Quoted from Craiger6 Yeah, in retrospect, I can kind of see where you are coming from here.  It’s like the Goldstein’s just pop up every now and then.  The idea for this came from how some parking garages in NYC (and other places I’m sure) are attached to an apartment building, so residents can come in and out, and get their cars.  In this instance, Trevor and The Goldstein’s are residents of the building and that’s why they run into each other getting their cars.  I kind of wanted to show that just because they (the Goldstein’s) had money, they weren’t dooshes like Trevor. Craig

Hi Craig, I know everyone loves the Goldsteins because they are well-written interesting characters. BUT no matter how good they are, if they're not organic to the story, and they don't move the story forward, these characters shouldn't be in the script.

Now if the Goldsteins were involved with Luis's heist or had something to do with the nude girl in the photo in Trevor's car, this might add layers to your story.

My $.02.

Herman

Quoted from dogglebe SPOILER SPACE The plot device was dropping the car keys under the seat, Sandra.  Trevor gave Miguel a reason to look through the car. Instead of finding the photos this way, he does so while chasing a set of runaway keys. Phil

Yeah, "the make it happen force it into the story" part. Fit damn it! OK, I see what you're saying; and therein lies the deep-deep dark truth that no matter how neat and tidy a script might be according to formulaic rules, if it's forced, it doesn't work as well.

Well, on the bright side, accidents do happen and keys get dropped. Wait, accidents are bad, not good, aren't they? Unless they're good accidents, like finding a good shoe sale.   But seriously, I guess the pictures could turn up in a little less obvious fashion. Like maybe Trevor is having a wild fit and when he's in his tornado, they fall onto the ground. Yeah, the old "lose your porno pictures" trick. That outta work.  

Sandra

Jwent:

Thanks for the read, bud.  I will return the favor shortly.

“Luis on the phone should be (V.O.) not (O.S.)”

Yeah, got ya on that.  I actually originally had it as (V.O) when I first wrote this, and then changed it to (O.S.) when I was doing some editing, before realizing that I had it right the first time.  Thanks for the head’s up, though.

“Some sentences look funny in dialogue. Like you spaced twice after Mr. G. a couple of times.”

Thanks, I’ll have to take a look at this.

INT. PARKING GARAGE - CONTINUOUS

“I didn't get why this slug was needed. I would get rid of it. They're already there.”

Yeah, I get confused about the use of CONTINUOUS in the slug.  I guess I just kind of toss it in there when I fell that it should be there, but you are probably right.

Glad you enjoyed the Goldsteins, because I enjoyed writing them.  Particularly Mr. G.
Also glad you enjoyed the dialogue, as that is always one of the first things that I notice when I’m reading a script.

“Weakness... I just don't buy that this would workout in the end. Obviously Williamsen knew who had his car keys. The cops would have to look into Miguel because of it. Then they'd probably look into his brother as well.

Also, if Williamsen was really out of town, He'd probably have some real alibies from wherever he was. That would definitely make the cops look at Miguel.”

Okay, let’s get down to the nitty gritty – plot holes.  

I actually wrote this script back in February, I believe.  I kind of sat on it for the very reason that you stated above.  I’m lucky to have some very supportive, but honest friends, and this is one of the criticisms that I got back from them when I ran it by them.  So, you are 100% correct when you point out the plot holes.

I tried (unsuccessfully, I think) to work around this issue by throwing in the lit bit of dialogue of Miguel talking to Luis on the phone after discovering the photos of Trevor where Miguel says something like, “Meet meet later…Yeah the place will be closed”.  The implication being that he would be off duty and therefore not be at the garage.  Of course, this doesn’t really work though, since as an employee he would probably still have access and yes he would have been the last to be in the car.  

In the end, I just kind of decided to run with it and hope people would suspend a little belief in reading it.  But thanks for bringing it up, because as I said, my friends had pointed it out, and I’m the same way when I’m reading scripts or watching movies, always saying, “that would never work in real life”.

