Stomach:The Movie! by Matthew (dresseme) - Short - With a vastly deteriorated stomach, courtesy of a lifetime of coffee drinking, Derrick sues "Big Coffee" in hopes of winning a big cash settlement. 26 pages - pdf, format 8)

I entered this short into a short screenplay competition.   I wish I could have added more to it, but there was a page limit for the contest.  The inspiration came after a semester of studying Business Law and Torts, and I tried to make it as un-biased as possible (even though I have an opinion on the matter).



Side note: My fiance HATES the title of this screenplay.  I was inspired by such great films as "Supercross:The Movie!"

I picked this script up because I also have a script up now about silly lawsuits, called The Orange Menace.

The biggest problem I was with this script was that it was too short.  A story like this could easily be made into a feature length script.  Everything seemed rushed; the jokes seemed forced for this reason.

Your formatting needs some work.

Take out you disclaimer at the very beginning of the script.

Don't tell us that Gerald is a father.  Show it to us.  Have Derrick call him Daddy when he talks to him.

What the hell is gaws?  Do you mean gauze?  Burns need moisture to heal.  Gauze will dry it out, causing more damage.

You introduce Derrick's doctor and lawyer as DOCTOR and LAWYER.  Later on, you give them names.  Give them names when you introduce them.

I found your court procedings to be very artificial.  CHaracterization could be a little stronger.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe I picked this script up because I also have a script up now about silly lawsuits, called The Orange Menace. The biggest problem I was with this script was that it was too short.  A story like this could easily be made into a feature length script.  Everything seemed rushed; the jokes seemed forced for this reason. Your formatting needs some work. Take out you disclaimer at the very beginning of the script. Don't tell us that Gerald is a father.  Show it to us.  Have Derrick call him Daddy when he talks to him. What the hell is gaws?  Do you mean gauze?  Burns need moisture to heal.  Gauze will dry it out, causing more damage. You introduce Derrick's doctor and lawyer as DOCTOR and LAWYER.  Later on, you give them names.  Give them names when you introduce them. I found your court procedings to be very artificial.  CHaracterization could be a little stronger. Phil

Eh, I don't think I would ever turn this into a feature film.  Mainly because it only interested me enough to write a short.  Granted,  I would have wanted a bit longer of a short (maybe 40 pages or so), so maybe I'll return to it someday.

How does my formatting need work?

I think it's pretty strongly implied he's his father.  I don't need to sugar-coat it with "Daddy".

Well, dang.  Didn't know that about gauze.  

And how are they artificial?

You're very fast to be critical, dogglebe, yet you don't back it up with anything.  Could you provide some examples, please?

I enjoyed this, but I think it would benefit from being shorter if anything. The coffee gag started to run a little thin after a while and I began to lose interest towards the end.

There are no obvious format problems. I'm not sure what Phil is referring to with that comment. (CONT'D) is considered redundant by some, as are scene transitions, but no-one's going to throw your script in the trash for using them.

I liked the intro, showing Derrick's introduction to coffee. It's a god, if somewhat predictable set up. I don't think you need to introduce the father in dialogue, it's obvious enough without spelling it out.

The court case is as realistic as it needs to be for a comedy, but it went on too long in my opinion. There are some nice gags in there, but also some dry spots e.g. the cigarette-style warnings on coffee gag just wasn't all that funny to me.

Overall, the writing is good and there are a few funny moments, but I think you could condense the story a little, especially the court case.

Examples of bad formatting:

PAGE ONE:  "GERALD, a father in his mid-forties"  Don't tell us this.  Show it to us.

PAGE THREE:  "A DOCTOR approaches clipboard in hand."  Give the doctor a name, here.

PAGE FOUR:  "An addict is born."  How does the camera film this statement?

PAGE FIVE:  "And joins his friend BEN at the table."  Don't tell us they're friends.  Show us.

PAGE EIGHT:  "a DOCTOR walks in."  Again, name the doctor.  Is this the same doctor as on page three?

PAGE ELEVEN:  "A LAWYER sits behind his desk."  Give the lawyer a name here.


Examples of forced humor:

PAGE EIGHT:  "Some coffee will put out that fire."

PAGE TEN:  "big coffee."

PAGE TWELVE:  the photo of the genitals.


Phil

First off, I'd like to thank you for the time you took to fill out your critique.  Quite frankly, and maybe this is just me, but I think you're being a little picky on formatting.  I understand the Doctor and Lawyer thing.  That happened because I originally wrote the characters without names, and then added them later.

