Craig,

An interesting little piece here. You did a good job of hiding the identity of those outside. That said, having stretched it out, I was a little disappointed at the outcome. I just felt a little bit cheated. It's probably owing to the length, which was maybe a tad too long and it made a rod for your own back. You have your reader's anticipation building, so you have an obligation to deliver, which I think you only partially achieved.

The dialogue maybe needs a bit more tailoring, 'cos you left it deliberately vague to skew perceptions, but when you view it through the lens of the actual situation, it's too vague and loses a tad of believability.

Your action was a bit sparse, and while we know it's a dialogue-driven piece, I think we need to know a bit more about what we're seeing 'cos you've left it a bit bare.

All that said, it was solid work, and with some dialogue tweaking, filling out the imagery and overall shortening, I agree this is ripe for being produced.

Andrew

Hey Craig,

Alffy's definitely right about the spacing. It was actually distracting at points, especially when they yelled one, two, three.

This was a good job by you in most aspects.  SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT.

The pregnancy thing was worked in nicely, as was the smashing of the T.V. I didn't catch on that you were giving us a twist ending until about 3/4 of the way through, so again, good job on that.

The one major flaw I see in the premise is that "they" are not after Nicki - so why can't she leave?  She says she can't just nip out to get cigarettes, and you have them eating what's left in the house for five days, etc.

Also I think some of your dialogue is a bit misleading - for example, when Nicki says "I don't think IT saw me", you bring us squarely around to thinking that she's looking at something inhuman, when she probably wouldn't speak that way.

These things aside I think it was a pretty nice job and a very interesting idea - good job.

AJR

Craig,

I enjoyed this, especially the banter between Nicki and Katy, which worked really well in showing the bond in their realtionship that reminded me of Thelma and Louise, or Butch and Sundance. It did feel a little long, possibly because I guessed what was waiting outside.

Spoiler


One suggestion, before it is revealed what lies in wait, is that they "arm" themselves before going out there- with the use of stuff,like hair straighteners, sizzling curling tongs, make-up. You know, - war paint,  before facing the press

Hi Andrew and AJR,

Cheers for the kind words and feedback, you're right, it does need tweeking somewhat.

All these suggestions are a great help.

Thanks again,

Craig.

LOTSA SPOILERS
Okay, I've deliberately not read the other reviews. So, here's my bit.

Well first off, this is different, Craig, and I don’t mean in a bad way though I have to say though overall though I find the idea sound I’m a little under-sold on the execution of it. It just doesn’t quite work for me (this draft, at least).

A few things foretold the big reveal ‘twist’ at the end and I tried to put my finger on it for quite a while. I think there’s just an element of melodrama and ‘domesticity’ via the dialogue that gives the ‘real’ situation away, too early, and some of your descriptions were a little over the top for me too. You set up a situation - likening it to a life and death and ‘real threat’ – that those ‘outside forces’ trying to get in are not human and that the women are in peril from an outside force of a supernatural or at least physically threatening kind. Yet imo, you soft-sell it.

My suggestion would be to be more brave with it. I’d be interested to see how it worked if you presented it as real ‘horror’ and then pull the rug from under me.

All the references are there – you plant plot devices really well through dialogue and description i.e. the Ouija Board, ‘evil doesn’t sleep’ – The use of ‘it’ instead of ‘they’ which you alternate between btw – another author ploy to make the reader feel the predators outside are not of this world  i.e. and yet it’s a little obvious to me still that they are in fact just ‘paps’ with long lenses.

You’ve got the reference to religion -‘God help me’, and to the occult (see above)and to one of them having done 'something stupid” and yet I felt like you were trying to have it both ways in an effort to hide what was really happening.

If you want to lead me up the garden path, I’d say, go ‘big’ with it.

In a filmic version I would think about what we would actually be looking at from within the house. We would see blinding flashes (camera) – that’s obvious and it’s a good image to play with. We would hear noise – even if presented as distorted. If the ‘women’ have the lights off (I'd set it at night btw) (which is entirely plausible) then those blinding lights would light up and emphasize shadows inside the house. Give me some horror clichés: footsteps, creaking floorboards, doorknobs turning, at least an instance of someone banging violently on the door, that’d be nice and be a good ‘jump’ moment. Also, not once do the women mention calling the police or the need for any other assistance either. I do know why – but that’s my point. It kinda’ gives it away as not being a ‘life threatening’ situation but another situation all together.

Set it up as a Stephen King horror situation – then turn it on its head, that’s my advice. I think that’s the only way these kind of ideas can really work.

Now I don’t want to get ‘picky’ about the writing cause you know I’m a fan of your prev. work but hey, I gotta, cause that’s how we get better and that’s what SS is for. So, my advice is cut back on your over-descriptions a bit. My opinion only of course. Present the image for me – I’ll fill in the rest. An example that stuck out: The “empty ready-meal containers” – this image alone does it for me straight off. It’s not necessary to add ‘cascading down onto the cream carpet’ line for example. The use of “‘almost’ stroboscopic” – it’s obvious that’s exactly what it is – not almost.