Anyway, thanks again for the read.  Much appreciated.

Sandra:

“This could be fixed with a neat fix at the end, having Mr. Goldstein drop some big dollars into the cops' hands.”

Again, interesting idea.  People seem to like Mr. G, and this is certainly something he would be willing to do for his “boy”, Miguel.  Making him a bigger character is certainly something to consider.  

Phil:

“Miguel's role in the story doesn't come near his full potential. A garage attendant is an example of one of those invisible people who learn everything.  While you have him getting involved in the lives of those he works for, he's barely involved.  Someone in his position can learn so much more from the car owners.”

Fair enough.  I think you hit upon what I was going for when you mention that the attendant can know so much about the lives of the people he works for.  In this case it’s a parking garage attendant, but the same goes for anyone from a gardener to a butler.  I think there are any number of instances of this in literature and the movies where you see that the “help” are really the ones that make things happen and who are the driving force behind those with the money.  I was trying to kind of modernize that concept while at the same time suggesting that you should be good to these people and not take them for granted.

That said, I see what you are saying when you suggest that I can push it a little further with Miguel getting more involved with these people’s lives.  I will certainly take it under advisement.

“Mister Goldstein was a funny character, but he didn't reach his potential either.  You start him off at a certain level of cluelessness, but he doesn't go further. Perhaps have him get worse the more he talks.”

Glad you enjoyed Mr. Goldstein, and I agree I think he can become a more integral character.  I’m not sure I totally understand what you mean by having him get “worse” the more he talks.  Yeah, he’s kind of a dodo, but he doesn’t have a bad bone in his body.  You might mean “worse” by being more clueless, which I can see though.

Sandra:

“Does anyone else get the feeling this is an embryonic short that is waiting to be born as a feature?”

Well, I’m not so sure about that (as currently conceived, it feels more like a one trick pony), but the more I think about it, I do believe that this short may benefit by adding a few more pages to include some of the great suggestions I’ve received thus far.  One of the ideas that I really like is the one offered by AJR about adding a scene between Luis and Miguel.  I think that could add another layer of tension.

Phil:

“The plot device was dropping the car keys under the seat, Sandra.  Trevor gave Miguel a reason to look through the car. Instead of finding the photos this way, he does so while chasing a set of runaway keys.”

Thanks for the follow up here, Phil.  Initially, I was a little confused by what you meant.  

Yeah, I guess I would have to agree with you, but at the same time, I would suggest that this kind of thing happens all the time in movies, and even in real life.  Cheap?  Perhaps, but not beyond the realm of possibility.  At the end of the day, I think, like the point made by Jwent above, I was just asking for a little suspension of belief on the part of the reader.  Sometimes, things just are what they are, you know?  Anyway, thanks for the read and the tips.

Herman:

“I know everyone loves the Goldsteins because they are well-written interesting characters. BUT no matter how good they are, if they're not organic to the story, and they don't move the story forward, these characters shouldn't be in the script.”

At this point, I agree that the Goldsteins should probably play a larger role, but I do think they already play an organic role in that they serve two purposes: one, a little comedic relief, and two, they are the counterweight to Trevor’s boorish/prejudiced behavior in that they show that not all people with money are dicks.  That said, I agree that their roles should be expanded.

“Now if the Goldsteins were involved with Luis's heist or had something to do with the nude girl in the photo in Trevor's car, this might add layers to your story.”

Great point.  Sandra suggested something in a similar vein above.  I really like both ideas.  I didn’t realize the Goldsteins would catch on with people.  Thanks for the ideas, man.

Okay, so right now I feel like a raging egomaniac for being so long winded, but I wanted to put in the effort that you guys did for taking the time to read it.  I really appreciate the feedback, be it positive or negative.  Thanks again to all for taking the time.  

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to finish this Mets/Yankees game and then I have to return some reviews.

Craig

Would there be security cameras in the garage?  If so, then Miguel's actions could be found out very quickly by the cops.

