.

I think the reason it’s doing solid business and that audiences are really liking it is that there’s nothing else out there like it. It’s kinda weird. It’s kinda silly. Yet it has this hardcore action component. It really is its own thing. Which is something I tell all writers – you have to give us a script that differentiates itself from all the other scripts out there. You can’t expect to write Type 1 concepts and get people excited.

Will Beekeeper become a franchise? If so, it has to pull off what John Wick did. Not a ton of people saw John Wick when it first hit theaters. It took off once it came to digital. That told Lionsgate that there was a big audience for the film, which is why they gambled on a bigger budget sequel. When that did well, each successive film budget got higher.

Cause, right now, The Beekeeper can’t compete on an action level with John Wick 4 or Fast and Furious. It doesn’t have the budget. To get that budget, it needs to perform like gangbusters on streaming. That’s probably the template for anyone wanting to build a franchise from scratch these days. It’s not like The Matrix anymore, where you become a franchise the first movie out. You have to build that audience.

I watched a couple of movies this past week, each of which provided screenplay lessons. The first was Anatomy of a Fall, which is a big awards contender. It’s a French movie that follows this married writer who lives with her husband and blind 12 year old son out in the middle of nowhere.

One day the husband’s dead body ends up in front of the house and it’s unclear whether he accidentally fell from the third floor, purposely jumped to commit suicide, or if his wife, our protagonist, attacked and pushed him off. The majority of the movie takes place in a courtroom where the prosecution tries to prove that she murdered her husband.

First of all, the movie’s fun to watch if only to see how the French court system works. It’s so bizarre and different from American court. It’s a lot more theatrical. You can’t believe that that’s how they really try people for murder.

But, beyond that, the movie is a failure (spoilers follow) due to the fact that they never tell you if she murdered him or not. If you’re going to build your entire premise around the question of did a woman kill or not kill her husband, then NOT GIVING US THAT ANSWER is cowardly.

You’re a coward because you were afraid to make a creative choice. I say this not just because of this movie. But because I see it all the time in screenwriting. A writer builds their entire story around a question, then doesn’t give the reader the answer. In their minds, they are being artistically courageous. Only hacky mainstream Hollywood movies answer questions, they reason. “Real” movies, movies with “artistic merit,” are vague and ambiguous. They allow the audience to come to their own conclusions.

Bulls#$%.

You can tell yourself that. But what you really are is spineless. You see, if you fashion yourself an “artist,” you can’t give your script a Hollywood ending. So you can’t give us the mainstream answer, which is that she didn’t murder her husband.

However, since there are only two options here – she did or didn’t do it – you know that the jaded readers will find the other avenue just as cliche. In other words, if you say that she did it, the “cool kids” in the audience will roll their eyes and say, “Of course she did. We saw that coming from a mile away.”

So your solution is to not give us any answer.  “You figure it out,” you say.

Let me make something clear to you. If you are offloading the work that YOU SHOULD BE DOING and making the reader do it instead, you’re not being an artist.  You’re just afraid to make a choice.

Is making a choice going to make some people unhappy? Of course. But it’s your job as a writer to write with conviction. Stand behind your choices. Write towards something you want to say. Don’t make the audience do the work for you. That’s lame. Because I know this writer knows if she killed her husband. They were just afraid to share that truth. That’s unacceptable.

Another movie I watched this weekend was a film on Hulu called Self-Reliance. Jake Johnson writes and stars in the movie. I’m a Johnson fan because he’s from Chicago (where I’m from) and there’s not one person I know who better looks and acts like a Chicagoan than Jake Johnson. Sometimes, when he speaks, I feel like I’m listening to myself.

The movie follows a guy with a boring job whose 15-year girlfriend broke up with him so he moves back in with his mother. Then, one day, he’s approached by some people who tell him he’s been chosen for a game. The game is a dark web game where he’ll be remotely recorded and people will try and kill him. If he can survive for 30 days without getting killed, he wins a million dollars.

