That March Newsletter is in your inbox. If you aren’t signed up for the newsletter, e-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com and I’ll put you on the list
Since it looks like The First Horseman is running away with the First Page Showdown title, I’m going to put this post up early so that people can discuss the Oscars while it’s going on. But if you still want to vote for First Page Showdown, head on over to that post and cast your vote before midnight.
I’ll make my screenwriting predictions here. For Adapted Screenplay, there’s no contest. Conclave was excellent and leaves the other scripts in the dust. The Original Screenplay Category is tougher to call. Anora is an exceptional script in the way that it takes risks throughout yet never loses momentum. But I think voters see it more as a movie. The Brutalist also has some great writing. Any time you’re working within a longer running time, it becomes infinitely harder to keep the reader/viewer invested. And The Brutalist manages to do that. But, again, it comes off more as a directing feat than a writing feat.
Which means it’s probably going to come down to Anora versus A Real Pain. I’ve seen A Real Pain. I found it to be highly average and a bit of smoke and mirrors. It’s essentially a vehicle to let Kieran Culkin act like himself for 2 hours. I didn’t find the writing to be memorable at all. The one argument you could make for the writing is that Eisenberg “crafted” this memorable character. But, like I said, this is less writing and more an actor doing his schtick.
But will Hollywood be fooled by that, I don’t know. I hope not. Cause I’d rather have Anora win. But ya never know with this show. Sometimes I think these voters are delirious.
Okay, onto the newsletter!
NEWSLETTER SCRIPT NOTES SUPER-DEAL!
The March of Scribes Script Notes Deal is back for 2025! After reading 10,000 scripts, I’ve found that most scripts have one MAJOR issue holding them back and, for whatever reason, that issue exists in the writer’s blind spot. Let me be your shotgun passenger. I can look behind you, see what’s in that blind spot, and help you turn an average script into a great one. I am giving out FOUR half-off script notes deals to the first two state-siders who write me and then the first two writers from anywhere else in the world. Your script DOES NOT NEED TO BE READY. You can pay now and send the script in later, when you finish. E-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com and we’ll get you set up with some game-changing notes.
The other week, I reviewed a script on the site called American Monsters. It was about this team of people who hunt mythical monsters on a remote ranch. What stuck out to me about that script was just how good the first act was. It really set everything up well, from the characters to the plot. However, once we got to the second act, the script slowed down a little. It wasn’t bad. But it became a bit formulaic.
Not long after that, I was reading a script from a client and the opposite happened. The first act was really messy. Character intros were in major need of an overhaul. I wasn’t really sure what the plot was going into the second act. I was losing faith in the script with every passing page. But then I got to the second act and the script came alive! It was like, all of a sudden, the writer knew exactly what he wanted to do.
Now let’s take a time machine back to a couple of months ago. I read a script that was absolutely atrocious. First act was terrible. Second act was abysmal. But somehow, some way, the writer wrote a really good third act with a hell of an ending.
For whatever reason, I was thinking about all three of these scripts one day and this brand new screenwriting revelation hit me. You have to understand, I don’t get many screenwriting revelations these days. There are only so many things one can learn! So this was a big deal.
What was my new revelation?
That the reason screenwriting is so hard is because each act requires a completely different skill set.
Let’s go through them one by one.
The first act is a technical act and therefore favors highly logical thinkers. It’s like the screenwriting equivalent of being an engineer. You have to set up the main characters and set up the problem they’re facing and set up the plot. And it’s really important to do so by certain page markers, which makes it highly mathematical.
Once you reach the second act, the technical aspects of writing become a lot more flexible. A big reason for that is that instead of having 25 pages to work with, you have 50. So, already, you don’t have to worry about cramming everything into this tiny space, which is what necessitated that mathematical approach in the first act.
The second act is also the most creative act. It’s about coming up with creative obstacles and coming up with creative plot points. You’re letting your mind roam in this act. If you do it right, this is the act where you’re going to have the most fun. Of course, for the technical thinker, this act is terrifying. It seems boundless and endless with no clear set rules to follow.
The third act is unlike either of these acts because it’s about bringing everything together. If you’re writing a thesis paper, this act is your concluding statement. And when you’re concluding anything, you’re bringing things together in your head in a way that has nothing to do with the setup or with creativity. You’re trying to land the damn plane.
Because each act requires such a unique skill set, it’s rare that you’re able to find a writer who’s good at all of them. And hence why you have so many scripts that start off strong and then dissipate. Or, to a lesser degree, start off terribly then heat up.