Maybe the pictures could be inside a book under the seat.  I wouldn't keep such incriminating evidence where a parking attendant could find it.  If someone found the book, Trevor could say something like, "That's where it is."

Of course, Miguel could drop the book for some reason and the pictures come out.  Maybe he sneezes on it, and while he wipes off the saliva and snot, the pictures come out.  As it is, he finds it just too easily.

You may want to use the Miguel and Luis names for Trevor's token remarks and use other Mexican names instead.  My landlord is named Cesar.  Maybe you can use that name for the protagonist.

I like having the Goldsteins there.  Not every character has to be related to a plot point in some major way.  Sometimes people are just there when something unusual happens.  This part added realism to the story.

Just some ideas.

Craig

Hey, man, you know I like your work, particularly "One Last Story" but unfortunately, I can’t say the same for this piece. I had big problems with how the story played out and its underlying karmic theme/message.

Firstly, your actual writing is very strong and assured as per usual...except a couple of things I noticed, nothing major:

"Sunshine cascades down onto the New York City street as a two
SANITATION WORKERS follow a garbage truck as it makes its
rounds."

-- Structuring a sentence to describe actions using "as" is perfectly fine, I do it all the time but I try to refrain from resorting to it twice in such close proximity. It’s repetitious and doesn't read well, in my opinion. Maybe change it to:

"Sunshine cascades down onto the New York City street. Two SANITATION WORKERS follow a garbage truck as it makes its rounds."

or

"Sunshine cascades down onto the New York City street as two SANITATION WORKERS follow a garbage truck making its rounds."

Or something like that where the second "as" is removed. I reckon it flows better when you don't repeat yourself in quick succession.

Also, the scene on pages 2 and 3 when we first met the Goldsteins, you don’t tell us Miguel is in the scene or where he comes from until he starts talking to Mr. Goldstein. The scene previous had him in the office but I think you should always establish what characters are in a new scene, especially when we are in a new location too.

As I said, the technical flaws here are sparse, minor and easily fixed.

Now, on to the story; I haven’t read the other comments as I wanted to go into this blindsided so I may repeat what’s already been said and to which you have already provided the explanations for, if so, my apologies and feel free to ignore them. I’ll be checking out the comments after I post this.

The “help” Luis wants from Miguel is very unclear to me. Obviously, Luis isn’t going to divulge much over the phone but you need to find another device in order to let us know what the beef is here. As far as I know, Luis has robbed a bank, (something he’s done before it seems), he looks to have gotten away with it for the meantime anyway (according to the newspaper headline at the beginning) but wants a favour from his brother which Miguel is reluctant to do but what it actually is I’m not 100% sure. I’m guessing due to Miguel’s aforementioned reluctance that’s its something underhand but with what little information you give us all I can do is speculate.

Due to the placement of the money in Trevor’s boot at the end and the cops filling in the blanks we can assume that perhaps Luis wanted Miguel to hold the money for him until the heat blew over (he says he wanted to give him money anyway to help out their sick mother) Ok, I got that but why do we see this money handover happening on a surveillance camera? Doesn’t Miguel ensure him on the phone prior that:

“MIGUEL
Yeah, I know where the cameras are.
(beat)
Meet me in four hours. The place
will be closed.”

So why conduct the meeting right in front of them? Maybe I’m (stupidly) missing something here but this doesn’t make sense to me. Would they not want to do discreetly?

Secondly, the discovery of the photo under Trevor’s seat came off as extremely contrived. We only know Trevor for one scene and it’s pretty obvious that he’s a complete prick before wham! He is sadomasochistic too, just like that. It’s apparent you made him so dislikeable that when Miguel finds the photo we are left with nothing but pure hatred and disgust for the guy. There’s no middle ground here, no redeemable qualities to him, thus I’m picturing a caricature as opposed to an actual person you might meet in real life. Having said that, I know there are cu?ts out there of immeasurable magnitude but you get what I mean. There’s a lot of detestable characteristics crammed in here concerning Trevor in such a short space of time. In other words; too much too quickly, overkill.

