Hey Writer,

Now then. I've read the other reviews, and to be honest I'm surprised.

Maybe it's because it's late and I'm tired, maybe it's because I've just got a different opinion to everyone, but I didn't really get all the emotion that the rest of the reviewers are finding.

The structure is solid, the writing smooth and I can't really fault the technique at all so that's a big tick. So it just needs to fulfil the parameters of the challenge and envelope me in the tale presented. I wasn't aware of all the back history here, so that was a fun wee read in that sense, and yeh I get where you went with it and that's clever.

It just never managed to drag the feelings out of me, and it never nailed the emotions that it was trying to put across. They seemed like tickles, when given the subject matter they should be leaving a scar.

All this being said, you should be bloody proud of this effort as it is well crafted. Perhaps I'm just being critical because you've absolutely nailed all the writing, and it just didn't leave that imprint on me that I'm sure this writer is capable of.

Everyone else loved it though so even if I was to suggest a re-write, I'd possibly just accept everyone else's judgement on this one.

Well Done

Cam

P.S. Slade was playing in the background for a large part of this, maybe something more emotional than Cum on Feel the Noize would have helped, might try a re-read with some Cohen or something

“I’m not crying, dammit. I’m wet mad, that’s all.” Nice line.

Now, this is a curious and engaging tale. Whenever you want to talk about a big event, find a low angle to make it interesting. That seems to have happened here. Truly strange and real-seeming people. It’s even got a baby skeleton in it. Hardcore.

Rushing through my last few reviews, as I think today is voting day and I’m running late. But I could happily have spent more time with this one.

This is definitely my favourite of the ones I’ve read so far. A smartly written character piece with polished dialogue (“I’m not crying, dammit. I’m wet mad, that’s all.” was a particular highlight).

This was clearly well researched, and you also managed to make it poignant as well.

The only qualm I had was with how the baby died - something about it just didn’t seem logical. Her just waking to find the baby dead in it’s crib one morning would feel more believable and tragic.

That aside though, this was excellent work in such a short time frame. Well done.

Quoted from SteveUK   The only qualm I had was with how the baby died - something about it just didn’t seem logical. Her just waking to find the baby dead in it’s crib one morning would feel more believable and tragic.

I agree completely!!

Writer,

I’ve read like five or so. Didn’t enter this time. But, for my money, this is the best of the crop right here. It’s an intriguingly original story, tautly written and never overstays it’s welcome. So many of these OWC’s don’t translate well outside of the OWC, and I think this might be one of those. But within the parameters of this challenge, this is definitely the best I’ve read so far. Excellent job, writer!

Steve

She said she put the baby on a stove and it died. That's how I remember it.

Just discussing a bit: re the baby, I buy it, and interpreted it as something was wrong with the fireplace, like, it wasn't sealed properly, so the baby couldn't breathe.

Quoted from PrussianMosby Just discussing a bit: re the baby, I buy it, and interpreted it as something was wrong with the fireplace, like, it wasn't sealed properly, so the baby couldn't breathe.

Miss Yemmie says she put the baby 'on the stove' not 'in the fireplace.'

Regardless of which way you interpret it, putting a baby on a stove or in a fireplace is never a good idea and this really threw me off this script, well that and the fact that it's just talking and two locations, no action. But if the baby issue is altered slightly, died of a fever or something, it wouldn't seem so strange.

Yeah, sure, she put it on the stove. But how does a stove look like in 1960's on that island? I at least didn't think that she has gas supply or electricity there, ergo fire. She might have put it beside the flue, where there's some waste heat, just not seeing her putting the baby on a stove plate in fact. That's stupid.

She said she was young, I think. And that the baby was always cold. I took it as the baby probably would’ve died regardless. I had no issues with it. My take.

Quoted from SAC She said she was young, I think. And that the baby was always cold. I took it as the baby probably would’ve died regardless. I had no issues with it. My take.

Mine too.

Thanks to all who commented, especially those who had some appreciation for the script.
One thing I should address is the baby on the wood stove. Miss Yemmie didn't explain it that well. The stove was only warm, and the baby was wrapped in blankets. She was alone, young, and desperate to save her child. The fact is, as some of you surmised, the baby likely would have died anyway.
The background for the story:
JFK had taken office only weeks before the story begins. In reality, he would not make his "we will go to the moon" speech for several months. In this story, given the Soviet Union's Sputnik failures, Kennedy wants to pull out all the stops to stay ahead in the Space Race.
The U.S. Government DID consider several sites for its new Space Center but eventually settled on Merritt Island adjacent to Cape Canaveral. The potential sites named in the script are accurate --except for Machipongo Island, which actually would have fit the bill quite well.

Henry

Henry,
    I really enjoyed this one.  I had this rated as my number 1 script.  Great job.  I thought you really captured Miss Yemmie so well.  I could envision her and i felt for her.  

So, you achieved what every writer wants to achieve.  I cared and I felt badly.

Dan

Quoted from DanC Henry, So, you achieved what every writer wants to achieve.  I cared and I felt badly. Dan

Thank you, Dan. That IS what I wanted -- that is, to make Miss Yemmie the story (not the alternate history) and elicit some emotion from people watching the film.

Also, I appreciate your explanation of your own film and what you were trying to do. So many commenters react to scripts from one vantage point only -- words on a page -- without considering the subtle things in a script that could/should be conveyed on screen
and/or by (competent) actors.

P.S. Interesting what you said about Russia & the AK-47s.

Regards,
Henry