All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Kind of like the first time people watched The People Under the Stairs. If you watch it as a horror, you'll hate it whereas one watches it as a comedy and it's hilarious.
Good shout. The bit at the end when all the yellowed people were walking around after being freed...comedy gold.
Will be interesting to see the end product. If this was am attempt at comedy, horror satire, I think it pulled it off pretty well...
As i said in my review. There were a few scenes in here that were laugh out loud funny. It just seemed like it tried to take itself seriously at the same time though. Normal horror with comedy peppered through out.
It will be fun to watch it hit the big screen... What will the Critics and public think of it???
The critics will hate it and hopefully, so will the public.
I personally have zero interest in seeing it, based on what I read.
So, does Iceland have their own God? Each and every separate country in Africa? Canada?
Am I reading too much into this? I don't know, but these and everything else I mentioned earlier came to me as serious logic mistakes. I like logic and I hate when things don't make any sense. It kills everything right out of the gate for me.
maybe this is intended to be watched at home with some friends while drinking...it could be kind of funny then, but personally I would prefer that they went for straight horror. Maybe Rick is right though. As a horror, it is unfixable in it's current stage.
The critics will hate it and hopefully, so will the public.
I personally have zero interest in seeing it, based on what I read.
So, does Iceland have their own God? Each and every separate country in Africa? Canada?
Am I reading too much into this? I don't know, but these and everything else I mentioned earlier came to me as serious logic mistakes. I like logic and I hate when things don't make any sense. It kills everything right out of the gate for me.
Scripts live in their own made up world. That place can be anything the writers decide.
I think you just didn't get it. It'll be there to get.
Oh, I got it alright. I definitely don't like what I got though.
Guess it should be said that I normally do not appreciate humor and horror mixed together, as I don't think the 2 go hand in hand at all. Horror can definitely have humor mixed in, but IMO, it should be played for reals...straight up. Just what I prefer, I guess.
I refer the honourable gentlemen to my recent posts. I try not to repeat myself. Hey, I can try. Alas I often fail. A lass. That'd be nice. One at a time.
Hmmm. They don't seem to be queueing up yet. This is frankly typical.
And no. I didn't. I read bits. Quick scan, typathing.
There were holes to be dug. And dug they were. Frigging things are fulla water now. Does anyone have a pump? Lasses and pumps. I'm sure there's a joke somewhere.
Now then. Quieten down, you lot. Yes, you boys at the back too. Come on!
That's better. Sitting comfortably? Then, I shall begin.
When a man loves a woman certain things begin to...
Sorry, wrong textbook. Where is my book. Ah, thank you.
Where is the table. Ah. Over there.
I scanned it. And I got it. It has a lot of humour in it. As Scream did.
A lot of references to previous horror films. Stuff that any horrror fan would recognise.
The scene it reminded me of was the discussion in Scream and sequels about sequels.
Witness Drew Barrymore getting slaughtered early on. All this yap about virgins.
Friday The Halloween. Even the bleeding Shining.
It's all there to find.
I found this script highly amusing. And rather entertaining. In the right hands it'll make a bloody good romp. I'd pay hard cash to see it. And it's not often I put up with all the little annoying tossers that like hanging round cinemas these days.
Of course it's not perfect. But then again, what is?
Oh, I got it alright. I definitely don't like what I got though.
Guess it should be said that I normally do not appreciate humor and horror mixed together, as I don't think the 2 go hand in hand at all. Horror can definitely have humor mixed in, but IMO, it should be played for reals...straight up. Just what I prefer, I guess.
Ren, did you read this?
Jeff... Geoffrey, you need to address your concerns to God. He did it I'm afraid. Yes, the whole mash of logical and illogical, laughter and horror... It's all part of the matrix we're in. It's the "you say toma-toe, and I say tomo-toe" debate. You can't have one without the other.
First off, 'making it' is an expression for achieving your own goals. Not just some sensationlised way to say 'making lots of money'.
Honesty is always the best policy, even if it's unpopular. My bugbear with some of the comments here and beyond come down to a basic lack of respect. It doesn't matter if the one being dissed is aware or not - and it's logical to deduce this type of disrespectful behaviour would permeate the actions of someone on set.