Oh, and you may add very fu?king complacent to Trevor’s list of undesirable traits. I take it he had been in Vermont engaging in these extra curricular hobbies but why oh why would you be so absent minded as to not give your car the once over when you got home...and right before you handed it over to the car valet? That’s my real problem with this part of the script. You could put it down to his coke habit distracting and addling his mind but the whole cause and effect device to too rushed and “set-up” for me to buy it.

“He turns the ignition off. Miguel drops the keys and
inadvertently kicks them under the seat.”

Finding it hard to visualise this; the drop, followed by the kick (or back heel as I imagine how it would happen) It would need to be a very well choreographed “unintentional” manoeuvre to pull off just from an actor’s and cameraman’s point of view. To simplify things you could just say that Miguel drops the keys and they fall under the seat, happens me all the time. Anyway I digress...

My third issue with the plot was Miguel’s supposedly noble framing of Trevor for the money. I’m thinking your idea behind this was not only is Miguel doing his bro a favour by taking the ill-gotten money off him but he’s also putting it to good use by stitching up a suspected sex fiend (or worse, we don’t know) So in the end the money goes back to its rightful owner (in this case, The Bank boo-fu?king-hoo), the heat is off Luis and Trevor will be put away.

This all seems great and honourable on Miguel’s part but it doesn’t hide the fact that he’s framing Trevor for something he didn’t do. To me, no matter how bad of a person Trevor is, Miguel is being dishonest and conniving also. Why not show the cops the photos? They are more then incriminating, particularly the second one where Trevor actually occupies the same photograph as one of his suspected victims. Why not do your bit, inform the cops of the evidence you got and rely on the justice system to exercise their duties and implement the necessary disciplinary measures, you can do no more after that. By Miguel planting the loot, I‘m inclining to say he’s complicit in the overall web of deceit and shady dealings going on here...albeit to a lesser degree.

Plus, Miguel should be sh?tting it when he finds out Trevor is a lawyer, because a) Trevor will be savvy to the workings of the law and could be a slippery fish to pin down. c) Being in a well paid job will leave his motivation for robbing the bank in the first place in serious doubt (maybe his coke habit has him in debt, I don’t know) c) Trevor will naturally deny taking the money so at some point in the investigation, the focus will shift to Miguel who was the only (known) person to have come into contact with Trevor’s car besides Trevor himself. This may lead the investigation to find out about his brother Luis (a thief with a history) and before you know it, they join the dots and Miguel’s perfectly planned, morally inspired plan will unravel. I’m sure the lawyer in Trevor will come out in that he will exhaust every possible avenue of investigation to acquit him of at least one of the crimes being levelled at him.

Plot points aside, I liked the Goldsteins, crazy mofos. Very hip for old timers complete with ghetto slang, fist pumps and blaring beats thumping from their “wheels”. Pretty random characters but enjoyable nonetheless, you went out on the limb with Mr. Goldstein in particular but you knew what you were doing, knew these weren’t your normal, everyday old folks and played to their strengths well for some comic relief. Although the husband and wife fist pump at the end was a bit much for me it didn’t stray too far from the brash impressions they gave off when we first meet them.

Overall, I can’t say I dug this too much, Craig. Too many plot holes, random coincidences underpinned by a questionable, ostensibly virtuous, ethical subtext which I couldn’t entirely get behind.

Of course, I may have picked this up all wrong, if so, let me know.

Cheers.

Col.

Hey Col.,

Thanks for taking the read.  My apology for not getting back sooner, but it’s been a really hectic week.

I’m sorry that this one didn’t really work for you.  You raise some good points below.

“Structuring a sentence to describe actions using "as" is perfectly fine, I do it all the time but I try to refrain from resorting to it twice in such close proximity. It’s repetitious and doesn't read well, in my opinion.”

