If you are referring to me... go right ahead.

I will chime in shortly. Got to type up a few things regarding Pimp Juice first.  

I’m sorry. I’m confused as to how this whole thing works. I thought we discussed particular aspects of the story at a time. It appears we discuss entire acts at a time? Now it appears we’re moving on from that. To me this has been a confusing discussion.

Are we not supposed to mention format in any way? If not, then why are we discussing story structure, which is format?

The only mention I made of his writing style was that a couple of techniques he used got annoying. It wasn’t a big deal. If we want to skip that stuff then fine. But on the nose dialogue and poor character development isn’t a matter of writing style. That’s format.

Having a great idea for a story is one thing. How to tell a story in a compelling way is another. Those two are inseparable for telling a great story. Story structure is format though.

And by format, no I’m not talking about this “rules” silliness. I don’t even know where that shit came from or why anyone would waste their time talking about it. All I care about is a great story and the best way to tell it. The way you tell it is format.

Now with regard to Countdown, I think the story is great. But I don’t think it’s told entirely the best way it could be told. And I think GM has a great point here:

Quoted from Murphy And here lies my first problem, at the top of page 7 we have Finn turning into Basil Exposition and giving us the plot in a nice tidy package by explaining it to the crew. I cringed when I read that and think it is lazy writing…Am I really expected to believe that he is saying something the crew really do not know already? This could have been much better as a conversation, maybe one of the crew asking "so how many probes have they sent out now", "ten thousand? wow, never realized it was that many. ten thousand and only four of them found a planet with hope?, never ceases to amaze me how big this universe is" etc.. etc..  You could easily get the same amount of information to the reader/viewer but make it a little more realistic.

This is not a matter of the author’s writing style. This is poor storytelling. GM said it was lazy writing and he’s absolutely right. It is lazy writing. That’s not an attack on the author’s style or the author himself. We’ve all been guilty of it at some time or another. It’s a problem for all writers.

The problem here is that he has Finn speak very contrived dialogue while his other characters need to be better developed. The problem is that I like GM’s suggested dialogue better than the dialogue in the actual script. The writer could have divided this information up over the other characters and taken the opportunity to differentiate his characters personality wise as well as present more credible dialogue and emerging relationships.


Breanne

Breanne... welcome to the club... I'm confused too. This is something sort of new here so there are no rules really. In the past we've discussed different aspects of the scripts. Usually what happens is that something sticks out and creates more discussion than other areas. In SC 2 it was the darkness of the script and if it work as humor or not. In SC 3 it was the long bar scene with lots and lots of dialogue that could be trimmed. In this case we seem to have got stuck on format. I know what you mean when you refer to format, so that's fine. Personally I hope that we can at least move past the problems with the writing itself in this script. As I mentioned early on in this thread, if this was posted by a non-pro member here at SS, the author would get slammed for a lot of those errors.

Maybe we can move on to ACT II and III and talk about the plot some more regarding the entire script. Where the mid point, end of act 2 and so on are and if they are strong/effective enough or whatever.  Or whatever you guys want.

Geez, I sound like the weakest hostess ever... can I get you guys something to drink. (that usually works)

Yeah, I think I need a shot of Jager!

We can go in any direction you guys want to take this, but for me, going over the various Acts, isn't accomplishing much.  I'd much rather discuss the writing format, the characterization, the story, the action scenes, the description, etc.

I'll sit back and wait for someone to get us back on some sort of track.

Half time... Here you go Jeff. A double shot of Jäger. Let me know if I can get you anything else...

I may suck as the SC hostess, but I do know hot to keep people happy with food and drinks. I'm pretty good at parties.

Back to business...

Okay we don't have to talk about specific acts, but I have a question. I really enjoyed this script (except for the creatures) I thought it was well plotted and and exciting. My question is in regard to the action. This script, IMHO is relentless, non-stop action in act 2 and 3. Every page something new pops up causing more stress, fear and urgency. If this would play out on film as one page/minute that would mean roughly 80 minutes of action. Is that too much? Don't we need to come up for a breather every now and then?

Feel free to chime in on that. We can also talk about character arcs. To me it seemed Finn was the only one who really changed. I guess Elster did as well even if a bit late. And like Mr. Z said, without the racial descriptions, how would we tell the characters apart. They all acted very even for the most part and no one really had any distinct language characteristics.

Back to the game!!  

AnotherWriter,

I must have typed while you posted your comment because I missed it at first.