He decides to join the game because of a small loophole in the rules which states that he can’t be killed as long as he’s with somebody. So he figures, I’ll just keep someone next to me the whole 30 days.  As it turns out, being physically within someone’s presence 24 hours a day isn’t as easy as it seems.

A few people e-mailed me after my Concept Post on Thursday and asked, “Is it possible to write a low-budget Type 2 concept?” And the answer is, “Yes.”  To quote the late great Montell Jordan: “This is how you do it.” This story is built around a game where you’re trying to avoid assassins for a dark web audience. It doesn’t get any more high concept than that.

Unfortunately, this script is an example of what happens when a newbie writer makes a movie. I know that Johnson has writing credits on a few other films but, from what I understand, those were improvised acting movies where the director gave him a writing credit cause he was making up his dialogue as he went along. Here, he’s actually writing a script.

Where newbies often go astray is that their tone bounces around too much. Here, we have this dark heavy game. But then later, when he teams up with another female player, it turns into a lighthearted romantic comedy. You can’t do that in screenwriting. You gotta pick a lane.

Actually, let me rephrase that. Anything’s possible. As I pointed out earlier, The Beekeeper is equal parts intense and silly. But The Beekeeper was written by a 30 year professional screenwriter who’s literally written 100+ screenplays. You have to go through the trenches to know how to balance tone. If you’re new to this, trying to fit wildly different tones into the same script is the equivalent of riding a roller coaster standing up. Loopdie-loop?  More like loopdie-dead.

In this case, had Jake committed to that darker tone, it would’ve taken a 6 out of 10 movie, which is how IMDB currently rates it, to an 8 out of 10. Cause I was into the movie when it was dark and unpredictable. The second it became a rom-com, my interest nose-dived. So it’s not just about matching tone. It’s about sticking to the story you promised the reader you would tell.

Then again, this is that weird movie month where up is down and north is south. So it might be worth checking out if you liked the sound of the premise. I STILL haven’t watched Holdovers. That’s going to be my next one. Oh, and Sisu. A few people have told me that one was good.

Two quick reminders before I go.

CHOOSE THE CONCEPT FOR THE SCRIPT YOU’RE GOING TO WRITE BEFORE THURSDAY. We’re going to start the outlining process.

Also, this is another reminder that January Logline Showdown is January 25th. So get those loglines to me before then!

One of the biggest short story sales of 2023!

Genre: Thriller
Premise: An American negotiator in London is called in to help deal with a unique situation – a construction worker is stuck on top of an old World War 2 bomb, which could detonate in response to the slightest movement.
About: This is the big flashy short story sale that happened recently, which landed Ridley Freaking Scott as director. Ridley Scott, who’s making Gladiator movies, for goodness sake, is not easy to lock down into a director role, especially at 85, when he only has so many bites at the apple left. So to say my anticipation levels for this one are soaring would be an understatement.
Writer: Kevin McMullin
Details: 5250 words. I know this because the writer tells us that on the first page. Will this now become the standard for short stories? (An average script is 22,000 words)

I have one question for you. Are you on the short story train yet?

Cause the train is moving people. It’s zipping and zapping its way around Hollywood – down through Culver City into the Sony Lot, up Highland before stopping at Paramount, over to Pico to give all the Fox Studio execs high fives, before muscling up the 101 into the Valley to visit all the valley girl studios.

Someone asked me the other day, “Is the spec script dead?” I said, “No! It’s just morphed into the spec short story.” And here’s the trick that writers are starting to get wise to – when you send your short story out there, you sell it with the stipulation that you get to write the first draft. Which means – if you’re paying attention – you ARE selling a spec script. You’re actually selling it before it’s written. Which means you’re a screenwriting time machine. That’s so much cooler than being a boring spec script writer.

Fear not, script purists. The short story craze does not mean you should drop all your screenwriting aspirations. The industry still needs screenwriters. They can’t live without them. So you should still be writing scripts that wow people so that you can get hired to write all those other projects Hollywood wants to make.

Today, however, we’re doing another short story dance. So throw on your dance shoes and join me. I’ll lead.