I don't really think it's a big deal that I say it's his father or his friend.  I think you get the idea, and it's just in the script because.  I really doubt (if I were ever going to do something with this script), that a Hollywood producer would throw the script down at that point and yell, "What the hell?  Don't you dare tell me it's his father!  Show it to me!"  It's such a minute detail.

And the addict is born line is just what I felt like putting in.  I wrote this script mainly for fun and submitted it to a competition at my University because it was free.

And as far as the humor, there's nothing to say about that.  You either find it funny or you don't.  You didn't, so I guess that's not your cup of.....coffee. (Oh yeah, there's plenty more where that came from)

Quoted from Martin I enjoyed this, but I think it would benefit from being shorter if anything. The coffee gag started to run a little thin after a while and I began to lose interest towards the end. There are no obvious format problems. I'm not sure what Phil is referring to with that comment. (CONT'D) is considered redundant by some, as are scene transitions, but no-one's going to throw your script in the trash for using them. I liked the intro, showing Derrick's introduction to coffee. It's a god, if somewhat predictable set up. I don't think you need to introduce the father in dialogue, it's obvious enough without spelling it out. The court case is as realistic as it needs to be for a comedy, but it went on too long in my opinion. There are some nice gags in there, but also some dry spots e.g. the cigarette-style warnings on coffee gag just wasn't all that funny to me. Overall, the writing is good and there are a few funny moments, but I think you could condense the story a little, especially the court case.

Thanks for the read, Martin.  You see, that's the problem with comedy; not everyone's going to find it funny.  I can't really argue them.

"Cont'd" is courtesy of Final Draft.

Yeah, I suppose if I were going to cut anything it would be the coffee warning gag.  I guess it was just one of those things that I pictured in my head, and that if it were done right it would be funny.

The court scenes...well, I don't really know what to say about them.   I mean, I got to that point and I went "Wow...uhh..I've never been to court."  BUT I have seen a lot of court movies, AND I had just gotten through with my law class at the time.  The main reason it was so long was because I was actually trying to present valid arguments and what not.

Like I've stated before; I really just wrote this for fun, and didn't take it all that seriously.  It's main purpose is to entertain.  So if it didn't do that, I apologize.  But if it did, then...Cheers.

I enjoyed this script for the most part.  I decided to read it because I really enjoyed what I read of "Based On A True Story".   The formatting issues that Phil pointed out didn't bother me enough to pull me out of the story or affect my enjoyment of it, but I wouldn't entirely disregard what he said.  

Lots of funny moments here, especially in the beginning and middle.  but I must say after the first couple lines of dialogue during the court scene, I started skimming, which usually means I'm losing interest.  I went back and read those scenes again and found some really funny stuff in there, it just seemed like, as the reader, I had to work too much to get to those scenes. (let me know if you're interested in specific examples, and I'll get them to you. but right now i'm at work writing this and I want to go home!)  I don't know how to, or even if you should fix that part-I'm just telling you my experience reading it.  

  

Quoted Text You see, that's the problem with comedy; not everyone's going to find it funny.  I can't really argue them.

The problem with comedy is that even though you think something's funny the rest of the world might not.  You write some funny s*&t, but some of what you write, no matter how funny you think it is, is just not going to be funny to other people.  I think any comedian or comedic writer/screenwriter would agree.  That being said, I would never judge the comedic value of a scene or decide to cut a scene I truly felt was funny, based on the opinions of 3 people.  But, I would never just chalk it up to them "not getting it," or "not liking that type of humor."    

Not to beat a dead horse...I just read an interview in the Onion with Stehpen Wright.  At one point he talks about a joke he refused to stop telling for a period of time, because he was sure it was funny, even though it never got any laughs.  He finally realized the absurdity of his situation and took the bit out.  But it just goes to show that even professional comedians tell sh*&ty jokes that they think are genius.  

Just my two cents.

Thanks for the great read!

Hi Mattew, I'm not the right person to give you a expertised review on you script, but I will say I loved it so much.

Lot of parts of it I liked a lot. For example the part when the doc showed Derrick and Ben the pictures. Many other parts were well developed. The names of the Lawers confused me a bit, but it is me.

About format for me was okay, I've just one restriction about CUT TOs the rest were okay.

Oh, maybe the title wasn't good. Anyway continue writing this way and you will be a known writer inside SS soon.