Likewise:
The “recently neglected living room” I already get that the place is in disarray.
Extreme panic “is apparent” – how? Is she shaking? Eyes darting, bulging? Can’t sit still or stand in one spot?  
“A brief glimpse of a calm expression shows on her face. She exhales. Just go for she exhales, her face relaxes.
“semi-disapprovingly.” - nup. Have her tut, or roll her eyes, or something.
“after a few minutes”? – nup to this too. Make it immediate. And, “she excitedly scurries back into the living room.” You get the gist, I think it’s just not as economical or succinct as it could be.

“Katy fights back the tears as she nods. She lurches forward, grabbing Nicki in a tight embrace.”

In small doses the “as she nods” thing is fine, but it’s a bit of a bug-bear for me and is not as fluid and ‘one action’ as it could be.

“Katy fights back tears. She nods, lurches forward, embraces Nicki tightly”. That’s not perfect I know, but I’d experiment if I were you.

Now, I gotta say, I like the predatory nature of the paparazzi as a story premise and the whole media-gone-mad equating them to villains/monsters and I see what you were trying to achieve. I just think in your efforts to keep the ‘reveal under wraps you were a little ‘on the fence’ in how far to go with it.  

I’d ramp it up even further – set it up as real horror. Set it at Night, as I said above. Oh, and one last thing.

Here’s an example lost in the ‘telling’ not ‘showing imo . The scene in which one of the women goes upstairs and leaves the other alone. This scene cries out to be intercut with the other and yet, instead of ‘showing us this’ she screams and then ‘tells her about it’ afterward. I’d be more interested in seeing her creep along the corridor to the bathroom, (intercut with the other woman praying) notice the open window, panic, and then nearly get her arm snapped off in the process.

One last thing. The title ‘clique’ seems too mild mannered and benign. Something with ‘outside’ in the title comes to mind. Course this is all jmo. And despite what I’ve been nitpickety about I still enjoyed it mate. It's good stuff I just think you need to decide how far to go with it.  

Hi Harriet,

I love the idea of the girls' ammo!

Thanks for the comments.


Hey LC,

How's things? Hope you're well.

Quoted from LC LOTSA SPOILERS A few things foretold the big reveal ‘twist’ at the end and I tried to put my finger on it for quite a while. I think there’s just an element of melodrama and ‘domesticity’ via the dialogue that gives the ‘real’ situation away, too early, and some of your descriptions were a little over the top for me too. You set up a situation - likening it to a life and death and ‘real threat’ – that those ‘outside forces’ trying to get in are not human and that the women are in peril from an outside force of a supernatural or at least physically threatening kind. Yet imo, you soft-sell it. My suggestion would be to be more brave with it. I’d be interested to see how it worked if you presented it as real ‘horror’ and then pull the rug from under me.

I was 50/50 on whether to tag this as short/horror, but I thought it might make people feel a little short-changed.

Quoted from LC All the references are there – you plant plot devices really well through dialogue and description i.e. the Ouija Board, ‘evil doesn’t sleep’ – The use of ‘it’ instead of ‘they’ which you alternate between btw – another author ploy to make the reader feel the predators outside are not of this world  i.e. and yet it’s a little obvious to me still that they are in fact just ‘paps’ with long lenses.

The Ouija board was originally mentioned in the opening scene, but it got re-jigged after some useful feedback. I tried to make the paps seem as threatening/paranormal as possible without over-egging it by using these little red herrings.

Quoted from LC You’ve got the reference to religion -‘God help me’, and to the occult (see above)and to one of them having done 'something stupid” and yet I felt like you were trying to have it both ways in an effort to hide what was really happening.

I used the 'God help me', because even the most unremotely religious  
person usually prays to or blames God in desperate times. I wasn't trying to have it both ways, just trying to get a bit of believable dialogue in there.

Quoted from LC If you want to lead me up the garden path, I’d say, go ‘big’ with it.

Okay, it's a deal. You've set me a mission now. The last one turned out to be a corking idea, and I'm gonna try my best with this one...

I thought there was a reference to calling the police just before the phone is shown smashed through  the telly screen, I've just checked and there wasn't. Doh! I'm sure there was a reference to that originally. Good call.

As ever, all your advice is taken, and will be seriously mulled-over during the next few weeks. You're right about having it set at night. How the hell did I not think about that?

The title 'Clique' was the only thing I could think of as a reference to the 'click' of the cameras, without making it too obvious.

Thanks again for the detailed feedback. I'll see what I can do...

Craig

First and foremost...thank you for not writing about zombies.  While I like them, they're a touch over done.  Again I have to comment on your lean writing style.  Very nice...and also another fun twist.  Had fun reading this one.