Hey James, congrats on completing an OWC script.

I have to start with a pet peeve of mine.  I really don’t know what it is, but every once and a while, I come across a script in PDF form that looks like it’s a poor copy made from a poor copy.  It’s hard to “move” within the script.  The font looks weak and washed out, and because of the difficulty moving around within the script, it’s a tough read for me right off the bat.

Does anyone know why this is?  I see it’s written in Final Draft, but all FD PDF’s don’t look or act like this one.  Just wondering.

OK, back to the script…sorry about that…

First line is poorly worded, and as RC pointed out, “It’s” is incorrect.  Not a strong start, I’m afraid, bud.  The line about Derek exposing a gun is incorrectly phrased, as Derek isn’t exposing anything…it’s the view and the position he’s in that exposes the gun.

Ah, fuck it.  I’m messing with you, James.  I’m not going to pick this apart.  Just fucking around…

On a serious note, tons and tons of missing commas everywhere, to the point where I have to reread some lines, which isn’t a good thing.

Way too much “he”, “she”, “they” going on that is unclear and again, causes me to reread to make sure I know who you’re referring to.
This isn’t bad, though.  The story is OK.  It’s a typical horror cliché, but it works for the most part.

The ending doesn’t work for me, though.  I really don’t understand what it’s supposed to mean.

A good effort for the OWC, James.  Good job.

Quoted from Scoob I'll admit to being a little confused by the ending at first because I went by the slug "the next day" and not six days later. Maybe showing signs of Derek and Norman decomposing would have helped. I'm assuming Annette pulled the trigger.

Scoob, thanks for reading. Guess i didn't set up the ending well enough. I see Jeff didn't get it either.

it was the next day. Annette thought she was going to be locked in that house til she died of starvation. When she learns her fate, she pretends like she's giong to change it by killing herself. Right then, Once free'd she realizes that when Zucker and he goons show up and find her, that he is going to kill her in some slow, methodical way. Like that story Derek told her in the beginning. He locked some guy in a cellar with honey bee's. took him six days to die.

Hope that helps, thanks for reading.

@ Khamanna, thanks for reading. Glad you liked it. Hope above explanation helps some.

@ ED, thanks for the read. May try to rework this one. Everyone seems to have a problem with the ending. Cheers man.

@ balt, Thanks for reading man. I'm glad you liked it. Thought you were gonna get after me for putting my FADE IN: on the right. Ha ha, I know your a stickler for that. I left alot of ambiguity to the ending, thinking of rewriting this after OWC.


@ CAtherine, glad you liked it. Am a big fan of killing chracters you like. I just didn't see enough time to do it in 10 pages, so I made them unlikeable. Wass more about the situation for me.


@ Jeff, Thanks for reading. I use Final Draft 7. I like the look of it. It's a big file, Stevie said he had the same problem. How old is your PC. Saw some like this on here and the read fine on mine. There is a patch you can download @ FD that's overrides this. I just haven't done it cause I like the look.

Glad you liked it mostly. Maybe my response to Scoob above explains the ending a bit better. Will probably rewrite this without any OWC guidelinds and see if I can get it to flow better. Thanks, be reading yours when its up. Assuming a pisstake?

James

James, my computer is less than a year old.  It's got nothing to do with that.

I'm not sure what the deal is. This is by far not the only script (PDF) that looks and acts like this.

I bet someone on here knows what I'm talking about.  I'd really like to figure it out.

My entry hasn't been posted yet.  Some will call it a pisser, but actually, it's written very well.  It's just a very wacky horror parody, which is definitely more parody than horror.  I'm actually worried that I submitted the wrong version in my wastedness Friday night.  We'll see when it pops up.

Hi James,

I think what got me stumped about the ending was when Annette fades away - as if she's a ghost? Otherwise I followed the ending as you had planned, it was just that bit which left me feeling as if I'd missed something.

She really just dissapers from view inside that cloud of dust. Could have worded it better. Sorry. I couldn't show Zucker when he got out and approached her. Would be breaking the rules. Heading over to yours soon. Thanks again.

James

James, the left aligned FADE IN: comes from Final Draft's default setting... I use the software from time to time myself and love it -- But in order to reset the setting, which is default for some reason, you have to change FADE IN: from a "Transition" to a "General".  It'll place it within the same ledger space, only on the left instead of the right.  And, you're right, I don't like looking at it.  I just seen several scripts using it for the OWC and have stated it many times.

And the PDF print out is what most Final Draft scripts look like.  They use a different font style for Final Draft scripts.  It's 12 pitch, just not Courier new  new.  It's Courier new Final Draft 12 pitch font.

James,

Think this was a really good effort.  I thought the story was sound and the writing was pretty good.  However, I also think the characters could have been a bit more defined.  

I know that is a function of space, so what I think is that this story might be a bit to big for the 10 pages it's contained within.   Oh, you tell it clearly enough, but a lot is lost because you tell it so quickly.  

Good job but would like to see this rewritten as a longer screenplay.

First up I want to jump to your defence because it is seriously annoying me to see comments about people having more than three characters.