It’s almost like we have to become three different versions of ourselves to get a script right. The good news is, now that I’ve told you this, you can put yourself in the right mindset for each act.
When you enter that first act, you must be “Logical Guy.” You must think very carefully about each and every page and how you’re using them to set up your characters, set up your plot, place that inciting incident where it needs to be, be methodical in how you write exposition. You need to somehow convey a million things to us yet keep things moving.
Back in the late 90s, every single pro screenwriter was really good at first acts because first acts were what got scripts sold back then. If you could set up an amazing movie with your first act, studios bought it because they were afraid the studio down the street, who was reading the screenplay at the same time they were, was going to buy it before they did. Better to buy after a great first act than risk losing the script cause you read the whole thing. Over time, however, since that system died down, writers have gotten pretty bad at first acts.
Once you get to your second act, you must become “Creative Guy.” The second act favors writers with strong imaginations who take bold creative chances and who, frankly, are good at entertaining people. A good example of a writer who thrives in his second acts is Bong Joon-ho. He’s got such a wacky sensibility that he comes up with these weird ideas, like the secret basement man in the Parasite house.
Quentin Tarantino is another writer who thrives in his second acts because all he cares about is entertaining people. So he just has fun with his scenes. He’ll throw you in the middle of the Manson farm, in a cafe in Germany circa 1942, or in a basement with a gimp. He defines the type of creativity the second act favors.
Of course, you still need structure to your second act. You still need to build towards the third act with your scenes and create a nice midpoint that ups the stakes. You need to know how to create obstacles, challenge your characters’ flaws, and consistently inject conflict into the story. But, overall, this act is about entertaining people and you should have fun with it.
The third act is a unique beast. To conquer it, you need to be “Time-Traveler Guy.” Let me explain. Your final act isn’t just about paying off what you’ve set up. It’s about trying to look for ways to make your ending amazing and, often, that means looking back into your script (time-traveling) to see if your setups can be improved to create an even better payoff.
The example I love to use for this is, ironically, Back to the Future. Originally, the time machine in that movie was a static refrigerator in a junkyard. Now, had screenwriters Zemeckis and Gale simply paid that off in their third act, we would’ve gotten a much weaker movie. But by going back in time (no pun intended) to their earlier scenes and challenging that setup, they eventually realized that a more active time machine would work better. They then had to time travel through the rest of the script to adjust for this new setup, but boy did it make a gigantic difference with the ending, where it became one of the time five endings in movie history.
Maybe a better way to put it is to say that, in order to conquer the third act, you have to think three-dimensionally. You can’t just rote-ly connect all the dots you set up beforehand. There are potentially magical revelations, like the Delorean rushing to the clock tower as the lightning strikes, in that third act if you’re thinking three-dimensionally.
Okay, now that you know all this, it’s time to get out there and write your next script. Because we have a script showdown coming up in June! I’m going to help you get ready for that, each month, with a new showdown. I’ll share the latest of those showdowns with you in a second. But first, we have to talk about Bond.
JAMES BOND
There was a seismic move in Hollywood this weekend. It occurred when the Broccolis finally let go of creative control of the Bond franchise, handing it over to Amazon. The whole thing was kind of weird because Amazon already bought the franchise when they bought MGM. But I guess the Broccolis retained creative control of the franchise as part of the deal. Well, over the past three years since that deal was made, the Broccolis haven’t done jack diddly with the Bond franchise and Amazon had had enough. So they dished out another billion bucks so that they could do whatever they wanted with 007.
A lot of people are calling it a tragedy. And, to a certain extent, they’re right. The Broccolis are one of the few people who think you make a movie once you have a good idea. Not the other way around. And the pitches they were getting weren’t very good. So they rejected them.
To be fair, pitching a Bond film must be hard. I mean, how many different ways can you say, “Bond goes to this continent. Then he goes to that continent!” It’s the kind of franchise that differentiates itself in a) the actor who plays Bond, and b) the direction. As scripts, all these Bond movies, much like the Mission Impossible movies, feel the same to me.
But that opinion may be because I’m not a Bond expert. And, for that reason, I decided to bring in Scriptshadow’s resident Bond expert, Mr. Scott Crawford, to give me an insider’s take on what’s gone on here and what it all means.
So, here’s Scott!