I do take umbrage with this comment, James:
Quoted from James McClung
that the average movie goer is retarded
Firstly, what is the "average movie goer"? That means nothing to me. Secondly, do these people exclusively see films that you deem suitably retarded? And what would those movies be? I'll refer you to three ex-girlfriends. One is a scientist. Very clever girl and her favourite movie is the 'The Notebook'. Is she retarded? Ex girlfriend number 2. She studied at Oxford and would watch anything (probably something 'retarded'). Third ex, she is a banker and much like the other two, she couldn't give a toss what is mass market or whatever else. I also have many working class friends, who didn't go beyond school. Mechanics, carpenters, bums and everything in between - very much the 'average movie goer' if we introduce demographics as a firm foundation and not some wooly tag. You know, one of the bums watches as diverse range a movies as anyone here and despite him falling under the 'average movie goer', he even thinks when he watches his films.
So what's the point? That stereotyping people often says more about the person doing so, than those judged. Also, why do you want to work in film? Serious, why? 'Cos the seeming contempt you hold for your potential audience suggests your career will be very short, frankly.
Why do I want to work in film? 'Cos I want to produce and write films that touch people. Entertain, inform, provocative or guilty fun, it doesn't matter. Do I want to a part of making movies for moviemakers, or for as many people who can take something from it? For me, that's not even a question.
The above example is exactly the type of attitude that needs addressing, to my mind. Yes, Hollywood is a business and many of its executives think of nothing but the bottom line. It's a business, so get over it. Film is not some pure form. It has prostituted itself as has many forms of entertainment - there are products churned out to make money, but does it mean they are made for 'stupid people'? Such a simplistic way to approach films. To me, it's more about tapping into what people want as enjoyment on date night, or chilling out to when they've have had a bad day, than going for the lowest common denominator. So, does that make the mass market stimuli exclusively catered for 'retarded people', or does it represent catching a mood, or writing for a market and giving them what they want? Which is not a simple skill in itself.
There are, however, directors like Spielberg, Scorcese who have weaved out terrific careers by working around the money men, by writing for 'both audiences', which is a load of bollocks 'cos it assumes the 'commercial' audience must be 'retards' while the 'art' audience comprises 'intellectuals'. The same intellectuals who seemingly do not understand psychology and social behaviour, if their stereotypes are to be believed.
No money men, no film. Any industry outside of Hollywood is essentially a microcosm that works to the same business logic, just maybe without the over zealous need to make money. But to suggest that any other film industry is not as susceptible to the bottom line as Hollywood belies a fundamental misunderstanding of the real world.
The key is to understand both the essence of your story, who is it for and knowing how to get it out there. A story can have a lot of soul and still be written with a market in mind - just look at the romantic genre or the horror genre for that matter. Writing gratuitous kill scenes could be considered the lowest common denominator for the 'retarded' audience, but it's generally termed creative writing. That's just plain hypocrisy. Some people just seem scared of 'selling out', but I thought most got over that at 15 when they realised listening to alternative music doesn't make them unique.
This comment from Rick shows that he is very shrewd and this will serve him well, a point that messrs Spielberg and Scorcese demonstrate in abundance:
The lack of understanding that a lot of writers, actors, filmmakers etc have about marketing and business is what separates them from the successful ones...not talent IMHO.
If people are content to snipe and bitch about working people's work while pigeon-holing themselves as serious-types, or trying to be the next Hitchcock, and refusing to acknowledge their audience may just be bright, will likely find themselves on the outside looking in, unless they get a huge dollop of luck. A huge appetite for learning, being modest and understanding what your own weaknesses are will stand you in better stead than labouring over why someone else - who coincidentally does what you want - is rubbish and not as good as you are.
Jeff, you are remarkably sensitive for a man who shouts the loudest. If you are taking any of this personally, you really need not. If you do, then maybe you should put your own insensitive comments in check for others who may take it personally when you exuberantly rip a script a new one.
I could go on, but will refrain as it may be considered sidetracking the subject. However, I do think it's pertinent as it touches on intentions, markets and audiences which seem to be applicable here.
First off, 'making it' is an expression for achieving your own goals. Not just some sensationlised way to say 'making lots of money'.
Honesty is always the best policy, even if it's unpopular. My bugbear with some of the comments here and beyond come down to a basic lack of respect. It doesn't matter if the one being dissed is aware or not - and it's logical to deduce this type of disrespectful behaviour would permeate the actions of someone on set.