American Francis Ipolito, a negotiator, is getting married in the UK over the weekend. He’s staying alone in his hotel room the night before the wedding. That is until his best friend and best man, FBI officer Dwight, calls him and tells him to check the news. Francis does and sees that Piccadilly Circus (London’s Times Square) is cleared out.

In a dug-up construction area, a construction worker is standing on top of an old World War 2 bomb. These bombs are known to be delicate. Even the slightest move could detonate them. So the man is frozen. Less than ten minutes later, a UK government official shows up at Francis’s hotel and says to come with him. Francis says, “Only if my buddy Dwight can join me.”

Once at the bomb site, Ministry of Defense Aoife Greggor tells Dwight to beat it and informs Francis that the whole World War 2 bomb thing was a lie. They put that out there for the press. The real deal is that the construction worker BUILT THIS GIANT BOMB he’s standing on top of and has demanded to talk with Francis.

Francis heads over to the Piccadilly construction site, with no idea of who this dude is, only to learn that he’s his fiancé’s ex-husband! Francis is called back to base, where he’s then informed that his buddy, Dwight, was given clearance to join a UK reconnaissance team charged with clearing the surrounding buildings.

Their first building they’re clearing is actually the one Dwight happened to be staying in via Air BnB. Francis freaks out, tells them to get the team out of there as soon as possible. But it’s too late. We hear a big BOOOOM. Dwight is now dead from a second bomb that the bomber planted earlier. Francis turns to Aoife: ‘How many bombs are there?’ The End.

I kid you not. That’s the end of the story.

I sensed something was off with this one right away.

The writing was clunkier than a ride in a square-wheeled wagon. I was constantly having to go back and re-read things to properly understand them. Even then, I didn’t always get what had been written.

This caused me to lose confidence in the writer as the story went on. For that reason, I knew it wasn’t going to deliver. But what I didn’t know was how spectacularly it would fail to deliver. I mean this isn’t just a bad short story. This is bad everything.

I don’t want to be mean because it isn’t the writer’s fault that his story sold and nabbed one of the best directors in the business. But with that success, readers are going to go into this with high expectations. And man, let me tell, this is not the kind of story you want people reading with high expectations. You want them going in with subterranean expectations. Even then, though, they’ll be disappointed.

Let me give you an example of how bad the writing is. It’s late in the story. There are a few pages left. Francis has just come back from talking to the bomber dude and asks Aoife where Dwight is.

Aofie, who mind you hated Dwight and was trying to get rid of him since the second he showed up, informs Francis that Dwight has joined the British reconnaissance team. Even if we stopped there, that’s terrible writing. There’s no way any British service is going to have some random off-duty American FBI guy join their team on the spot. Also, you’ve set up that the Ministry of Defense hated this guy. So why would she allow him to join one of her teams?? In less than five minutes no less!!????

But it gets worse!

Aofie tells Francis that the team is investigating a building nearby, a building that just so happens to ALSO be the AirBnb apartment Dwight is staying at. In that moment, Francis realizes that this was all part of the bomber’s plan. So he tells Aofie to get the men out of that building as quickly as possible. But before they can act, the building blows up from a DIFFERENT BOMB the bomber planted earlier, and Dwight is dead.

Think about that for a second. The number of hoops we need to jump through for this to make sense is astounding.

In order for the bomber’s plan to work, he would’ve had to secretly set up a bomb weeks ago below Dwight’s AirBnB building AND THEN, since Dwight wasn’t actually at the building, the writer needed to construct a scenario by which the British bomb team recruited Dwight on the spot, and then, of the hundreds of surrounding buildings they could’ve gone to, the writer made the team coincidentally go to Dwight’s AirBnB building, so that the bomber could kill him.

All of this was done via a payoff THAT WAS NEVER SET UP. Because we didn’t even know about any other bombs until the second one blew up. So none of it feels earned or realistic. It’s the kind of sloppy writing that even low-level Hollywood execs don’t let fly.

Everywhere you look in this story, it’s bad. There are no positive attributes at all other than it’s sort-of high concept. It was one of those situations where I actually thought I got duped – that someone sent me the wrong “Bomb” story. That’s how ugly it got.

