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.
Clique by Craig Cooper-Flintstone - Short - Two beautiful women are trapped inside their house by the unspoken evil that lurks outside. 12 pages - pdf, format
I enjoyed the script. I originally thought they were talking about zombies, but as the script wore on and there were no other hints about the zombies other than the dialogue, I thought that there had to be a twist ending.
I know you were going for the twist, but would it be more powerful to intercut between the girls and the paparazzi in a way so that what they're saying is being shown?
Right now, the script is full of dialogue and lacks action. I think it would be cool if the girls were talking about the paparazzi in a zombie-like manner and then we cut to the paparazzi acting like zombies in someway... so that the dialogue relates to something.
The problem with twist endings is that there is no replay value. Once you know the trick, then that's it. But if you let the audience know who's outside from the very beginning, then you can play with suspense.
Of course, you would have to restructure your story and add more of an arc to your script, but its only a suggestion. Otherwise, very enjoyable read!
Cheers for the read, and I'm glad you got something out of it.
As to your suggestions, I don't really think the story would work if the reader was aware of the presence keeping them in the house. I sort of know what your saying, but I think it would take away the essence of the story.
BTW, is there any chance you can edit your feedback and the word SPOILERS before giving away the twist... thanks in advance.
I put the Spoilers in. I respect that you think it would take away from the essence. There are probably even better ideas on how to improve the script, but I haven't thought enough about it. It was just the first thing that popped in my mind. I am excited to read other suggestions.
Thanks for adding the spoilers, it's easily forgotten.
I'm always happy to hear feedback and suggestions, and, as I said previously- I understand what you mean, but if the reader was aware of the whole situation, the story wouldn't really have a satisfying ending (in my eyes anyway).
Really glad you enjoyed it though, and I noticed you'd also read emergency service. I feel a read is owed- is there anything you like me to take a look at, or shall I wait until the newer version of your script 'fiber' is up?
I wish I could knock out scripts as quick as you lol.
Your first slug is missing INT.
Typo on page 5, 'Katy take a huge drag on her cigarette.' Should be 'takes'.
SPOILERS!!
Well this started and I thought maybe monsters or zombies were outside then I changed my mind and thought she'd maybe won the lottery or something, so I never guessed the ending.
Pretty good effort, and real easy to film too. The dialogue between Katy and Nicki was good throughout. The only real negative for me was that it runs a little long for what story there is, although I do wonder if your page setup is right, the spacing seems a bit out to me.
Good stuff.
Check out my scripts...if you want to, no pressure.
The only real negative for me was that it runs a little long for what story there is, although I do wonder if your page setup is right, the spacing seems a bit out to me.
I had meddled around with the formatting options after reading a thread on here that stated an extra space should be added after slugs and between dialogue and action. I thought it seemed a little too 'white' as well. Maybe I'll revert back to how I used to do 'em!
Nice job on this one. I thought it was a terrific concept and thought you did a very nice job of executing. As we discussed, it was more difficult than you initially expected considering that it involved just two woman in a house. Keeping the audience invested and curious about what was going on outside was tough.
That said, I think you definetly pulled it off, and it works for me. Also, as Alffy points out, should be relatively easy to get shot. Good luck my friend, and look forward to reading more.
Nice job on this one. I thought it was a terrific concept and thought you did a very nice job of executing.
Cheers buddy, thanks for the vote of confidence!
Quoted from C6
As we discussed, it was more difficult than you initially expected considering that it involved just two woman in a house. Keeping the audience invested and curious about what was going on outside was tough.
Yeah, it was pretty difficult- I stumbled quite a few times trying to get it sorted.
Quoted from C6
I think you definetly pulled it off, and it works for me. Also, as Alffy points out, should be relatively easy to get shot. Good luck my friend, and look forward to reading more.
I'm glad you thought so- I'm gonna do something a little more straightforward next time.
I thought it was extremely well written incorporating all of my favourites: good structure, smooth flow, tight and believable dialogue, appropriate character development.
But most of all.....an interesting concept that grabbed me and made me feel satisfied that I had read a good short with a neat twist. So well done.
The Negative
SPOILER
Unfortunately, I saw the twist from a long way off. I recognise there's always a chance of this happening with different readers, but I don't think you did enough to hide it from me. I don't actually agree with your first reviewer.....for me it's the twist that makes the story so giving it away would degrade the viewer's overall experience. However, I do agree that you need to work on your development of the Paparazzi. A few lines that develop the viewer's impression of a sinister presence outside the house will pretty much do it, I reckon. The lines where you talk about them climbing on the garage roof is a good example of this. There simply needs to be more of this and I think you could be more creative about it. A poor example perhaps, but if they've been outside the house, waiting for hours/days surely their eyes would show an extreme level of tiredness. Could you use that to describe their eyes in a way which makes them appear 'alien'?
This would also have the bonus effect of giving the piece a more urgent pace (which in turn would enhance the malevolent atmosphere) My feeling is that currently it is on the slow-side.
One last thing...it's never 'try and' it always 'try to'
As mentioned, I hope my feedback is useful. If I have not made myself clear at any point, please feel free to PM me for clarification.
Glad you thought it was extremely well written, and you thought the dialogue was believable, and I'm happy you got something out of it.
It's a pity you saw the twist coming, you're the first person that's told me they did so.
Thanks for the feedback, buddy. I always find it helpful. We'll just have to agree to disagree about the 'try and'/'try to' scenario. It was a piece of dialogue, and I've heard plenty of people say that, rightly or wrongly.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
Pages: 
Author
Clique
Logged
Locked Board