Hi Xavier,

I understand where everyone is coming from with the “likeable” advice, but I think there is more to it than that.  What I don’t quite grasp is your aim of creating a character nobody cares about.  I don’t feel that a character, even a main character, has to be likeable – that’s just the easiest way to go, so it is the most common.  With that said, a character MUST be interesting, likeable or not.  Creating a character that is not interesting, and that we don’t like, then presenting that character in a “slice of life” vignette where there is no tension or conflict, means you have a story that is not going to appeal to the majority of people.  It may make a fair artsy, experimental film where your meta-statement about homeless people is the main purpose, but it will not be something people will likely be able to feel a real connection with.  Even if they “get” your message, they won’t feel it, or give it as much weight.

I do understand the drive to create film stories that go against the norm, and don’t follow the same old formula.  This is a tricky task to pull off, even for the most experienced writers.  But the reason that the norm is what it is, and those formulas exist, is because they have been tried and tested over the course of millennia, and it is what most often leads to telling an engaging story.  

It’s all about having something to communicate.  In order for us to get an audience to listen to what we want to tell them, we have to give them something in return – otherwise we are just preaching at them, and no one enjoys that.  In order to get across what we want to say, we need to entertain our readers and viewers.  We do that with interesting characters, who want something that we can identify with.  We do that by raising dramatic questions that the audience wants to learn the answer to.  We do that by providing tension, drama, laughs, scares, tender moments, and, sometimes, big explosions.

Your message is “nobody cares about homeless people,” including us (the audience).  I have to disagree with your premise.  There are many, many good folks who care about homeless people and their problems, and work tirelessly to assist them.  As a matter of fact, I suspect that your audience will mostly be made up of people who come into the film caring more about homeless people.  If I don’t care about homeless people, why would I want to see a film about homeless people?  If I do care, I’d be attracted to your film and want to see it.  So I think your reasoning on this may be somewhat flawed.

Okay, so you’ve created Joe to teach us about how nobody cares about the homeless.  He wakes up, wanders around coughing, grunting and hissing at people, steals money from another homeless guy (money that uncaring people gave him), buys cigs, trades a cig for pizza, returns to his bench and dies.  The problem I find with this series of events demonstrating your point is that I never get the sense that Joe would accept anyone’s help.  If there was someone who cared, and tried to help Joe, his character is such that I would expect him to reject the help.  He’s too “proud” to beg for money, apparently, and would rather steal from his fellows that accept a hand out.  

Since you’ve made Joe someone seemingly incapable of receiving help, or at the very least projecting a “leave me alone” attitude, your message gets lost.  We understand why people don’t care about Joe, and we agree.  It’s hard to blame the people in the story who are put off or disgusted by this guy, since he is purposefully off-putting and disgusting.  Your message, therefore, ends up being more along the lines of, “homeless people don’t want to be cared about,” which is not what you want to say (I don’t believe).

If, for example, Joe starts off the way you portray him, and realizes along the way that he’s sick (perhaps when he coughs up blood), and that he’s going to die, and this makes him stop and reevaluate his behavior.  He’s afraid to die, or there’s one last thing he needs to do before he dies, and he realizes that he can’t achieve whatever it is without help.  He reaches out, swallowing his gruff pride, and seeks help.  He finds that no one is willing to help him, he’s dismissed and mistreated, even though he’s trying his best.  He ends up dying, cold and alone, and we feel something.  

This is a tragic scenario, one that could elicit many different reactions, not just because of our personal view on the homeless, but because of the very relatable human circumstances Joe faces that we can all identify with.  I’ve never been homeless, but I can identify with feeling alone, or being afraid of dying.  As someone mentioned earlier, Joe doesn’t care if he dies, so neither do we.  If Joe doesn’t care, then homeless people don’t care if they die, so we don’t need to care about them dying.  If, on the other hand, I can connect with Joe as a homeless man, and see that he has the same fears and desires as I do, then I can see that we share the same experiences of humanity, and now I am engaged, and I’m open to your message.

Format/Mechanical Notes:
General: Don’t cap “coughs.”  I don’t recommend capping sounds at all, but even when you are using this style, you don’t cap sounds that the actor makes, only sound effects that come from somewhere else that aren’t generated by the action on screen (for example a siren in the distance, or a crash in the next room).
Pg. 1: You say you don’t mention Joe’s name until the 3rd paragraph because his name isn’t important.  If this is the case, why do you give him a name?  If you do name him, then waiting until the 3rd paragraph isn’t going to translate onto the screen, so what’s the point?  Just name him when we first see him.
Pg. 1: You use “CITY STREETS” as a location in several places.  Does this mean we are moving locations from one street to another, and maybe another?  I would stick with “CITY STREET” to avoid any confusion.
Pg. 1: “Poeple” should be “People”
Pg. 2: “Gum” should be “gum”
Pg. 3: “The bench Joe awoken on is empty.” – This is very awkward.  Get rid of the passive voice stuff (“is”), and try something like “Joe approaches the same newspaper-strewn bench he woke up on earlier in the day.”  You replace two lines with one, and make it more active.
Pg. 3: “into frame” – Get rid of camera references; it takes us out of the story.  You also have a couple walking OS earlier – see if you can rework that as well.