Good point here.  I didn’t even notice it until you pointed it out.  You are right, it does sound repetitious.  I’ll have to keep this in mind in the future.  I think that’s one of those things that you can read, and re-read a hundred times when you write it and not notice it until someone points it out.  Thanks for the heads up.

“The “help” Luis wants from Miguel is very unclear to me.”

“I’m guessing due to Miguel’s aforementioned reluctance that’s its something underhand but with what little information you give us all I can do is speculate.”

Yeah, I guess I can see your point about it being unclear what Luis wants Miguel to do.  That said, I didn’t want to come right out and give it away, you know.  There was a line from Miguel saying something like, “not this time, not again” or something along those lines.  I was trying to intimate that it was something underhanded, and that Miguel had helped him in the past doing the same thing, but has now put his foot down.  

“Due to the placement of the money in Trevor’s boot at the end and the cops filling in the blanks we can assume that perhaps Luis wanted Miguel to hold the money for him until the heat blew over…”

The placement of the money in the trunk was intended to be a frame up of Trevor.  It wasn’t all of the money that Luis had stolen, and this money had been splattered by the exploding ink.  Basically, Miguel finds some prick that deserves to be punished, Luis gives him the money and then the cops get called.  A bit of a stretch, I know.  Haha.

“So why conduct the meeting right in front of them? Maybe I’m (stupidly) missing something here but this doesn’t make sense to me. Would they not want to do discreetly?”

No, you most definitely aren’t missing anything.  This was definitely an oversight on my part, and something that I will correct if I do a re-write.  In fact, some of the earlier suggestions seemed to indicate that a meet up between Luis and Miguel would add some drama to the piece.  But the security camera angle doesn’t work.

“There’s no middle ground here, no redeemable qualities to him, thus I’m picturing a caricature as opposed to an actual person you might meet in real life. Having said that, I know there are cu?ts out there of immeasurable magnitude but you get what I mean. There’s a lot of detestable characteristics crammed in here concerning Trevor in such a short space of time. In other words; too much too quickly, overkill.”

Good point here.  Yes, he was intended to be a total prick, but I think you are right in saying that it may have been too much too soon.  I actually did tone Trevor down a bit.  In an earlier draft, I made him a pedophile, but felt that in that instance, Miguel would simply call the cops and be done with it.  But you are 100% correct, Trevor need more dimensions.

“Oh, and you may add very fu?king complacent to Trevor’s list of undesirable traits.”

Haha – touché, sir!

“That’s my real problem with this part of the script. You could put it down to his coke habit distracting and addling his mind but the whole cause and effect device to too rushed and “set-up” for me to buy it.”

I guess the point in that Trevor doesn’t see people such as Miguel as a threat.  Yeah, they might sneak a few quarter out of his change draw, but they aren’t capable of really hurting him. They just aren’t on his radar in that respect.  That said, I think you have a valid point in saying that it feels to set up.  I’ll have to give it some thought.

“This all seems great and honourable on Miguel’s part but it doesn’t hide the fact that he’s framing Trevor for something he didn’t do. To me, no matter how bad of a person Trevor is, Miguel is being dishonest and conniving also.”

True, but remember, this is karmic justice we are talking about here, and not courtroom justice.  I think in a free society, we rightfully adhere to the notion that we are “a nation of laws, and not men”, but I also think that we sometimes admire vigilante justice (even if we won’t readily admit it) when someone who is truly bad and guilty gets what is coming to him or her.  It’s kind of like the cop who “tweaks” the evidence he finds to ensure that a guilty person definitely gets convicted.  We don’t want to condone that cop’s conduct, but at the same time we don’t want that guilty party on the streets either.  Make no mistake, Miguel is no innocent, and he has to deal with the repercussions of his actions.  Watch out for Karma Attendant II: Karmic Revenge – haha.

“Overall, I can’t say I dug this too much, Craig. Too many plot holes, random coincidences underpinned by a questionable, ostensibly virtuous, ethical subtext which I couldn’t entirely get behind.”