This begs the question. If this story is so bad, why was it purchased? One of the frustrating things I’ve learned about Hollywood is that every working individual has their specific movies that THEY WANT TO MAKE. Only that person and their close friends know what those movies are. We, outside the business, don’t know what they are. So we can’t write the script that Denzel Washington is desperate to make or pitch the movie Jacob Elordi has wanted to be in since he was five.

I suspect that Ridley Scott really wanted to make a negotiator movie or a bomb movie and this came across his desk. Boom. That’s it. He was in because this is the exact type of movie he wants to make right now. And make no mistake, after he lets McMullin write his contract-guaranteed first draft, he will bring in a much more established screenwriter to write a version of this that actually makes sense. Cause if he goes with this version, it will be one of his worst movies ever.

Of all the short story sales I’ve seen so far, this is by far the worst.

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

What I learned 2: Is getting married a short story sale hack? This is the second big sale in a row (the last was Run For Your Life) where an impending wedding was the centerpiece. Weddings give you ticking time bombs and heightened emotions, both of which create more drama. Not saying you SHOULD use a wedding. But there’s clearly something to it.

Is today’s script “The Player” for Gen Z?

Genre: Thriller
Premise: After passing on a hot new screenplay, a studio executive finds himself trapped as the protagonist inside the film and must regain control before the credits roll.
About: This script finished NUMBER 3 on the most recent Black List.
Writer: Jordan Rosenbloom
Details: 111 pages

Cooper needs a snazzy fun script after the dudtopolis that was Maestro.

“Bad Boy” has set a high bar for the 2023 Black List. I’m doubtful that any script can top it. Oh, and if you’re wondering why I’m jumping from the number 1 script to the number 3 script today, it’s because I’ve already reviewed script number 2! It’s called Stakehorse and you can check out my review here.

As for “Spoiler,” I knew nothing about it going in. Yes, I do those Black List logline breakdowns in my annual Black List Logline Assessment post. But I’ve forgotten almost every script since then. That’s the way I like it. I enjoy going into a script as blind as a bat. It gives me the best chance of being surprised.

Sam Feldstein is a 40-something executive at Silverhead Studios. Sam is about to be named the new head of that studio. At least, that was the plan BEFORE his latest movie, “Captain Queer,” plunged to a 68% on Rotten Tomatoes the morning after the Thursday evening showings. It’s looking like the 200 million dollar movie is going to suffer an Aquaman 2-like weekend.

Sam tries to ignore this while taking a breakfast meeting with the hottest writer in town, “The Kid.” The 20-something “Kid” is all the rage and boy is he eating up the attention. Which, of course, makes Sam’s breakfast with him insufferable. Less than five minutes into The Kid’s pitch for his next movie, Sam tells him to F-off. He’s too douchey for Sam to handle. As far as he’s concerned, Silverhead will never work with this guy.

But before Sam leaves, The Kid makes him take his latest screenplay, and informs him that he WILL read it. Sam throws it back at him and heads to work. Once there, we get bits and pieces about this Captain Queer movie, which stars a young actor named Rocky Jones, who the married Sam had a secret affair with during production. Now, he wants nothing to do with Rocky. ESPECIALLY with the movie underperforming.

When Sam finally makes it to his office, he’s shocked to find that The Kid’s script is waiting for him. Annoyed, he rears back to toss it in the garbage, but out of curiosity, reads the first few pages. And the first few pages include Sam as a character. In fact, the first ten pages are the exact same meeting, word for word, that he had with The Kid earlier.

Convinced this is a sick joke, Sam asks his assistant if she’s seen anything suspicious, only to be told that he doesn’t look okay. When Sam delves further into the script, he’s horrified to see that EVERYTHING that has happened so far in his day IS IN THIS SCRIPT. Determined to find out what’s going on, he barrels into the city to search for The Kid.