To me what makes this one a "winner" is that there are no dead moments what so ever. Almost every single line of dialogue, every action paragraph moves the story forward. The action and tension grows constantly. Are there things that could be improved? Absolutely, but for me at least, this one was a page turner...

Quoted from Grandma Bear To me what makes this one a "winner" is that there are no dead moments what so ever. Almost every single line of dialogue, every action paragraph moves the story forward. The action and tension grows constantly. Are there things that could be improved? Absolutely, but for me at least, this one was a page turner...

See, it had dead moments for me in the beginning. I felt the beginning was rocky. But then after it kicked in, I agree with you that it moved along. But I also think sometimes the action was muddled.

So why do you (anyone, not just Pia) think it sold? Do you think it was the premise?

I do like the premise. I like the story of people finding their own bodies and trying to figure out how to prevent their own deaths or alter their future. Even in the old Twilight Zone episode this is based on, it was a powerful moment when the astronauts found their own bodies.

I also liked the sort of unfolding murder mystery feel, although that never really played out. It never really went that direction (and I kind of hoped it would) but I still found the possibility intriguing.

Ultimately I don’t think they took full advantage of the premise. And in many ways, the creatures detracted from the story. I also think this script is clearly doctored and suffers from obviously different writing voices at different times. I think some of the action was unclear and I don’t think it reached its full potential.

I liked the sort of claustrophobic sense to it, the astronauts all sort of “stuck together” in this confusing world. And I think that makes it cheaper to produce than beginning the story on Earth and learning about the population problem firsthand. However, I didn’t feel we got to know enough about the characters.

In fact, I’m kind of torn about whether or not I think it should begin on Earth. On the one hand, I kind of like the claustrophobic sense that these people are all out here alone far from home. On the other, their motivations are never quite clear. Other than Ryker and Mills having a relationship and Kwon’s message to his loved one, we never hear anything about any families for these astronauts. I think that causes them to come off as one dimensional.

I think the character introductions could have been clearer although I can completely sympathize with the difficulty here. The setup is probably the hardest part of any script and introducing nine characters in one location is a very difficult task. Honestly, they did a pretty good job under the circumstances.

I did have to write the characters' names down and basic descriptions to keep them separate as the story progressed. On screen, the visual differences would certainly help with that. But I do think the characters could have been differentiated more with their personalities. The Daya character turned out to have a very strong commitment to mission and goal. I wish that had shown up earlier for her character.

As it turns out, I thought the Daya character was a better female character than Mills. So in the early stages, I think it would be important to establish both Mills and Ryker as strong main characters.

I found Ryker and Mills both too weak to really carry this film. I never felt Ryker was really established as a strong leader in those early pages. And I think the story would benefit from that.

Now with the Mills character, I’m going to state something I’ve found generally true of all writers. When it comes to the opposite gender, characters often come off as idealized more than realistic. I felt Mills suffered from this trait. She seemed to be an idealized version of male expectations for women. And in those cases, often the writer uses some outside influence in lieu of genuine character flaws. For example; Mills gets upset over Ryker’s promotion. That certainly helps create some dramatic tension but it’s not really a character flaw.

I felt the relationship between Ryker and Mills should have been more substantially established. A look at the beginning in which the writer describes, “Clearly there’s something between these two,” isn’t enough for me. Nor does it help me sympathize with their characters. I felt their characters and their relationship were too weak initially. I could have forgotten that if they had progressed more fully. But they didn’t. In my opinion, their relationship stayed weak throughout the story.

I felt the Finn character was…well….hmmm….kind of a cross between an informer and the big bad corporate villain. Of course, he later turned out to be not quite so. I actually like that his character remained so enigmatic throughout and I also like the way he was sort of “above the law.” I felt that created a lot of unpredictability and added freshness.

I think his character suffered a little from having so many writers tinker with the script. Sometimes he seemed to wax philosophical but then he never really gets too deep.

A couple of times, his dialogue got too contrived, but overall, he remained fairly enigmatic.

The exercise scene didn’t move the story forward. Maybe it was a bit too long. It was okay but it did come off to me as a bit of an attempt to mimic 2001. I was okay with it but was disappointed to see so much effort put into that scene while character development opportunities were being passed up.

The Corvin character - whom we barely get to know - is pretty much just a plot device. I’m not sure what they really could have done with him though. He had a purpose and he served it. I almost forgot about him until the end.