Amazon has paid over $1 billion to take creative control of the James Bond movie franchise from producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli. The world’s longest-running movie franchise, which for almost 63 years has been a London-based, independent, family-run affair, has been taken over by the world’s second largest company. From Dr. No in 1962 to No Time to Die in 2021, one name has been synonymous with the franchise: Broccoli.
It was British-based American producer Harold R. “Harry” Saltzman who in 1961 gave Fleming $50,000 for a six-month option on James Bond. Just as the option was about to expire, Saltzman teamed up with another British-based American producer Albert R. “Cubby” Broccoli and secured the backing of David Picker at United Artists (UA). Broccoli and Saltzman formed a company called Eon to produce the movies.
UA, a studio founded in 1919 by Charlie Chaplin and friends, took a hands-off approach to making films. They agreed to finance and distribute the Bond films while Eon would produce. Profits would be split 50/50, Eon’s share rising to 60% and then 75% as the films remained profitable.
The formula was simple but effective: make the Bond films relatively cheaply in England, at Pinewood Studios just outside London, and – as the budgets got bigger – at locations around the world. Casting a relatively unknown actor – Sean Connery – as Bond rather than a star like Cary Grant or David Niven saved them money they could use to build huge sets.
By the mid-70s, Saltzman’s outside business activities had got him into huge financial debt and in 1975 he sold his half of Eon to UA for $36 million. UA now owned half of Eon but agreed that Broccoli – who would now produce the series alone – would retain creative control.
Broccoli’s stepson, Michael G. Wilson, a lawyer who had previously been an assistant on Goldfinger and legal advisor on The Spy Who Loved Me, became an executive producer on Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy and a full producer on A View to a Kill in 1985. He would be a producer on every Bond movie after that. In addition, Wilson co-wrote all the screenplays for the five Bond films released in the 1980s and continued to contribute many story ideas going forward. Cubby remained the man in charge, but from 1981 onwards, day-to-day production was handled by Wilson.
Money problems at MGM led to multiple delays on productions, the longest of which was six years between Licence to Kill in 1989 and GoldenEye in 1995. During that time, producer Joel Silver tried to buy Bond but was told it would cost $150 million to get the rights.
MGM/UA’s shaky finances eventually led to the announcement of its sale to Amazon in May 2021, five months before the release of No Time to Die, for $8.45 billion. The sale included half of Eon since MGM owned half of Eon after buying UA which had been sold half of Eon. Which many speculated to be the reason why Amazon paid (overpaid) such a large sum.
But Wilson and Broccoli retained creative control, per their contract.
Amazon MGM became almost immediately impatient, having paid over eight billion dollars, and pushed for a James Bond TV show, an idea which Barbara rejected. Another Amazon executive said they didn’t think Bond was a “hero” and when Amazon MGM head Jennifer Salke referred to Bond as “content,” that seems to have been the the tipping point.
Wilson had announced his retirement from Bond after No Time to Die. Barbara didn’t want to produce the series alone, or with a new producer, and so she sold creative control to Amazon for $1 billion+ to let them produce the films. Let’s see how easy they think it is.
Many people have tried to copy Bond, including 100s of Italian “Eurospy” movies, as well as two unofficial Bond films: a 1966 comedy based on Casino Royale and a 1983 remake of Thunderball starring Sean Connery called Never Say Never Again. Both cost a fortune, more than any Eon film to that point, and neither was as successful.
It’s not as easy as people think it is.
With Amazon given full creative control, the chances of seeing another James Bond film within the next few years have increased, but the worry is that this will be at the cost of the scrutiny that the Broccolis brought to the franchise. The push to make the films for less money, use CGI over practical effects and make Bond more American (Bond movies usually only make around a quarter or a fifth of their money in the US which affects profits) can only result in a more substandard product.
The other fear is that Amazon will push for a Bond TV show. Lots of TV shows. A TV show for every other character… a Miss Moneypenny show… the Q show… a Felix Leiter show… diluting (a word which keeps coming up) the franchise just as it did for Marvel and Star Wars.
Quantity over quality. Bond is too big for TV; he belongs on the big screen.
Personally, I don’t think Amazon will make MULTIPLE TV shows (a la Star Wars and Marvel) because the backlash against that has been so immediate. I think they might do one just to exploit the rights more, but it will be a movie next, first and foremost.
The next thing Amazon will have to do is find a new producer to “run” Bond. That producer will have to find a new Bond (good luck with that)… and do all the rest, probably without the support of the outgoing producers.
