To Kill Two Birds With One Stone by Slevin - Short, Black Comedy - A man in need of a new car after a drunk night at Las Vega, enlists the help of two degenrate theives to steal his car subsequenltly getting a brand new one from his $6,000 insurance.  12 pages - doc, format 8)

Any criticism would be helpfull

Hey chudi,

For a comedy (even a black one) this wasn't really funny, I would definitely categorize this as a drama (c'mon, his son was killed - it's a revenge story).

Anyways, on to the review.

The basic premise of the script is revenge. I like that you don't reveal it until at end, but it sort of falls flat on it's face because there is no real build up. This is mainly because your main character Jeffery is very one-dimensional, he's like a wooden figure, not a living breathing man with heart mind and feelings. You have to make him interesting, make us feel and for him and care about what happens to him and what he's been through. I think your description of his son's death needed more, it was like you're only stating facts. You have two lines about Jeffery's grief and IMO that doesn't sell it properly.

Your writing has to tighter and leaner, overall I thought you did a pretty good job, but you have to trim the filling.

"An anonymous man steps out of his vehicle". He just a man, and since the reader doesn't know him he's obviously anonymous. No need to state that which is obvious. Also, and you're gonna hear this a lot, show - don't tell. "The smaller man is the brains of the two", unless you show us that in the script then we will never know this. And if you show us that, then there is no reason for you to tell us that.

Another thing, in a spec script you shouldn't use the terms "we see", "we hear" or "we move" etc.

Be consistent when you write, you first refer to them as Man 1 and Man 2, then as Man 1 and Man two. A female waiter is a Waitress, a mistake you later correct but you should never change a character's name/title during a script (unless the character actually changes his/her name). Also, unless you have a very good reason not to, you should always give a major character a name. Man 1 and Man 2 simply doesn't work.

Don't forget to proofread your script.

All in all, not a bad effort, but it needs a major overhaul to work.


Cheers
Rob

Hey, thanks for the review- this story was just me having fun and trying to really experiment- i'm a much better wirter than this as i have optioned a feature legth script. But as i said it was more of a rush than anything- the lack of character development, and disassembled sub plot - ws just realy me working uder an experimental time phrame.
When i meant an 'anonymous' it was a reference to the character being un-remarkable and not insignificant in that sense. I should have used un-remarkable as a prefered adjectival lexis, so well spotted.
I am familliar with the 'show dont tell' saying,but i did tell and showed that the characters differed in mental strength by the way - man 1 was doing all the talking and buisness and man 2 was just doing nothing but eating. Again i should have taking it out--
me not giving those guy's name's i thought was quite obvious- they are insurance criminals and as such their names were not needed- kinda why in the earlier scene- when jef called on the phone and inquired to meet them directly- the voice replied 'we dont usually do this' the client never is allowed to meet the nsurance agents. That's why i never gave them a name- its just business.
One last thing, what is the reason behind the rule of not using 'we see, we move' etc in a spec script and is it a major fall out - cause i've never come across that.

Thanks for the review.

WE are not there - the characters are.

The use of WE in spec scripts is generally frowned upon in the industry (or at last that's what I have read and been told), it's not a rule per se.

But reading WE see, WE hear etc. really disrupts the flow of a screenplay IMO, you can make a script work much better (also iro pacing) if you just show what it is we're seeing instead of telling us that we're seeing this and that.

Sure, this calls for creativity - but what could be more important than creativity in a screenplay (other than the format)?


Rob