When he finally finds him, The Kid comes clean. Sam is not a real person. “What did you do before breakfast today?” The Kid asks him. Sam racks his brain. He can’t remember. “That’s because you didn’t exist before that breakfast. I created you.” Horrified, Sam’s brain starts spinning. That can’t possibly be true. But the further into the day he gets, and the more of the script he reads, he comes to the realization that he is, indeed, a figment of The Kid’s imagination. Which means that when this movie is over, Sam is over. Can Sam find a way out? Or is this the one Hollywood problem he won’t be able to solve?

These scripts always work best on readers who’ve never read them before – these meta “what’s real, what isn’t” living-in-a-movie-or-a-video-game-or-a-book screenplays. But I’ve read a lot of them. So my bar is higher than most. Taking everything into consideration, I thought Rosenbloom’s take was pretty good. But it’s clear that the writer isn’t aiming for “pretty good.” He’s aiming for great.

Here’s the catch with these scripts – once we get used to the gimmick, the script has to deliver on a plot and character level, aka, the same level any other script has to deliver on. Without being able to lean on the wacky meta x-factor to carry the reader’s interest, can the script still be entertaining?

I’ll say this: Rosenbloom gives it his best shot. He is trying to say something here, both with the character of Sam (a man who’s abandoned his family for his work) and with life itself (ya blink and it’s over). I’m just not sure it was presented in a way that changed the game for me. It walked right up to the line of profound but then stepped back and retreated. Yeah, when the movie cuts to black, his life is over… okay. But I’m still sitting there saying, “So what?” Who is Sam? He’s a workaholic borderline a-hole executive. There’s nothing likable about him. I don’t care if he dies.

That’s not to say there weren’t things to enjoy. I liked how the script lures you into a sense of normalcy with its real-time first act, only to then shock the heck out of you later on, when the story starts jump-cutting. When we go that breakfast meeting, drive to the studio, head into work, it’s all happening in real time. Therefore, when the CUTS start happening, they hit us hard. Sam is in his office one second and then – BAM – he’s at a party. For a movie, this is normal. But imagine being a person in a movie and jumping from scene to scene with nothing in between. It’d be terrifying. And that’s exactly what it is for Sam.

I also loved that opening scene. All it is is a ten page breakfast scene. But the dialogue is strong and Rosenbloom does a good job building the tension. It starts off so casual but then the importance of what’s happening becomes more and more evident and The Kid becomes this, almost, ethereal figure, as he imposes upon Sam to read his script at all costs. By the end of that scene, I wanted to keep reading.

Sam’s backstory also had some nice moments that intersected nicely with the plot. You had this movie that was tanking on its opening weekend. We then reveal that Sam was sleeping with the star. The star, who’s mentally unwell, is stalking Sam, begging to be in his next movie. He then kills himself which, ironically, pumps up interest in the movie. So now Captain Queer is going to be a hit. That kind of plotting isn’t easy to pull off in such a tight space but I thought Rosenbloom did it well.

I was also impressed by how Rosenbloom rode this line between criticizing and championing the industry. “Captain Queer” is obviously a dig at Hollywood’s obsession with wokeness. Yet Rosenbloom plays it straight (no pun intended). He never makes a big deal out of the ridiculousness of the film’s subject matter.

They say to never write a script about the industry. I have an addendum to that. Never write a script about the industry UNLESS YOU’RE IN THE INDUSTRY. Because if you’re in the industry, you can inject the requisite specificity required to sell this world. I don’t know anything about Jordan Rosenbloom but I’d be surprised if he didn’t work in the industry in some capacity. There’s enough specificity here that I believed in his world.

I still think if you’re going to dip your toes into the fourth-wall-breaking meta movie-verse, your entry point should be “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare.” That’s the best I’ve seen tackle this subject matter. But I’ve never seen anyone master it. It’s insanely hard. Still, Spoiler does a decent job.

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

What I learned: It’s easy for these meta concepts to go off the rails. So I always recommend containing the story in as many other ways as possible. That way, even though you have this meta-weirdness going on, it’s still easy for the reader to keep up with the plot. That’s exactly what Rosenbloom does here by restricting this timeline to a single day (with a minor caveat at the end). By keeping everything in the here and now, it makes the weirdness easier to navigate.