To cap it all off, last year Wilson & Broccoli were awarded the Irving G. Thalberg Oscar, a lifetime achievement award for producers, at the governor’s ball. This is a VERY prestigious award; it isn’t handed out every year. Among previous recipients of the award, back in 1982 when it was still shown on TV as part of the main ceremony… was Albert R. “Cubby” Broccoli. His stepfather. Her father.
That’s how respected they are in Hollywood: they gave them an Oscar.
And now… they’re out.
Yeah, I agree with Scott that Marvel and Star Wars have established the protocol for how NOT to treat a franchise re: all these TV shows. But here’s the problem. Amazon has never had a franchise like this before. They paid kabillions for Tolkien’s work but that was for the crappy Tolkien books no one read. Now they’ve got James Bond. JAMES FREAKING BOND. Do you think they’re only going to produce one movie every five years when they have JAMES FREAKING BOND? Helllllllllllllllll no.
So, as someone in the comments said, we will get shows for 001, 002, 003, all the way up to 009. Will that destroy the franchise? Here’s the thing. Bond has a unique problem specific to it and only it. It is ONE DUDE. Just one guy. So, if you come up with the perfect casting, similar to Tom Holland becoming Spider-Man, those shows won’t matter. People will joyfully come to see new Bond movies. Especially because they’ll now have a new one every year. ;)
And the March Showdown is… SCENE SHOWDOWN
That’s right. January was Logline Showdown so we could find you a script to write. February was First Page Showdown so we could get you started on your script journey. March is Scene Showdown. Which means, that’s right, you’re going to enter an entire scene. The only rule is that the scene must be five pages or less. What I’m looking for here is the ability to tell a story within a scene. Scenes are, essentially, mini-scripts. So if you can tell a strong story within a scene, that tells me you know how to structure your larger story, aka your script. Your entry doesn’t have to be the first scene of your script. It can be any scene. And because some scenes are going to need context, I will give you 50 words MAX to set up your scene if need be. Okay, can’t wait to see what you have in store.
What: Scene Showdown
Rules: Scene must be 5 pages or less
When: Friday, March 28
Deadline: Thursday, March 27, 10pm Pacific Time
Submit: Script title, Genre, 50 words setting up the scene (optional), pdf of the scene
Where: carsonreeves3@gmail.com
AROUND TOWN
Andor Season 2 Trailer – At this point, I think Disney’s trolling. I know a small group of Star Wars faithful who champion this show. But I never liked it because the creator, who openly states he dislikes Star Wars, has no interest in making a Star Wars show. He wants to make an adult drama about living under an oppressive system. He’ll begrudgingly add Star Wars touchstones if need be. But he doesn’t care about the universe, which is clear in every frame of the story. This trailer for the second season could not be more indicative of that. Our story, which takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, is playing a 2025 rock song. Could you bastardize Star Wars any more?? I just want Kathleen Kennedy to go away. She doesn’t understand this franchise and keeps missing the tonal bullseye. It’s either too goofy or too serious. Neither is Star Wars.
Havoc Trailer – I mean, C’mon. This looks absolutely badass. And there’s actually a screenwriting lesson to learn here. Havoc is an action movie. It’s a movie where people shoot a lot of guns at other people. If you are going to make an action movie where people shoot a lot of guns, then make sure every scene that has action and every scene that has guns is amazing at the action and gunplay!!! Nobody will care if this movie isn’t funny. Nobody will care if the character development sucks. Nobody will care about clever plot twists. All they’ll the care about is the action and the guns. Same deal when you write scripts. If you write a comedy, 90% of audience satisfaction will be due to whether they laugh or not. If you write a horror film, all I care about is that your scares are first-rate. If you write a Hitchcockian thriller, you better be amaaaaaazzzzing at writing suspense. Havoc knows what it is and its writer and director knew to prioritize that. Which is exactly why I’ll watch this the day it comes out.
