This is the first one I've read that was actually above average. In fact, I'll go out on a limb and say it was great. In fact, forget the limb. It was great. I won't say the idea was completely original. It's been explored to a certain extent before but never this far. You've got all the minutia down pat. Just the same, not an exclusive concept for the writer. Just the same, I think this interpretation could've come with a lot of pitfalls. This particular execution, however, was not. It wasn't too cheesy, too gory, too preachy, too melodramatic, etc. It was approaching the latter two but never made it. So good.

I don't want to comment too much on what was wrong here. This is the first one that's really worked for me and I don't want to overanalyze it. There's been far too many instances of people either not trying or not caring thus far. This one felt like some cared and actually spent a lot of time on their entry. It feels very complete. I will say I didn't care much for the characters but this didn't seem to be about the characters too much. They served their purpose and that was good enough for me.

This was a very good idea and take on the theme. Well written too.

I think the only thing that really holds it back as a stand alone script is the characters. Didn't really feel anything for them. This could have had a very haunting end - similar to 'The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas' - if you had helped me to identify with the boy. I think he is key to the heart of the story here.

The only real thing that holds this back as a OWC script is that it didn't feel too much like a drama and there isn't really an argument between a vegan and a carnivore. There's a little of both but not really enough.

Having said that this is the best one I've read so far - not really saying too much based on the ones I've read - but, yeah, really well done with this.

Ste

This is extremely well written in my opinion. Is it pretty damn disgusting? Yes, that too.

Although this reminded me of Planet of the Apes, it's clear that you attempted to work hard for the theme of this challenge.

Very strong effort and you get high marks for this one.  

But please, CHANGE the title.   I seriously wouldn't have read this unless Ryan told me I should.

Sandra

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. please, CHANGE the title.

You're upset about the title, but slaughtering human baby's for food is no big deal?

Quoted from screenrider You're upset about the title, but slaughtering human baby's for food is no big deal?

I never said that, Screenrider. What is your dispute?

Sandra

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. I never said that, Screenrider. What is your dispute?

No dispute.  I was just making an interesting observation. Isn't that what we do as writers?  Observe and ask questions.  

Yes, we do, Mike.  I see what your point is and I agree, actually.

This one was very well written, I didn't really see a debate between a Vegan and a carnivore,  but i think some of it was done in the actions, but still this was a very solid entry, good work!

Yep, this is the best so far and I do have an idea who might've done it. I agree with screenrider that it reminds me of Soylent Green.

I was eating crackers with jam whilst reading and felt a little queasy!
Could really identify with the little boy at the end, and the top notch writing made this hit home well.

Excellent job

Quoted from screenrider No dispute.  I was just making an interesting observation. Isn't that what we do as writers?  Observe and ask questions.

I don't understand what your observation is, but I feel that the title should be different because it almost lost a read because of it.

People pick up books or movies and will choose to read or watch based on a title and a picture and a few choice words.

I don't know what the right title is or if Dumb Animals is indeed the right title after all, but I would guess that a lot of animal lovers would read that and think hell no.

Sandra

Well, this is probably the best so far IMO. Guessing Phil, wouldn't put it past Cam, but whomever wrote this is seriously intrigued by the science.

Which adds to this because it educates as it entertains. Very interesting world created here. Enjoyed the read.

one qualm, would've thought the bolt gun would've been placed against the child's forehead. Not his neck. Much like in No Country For Old Men.

James

Man, this was one clever script. Very impressed with the approach here. Yeah, a nod to Soylent Green but more a commentary on how animals are treated really in the industrial world. Very powerful. Very matter-of-fact'ish. Just what the doctor ordered. So some of the writing could be tightened up but it doesn't take away from the fact that this was an impressive read and an engaging little story. Only downside - OWC-wise - is the lack of relevance to the theme. This isn't so much a pro/con argument of vegan vs carnivore but more of a social commentary.

Also, I agree with Sandra, the title doesn't really sell it properly, if you know what I mean? It sounds a little too much like the title to a stupid Adam Sandler comedy. It fits the story, definitely, but such a good story deserves a better title. I have no idea what it should be though.

Never the less, this was a fantastic read, one that has brought back a little hope to this rather sub-par round of OWC.

This was ok. The concept works if viewed as commentary on the treatment of animals, as stated by Rob. You only need to view boxes for eggs, and how stating good treatment is actually a marketing gimmick for higher pricing.

That said, while this script has potential, what is presented here is very uneven. Julie's arc really doesn't seem right. She arrives as a snooty company woman, but the maternal instinct kicks in with the young lad and changes her outlook. The rationale is sound, but doesn't work here. If this was shot, it would essentially be a woman arriving at a farm, being taken on a tour and then radically changing with no real stimulus. A script is a blueprint to shoot , but currently, this works better as a written story alone. Where's the glue to keep me watching? Where's the real sense of conflict for the characters? We have a beginning, an ending, but no meat in the sandwich - no real emotional punch. Just a shell. For me, too much time was spent building up the world, with very little actually happening. It's the reverse of some other entries where we're left without context. That's the real challenge for a writer with a page limit - find the balance, but also an idea that's compelling enough thematically for more, whilst retaining a self-contained story that adheres to fundamental story structure and character arcs/development.

So, while kudos is given for establishing your world and providing decent imagery, you fell down on the actual entertainment value. Fairly compelling, but for me, requires a firm rewrite.

Andrew

Dude. Yeah, so far that's the best of the bunch. I'll agree with the comments that it doesn't exactly meet the meat/veggie debate, but you can't deny its quality. I was entranced enough reading it that I overlooked anything technical, if there was anything.

To sort of echo Pia here on the time, since you've got sci-fi involved anyway, you might as well have something to increase growth and aging. It's a well-established fact though, that people taste the best. Otherwise, we wouldn't have stories going back to Sweeney Todd over eating each other.

If it ain't a fact, then I would be surprised. Can't say anyone's ever confirmed that one for me though.

Well done here though. It was a compelling, if not completely disturbing, story. And hey, we writers do enjoy being completely disturbed.

Andrew, I would say that the meat of the story is the setup and it is Julie that has the character arc. Her experience learning of the process at the same time we do is what causes this change. There was some effort put into her changing expressions as Blake led her through everything. By the end, she was done.

Quoted from George Willson Andrew, I would say that the meat of the story is the setup and it is Julie that has the character arc. Her experience learning of the process at the same time we do is what causes this change. There was some effort put into her changing expressions as Blake led her through everything. By the end, she was done.

It's a fair enough point of view, but I do disagree. I previously alluded to Julie's arc, and suggested it didn't seem right. She has a start, she has an end, but no stimulus for reversal/life questioning. Walking through isn't sufficient to justify her change. Personally, it would seem the maternal instinct drove the shift; this isn't a request to have it spelt out, but as a 10 minute short film, it would really be a struggle to decipher the motivations on this blueprint. If you watched this in its current form, you'd probably feel shortchanged to see a character turnaround based on a walk through and facial expression. Fundamentally, there was no conflict for her.

Be interesting to see how the author views it.