Since Ryker, Mills, and Finn turned out to be the main characters who would later make the most important decision in the story, I think their development should have been more thorough. I think we should have learned a little more about their back stories.

Later in the story, there were some really good action sequences and some good writing that I really felt. I didn’t get any of that in the set up of the story. At times I felt it really showed that different writers worked on this because it seemed to change in tone after the beginning.


So what was it? The Premise? Did the good just outweigh the bad for whatever executive gave the go ahead? Was it strictly business? Did they just think they could market it to teenagers and make some money?


Breanne

Quoted from Grandma Bear We can also talk about character arcs. To me it seemed Finn was the only one who really changed.

I am not sure anyone changed, I think the only thing that worked out for Finn is that the crew found another fight that was a much bigger one than Finn. People tend to band together and overcome their differences when fighting something much bigger and I think that is what happened with Finn. I don't think you necessarily change as a person, your priorities just change slightly. Besides, Finn was in the right all along really, he was only cast as the early antagonist because he pi$$ed off our hero, not that he was bad in any real way.

So no character arcs for me at all, as Pia said as soon as we reach the first plot point we get 80 pages of non stop action and heroics from our hero. There is nothing much else going on here,  what you see is really what you get.

Quoted from Breanne Mattson .So what was it? The Premise? Did the good just outweigh the bad for whatever executive gave the go ahead? Was it strictly business? Did they just think they could market it to teenagers and make some money?

So when this script was pitched for the Script Club I was very interested, A story by Richard Matheson, an early Twilight Zone episode, two ingredients for what could be a really interesting movie. Matheson also wrote the book that Omega Man / I am Legend was based on. I liked Omega Man, I did not really like I am Legend really, and for very similar reasons to this.

From the outset this script has almost certainly been crafted with a big budget action movie in mind, this is a popcorn movie and will get bums on seats. Personally I would probably not go see the movie unless there was nothing else showing, not my cup of tea at all, but it will no doubt make money and do alright.  I personally think a waste of a good premise. But like I said earlier, I am not saying it is a bad script, for what is expected of it then it is a good script, just not a script for a movie that I would really want to see.

Quoted from Murphy I am not sure anyone changed,...So no character arcs for me at all,...

This was also a problem for me. I didn’t feel any of the characters really went through any sort of transformation.

Maybe that’s where the non stop action became a liability. It essentially caused everyone to be under stress incessantly and hindered any further development.

Maybe Finn and Daya should have been the main characters.


Breanne

Breanne,

Quoted from Breanne Mattson So why do you (anyone, not just Pia) think it sold? Do you think it was the premise?

for me it was a lot of things... and they worked well together. I admit I LOVE sci-fi, especially anything to do with space. I was intrigued by the premise, thought the "mystery" revealed itself at a steady pace, action was great, something new added all the time. Just when I thought they had figured something out, had a solution, something else entered the scene.

I agree the characters for the most part were flat, but I found myself not really caring. I was too caught up in the plot and action.

I liked how they are forced to band together while distrust against each other grows. The creatures almost become a side thing.

(I'll respond to the rest later, I'm in the middle of a football "high".)  

Gary,

Finn to me changed a lot. He goes from being this semi-villain government type to smug asshole who thinks none of this will affect him, then when they find his corpse he totally changes his tune and becomes one of the good guys. At least that's how I saw it.

Quoted from Grandma Bear …for me it was a lot of things... and they worked well together. I admit I LOVE sci-fi, especially anything to do with space. I was intrigued by the premise, thought the "mystery" revealed itself at a steady pace, action was great, something new added all the time. Just when I thought they had figured something out, had a solution, something else entered the scene. I agree the characters for the most part were flat, but I found myself not really caring. I was too caught up in the plot and action. I liked how they are forced to band together while distrust against each other grows. The creatures almost become a side thing.

Oh I love sci-fi too. I wrote a sci-fi feature length script. What I’m trying to figure out is why this story is so much better than mine; why an executive would think this movie would do better at the theater than mine. Mine had action, blood and guts. No monsters though. And personally I think mine was more inventive with the imagery and the devices than this one.

I’m preparing to revise my own script and I’m trying to figure out what makes this script superior. I’m just trying to get the most out of this.

So thanks for your response.

If there’s anyone out there who’s read this script Countdown and has also read my sci-fi script Kill the Person Next to You, I would love to hear your thoughts on how mine can become more salable. Other than the suggestions that had already been made.