Fair enough Col., and truth be told, I would definitely agree with you regarding the plot holes.  I was asking the audience to suspend a lot of their belief.   No doubt about that.  That was part of the reason I sat on this one for awhile.  I’ve received some great feedback though, and maybe I can make some tweaks to make it a bit more believable.

Anyway, thanks as always for taking the time.  It is very much appreciated.

CR

Hey Craig.

You know I like your style of writing. good visuals, snappy dialog, nice!

This story went along very well with the differences between the Goldsteins and Trevor being quite well defined although I think you could've given us more. Developed Miguel's whole existence further. (Scumbag brother, sick mother, sh**ty customers etc. just giving the characters a tad more depth).

I kinda like the 'What goes around comes around' philosophy and was quite happy when Trevor got his come uppance.

One technical point on page 7. Is that a montage? If so it should be introduced as such, but other than that query everything else was spot on.

Anyway Craig, another good'un as far as I'm concerned.

Good stuff!

Best.

Martin.

Craig

I get what you mean about the differences between courtroom and karmic justice, you're right, they shouldn't be treated the same and its obvious which one you were going for here. Miguel, although far from innocent, is definitely the lesser of two evils in this scenario.

Hey Martin,

Thanks for the read.  My apologies for the tardy reply.  

Yeah, I agree that Miguel, and his motives, should be better developed here.  I'll be honest, when I finished this one, I kind of hit a wall, and realized that there were a bunch of plot holes.  I've received a bunch of really good advice on this one, and think I might take another crack at getting her straightened out.  Anyway, thanks again for the read.

Col.,

Yeah, form the get go, this was not going to be about doing it by the book so to speak in that Miguel was going to do something that was immoral, and yet when he does it, the hope was that the audience would be behind him.  Anyway, thanks again for taking the time.

Craig

Trippin with the Goldsteins!
Diamond hustlas and fencers worldwide, B!
Now there's a feature length script I want to read!
The Goldstiens were the last thing I expected to poll up outta that Escalade. Kudos!

I liked your supporting characters far more than your protagonist.
That being said, I didn't care much for the plot.
The device of an errant keys leading to poorly hidden compromising pics left me flat.
It plays out like fun escapist fare ending with the Goldensteins.
Realistically, Miguel is drawing the wrong kind of attention to his brother.
I'm sure the cops can verify where Trevor actually was for the weekend.
If Luis has a record, then the police have probable cause to investigate further.

Now please write Trippin' with the Goldsteins!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from Electric Dreamer Trippin with the Goldsteins! Diamond hustlas and fencers worldwide, B! Now there's a feature length script I want to read! The Goldstiens were the last thing I expected to poll up outta that Escalade. Kudos! I liked your supporting characters far more than your protagonist. That being said, I didn't care much for the plot. The device of an errant keys leading to poorly hidden compromising pics left me flat. It plays out like fun escapist fare ending with the Goldensteins. Realistically, Miguel is drawing the wrong kind of attention to his brother. I'm sure the cops can verify where Trevor actually was for the weekend. If Luis has a record, then the police have probable cause to investigate further. Now please write Trippin' with the Goldsteins! Regards, E.D.

Haha, "Trippin' with the Goldsteins", starring Cloris Lechman and Jerry Stiller coming to a theatre near you!

Thanks for the read ED.  Yeah, this one is definetly flawed, and all of your points are valid.  The impetus for this one was to show that those people around us that we kind of take for granted are also familiar with some of our most personal secrets.  So we should treat them with respect.  I also wanted to try (unsuccessfully as it is) to examine the fine line between doings something right, while also doing something wrong.

It seems that most people came out liking the Goldsteins so that's a positive.  I've received a bunch of good advice on this one, and I may revisit it at a later date in order to try and tie up some loose ends.

Thanks again for taking the time.  Let me know when you get your's up.

CR