The criteria states clearly that you can only have three actors, it says nothing about characters, it is possible to have a 100 characters and still meet the challenge. I am 100% that Don knew what he was doing when he set the challenge up and picked actors for a reason. As long as there are no more than three characters together in the same shot then I don't see an issue with the the same actor who played Norman also being the voice of Tucker.

Anyway, onto the review...

It was great, really nice job. I thought you did a decent job of setting things up, the two leads were at least fleshed out enough for me to want to carry on reading. In fact on that note this is the first OWC I have read so far that I actually wished was a feature, this happened on page 4 where I was at my most impressed. Obviously there is a 10 page limit so you had no choice but to cut to the chase from then on in, so any problems I have wih the story from here are certainly not the fault of the writer.

The ending was fine, I probably could have done without the reference to the guy and the bees, as that makes me think she is going back in the house. I would have liked the idea of her trying to live a normal life for the next 6 days wondering when it is going to happen.

I actually think there is a feature buried here somewhere.

Good job sir.

I really liked this, everything is well paced and suspenseful, I was at the edge of my seat. Especially the phone calling, albeit a little bit like The Ring.

All of the characters have their own agenda, not some random reasons going into the house. They act like what real people would do in those situations.

However, I don't understand the ending. What's supposed to be going on? So Annette got out and her husband sent people to kill her. But what about the six days thing? That ruined me a bit for an otherwise well done OWC.

Writing is crisp and visual. One of the best OWC entries.

Herman

1 - Story: That was pretty good. I enjoyed it.
2 - Filmable & Budget: Easily with a reasonably low budget. Big, abandoned, mansion on a hill would be a tough requirement, but... shoot with what's available.
3 - Horror & Audience: Eh... Kinda light on the true horror part. R rating for graphic violence and language (one of the better simultaneous utilizations). Abandoned house - check. Cast - check. Didn't burn it down - check. Dark and stormy night as a theme - eh... check, sorta. Didn't establish date. It was a complete short, not a scene or sequence, which is appreciated.
4 - Technicals & Format: Both are fine. Dialog is fine.
5 - Title & Logline: Title is okay. Decent enough logline.
General Comments:
A - This was more thriller/suspense with a supernatural element to it than horror, and I've no real idea on what to add, but I don't think you should.
B - I like how the story gets rolling kinda fast on page three and keep the pace of twists and turns going all the way to the end. Very nice.
C - It was fun trying to out-think the problems the phone ghost was giving them, watching assumptions gone awry. Cleverly done.
D - I support your usage of three actors "as you see fit" to include making voice overs for phone calls and such, thus a non-violation of criteria and a creative utilization of your resources. (I have two actors each with double roles!)

MIchael,

Thanks for reading. This was set-up a bit too fast. My original idea was to break the rules and have the last scene at a motel. her carrying a bag of groceries. When she enters her room zucker is there SUPER: DAY 6. But, i stuck to the rule book. I don't think i'll revisit this unless it gets some interest.

Murphy, Thanks for reading. I hear you about the people and the rules. I didn't feel I broke them. I share your view here. Glad you liked this. Your ending suggestion was my thoughts exactly, but that would have broke the rules. If I rewrite it, That's the direction I'd go. Thanks again...

Herman, Thanks for reading. Yes, was expecting some to say this was derivative of the ring with the phone calls. The ending is explained to my above post where I quoted Scoob. If I rewrite this, it will read more clearly. Thanks...

Ray, like your review style. Thanks for reading. Many felt the same, that this wasn't real horror. I kind of made the house my own character. It is haunted, I just didn't have time to get to a legend as to why, which IMO would have made it feel more like horror. Thanks again, I will be getting over to yours shortly.

TO ALL... Pretty sure I've hit everyone's whose taken the time here. Gonna scan the list again, but if i miss it, please PM me. I always return my reads...

James

Very interesting, suspenseful and creative. Lots of little bits of characterization tucked into the dialogue which is refreshing. The ending needs some tightening though.

Quoted from Sanderson Very interesting, suspenseful and creative. Lots of little bits of characterization tucked into the dialogue which is refreshing. The ending needs some tightening though.

For fucks sake, You said the same damn thing everybody else said! Try not to be so damn redundant! You probably just read the comments!

Ha, having a bit of fun. Huge thanks for reading. Yes, I agree with everything you've said. Good to see you be more active. Don't worry about saying the same things or beating a dead horse. The more who tell me, the more I need to know something needs fixed.

Off to read yours, I may be redundant. Cheers...

James

James,

I peeked around the comments to see your explanation of the ending and I get it now but didn't really while reading.  I also saw this:

Quoted from jwent6688 Was ready for this, kinda. Never said Zucker was human. Muhahaha......

Hahahaha.  

But yeah, this was a good read.  Had some genuinely creepy elements in it and a good conflict to build on.  Thought Annette's "gloating" at the house at the end was kind of lame to be honest, but otherwise I enjoyed this.  Again - ending left me asking questions but overall this was well done.  Good job!

Greg

Greg,

Thanks for reading. Seems very few got the ending without explanation. So i missed there. I think in a rewrite without the rules I could polish this up a bit. Had fun. Thanks, Just got done commenting on yours.

James