The Girl With a Cigarette Who Loses Love on the Weekends by Cody Michaels (cm) - Short - A beautiful young woman does what she does best and breaks yet another heart.   7 pages - pdf, format 8)

Hi Cody,

This was a quick read, although I think most of that comes down to the fact that it's based purely on dialogue, with very little action. Some writers will be fine with that, others will like to see more action. As for me... I'm undecided.

An interesting way of telling this one. I'll get to that later. As a whole, I think every man or woman who has ever been dumped will see something of value in this short. Most of us know how Francis feels, although not all of us would have been dumped in such a bitchy manner. So you're working with a vast audience, which leads me to believe that this may get picked up and filmed.

I'm incredibly undecided on the use of Voiceovers in this one. I love the use of voiceovers as a technique and I think it has a lot of value in writing. However, to me they have to be used for a reason. This reason could be anything from a character writing in a diary or leaving a message on the phone, but it can never just be random voiceovers, in my opinion.

Here, the voiceover is kind of random, but at the same time, it serves a purpose... if you get what I mean. This guy is narrating a scene in his head, which is a nice way of telling a story. However, I also get the feeling, that while it makes sense, the voiceovers get incredibly redundant in places. For example, in places you're using it as a tool to describe characters feelings, while showing the exact same thing on screen. It's the same with when you describe what the characters do in the voiceover.  In a script, it works, but on film it would look incredibly awkward. Ever watched a film with the commentary for the blind on? I can imagine this short being something like that.

Before you tell me I have no idea what I'm talking about, I think you should understand that I do know why you used the voiceover. You're narrating the scene from the guy's head. I get that. But at the same time, I don't particularly like it. That's why I say I'm on the fence with this one.

In terms of story, I think it's lacking somewhat. This may just be my opinion, but I think your logline is a bit misleading. I originally thought that this story was going to be more about Marianne than Francis. For me, the story is actually more about Francis, although we never actually meet him. Just a minor nit-picky thing, there, but I'd advise possibly making the logline more focused on Francis.

I'm also a little turned off with the story for other reasons. Remember, this is only my opinion, but I don't think that it works. For me, the story is: A guy gets dumped. Nothing new, here. To me it's incredibly bland and a little derivative. Sorry to be so harsh, but I know that you're capable of coming up with better stories than this.

I'd advise possibly changing the names of Francis and Frankie. Very confusing when reading it on the page.

Sorry to be so harsh, man, but for me there's not much in this one.

Keep writing.

Dan

Well ... I think this was a good attempt, but it somehow crashed badly.

One of my issues is with the v.o. as it confuses itself between being a descriptive and being the guy-sat-next-to-you.

Frankie sits trembling on the bench. He rises in a rage.
     FRANCIS (V.O)
Still sitting on the bench he has
nothing left,
... the v.o. is just a repetition of the description

whereas:
     FRANCIS (V.O)
KABOOM. There it is.
... is commentary.

I think your intent her with the v.o. is correct, it's just the way you've deployed it is all over the place.

You need to use your OVER BLACK: or equivalent better as well.

I think this could work as quick short and could be effective, but you're going to have to get it right.

Cody,

I liked this.  There’s a few issues with the writing, especially with the repetition in the action/dialogue (as already mentioned above).  Address that and you’ll lower the page count -- which is no bad thing.  Had this been much longer I’d probably have tuned out -- particularly as these types of stories have a tendency to wander in circles.  You got in, said what you needed to and got out again.

Thought for the most part the V.O worked for me -- you kept them short and to the point and the bookend approach was a nice touch.

Can’t say I was drawn to care for either character.  She’s cold and detached; he’s young and naive -- though I guess that’s deliberate.  To be honest as I was reading this I wondered if it was meant to be slightly tongue-in-cheek?  

I’d re-work the Francis/Frankie thing. It tripped me up a number of times. Stick to one name followed by V.O.

p.3 -- ‘I don’t think I know for sure yet?’ -- Not sure this needs to be a question.

p.5 - consider dropping the ‘Dusty Springfield’ line.  Took me a couple of reads to see what you were getting at.  Perhaps something more generic such as ‘music’ or the like.    

A good example of what works for some and not for others. Best of luck with it.

