All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Our Lady of Eternal Suffering - OWC (currently 5886 views)
dogglebe
Posted: October 23rd, 2011, 8:17am
Guest User
SPOILERS AHEAD
Sorry to say, but I didn't like this at all. From the very beginning, you start with weapons-grade-exposition. Charles starts with who he is and what he's doing. What would a theologian expect to learn from and ancient church in the middle of the night? Don't these guys generally do their research in libraries? An archeologist or historian would visit the site, but not a theologian. Especially at night.
The mad scientist was chock full of exposition, as well. You start off his dialog with his introduction. Why would he conduct his experiments in the secret basement of an ancient church? Why not do it in a proper research facility. This was so cliche and silly that I expected Scooby Doo to make an appearance.
Dialog and character development were very shallow. I did enjoy how you used the White Lady's dialog for both conversations.
Points for originality, even if science fiction is far from being my favorite genre. I found some of the sci-fi elements kind of weirdly excessive (one of my issues with the genre) but overall enjoyable.
While all of this was going on, it would have been nice to go back to Charles for his reaction, or to condense the doctor's ramblings by quite a bit.
The end was clearly an ending, albeit not as strong as the rest of the piece. Kind of like a little tacked on exposition to verify those at the inn were aware of what had happened for some time, and a brief chuckle at the very end.
Overall, I'll say it's pretty well done. Some issues with little things that could easily be fixed when a shooting script was being worked on, but otherwise, fairly strong.
I liked this You established a nice mood, although I will say that the tone leading up to the Abbey seemed entirely different from the tone in the lab. I'm sure you could fix that easily, though.
I wasn't quite convinced about the ending. What you're trying to convey doesn't come across very clearly, so maybe tweak that a bit.
A great original concept, well done. I admire the ambition.
There was a case of what felt like a story within a story, or a story of two halves. You abandon your protag for around 5 pages, while we watch what feels like a window into another world, probably alright for a feature, but too long for a short.
Gothic? I don't think so. The lab, when you mentioned Victorian design, had me wanting to picture something along the lines of Frankenstein, but the futuristic equipment along with computer screens was jarring. I think a more antiquated approach would have been better.
A very interesting concept, just needs some work to help it all gel together.
Lots of interesting points of view, both good and bad.
I largely agree with all the criticism, whilst maintaining my pride in what I consider to be an interesting concept/story.
It tends to be the case that my ambition outweighs my competence over this time frame. I'm a slow, methodical writer in general.
A common problem seemed to be that Charles disappeared half way through. I'll either fix that up, or remove him from proceedings.
It is overly expositional, something I myself often decry. With the opening I was just trying to convey a sense of normality. The tourist drinking in the local bar, enjoying himself, before being thrust into this surreal experience...start with something people can relate to, before taking them on a journey kind of thing...
I think Eoin's appraoch would be better...have him instantly looking for the Abbey.
Anyway, thanks again for the reads. I'll addres specific points in reply to the reviewers.
Thw standard of writing and creative thinking here was impressive. As a stand alone piece, this is a nice little tale. In terms of the challenge however, it's a bit off the mark. It's a blend of genre elements, rather than a gothic horror.
Would have prefered the InnKeeper description after he is introduced.
Alot of the dialouge at the start is exposition. I'd prefer to be at the Abbey discovering the story as Briggs does, or watch Briggs walking up that trial, map and flashlight in hand, nervously navigating his way.
I have a hard time believing Charles would scream at the owl's hoot, but doesn't even seem fazed by blood dripping from a statue . . .
'Bottomless eye sockets', reads a little awkward.
By page 7, this writer is deep into their comfort zone, sci fi.
'A blue electromagnetic force-field surrounds the bed.' Electromagnetism can't be seen, it's effects can, so we wouldn't know that's what this is.
Some the action descriptions here are redundant:
'The world dissolves around her. The fabric of reality tears apart piece by piece. Light shines through from the other side as...
...the VORTEX opens. A tunnel of sound and vision that moves at breathtaking speed and ends in unbearable light.'
Just show us what happens, don't tell us, we'll interpret for ourselves.