Did Mario make the list???

I’ve got some devastating news for y’all.

This might be THE LAST POST OF THE YEAR.

Then again, maybe not. Maybe I get nostalgic and post something tomorrow. Or the next day. You never know with the wackadoodle running this site.

But I will say this. I’m excited to share my top 10 movies of the year. This year started out shaky but made a noble comeback towards the end.

I don’t want this to only be a thread discussing my favorite movies. I want you guys to discuss your favorite movies as well. I’m particularly interested in movies that weren’t on anybody’s radar. Collectively, we can come up with a handful of gems that we all get to watch over the holidays.

Before we get to the best movies of the year, I must mention the movies that fell outside my top 10. The biggest one is Oppenheimer. I thought it was an okay movie that fell apart when it rambled on for an extra 45 minutes after the bombing. Also, for a movie that spent its entire running time focusing on one person, I was shocked at just how little I knew about Oppenheimer when it was all over. With that said, I liked it better than Killers of the Flower Moon, which had an even weaker narrative structure.

Both Across The Spider-verse and Guardians 3 were solid superhero movies. But I had enough issues with each that they landed outside my Top 10.  Then there was another solid movie in John Wick 4.  But the director needs to learn that action movies are slim, not bulky.  A 110 minute version of John Wick 4 could’ve been awesome.

The Equalizer 3 was sneaky good and almost made my Top 10. I haven’t seen Napoleon. Air was pretty good but I was let down by Ben Affleck’s rushed direction. The script was much better. The Creator looked beautiful but Gareth Edwards desperately needs a writer. The film’s narrative and point were too muddled. I haven’t seen The Holdovers, Godzilla Minus One, or Saltburn, all of which, I’m assuming, would have had a shot at my Top 10.

Okay, are we ready for the DEFINITIVE Top 10 Movies list of the year? Let’s get to it.

NUMBER 10 – BARBIE
This is a shocker to some of you. It’s a shocker to me too. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized you can’t tell the story of 2023 Cinema without talking about Barbie. But it’s more than that. While I didn’t agree with the message of the film, I admire what the writers did from a screenwriting perspective. This may be the best example of writers infusing genuine depth into a studio film in over a decade. It is NOT EASY to do what Gerwig and Baumbach did. They made a mainstream movie with indie sensibilities and it resulted in the movie making MORE money than it would’ve if they went 100% mainstream. The character of Ken still resonates in me today. Gosling is iconic in the role. And you know what I think the secret sauce was here? This is the first time in forever that a studio made a big IP movie without a franchise in mind. Gerwig and Robbie just wanted to make a singular great film. Because they didn’t have to leave any open threads, they ensured that the movie stood on its own.

NUMBER 9 – THE KILLER

How bout that for a contrast in entries? The most feminist film of the year back to back with the most masculine film of the year. If that doesn’t prove that I have eclectic taste, I don’t know what does.  The Killer got some pushback when it came out and I’m still trying to figure out why. It was an awesome movie. Not only did it deconstruct the John Wick formula. But it was buoyed by the amazing direction of Fincher (that fight set piece was INSANE!). It felt nastier, grittier, and more realistic, than all these slick over-produced John Wick clones. And, as I covered in my review, I loved the way they sequenced out the scenes into mini-movies, all with their own beginning, middle, and end. I’m guessing people may have been expecting something more complex from Fincher and were therefore disappointed in the simplicity of The Killer. But I thought it was great.

NUMBER 8 – THE FLASH

I loooooooooved this movie. To me, this film is a prime example of media manipulation of the audience’s expectations. The media went above and beyond to make this movie feel “less than,” and, as a result, people went in with their 2-liter bottles of haterade and came out urinating those thoughts all over the internet. But if you distance yourself from the narrative and see this movie for what it is, it’s a really good movie. The main character is likable. The concept (two Flashes working together) is fun. Bringing in Batman added a whole other element of excitement into the mix. Literally the only thing wrong with the movie is that Warner Brothers stopped putting money into it when the PR went south. So you have these weird unfinished effects scenes. But that just goes to show how good the movie was – that it could withstand that. This is the best superhero movie of the year and it’s not even close.