Steve.

Thanks for the feedback all.  I appreciate it.  

After hearing your comments I wonder if one route I should go is establishing that Francis, the narrator, is typing on a computer or typewriter.  

I also agree with the fact that maybe some of the action and narration is to on point and unnecessary at times.

I had planned on shooting this myself so I wonder if that's why I wrote it the way I did.

I'll be sure to rework it a bit and fix the logline as well.  

Thanks again.    

CM,

Here are my notes:

"She left for New York that same
day." -- Who is this she? The goal of Act I is to introduce the characters, situation, etc. A V.O. starting with 'she' will only cause confusion.

"I am doing this for several
reasons."

You're sort of dropping us in the middle of something and having us try to figure it out. Questions keep popping into my head as I'm reading this. Who is "I" and what is he doing? I don't think this is a very effective way of utilizing the V.O.

I keep reading the V.O. and I'm really struggling through it because there's no narrative to it but just constant information thrown at me that I'm suppose to keep track of? I'm sorry, it's just not doing it for me.

I didn't get much from page 2. I'm struggling to find the narrative in this.

And the same with page 3. I'm still not sure what narrative is because I feel like they're talking about something that's too intimate and too deep to let the audience in on. So that makes it very hard to understand.

I will return to this, but these are my feelings about it thus far.

Take care,

-J.S.

I really enjoyed it.  I like a little bit of drama in my scripts, and this was a quick read, and I can see this working well on camera.

First, you need to start off with "BLACK" or "OVER BLACK:" or something.

I think you should establish at the start that our main character's (V.O) is that he's typing at a computer or something, like you suggested above yourself.  It gives them a purpose and they're easier to "get" then, if you understand what I'm say.

I only skimmed over the comments, but I went into this think this story was going to be about a girl whom breaks someone's heart.  This wasn't Marianne's story, it was totally all Francis.  I'd suggest changing the log so that Francis is more of a focal point.

Although I did enjoy it, I think this has been done to death.  Something else has to happen here.  It's too "seen it all before."  You need to find a way of making this more enjoyable and less drag-y.  Give us the story, then twist it and make it fresh, and you're onto a winner... maybe.

I thought the writing was okay, some technical issues though with how you format things.

Francis as a whole is good.  But he's your average naive guy.  He needs something more too.  I would leave your evil bitch the way she is, I liked how ruthless she was.  I also like the fact that we never meet Francis.

IMO, I could see someone wanting to film this because it'd be easy to pull off.  But it could be far better.  You wrote passively a lot, but no sweat, I still am having trouble with it.

Good luck with this!

-- Curt

Quite cleverly done. What would otherwise be a dull story you've somehow managed to make interesting. Dialogue and VO could do with tightening up a little in places. Aside from that it is well done for what it is.

Hey Cody.

This one's very similar to your other one, 'Third Avenue'.  Lol, in fact, I thought this one was going to be about two lesbians drifting apart because your other one was about two male lovers drifting apart.  (Especially with the names Francis and Marianne.)

There's kind of the same premise going on here as 'Third Avenue', (parting relationships), and even the same device used to tell the story, a Voiceover Narrator Author who's writing a book.  I'm wondering, are you trying to do a series of stories like these?

Likewise, my reaction to this story is very similar to my reaction to the other one, as it's coming off a little bland.  (For my tastes, that is.)  Not much is given storywise and the action on film only dictates what we're already told in voiceover and becomes redundant.  It sounds like a not bad idea at first, as stories that do that often have a uniqueness, but at the same time, it gets old and boring and pish-posh at the same time.

Nevertheless, it's still an atmosphere that seems to be a signature for you right now.  I'm curious to see what new ideas you bring to the table for those kind of stories.

- Mark

cover page needs to be fixed

p1

need a fade in (even if it's into black)

how old is marianne? "she means business" is unfilmable. I have no idea what that looks like.

carefully bouncing? once again, makes no sense. just say "bounces"

watch your -ing verbs and your -ly adverbs.

what year is it? are we in current day? doesn't feel like it.

p2

you really need to work on your descriptors. give us more to work with.

p3

a little confusing having the VO speak in between the two characters

don't underline words. the exclamation point says enough.

this back and forth is a bit cumbersome. i'm just not interested.

p4

beats are not pauses.

missed a question mark

p5

don't type the number 3. spell it out.

