Don't know if you been sticking around, Kurtis, but here it goes...
FADE In belongs flush left of page; you need to turn off the continued's on the headers and footers. Drop the camera angle (p3) and drop all of the �begins� with characters. A character or characters do an action. They do not begin or try. The �Credit sequence� (p10) is not the writer's call to make. Just get with the story.
Abracadabra! Axe in both hands; hatchet in another. (7)
The Security Guard seems to be closer than he seems to be (�He takes out his gun and moves back to Emily� p9) As it is, he does not seem to be alarmed by Emily's appearance . His reaction is way too casual
Quoted Text Emily picks up the axe.
EMILY This is for Josh, bitch.
She swings the blade into the man�s stomach and blood sprays across her face. The man falls back and begins to bleed out. Emily manages to limp off and find a security guard near the entrance.
SECURITY GUARD What's wrong mam. |
Aside from being covered in blood and a bit dirty from her fall,
she still has the ax It's about here I note the second time the dialog margin is out of place. But it is the spelling and grammar errors that hurt more than camera angles. Here's one that is pure poison:
Quoted Text On top of a pair of jeans is a newspaper article. Titled: "Brutal murder of teenager, Killer on the Lose" |
A newspaper headline with a spelling goof. The line is in italics (quotations alone work better) and by itself....but that's the joke with spellcheck. Always allowing correct spellings of words- used in the wrong way. But that gaffe sticks out by itself; even a brief once over would have caught it. So I'm thinking that you didn't proof anything.
Note that the article is a subject of conversation- in scenes with no transitional sub-slugs (BEDROOM, for example) people just come and go, open doors, close doors etc. It isn't REALLY needed. After all, if we were to have characters in a room or other location, do you need to show us how they got to that point if all they did was walk in the entrance? Shouldn't it be a given that's how they got into that location? Do we need to see them leave that location when, in the next scene, some time later, they might be in another?
A word about the Friends. (p13) I would rather SEE these traits then be told about them. Madison is fine; attitude can be shown. Her demanding much is not. Marcus has a nice smile. That we can see. But 'looking for a good time'? The answer is no. He must reveal it through actions and words. Both Kevin and Jake's personalities are too internal and cannot be filmed. ("Fraternal twin brother of Josh Harper and is riddled with grief from Brother's death. Always caught up in Swimming and barely has time to enjoy himself.")
In the scene, Jake mentions his training. That is fine. That also renders the sidenote pointless. As for now, this is a script, not a novel.
(Note that Jake leaves the restaurant and Emily goes after him then goes back inside. There is no EXT. slug transition when it is called for one.Likewise, no INT when we are back in the restaurant, nor a MEN'S BATHROOM sub-slug when Sean goes to the urinal. )
Quoted Text Detective Allen Price, late 40�s, cleanly shaven, with a long history in the police force.
DET. PRICE I�m gonna need to talk to you guys down at the station. |
Again, info about a character than you need to show, not tell. Not to mention that it's better if you just call him in character slugs as �Price�. I have low, low tolerance for shorthand abbreviations in screenplays. (See p 43 as to why it can be a problem: �That Det. Price said that we had to stay in protective custody.� In fact, all the young call him 'Det' Price. ) I don't mean a character having a shorthand with a pal or anything- I am strictly talking about the writing itself. Write out Detective.
===SPOLIERS R US===
?So Josh had to go, and getting
close to you again was easy. I
killed the real Det. Price and took
his place."
Even Det. Price calls himself Det. Price.
Wait a minute.
What did he just say?
Pick another killer. This is all wrong and makes no sense whatsoever. If Price 'killed the real Price' and took his place then that means all the other police officers were caught unaware of that fact. Correct? If I'm right about that, you are wrong.
I was a trooper here. 80 some pages, I thought. I'll roll the dice, give a page to page read. Anyone else here would have put in the towel by page eight. Without transitions (and I don't mean the CUT TO padding) of place and location, characters who sound so much alike it's really difficult to know who's who (in spite of what you tell me about them-only one trait had been really shown, that of Jake) and then hellos, see yas, coming and going ...hey, I was more than willing to bear it. One too many times people here give up in the first few pages. Sometimes I don't blame them. But every now and then, somebody's going to have to bite the bullet, and help that writer not to keep making the same errors.
Could this be a decent slasher-thriller? It's possible.
Is Price the killer? No, it's his impostor- which is next to impossible for it's one thing to leave the brain at the door. But...c'mon. It's a huge leap, and bigger disappointment. Then again, I wonder...if the local paper makes a lot of spelling errors and nobody notices, I suppose the Price phony
could have been under the radar...
(That's not a good thing)
-DjS