NUMBER 7 – TALK TO ME

I think this movie taught me the secret to horror. It contains 3 steps. One – simple premise. In this case, a cursed hand that makes you see dead people. Two – make it scary. It’s obvious but make sure the scares are legitimate scares. I read too many horror scripts where the scares are unoriginal and tame. You gotta push the envelope and be legitimately scary. And three, put an actor or actress in the lead role who we love. The actress in this movie was amazing. She’s going to be a gigantic star. Something about her eyes pulled you in and didn’t let you go for the entire running time. The script has a few issues. The narrative isn’t the tightest. But it makes up for it in the direction and acting. It’s a really fun little movie.

NUMBER 6 – POOR THINGS

What surprised me the most about Poor Things was that I thought it was going to be a directing showcase only. That there would be no script to speak of. I was dead wrong. Like I pointed out in my review, the movie follows The Hero’s Journey to the T. It is as screenplay-ish a movie as there is on this list. It’s also a movie that takes a lot of chances and challenges some of the narratives in Hollywood right now, which I found refreshing. It’s almost like the anti-Barbie. Just like Barbie, it has an awesome male character, this time in Duncan, who may be the funniest character in any movie this year. Whenever he had one of his temper-tantrums, I couldn’t stop laughing. The subject matter is uncomfortable if you really start to think about it. But that’s the genius of this movie. You can watch it with your brain or you can watch it with your brain turned off and it works either way. Also, Emma Stone is amazing in the film. I can’t see any scenario where she doesn’t win the Oscar.

NUMBER 5 – DUMB MONEY

If you just want to have a good time with a movie, throw Dumb Money in. It’s such an unexpectedly fun flick. What’s weird about it is, I don’t even know if I’d call it a comedy. It may have invented a new genre. Cause it’s more “fun” than “funny.” So maybe it’s a funedy? Can we create that genre right now here on Scriptshadow? If it starts getting used everywhere, make sure to timestamp this. The movie is most effective at getting you invested emotionally because we can’t stand the fact that these rich corporations are laughing as they steal money from the regular folk. And when the regular folk finally figure out a way to win the game, the corporations change the rules. It’s infuriating. The Robin Hood CEO guy alone deserves to be publicly shamed for an entire year with what he did. If you get me to invest emotionally AND entertain me? I’m the happiest moviegoer in the world. Dumb Money is the biggest shocker on this list. I wasn’t expecting anything from it and I loved it.

NUMBER 4 – MISSING

For some reason, I’m obsessed with these screen-capture movies — movies that take place all on a computer screen. But the reason this one elevates itself above all the others is that it utilizes all the latest apps and technology you can use straight for your computer. For example, when June is trying to figure out where her mom is in Mexico, she hires a task-rabbit person through an app to go looking for her, giving her boots on the ground. This is something that just wasn’t available five years ago. I love when screenwriters do this – utilize new technology to create new story avenues. Cause otherwise, you have to compete with hundreds of years of ideas. The script also has one heck of a twist that I was shocked I didn’t see coming. But, in retrospect, I know why. It’s because the unique point of view (a computer screen) makes the viewer think in ways they wouldn’t normally think. Which allows you, as the writer, to use that against them. This is such an enjoyable little movie. I can’t recommend it enough.

NUMBER 3 – BLACKBERRY

I don’t know what I was expecting with Blackberry but awesomeness was not on the list. Except that’s exactly what was served. Even if you liked nothing about this story, it’s impossible not to get caught up in Glen Howerton’s performance. I don’t know if the Academy has the balls to nominate him.  He doesn’t fit what they’re looking for these days.  But they should. And guess what? The story’s pretty good too. “Blackberry” is the tech industry remake of Titanic. We all know what happens to Blackberry. It hits an iceberg. So we have this dramatically ironic omniscient point-of-view which allows us to squirm in our seats as all the decisions are being made to position the company into being a global powerhouse.  “Take Apple more seriously!” we scream. But they ignore us.  Side note: If you can get your audience to yell at the screen, you’ve won.  I love it when writers make cautionary tales fun. Cause most cautionary tales are just sad. This was fun because the supporting characters (especially Matt Johnson, who plays the co-founder) are so zany.  And Howerton chews up so much scenery he gains ten pounds by the end of the film. Blackberry is like the cousin to Dumb Money. If you’re feeling down, throw these two in for a double-feature and I guarantee you’ll be smiling for the rest of the day.