And that she does. Blasting in is
Dusty Springfield singing You Don’t
have to say you love me. - awkward

prances? might be the wrong verb here.

Closing comments:

Unfortunately I wasn't a fan of this one. Way too dull and cliched. I've read this story a thousand times before. And the VO just adds insult to injury. Furthermore, your charcters have no...character. Very bland and the audience has no time to connect. Was a worthwhile exercise. But I would put this behind you and move on.

Best of luck.

Thanks for the feedback all.

And, Albinopenguin.  Not every single movie starts with a FADE IN.

Quoted from CM And, Albinopenguin.  Not every single movie starts with a FADE IN

True, when talking about a Fade In in a transitional sense. Not every movie Fades in to a screen. However, I don't think Albinopenguin was talking about a Fade In in a transitional sense. He's talking about what is traditionally acceptable for a screenplay. Traditionally, screenplays start with a FADE IN: at the top left hand corner of the screen. To me, it has nothing to do with a transition, just how tradition depicts writing.

Some writers will say that you have to have a FADE IN: at the start of every script. Why? Because that's the industry standard. Those who don't comply according to industry standards may get themselves a bad reputation.

Think of it, not as a transition, but a way of always starting a script. Personally, I can't explain it, all I know is it would be best to FADE IN: to every script. Not including it, immediately sends out red flags.

Personally, I don't mind it, but other readers (including some execs) might.

Cheers,

Dan

Cody, I agree that you don't need to have a FADE IN, but you should consider having some kind of scene heading like BLACK, or "The following voice over plays over black". It's a bit odd to just start with the voice-over.

I thought Frankie was Francis' alter ego, or fictionalization, or whatever. The story of a guy stuck in a painful memory with nothing to do but write about it.

I like the style and the tone, but I have to agree with the accusations of blandness. The characters are one-note -- she's all heartless, he's all passion. Without depth, we need more premise, or failing that, more gimmick. I'm compelled by the narrator, but as is, the relationship between him and the action is essentially unexplored. If I'm right, above, that still doesn't add much to the story. Why should we care about this guy? Because he got his heart broken by a woman we're given no reason to like? Won't work. To identify with characters we need to believe their motivations, and it's hard to believe Frankie's love when we're shown nothing to love, in fact tipped from the start that there's nothing to love by the narrator. I think the uniqueness, or at least the potential thereof, is all in the narrator, and I think that's what should be built up.

Yes, I realize not every screenplay begins with a FADE IN, but it requires an OVER BLACK or something similar. Not including this makes the reader weary from the very beginning, so why take this chance?

Hey Cody.

I didn't read all of the comments but it seems like you've got some mixed reviews.  I for one liked this story and can picture a miniseries spawning from this.

I actually see Francis as more of a ghost following Marianne around as she rips out the hearts of all these guys rather than just narrating the entire thing.  I think it would be beneficial to put Francis right there with Marianne to add a bit of flare to what feels like just a simple, shallow breakup.

Marianne's apathy may be a turn off in terms of depth but I think coupling her with a dramatic Francis could work in your favor and who knows, I sorta think that Francis could even be a figment of Marianne's imagination.  Perhaps her single piece of morality screaming at her to grow a f***in' heart.  In a way a divided character which could clash in later episodes.  Well anyways, great job with this.  It was an interesting read.

Johnny

Cody

Love the title.

I was endeared to this. It’s essentially just a talking heads piece, not much going on in terms of action but I like the dialogue between both characters. Like your “Third Ave” script there is an emotional honesty and personal feel to the piece that gives it tangibility often lacking in others which meditate on the subject of love.

You are coasting very close to accusations of pretentiousness and naval gazing but I think you stay just within the borderline. For me, it’s that dreamy, poetic delivery of the dialogue that I like about it so much. It’s not really how people would talk, its highly stylized, feels like written dialogue and that’s cool, its goes in tandem with the airy tone of the piece. The intertwining V.O. works well too, I particularly like the passages which bookend the piece.

Interesting work with a unique voice.

Col.