Hi everyone!

I'm Lars, 20 years old from Germany and got interested in screenplays in school during class. One could call it theatre class although its probably not the most fitting word for it.

I had some ideas, read some scripts and this is my first project. Well, the first 13 pages.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7setfec2v0ob0eg/SonsofVol.pdf?dl=0

I am really interested to see what others think of it. So any criticism is welcome.

Cheers.

Hey Lars, newbie buddy!

As a fellow newbie, I'll do my best to critique your work. So here we go! (I'm writing these as I read).

PAGE 1:
I think you should break up your first paragraph as it contains a few separate sequences of action and is a little big.

Speaking of "big". I don't think is necessary for you to describe a planet as "big". I mean, what kind of planet isn't big? The perceived size of the planet also depends entirely upon our distance from it.

Your descriptions of 'rotating around the planet', etc. towards the end of the paragraph were also a little confusing and I found it difficult to picture this in my head.

"The number 2133 appears..." etc. This should all be written as simply:

"SUPERIMPOSE: 2133"

You say "some space station". The word "some" comes across as almost disparaging, which would be avoided simply by saying "a space station".

"BIG FUTURISTIC CITY" ... maybe it's just my prejudiced against the word 'big', but I think it could be swapped for a more descriptive word. By implication of it being a 'city' we can already infer that it is big. Same with a planet.

A note so far: you use 'we' A LOT.

PAGE 2:
"only a few cars still parking there" -- parked* ... also, how many cars is a few? How large is this parking lot?

SUPERIMPOSE: Luna City, Moon. **

I like the, "not so white anymore".

With the police arriving, again I would say to break up this paragraph. It is very BIG.

"British, classy look" -- sticking to stereotypes, I see  ;D well, I'm truly offended!

PAGE 3:
Page three, the best part of any decent newspaper.

When Marcus says, "search for: Prof. Wendford, Henry" it seems weird that he would abbreviate 'professor' in speech.

[...]

I'll return.

Thanks for your effort Jack! Greatly appreciate your critique. Looking forward to the rest of it :)

A lot of things I need to pay more attention to moving on. (Holy hell do I use 'we' a lot)

Quoted Text ... also, how many cars is a few? How large is this parking lot?

Would it be considered 'wrong' to leave things like this open to the imagination of the reader?

Hey Lars, sorry that I haven't read and critiqued more of your work yet, just been busy.

In response to your question, I personally leave out a lot of detail (almost too much). However, I would suggest, of you are opting to leave it to the imagination, that you use more descriptive language.

For instance, rather than saying that there are "a few cars" in the car park, which makes the whole description rather clunky (imo). You could simplify much of it down to something like:

EXT - PARKING LOT - NIGHT.

A parking lot illuminated by lamplight, cars sparsely parked.

[...]

You'd think that in the future they'd have implemented better lighting in public areas.

Take all the time you need Jack, I am in no way entitled to receive critique, so I am very grateful for your effort.

Quoted Text However, I would suggest, of you are opting to leave it to the imagination, that you use more descriptive language.

Noted.

PAGE 3 (CONTINUED):

Addressing the overuse of 'we' issue -- using the DARK ALLEY part.

First of all, "EXT. DARK ALLEY - CONTINUOUS" does not really need to be preceded by a "CUT TO:"

Rather than saying "we watch our detectives" , try something like

"An obscured figure watches the detectives. He breathes heavily."

You don't need to say "and we" before "CUT TO:"  ;D ...but you see how you can word things in a way that doesn't require the constant use of 'we', and is simply describing the action?

Notice also that I don't direct camera position/movement, etc. in my example (which you have been doing intermittently so far, as in: "over the shoulder"). That's the director's job. Yours is to tell the story -- that's it.

Anyway...

"INT - POLICE CHIEF OFFICE - LATER".

Using 'LATER' in the slugline shoulder really be reserved for scenes that are taking place in the same location over an extended time period. Here it would be perfectly correct to say "NIGHT" as the reader/audience would join up the dots in their heads anyway.

Again, I take issue with the excessive use of 'we'. When you say, "we are looking directly at", this is superfluous, because as a viewer we are ALWAYS looking at the screen (there is also another issue with directing camera position here). It also creates a strange sense of POV when you say this, as though there is another character in this scene.

My advice to you would be to try and rewrite this paragraph, a) without using the word 'we', and b) without describing HOW it should be filmed. For insance:

INT. POLICE CHIEF OFFICE - NIGHT.

In the middle of the room is a desk, atop of which are orderly arranged office supplies.

A man enters, sitting down on the black leather chair behind it. This is CHIEF KLEYTON (51), graying black hair, wearing a checkered shirt.

[...]

Notice that I don't direct any camera movement and the use of we. Sorry to really drill on the point, but I think it's important.

TO BE CONTINUED. Sorry for the brief posts.

Thanks again Jack!

So I reworked the text earlier, trying to eliminate the 'we issue', which also got rid of (most) camera movements. Only in the first scene they still remain in some places, because it is more about the visuals at his point than story if that makes sense?

Unless it is a VERY important thematic choice I would seriously advice not to direct the camera at all.

If you want to direct movies then . . . well, direct movies! If you want to be a writer . . . write stories.

Of course, you could also do both, as people like Tarantino and many others do, but as I assume you are not going to be directing this movie, I insist that you follow this rule.

Your story should be able to stand alone as just that -- a great story.

Welcome Lars

This is a great place to be - the Best way to get critique is to give it. review scripts that take your fancy and hopefully the authors will return the favour.

Opened your's up just to take a glimpse and there is a whole lot of black ink on that first page - and a hell of a lot of "We" - really not necessary, it's like you are trying to lead me through the story - Just tell us the story, none of this "we" business.

Hope you stick around as you can really learn a lot around here.

Matt