I do take umbrage with this comment, James:
Firstly, what is the "average movie goer"? That means nothing to me. Secondly, do these people exclusively see films that you deem suitably retarded? And what would those movies be? I'll refer you to three ex-girlfriends. One is a scientist. Very clever girl and her favourite movie is the 'The Notebook'. Is she retarded? Ex girlfriend number 2. She studied at Oxford and would watch anything (probably something 'retarded'). Third ex, she is a banker and much like the other two, she couldn't give a toss what is mass market or whatever else. I also have many working class friends, who didn't go beyond school. Mechanics, carpenters, bums and everything in between - very much the 'average movie goer' if we introduce demographics as a firm foundation and not some wooly tag. You know, one of the bums watches as diverse range a movies as anyone here and despite him falling under the 'average movie goer', he even thinks when he watches his films.
So what's the point? That stereotyping people often says more about the person doing so, than those judged. Also, why do you want to work in film? Serious, why? 'Cos the seeming contempt you hold for your potential audience suggests your career will be very short, frankly.
Why do I want to work in film? 'Cos I want to produce and write films that touch people. Entertain, inform, provocative or guilty fun, it doesn't matter. Do I want to a part of making movies for moviemakers, or for as many people who can take something from it? For me, that's not even a question.
The above example is exactly the type of attitude that needs addressing, to my mind. Yes, Hollywood is a business and many of its executives think of nothing but the bottom line. It's a business, so get over it. Film is not some pure form. It has prostituted itself as has many forms of entertainment - there are products churned out to make money, but does it mean they are made for 'stupid people'? Such a simplistic way to approach films. To me, it's more about tapping into what people want as enjoyment on date night, or chilling out to when they've have had a bad day, than going for the lowest common denominator. So, does that make the mass market stimuli exclusively catered for 'retarded people', or does it represent catching a mood, or writing for a market and giving them what they want? Which is not a simple skill in itself.
There are, however, directors like Spielberg, Scorcese who have weaved out terrific careers by working around the money men, by writing for 'both audiences', which is a load of bollocks 'cos it assumes the 'commercial' audience must be 'retards' while the 'art' audience comprises 'intellectuals'. The same intellectuals who seemingly do not understand psychology and social behaviour, if their stereotypes are to be believed.
No money men, no film. Any industry outside of Hollywood is essentially a microcosm that works to the same business logic, just maybe without the over zealous need to make money. But to suggest that any other film industry is not as susceptible to the bottom line as Hollywood belies a fundamental misunderstanding of the real world.
The key is to understand both the essence of your story, who is it for and knowing how to get it out there. A story can have a lot of soul and still be written with a market in mind - just look at the romantic genre or the horror genre for that matter. Writing gratuitous kill scenes could be considered the lowest common denominator for the 'retarded' audience, but it's generally termed creative writing. That's just plain hypocrisy. Some people just seem scared of 'selling out', but I thought most got over that at 15 when they realised listening to alternative music doesn't make them unique.
This comment from Rick shows that he is very shrewd and this will serve him well, a point that messrs Spielberg and Scorcese demonstrate in abundance:
If people are content to snipe and bitch about working people's work while pigeon-holing themselves as serious-types, or trying to be the next Hitchcock, and refusing to acknowledge their audience may just be bright, will likely find themselves on the outside looking in, unless they get a huge dollop of luck. A huge appetite for learning, being modest and understanding what your own weaknesses are will stand you in better stead than labouring over why someone else - who coincidentally does what you want - is rubbish and not as good as you are.
Jeff, you are remarkably sensitive for a man who shouts the loudest. If you are taking any of this personally, you really need not. If you do, then maybe you should put your own insensitive comments in check for others who may take it personally when you exuberantly rip a script a new one.
I could go on, but will refrain as it may be considered sidetracking the subject. However, I do think it's pertinent as it touches on intentions, markets and audiences which seem to be applicable here.
Actually I'm kind of pleased that people are being critical of the script. I remember a while back when we did our first produced script and no one would comment on what was wrong with it because it was going to be "produced".
Okay. Once again. Why don't you read the script. I can see you're making the effort but how can you possibly comment if you have no idea what people are talking about?!
Firstly, what is the "average movie goer"? That means nothing to me. Secondly, do these people exclusively see films that you deem suitably retarded? And what would those movies be? I'll refer you to three ex-girlfriends. One is a scientist. Very clever girl and her favourite movie is the 'The Notebook'. Is she retarded? Ex girlfriend number 2. She studied at Oxford and would watch anything (probably something 'retarded'). Third ex, she is a banker and much like the other two, she couldn't give a toss what is mass market or whatever else. I also have many working class friends, who didn't go beyond school. Mechanics, carpenters, bums and everything in between - very much the 'average movie goer' if we introduce demographics as a firm foundation and not some wooly tag. You know, one of the bums watches as diverse range a movies as anyone here and despite him falling under the 'average movie goer', he even thinks when he watches his films.