87 North Heist Action Thriller – We’ve got a big heist project that sold to Amazon. 87 North, David Leitch’s company, is producing along with Imagine. Leitch has made a lot of middling movies since he co-directed John Wick. Atomic Blonde, Hobbs and Shaw, Bullet Train, and most recently, the frame-by-frame flop known as The Fall Guy. Lavish production value and star power slathered on a script so vanilla, they’re naming a Starbucks latte after it. But I understand why Leitch believes he doesn’t need good screenplays. He broke out with John Wick. That John Wick script was laughed at all over town. John Wick was never seen as a script success. It was seen as a directing success that became great in spite of its script. So why would Lietch think you have to work hard on a screenplay? Which is why he’s hiring some guy named Mark Bianculli to write this. He of the vaunted TV series, Lincoln Rhyme: Hunt for the Bone Collector, whatever that is. The pitch for this script is that a group of bank robbers use social media to document their heists. So, we’re taking an age-old story trope – bank heists – and we’re modernizing it. But if they don’t have a writer who knows how to dramatize scenes so that the audience actually stays invested, Leitch is in trouble again. With that said, rumor on the street is that Bianculli and Imagine have been developing this script for a decade. A DECADE! So, maybe that’s why 87North is teaming UP with Imagine. Cause Leitch is finally realizing, after Fall Guy, that the script is important. I don’t have a ton of confidence in that theory. But we’ll see.
UFO Conspiracy Thriller – One of the biiiiiiiig scripts that’s been getting the town excited is Zach Baylin’s new UFO conspiracy thriller, which is being pitched as “All The President’s Men meets UFOs.” Baylin wrote King Richard, about Serena and Venus’s crazy dad. He wrote Creed 3. And he most recently wrote the 70s crime thriller, The Order, about big bad white supremacists. I think the concept here is good. Most writers who write in this space focus on the aliens. This sounds like it focuses on the conspiracy aspect and whether there even are aliens. This conversation has been pretty intense in the real world over the last few years. A lot of people, such as myself, think some level of UFO disclosure from the government is imminent. So, why not treat the subject with an adult lens instead of the kiddie lens it’s usually explored through? That’s the main thing we have to remember when we come up with a concept. Every subject matter has been done to death in Hollywood. But not every ANGLE has been done. And this is the answer to the age old question, “What does Hollywood mean when they say they want something ‘the same but different?’” The answer is they want the same subject matter (aliens) but a different angle (explore them through a serious investigation).
Fantastic Four Trailer – This was a head-scratcher. Fantastic Four is the first film in the next phase of Marvel’s storied franchise. Therefore, we should see a clear correction from all the mistakes they made in the last phase. Yet they started off doubling down on the biggest mistake of all – the multiverse. This Fantastic Four movie takes place in some 60s futuristic universe. Kevin, buddy, Carson here from Scriptshadow. Got a “what I learned” for you. If a movie takes place in a parallel world that has nothing to do with the one we, the audience, live on, that means there are zero stakes attached to anything that happens. The whole planet could blow up and it wouldn’t matter at all. You’re going to start your new phase with that? The multiverse is the worst case of toothpaste leaving the tube that I’ve ever seen. Cause if there’s anything that needs to be put back into the tube, it’s the multiverse. But now you’re fucked. You opened that door and you’re fucked. I also found it odd that the movie trailer featured Ebon Moss-Bachrach, known for playing Richie in The Bear, in character as The Thing, discussing cooking. Most of the audience for The Fantastic Four—probably 90%—won’t know what The Bear is. Even fewer will recognize that The Thing is played by Ebon Moss-Bachrach, the same actor who portrays Richie. Prioritizing such a niche Easter egg moment in a trailer tasked with selling the next phase of Marvel feels like the largest of large miscalculations. Why not prioritize… oh, I don’t know… crafting a good movie concept!? I heard someone say they thought this might make a billion dollars this summer? I think it’s going to play like every other non Deadpool non Spider-Man superhero movie. 80 million dollar opening and a plunge off a cliff.
SCREENPLAY REVIEW – BLUE FALCON
Genre: Action Comedy
Premise: When a retired CIA agent learns that his estranged son is marrying the daughter of his nemesis, he must travel to a destination wedding to kill him.
About: Sony purchased this script with Eddie Murphy attached to star. Screenwriter Chad St. John has been around for almost 15 years. His biggest credit would be London Has Fallen.
Writer: Chad St. John
Details: 102 pages
I remember Chad St. John! He used to sell specs consistently during the early days of Scriptshadow. It’s good to see him back. Although I’m sure he’d say, “Yo, Carson. I never left!” Let’s see what old Chad’s been up to lately.
60-something Joe Hayes is a semi-retired CIA agent who isn’t doing a whole lot with his life. His one regret is that he spent so much time on his work that he was a nonexistent father to his son, Chuck. He really wishes he could fix that relationship.
Joe hangs out with his other retired CIA buddy, Sugar. But their hang-out seshes aren’t going to last much longer since Sugar is almost dead. One of their favorite topics is discussing the disappearance of their former co-worker, Vick Arbaca. Sugar and Joe HATE Vick because he screwed the CIA over in order to secure the bag.
