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.
Willow's Bewitchment by Seven - Horror - Poor, sweet Willow the witch deftly escapes the horrors of inhumanity only to face a worse fate! ( R ) - pdf, format
A few writing issues but which one hasn't , they're all rushed.
I quite like the genre, quite Shaun of Dead esq, but the story was a bit lacking for me. We have no background or connection with willow, or why She's there, or why there's zombies etc Like another script, it felt liked we missed the beginning.
A few fun lines, front door, back door etc, but they felt tossed in to give a bland situation some spice.
There were things I liked but it lacks a connection for me, but has potential to be something.
The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards. Third - Honolulu Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
Yes! First sentence - zombies! Horror? Check. A lot of these are more mysterious but this is a fun action horror. It's not so scary, but more intense and exciting. Right off the bat I loved your female protagonist. She had a few good lines - "get a life". Haha. The style reminds me of BUFFY-era Whedon. Her name helped too.
I enjoyed the inventive use of magic with the knots. Built the tension nicely too. Once she gets to the house the horror traditions continue like the messed up family providing shelter. Great line about the front door type of girl. Perverse and crude, but that's black comedy for ya. Nice use of charm magic as well. A variety.
Spunky attitude. Intense. Action packed. Light on true scares.
But I definitely enjoyed myself wih this witch vs zombie mashup. It's one of those fun horrors you'd watch with buddies and yell at the screen. As for comments on not enough development - shake it off - it's 10 pages filled with witchery, zombies, and unwanted gentleman callery.
Organic? -- Seems like an odd choice of word to describe a character.
For me some awkward descriptions made this difficult to follow and the action tended to dive around all over the place. The first page alone left me scratching my head -- took me a while to understand Willow was driving. The initial description should clarify this.
Story-wise it feels like the witch angle was shoe-horned into a zombie short with little attention to any background or development. Overall I just don’t know what was happening or why. Plenty of creativity on display but a kind of scattergun approach to story telling that doesn't give the story time to breathe. Apologies, but this was not for me.
My short scripts can be found here on my new & improved budget website:
Not a bad little tale you have here, but it just didn't do it for me. I did enjoy Willow's dialogue (to a certain extent). She sounded a bit aloof. And the knots in the yarn was clever. I really got good visuals here, but I think perhaps you used too much exposition.
Where you lost me is when Willow entered the house. I wasn't too sure where the story was going there, but when I did realize the zombies were already at the door and feasting.
I don't know what to make of this one. I was down for a Witch vs. zombies, then that Willow! That lovely proptagonist opened her piehole. Every word this twerp spoke I wanted a zombie to eat her brains...whatever's left of them. Uly too.
I gave up around page six. The dialog was that bad to me.
You can call me Uly. Pronouce it. Say it aloud. I dare you. That's supposed to be funny, I guess.
I'm sorry if I'm being a bit on the rough side. Some OWC aren't always going to be clean andneat. Even the regulars miss stuff now and then. I'm not perfect, not even in my own delusions of granduer.
Thought the visuals and action were at least a bit interesting at the beginning. Zombies and comedy are almost like bacon and eggs these days. But then the middle just seemed off and weird. The ending action sequence had me confused as to what exactly was going on. I didn't know why I should care about this character, so can't say I did.
Careful of typos. Pg. 3 bouse s/b blouse. Pg. 5 flannel is wrong. Pg. 7 beautiful is wrong, etc.
Finishing is to be commended, so well done there.
“Every piece of writing... starts from what I call a grit... a sight or sound, a sentence or happening that does not pass away... but quite inexplicably lodges in the mind.” ~ Rumer Godden
interesting mix - witches and zombies, I don't think I've come across that before.
Good on you for making the effort to get an entry in, and none of them are going to be perfect.
I wasn't too sure about the dialogue, to be honest, and some of the story felt a bit rushed. The story elements were there, and a fairly good idea backs it up. Maybe it needed a little more investment in the characters, and there's a couple of typo's here and there too.
"C’mon, c’mon, c’mon! C’MON! A pox upon you, you dirty bucket of bolts! START!" Love this line.
And it's followed by a very obvious spelling mistake...
"DADDY ZOMBIE Bay-yees."
"Uly slips again, his shoots acros beneath him, his hand rips away magick banishing bag." What?