The average movie goer is not so much some who will watch anything so much as someone who doesn't care what they watch. Not specific enough for you? How about someone who'd watch Norbit and like it?
You must've wanted to ruffle my feathers with this one. Seriously.
Because I love film and I have a fire in my belly and I can do better than the bullshit Hollywood is feeding to me. Why else? I don't so much have contempt for this audience so much as I don't want to write for them. I want to write for people who actually care about films and can take more from them than someone who goes to see Watchmen and gets made that it wasn't a "real" superhero movie. All my heroes have been cult filmmakers to a certain degree who care about what they do and were able to find an audience just the same so I know it's possible.
What can I say? I'm the wrong person to be talking to about this. I have no interest in the Hollywood system and I know that I can be successful without it. You can pass judgement on my "lack of success" (if that's what you want to call it) all you want. I don't give a fuck.
No money men, no film. Any industry outside of Hollywood is essentially a microcosm that works to the same business logic, just maybe without the over zealous need to make money. But to suggest that any other film industry is not as susceptible to the bottom line as Hollywood belies a fundamental misunderstanding of the real world.
Movies are expensive. It has to be a business and I understand that. But to say the industries outside of Hollywood are exactly the same... no, just no. I never said it was easy to thrive outside of Hollywood and I never said other industries aren't looking for money. But I do believe there's more people who care outside of Hollywood and I've seen it first hand.
The key is to understand both the essence of your story, who is it for and knowing how to get it out there. A story can have a lot of soul and still be written with a market in mind - just look at the romantic genre or the horror genre for that matter. Writing gratuitous kill scenes could be considered the lowest common denominator for the 'retarded' audience, but it's generally termed creative writing. That's just plain hypocrisy. Some people just seem scared of 'selling out', but I thought most got over that at 15 when they realised listening to alternative music doesn't make them unique.
If you'll look back, you'll find some of my thoughts on this kind of mentality.
If people are content to snipe and bitch about working people's work while pigeon-holing themselves as serious-types, or trying to be the next Hitchcock, and refusing to acknowledge their audience may just be bright, will likely find themselves on the outside looking in, unless they get a huge dollop of luck. A huge appetite for learning, being modest and understanding what your own weaknesses are will stand you in better stead than labouring over why someone else - who coincidentally does what you want - is rubbish and not as good as you are.
I know this wasn't for me but then it sorta is. Why not snipe and bitch? Why shouldn't I snipe and bitch? I'm 23. I've got the rest of my life to be "reasonable" and I think I stand a better chance in this business than someone who's all bright-eyed and hoping for the best. They're gonna get their hearts broken in the end. Besides, I think I'm a better writer because I'm unhappy with the current state of things. I push myself harder because of it. I understand my own weaknesses and I'm flexible when it comes to the business side of things. But I'm never going to put someone over me just because they have success. Can't you see the bullshit in that? It's important to be humble but it's important to have some self worth and, more importantly, some goddamn confidence as well.
I could go on, but will refrain as it may be considered sidetracking the subject. However, I do think it's pertinent as it touches on intentions, markets and audiences which seem to be applicable here.
Fair enough.
What can I say? I'm not in this for the same reasons as you but I can tell we both genuinely love film so we can go our divergent paths. I wish you the best. I just can't believe you asked me why I want to be in film? Obviously, it's not money and obviously, I'm here on SS talking to you. WTF do you think?!
The critics will hate it and hopefully, so will the public.
I personally have zero interest in seeing it, based on what I read.
So, does Iceland have their own God? Each and every separate country in Africa? Canada? Am I reading too much into this? I don't know, but these and everything else I mentioned earlier came to me as serious logic mistakes. I like logic and I hate when things don't make any sense. It kills everything right out of the gate for me.
Re-read what the Director says on pg 102
"In every country, in every culture, there is a God to appease".
So yes, there is one in Iceland...one in Uganda, D.R. Congo...the whole world is going to be destroyed and evberyone on it after all.
These sleeping Gods used to walk the earth and fight amongst themselves. It's kind of a parody of H.P. Lovecrafts Cthulu mythos mixed in with the old tales of the Titans and such.
Pages: 
Author
Script Club XIII Cabin In The Woods
Logged
you need to address your concerns to God. He did it I'm afraid. Yes, the whole mash of logical and illogical, laughter and horror... It's all part of the matrix we're in. It's the "you say toma-toe, and I say tomo-toe" debate. You can't have one without the other. 
Locked Board