Joe is shocked when his son invites him to his destination wedding. Joe sees it as an opportunity to finally fix their relationsthip. However, when he gets there, he finds out that the woman Chuck is marrying is the daughter of… you guessed it… Vick! And Vick, who these days is richer than Bill Gates, is there too!
Joe then gets some terrible news. Sugar is dead. But his daughter, Sharon, is here. And she says that she’s more than happy to help Joe finally kill his nemesis (before Vick kills him). The two play a couple of deadly pranks on each other until they’re ruffied on Vick’s yacht by a bunch of college kids.
They wake up to learn that this ruffie business may be worse than originally thought. It turns out that the world’s worst bad guys, people who Joe and Vick used to make miserable, have been alerted to their position and are coming to kill them. This forces the two to team up. But what they eventually learn is that someone close by is orchestrating their demise.
I mean if they’ve got DeVito, Schwarzenegger has to be Sugar, right?
The first thing I’m going to tell you about this script is from a MARKETING perspective. Not a screenwriting perspective.
Action-Comedies sell!
Comedies may not sell. But action-comedies do. So, if you’re thinking about writing a comedy, just add some action to it. Or include lots of guns!
Now, what about the concept?
The concept here is okay. I love the enemies-who-are-forced-to-work-together trope more than anybody. So I was all for it here. My only issue with this specific pairing is that Joe and Vick were both CIA agents. So how are they enemies exactly? The script jumps a lot of rope and flips through a lot of hoops in order to explain that and I was never convinced. Vick sold CIA secrets or something? That’s why he’s a villain? Okay. I guess? But the pairing didn’t have nearly the same impact as it would’ve if Vick had been an actual villain.
And I say that for a reason that extends into the art of screenwriting itself. As screenwriters, we are constantly wrestling with our stories in order to make them feel as natural as possible. But, at times, we want to make the script go a certain way that’s a little artificial and that’s when we bring out our big writing pen and start manipulating reality in order to get what we want. Chad St. John wanted these two to be enemies but they both worked for the same side. So he wrote in a bunch of mumbo-jumbo with his big writing pen to make that as believable as possible.
Granted, comedy allows for a lot more leniency in this area. But you still have to be careful because the Joe-Vick relationship is a pillar in the script. It’s not like a tiny subplot relegated to 6 pages. So, it’s important that it’s believable, since it will affect every aspect of the story. And it wasn’t believable.
Was the script funny?
I didn’t laugh. Then again, I rarely laugh while reading scripts. I judge comedies on a less rigorous scale. Was the comedy so bad that I became angry? That happens quite a bit. Was the comedy uninspired? That’s fairly common. Was it neutral? Getting better. Did it make me smile multiple times? That’s good. And did it occasionally make me chuckle? That’s usually the high mark for a comedy script with me.
This one was somewhere between neutral and smiling.
Probably the best running joke was Sharon, Sugar’s “daughter.” She’s this wanna-be agent who’s clumsy and clueless. Her continued screw-ups were funny.
[insert page]
It may be hard to impress me with a comedy script but I can tell you how to do it. Because my journey to creating Scriptshadow started with reading a comedy script. It was called The Hangover and I absolutely loved it. It was hilarious.
Why was it hilarious? Were the writers just funnier than Chad St. John? I don’t know if they were, to be honest. But what I can tell you is that the concept for The Hangover was a million times better than this.
You see, the thing with comedy concepts is that you need something to generate consistently funny scenarios. If your concept sets up a familiar scenario, you’re going to be writing a bunch of familiar comedy scenes. But if your concept is unique, like The Hangover, you’re going to be writing a bunch of brand new comedy scenarios that you don’t even have to try to create. Cause they’re built into the concept.
Hasn’t Adam Sandler’s company already made three island movies with secret agents? We’ve seen this before. And not that long ago. So, it just feels too familiar to celebrate. Which is why it’s not recommendable for me.
Script link: Blue Falcon
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: I’m now an official fan of suggesting actors in comedy scripts. I would’ve read the part of Vick totally differently had Chad not suggested we think of Danny DeVito for the role. It instantly clarified the character and, as a result, it was one of the most effective parts of the script. Cause Danny DeVito has a very specific delivery. He can play the jerk (as he does in Always Sunny) and yet you always like him. So don’t be afraid to cast actors for your roles in a comedy script.