NUMBER 2 – FLORA AND SON

There isn’t a more feel-good movie this year than Flora and Son. John Carney is my new hero. He recognized that studios have spent the last five years making these divisive movies that piss half the audiences off. He realized that there was a market for making a movie for everyone. Flora and Son is about family. It’s about music. It’s about never giving up. It’s about trying new things. It’s about love. To be fair, a lot of movies try to be about these things. But what sets this film apart is Flora. Flora is a great character. Cause here’s the thing. When you make feel-good movies, the goal is not to make everything in the movie happy-happy. That’s not how you make people feel good. You have to show people the dark side in order for them to appreciate the light. There’s this early uncomfortable scene where Flora, who’s hired a hot online male guitarist from America to teach her guitar, listens to a song of his where he bares his soul.  Afterwards, she asks him to sing it again, but this time with his shirt off. In other words, Flora is not perfect. She has some learning to do. But that’s what good movies are about. They’re about characters who learn.  Who change. Watching Flora change into this better version of herself was the best character journey I watched all year. And, even if you don’t buy into any of that, it’s still a fun feel-good movie that’s perfect Christmas viewing.

NUMBER 1A – WONKA

The reason this is 1a is because I didn’t see it until after I made this list and, therefore, had to fit it in.  Because it’s THAT GOOD OF A MOVIE.  I’m not saying this so I could look like the cool film Cinephile who likes films that are overlooked.  This film blew me out of the water with how great the characters were, how simple the plot was, how elegantly that plot was executed.  Here’s how good this film is.  Timothee Chalamet, even though he’s got that one-in-a-million onscreen presence, isn’t over-the-moon good as Willy Wonka.  And still the film is amazing.  I can’t remember the last time I’ve watched a film where THIS MANY CHARACTERS popped.  Every single character stands out.  A lot of people will ask if it’s as good as the original.  Probably not……… but it sure is close.  Just because of the screenplay and characters alone.  It’s that impressive.

NUMBER 1 – FULL TIME

Full Time is an extremely simple movie. It’s about a mother who lives in the Paris suburbs who is hanging onto her hotel maid job in the city while raising two kids by herself.  Then the train workers go on strike, preventing her from having an easy way into the city. Over the course of the next few days, this complication creates a chain of events that leaves her on the brink of losing everything. I’ve passively mentioned this movie a couple of times and a few of you pushed back, saying it was boring. I can’t imagine anyone thinking this movie was boring. You have all the Scriptshadow screenwriting staples in play. A main character we love because all she’s trying to do is support her family. She’s taken advantage of at work, which makes us like her even more. She tries to secure a better job, at the expense of losing this one. In other words, she’s an ACTIVE character. She’s not just passively waiting for the world to throw bad things at her. The stakes are enormous. She could lose her house if she gets fired. Her and her kids could be on the street. But the movie’s biggest advantage is its urgency. Every – Single – Day is a race. Cause she’s trying to get to work. If she’s not on time, she’ll get fired. So we always feel this desperation in the narrative. And that’s what I was most impressed by. It’s one thing to create tons of urgency in a movie about terrorists or superheroes or asteroids. For a writer to create this much urgency out of a woman just trying to get to work? That’s what blew me away. Not only creating that level of real-world urgency. But making us FEEL IT. The craziest thing is, I wouldn’t have even heard of this movie if my parents didn’t recommend it. I’m supposed to be on top of things. It just goes to show that there are gems out there. Which is why I now leave the voting in your hands. What gems did you find in 2023??