The ending with the Innkeeper was a little weak. Overall this enjoyable.
Thanks for the read Eoin.
1. Agreed about the opening. 2. The description is bad. It's not real blood...it's just a statue of a woman with bleeding eyes. I struggled for a while with that bit. 3. Do you have a suggestion of what it should say? It's just a kind of electric field, blue and crackling with electricity. 4. Don't really see any of it as redundant. I'm just describing what I see in my head...the material world dissolving, then cracking as light shines through, then a tunnel/vortex opening. Basically leaving it open to the individuals interpretation (ultimatley it would be whichever effects I can find that look the best!).
I think your action description is as you say 'describing what I see in my head'. I'm pretty sure you know EXACTLY what you mean. Th problem is that the reader needs descriptions that are not ambigious. I have seen similiar action descriptions when reading scripts that are written by writers/directors or people who spend time behind the camera.
3. I don't want to write the description for you, you're more than capable. The best suggestion I can make is to take a look at some youtube clips of Tesla coils discharging and write some description of what you see without referring to electricity or magnetism.
4. The only reason I said that the description is redundant here is that you are telling us the material world is disolving as opposed to showing, the telling part is redundant.
I think your action description is as you say 'describing what I see in my head'. I'm pretty sure you know EXACTLY what you mean. Th problem is that the reader needs descriptions that are not ambigious. I have seen similiar action descriptions when reading scripts that are written by writers/directors or people who spend time behind the camera.
3. I don't want to write the description for you, you're more than capable. The best suggestion I can make is to take a look at some youtube clips of Tesla coils discharging and write some description of what you see with referring to electricity or magnetism.
4. The only reason I said that the description is redundant here is that you are telling us the material world is disolving as opposed to showing, the telling part is redundant.
On point four, I consider the dissolving part to be fundamental as well though. I mean it quite literally...as though the image on screen is dissolving.
I'm pretty sure it is fundamental. The real issue is that, to the best of my knowledge, the material physical world has never dissolved (unless you count people who experiment with drugs), so that description does not envoke a visual or reference that a reader, script wise, will understand. Instead, the visual discription(s) should infere to the reader that the material world is dissolving.
'The objects in the room shimmer. Bright light spills in through cracks in the wall. The entire room crumbles and yields to a flood of brillant light.'
Not saying the example above is by any means great, but it describes what is happening on screen, yet it shows and inferes something else, that the material world is dissolving.
I appreciate your input, and understand where you're coming from, but I disagree personally.
Imo...an attempt to create a physical description of it completely subverts what's actually happening...it infers that there's a physical cause and not a mental one.
At this point she's floating in space in her mind (and the only thing I'd change tbh is the word "world" to "Universe").
Dissolve:
10.to becomed issolved,asinasolvent. 11.to become melted or liquefied. 12.to disintegrate,breakup,or disperse. 13.to lose force,intensity,or strength. 14.to disappear gradually;fadeaway.
To me it makes perfect sense what's happening and it's also a technical cinematic term for number 14.
If I was to describe something like the Moon as "breaking up or crumbling"...it would suggest 3 dimensional action and a physical occurence. It's not the Moon or anything else that's breaking up, it's the fabric of reality...it's as though our Universe is a 2D sheet of plastic stretched too thinly and the light is streaming through the holes. The idea being that the other reality is more real than this one.
Of course, I veered away from such a line to protect against rabid accusations of over description..ha ha. You can never win.
All that being said, I know I need to make things clearer. I try to make my stuff pretty deep and layered and it's easy to miss things
I think there's a misunderstanding in what I meant. I wasn't suggesting that the description had to be physical, rather than what was mentally experienced. the point was simply that whatever was shown on screen should be described as such.
I think I confused that by the example I presented.
If she's floating in space and time then this would be indicated as a POV at some point, what's on screen is what the character see and experiences.
Pages: 
Author
Our Lady of Eternal Suffering - OWC
Logged
You established a nice mood, although I will say that the tone leading up to the Abbey seemed entirely different from the tone in the lab. I'm sure you could fix that easily, though.
Locked Board