Good luck!

Thanks for the comment, a little long but I get your point.

I would just like to point out: you say that Joe is a man who rejects help, you're right, he does so because he has pride, he doesn't want people to think that just because he's homeless he needs everyone to care for him. But he would accept help like most homeless people would. I once knew this homeless man who Joe was based off of who would stand outside of a Truck Stop yelling at people fro looking at him. I gave that man twenty dollars and he gave me a hug and said "God Bless You" I'm not sure he meant it, but it just shows that even the worst of people will accept the right type of help.

Some one DID mention that Joe doesn't care if he dies, that's not really the case, he's not afraid of dying but at the same time he doesn't want to. He tries to hide the fact that he's dying, when he covers up the blood with his coat; which is also part of his not wanting any help because of his pride. So I do give Joe some actual human characteristics.

I like to CAP words that are important, usually I like to do it your way, but when something will soon lead up to something else, like the coughing is what causes Joe's death,  I like to remind the reader that it's there. And I give Joe a name that's simple, very average Joe like, which is were I got the name from, and the title is just a working title, it could easily be changed.  And when I write CITY STREETS it's usually cos I picture those scenes as Tracking Shots or moving shots, they could walk from one street to another, I just don't like to write in camera angels and  stuff into short films.

Thanks for pointing out the typos, I'll make sure to fix it while I revise the script, and I'll take some of that other advice as well, it could use a little more emotion, I agree with that, and I'll try to fix the story up... again, thanks for the comment.

I wanted to punch Joe in the face. Why? Because he didn't say thank-you for the gum.

Joke ^

Quoted from Xavier Thanks for the comment, a little long but I get your point.

Sorry about that.  Won't happen again.

-R

Quoted from Script_Monkey I wanted to punch Joe in the face. Why? Because he didn't say thank-you for the gum.

yeah, the gum was actually supposed to be something important in the script but I cut out the extra scene because it didn't really go with the rest of the story.

And don't worry about the length of the comment rjbelair, I like to read what people have to say about my work.

Xavier

Admirable idea, lacking in delivery.

Joe pays no attention. Just continues to run. -- Could be re written as "Joe pays no attention. He continues to run."

"This person eats a pizza slice from the trash." -- Would work better like this "She eats a pizza slice from the thrash"

MAN
Hey watch it you lazy bum.

MAN
I don't see why those people can't
go get real lives.

These lines don't sit right when I read them. Just calling him a "Bum" would do in the former, while "real lives" sounds a little off in the latter. Maybe say something like "I don't see why those people can't go sort themselves out or "...can't go and get a job"

"The bench Joe awoken on is empty." -- Your tenses & grammar are mixed up here.

"You've better be worth it." -- "You" instead of "You've"

Very sad ending even if it were enevitable from the beginning. Sorta' reminded me of Barney's film in the film festival episode of the Simpsons.

We merely observe Joe here, there is no narrative or story. just the final hours of a poor homeless dying man. I completely respect what you attempted here, it is an interesting direction to take & for the most part it isn't a bad job but again its your grammar & dialogue that let it down (similar to "People Who Lie" both have interesting concepts, its the execution which needs to be worked on)

Once again, best of luck, I truly believe this has some potential.

Col.

Thanks, for the read.

This script, I wrote it like an action instead of a drama-ish like script. I can tell that when people read a drama they like for grammar to actually be there. But when reading an action people like to make it a quick read. So maybe I shouldn't mix the two.

I don't know if you're from New York, but that's were the story might take place, I'm not really sure, even as the writer. But everyone in the story has a New Yorker accent so they skip a few words when they talk. So I guess that can explain the dialog a bit.

Thanks for liking the idea on both my scripts, I just sat down and started writing them, so it didn't take much thought, but again thanks.

Xavier.

Xavier,

I'd have to agree that you need to delve into Joe more.  Right now, we bear witness to Joe's final day, but after he dies, we don't know any more about him.  I understand you were trying to give an unsentimental end to a rough life, but I would have like to known how Joe arrived at this pathetic point.  I think flashbacks would be very useful in a story like this.  Maybe a few glimpses of Joe as a child, Joe in college, Joe married, Joe with his kids and then the event that mentally broke Joe and sent him down this road.  Was it drugs?  Alcohol?  Family tragedy?

You gave us a surface view of Joe, but we need to know more to give a damn about him.  If we don't feel anything when he dies, then the script doesn't work.

Some have already noted that you occasionally over-describe, such as here:

"It is not too much but enough for him."
"They must think he is asleep, or they just don't care."

Those sentences simply aren't necessary, even if you, as the writer, thought they were.  I'm not preaching here, because I've been guilty of doing this myself.  It can be hard to catch these sentences when you've been staring at the screen for hours.

"I guess what I'm saying is that no matter how much more stuff I put in it's not going to change the way the ending makes you feel "unchanged" there is no sadness or happiness in my ending, it just is and once again I don't think anything can change that."

I disagree with that statement.  I think if you dig deeper into Joe and show us the real person beneath the shabby exterior, we would be moved by his death.