Quoted from Murphy So when this script was pitched for the Script Club I was very interested, A story by Richard Matheson, an early Twilight Zone episode, two ingredients for what could be a really interesting movie. Matheson also wrote the book that Omega Man / I am Legend was based on. I liked Omega Man, I did not really like I am Legend really, and for very similar reasons to this.

So I wonder how much of this script’s appeal was in the name Richard Matheson. This makes me wonder if the premise didn’t sell initially and then two pros were hired to punch it up.


Breanne

Interesting Breanne!

Maybe we should do that one of yours next just for comparison's sake?

Ok, I'm going to give my comments before I read any so I'm not swayed by opinions.

Some of the obvious problems in the script such as writing what can't be filmed and writing in camera directions can probably be forgiven because we're apparently dealing with professionals who've paid there dues and can do whatever the hell they want. (Did I just say that?)

Well, that's the way it feels to me anyways. The way I feel about this script is that it's a bit paint by numbers-- but hey-- if paint by numbers works-- then why not use it. The only thing is that I felt like this might have been a Star Trek but with different names plugged in. For all I know, that's what they did. But really, the only reason I'm saying that is because I'm supposed to criticize and so if I've got to-- then this is where the fault lies as far as I'm concerned.

I just didn't feel like there was anything really new here and the character development (what little there was) just seemed to exist for the sake of the movie.

...and yet, I think that the script delivered its "thriller" promise and it needs to be applauded for that. And afterall-- the truth is that thrillers aren't always meant to be beefed up on the character side anyways.

At first, I found the underlining irritating, but I think that's just a matter of the style that was chosen.

Some of my notes:

Camera directions:

Close on.

Widen to see.

There's nothing wrong with this if you're a pro and already in the biz, but I would caution writers to try and write in such a way that the director can shoot the scene the way he wants.

I think the fact that a woman lies there in agony is enough to tell the story.

>is holding it back

Should read just:

holds it back

I don't know why "Bald" is put into its own distinct sentence when it could go along with the rest of the character intro. Seems strange to me.

Well-- there's a brilliant way to begin dialogue: Fuck. It really does work. Maybe I should try that.

>Elser's an overachiever, a copilot at 21 thanks to quick wits, quicker reflexes.
How do you film that?

How does Torrance know-- by simply looking at the slug-- that the mucus he's leaving behind is fertilizing the plant?

>where they all shared

Should be "share".

I didn't get how you could see a missing lock of hair from an entirely thick head of woman's hair-- and to check DNA all you need is a single strand.

I have a question: What are they eating on this planet? What are they drinking? ... ok, finally we see (settle yourself- this is only a little itty bitty crit) Fin eating an energy bar, but I guess thrillers are meant to thrill and eating and drinking aren't too thrilling. This is actually a good thing for everyone to keep in mind no matter what they're writing. Every scene needs to fulfill the purpose of the "great goal" of the movie and if a dinner sequence fits, then that's great, but if not then: Feh!

My favorite scene was the one with Daya working with that Firefly/mosquito in her eye. I think this was really good and it showed how an insignificant bug can make a BIG difference!

I think the script did well with the sound effects and also with writing the action. Writing action is a difficult thing because it doesn't always read so great compared to its movie form; so I have to give a thumbs up there. I really admire anyone who can write action that moves us along but doesn't bombard us on the page.

Ok, that's it for now.

I'm going to take a look at some of the other comments and find insight there.

Sandra

Quoted from Breanne Mattson I’m preparing to revise my own script and I’m trying to figure out what makes this script superior. I’m just trying to get the most out of this.

I didn't read your sci-fi script but still I probably wouldn't call this script superior.  What I would call it is more marketable.  And that likely doesn't have much to do with your writing or your script - it mostly comes from name-recognition.  This script automatically had Matheson attached, once Brandt came on board it was probably a given that the script would be green-lighted.  No matter what changes you make to your script it isn't going to give it name-recognition so don't knock yourself about over it.

Though to add some fuel to the discussion, one of the main differences I find between the produced and unproduced scripts is that the produced scripts don't seem to care about asides from the writer.  In a number of cases in this script (and others) I have noticed the writer flat out stating something about a characters internal stuggle or something "we" see or don't see or just general notes.  They could care less if they distract us.  I think their intent is to make their vision as clear as possible for people reading and their expectations of the readers level of understanding is low.