Congrats, dude!

BTW Take a look at The Cab's Tales there is another script in there for your reading. Thanks!

Wow, I...umm...wow.  What an unbelievable review.  Thanks for the compliments.

As I've said before, I agree about the, at times, problematic formatting, but it's mainly because I just wrote this for fun.  I had a lot of fun writing it, and never really thought anything would come of it.  I've had a few people tell me that it would work best as a feature, but I guess I just can't see pitching it around Hollywood.  I have a couple more marketable features I'm currently working on.  But on the plus side, it wouldn't really be all that hard to turn this into a feature.

The script is registered.  Even though I never planned on doing anything with it, I don't really like the idea of putting something on the internet without registering it.

And the title?  I have no other argument other than the fact that it makes me laugh.  If I ever did anything with it, I'd change the title.  But hey, it got Snakes on a Plane made.

Matthew,

Here are some other things that haven't been touched on.

I would not have included those personal quotes at the top of the first page.  Just a professionalism thing.

If Derrick was 5 in 1980, he'd be 31 in 2006, not 26.

The line about reputable studies such as those in Canada reads awkwardly.

I thought the early section of the courtroom scene would be more funny if Romanowsky's argument was even more flimsy.  Possibly you could bring back the teeth and genital pictures for a 'Rule of 3' kind of thing.

Is Ben perjuring himself at the top of Page 18?  In the initial scene where Derrick spits up the coffee, both he and Ben act like this has never happened before.

I would not use LATER and EVEN LATER in sluglines.  Those should usually be only DAY or NIGHT with possible use of MORNING, AFTERNOON, or EVENING.  That it is later on in the court proceedings is not apparent to the viewer.  Maybe you could write in more LAW AND ORDER TYPE SOUNDs.  People love the Law and Order sound. :)

On Page 25 when DERRICK asks 'What about the pictures?'  Does that mean the proposed pictures on the coffee packaging?  Not sure what other pictures it could mean, but I don't think Derrick really cares about making coffee safer.  He's just trying to cash in.

Certainly a fun read.  Any future plans for it?

-Bob

Quoted from rjw8625 Matthew, Here are some other things that haven't been touched on. I would not have included those personal quotes at the top of the first page.  Just a professionalism thing. If Derrick was 5 in 1980, he'd be 31 in 2006, not 26. The line about reputable studies such as those in Canada reads awkwardly. I thought the early section of the courtroom scene would be more funny if Romanowsky's argument was even more flimsy.  Possibly you could bring back the teeth and genital pictures for a 'Rule of 3' kind of thing. Is Ben perjuring himself at the top of Page 18?  In the initial scene where Derrick spits up the coffee, both he and Ben act like this has never happened before. I would not use LATER and EVEN LATER in sluglines.  Those should usually be only DAY or NIGHT with possible use of MORNING, AFTERNOON, or EVENING.  That it is later on in the court proceedings is not apparent to the viewer.  Maybe you could write in more LAW AND ORDER TYPE SOUNDs.  People love the Law and Order sound. :) On Page 25 when DERRICK asks 'What about the pictures?'  Does that mean the proposed pictures on the coffee packaging?  Not sure what other pictures it could mean, but I don't think Derrick really cares about making coffee safer.  He's just trying to cash in. Certainly a fun read.  Any future plans for it? -Bob

Ok, first off, thank you for the read.  I'll now address your critique...

First off, the quotes were just for my own jollies.  I didn't write it for the professional world, I wrote it for fun, basically.  I might do something with it in the future, but as of right now, no real plans.

31, eh?  Guess that explains why I'm majoring in film, not math. (I suck at math, by the way)

Never had such an extreme reaction to the coffee occurred before.  I basically wrote this off my own experiences with coffee, and how much it can upset my stomach now (mainly because of the insane amount of coffee I drink).

Yes, he means those pictures.  I kind of looked at the pictures as Derrick having fun with our asinine legal system and the demands you can make.  I think, as far as Derrick goes, it was initially about the money, but as time passed, he actually convinced himself that what he was doing was the right thing.

Once again, thank you for the read.  The comments were much appreciated.

Stomach: The Movie! is actually doing really well in a competition I entered it in at the University I attend.  So far they've weeded out 3/4 of the scripts, and S:TM! is one of the ones that is left.  It's made it through two rounds.

So there's a chance it could get made.  Wow, never thought that might happen.