Strange script but it was refreshing in one way. Not very clear what goes on and why but I enjoyed it and got a few chuckles, could've been funnier though. Not a bad effort, haven't got a lot to say. This was a sound entry for the challenge
Zombies and witches combined – this should be my kind of story but…
Some terrible execution and poor dialogue really lets it down.
Do these people even know about the zombies? Willow’s ringing the damn doorbell when a zombie horde is coming after her… Really! And Uly (great name) is making apple cider – although I love his taste, why in the hell is he making apple cider and offering Willow a cinnamon stick to stir it with. Looks like Rick and his party missed out when they found Hershel’s farm.
Why does Uly only have flannel shirts at this time of year? What time of year is it?
Do we need to know the whole inventory of the kitchen?
I’m sorry but this one was a big letdown for me because I was expecting it to be fun, but I had to keep rereading pages constantly because of the sloppy writing.
Try not to have characters talk to themselves for too long as it rarely reads well and keep an eye out for those pesky typo’s (zobie) because there was few around. And also try not to finish with Fade out on its lonesome on the final page which never looks good.
Do these people even know about the zombies? Willow’s ringing the damn doorbell when a zombie horde is coming after her… Really! And Uly (great name) is making apple cider – although I love his taste, why in the hell is he making apple cider and offering Willow a cinnamon stick to stir it with. Looks like Rick and his party missed out when they found Hershel’s farm.
Surprisingly, I actually loved this for some reason. I thought it was so outrageous and stupid that it became great. Glad you mentioned it though, gave me a good chuckle.
I like the direction this was started in. The apology for running over "mister zombie" promised something special, but it didn't really turn out that way. Instead, it degenerated into gory slapstick, which would have been okay if it were written with a bit more care.
What starts off with competent writing becomes very hurried, full of spelling and grammar mistakes. I can only assume this was a last minute entry. The tension and pace are frustratingly slow at the start; what should have been fast action was bogged down by long and detailed descriptions inexplicably separated into multiple paragraphs. That part gets better later on, a case where rushing actually helped the writer.
Willow talks to herself too much, I'm not sure what this world looks like or the rules, why Uly wants babies, and I can't for the life of me figure out how she gets away because the writing got way too confusing at that point.
I like the vibe here, it has potential to be fun and entertaining, but it's chock full of mistakes and should be better than it turned out. Give it a careful rewrite, work on Willow's character and detail the world a bit more, and I think people will dig it.
I, too, like the whole 'Zombie vs Witch' thing, but found that Willow's comical lines in the beginning made this feel a little cheesy. I don't know what I was expecting, but not that.
As the story wenton though, I like this more and more. I liked the setup at Uly's house and how the Zombies almost got her. I liked the use of the pouch that Uly has and how that ties into it - and then he got his own back. So all in all, except for the comical side in the beginning (althougth I did like what she said when she was trying to start the car again) and a few little errors here and there, there was a lot to like about this in the end.
3 pages of Willow talking to herself is a bit much.
Hmm. Can't say I was a fan of this story. The challenge was horror and this def was not a horror. I appreciated some of the "cheesy-ness" but I think you went a little over the top.
Congrats on completing something for this challenge.
There were things I really liked about this story and thing I really did not. I almost quit reading twice, but both times, I told myself the writer deserves more, so I continued to the end.
I did like the zombie witch combination, but I will admit to groaning when I first came across the word zombie. I think this could be made into a fun script. Like Shaun of the Dead or even better, Zombieland type script. There funny parts in this. I guess that's one reason I almost gave up on it. It didn't feel like horror to me. More like a comedy.
For some reason, once we get inside the house and meet this f'd up family, Uly and Momma and Daddy zombie, visions of TCM came to mind. Especially one of the remakes. Can't remember the title right now. Especially the parts of Willow making real nice bay-yees. Messed up for sure.
All in all, not bad. Has potential. IMHO, you need to turn it into more of a comedy. That wouldn't fit the OWC parameters, but I think that would be the best way to go with this one.
This felt a lil bit cheezy with Willow's first few lines. I was surprised to see zombies out of the gate. And the talk about back door front door ...ack! lol
This didn't feel like a horror to me but it has good potential maybe as a comedy even. Cute story overall.
Well, I will give you this: for a script with so much comedy in it, I think there's still enough here to call horror. I mean, zombies go a long way in that regard.
Still, I had an extremely hard time with this one. Right off the bat, I had trouble finding my bearings. The descriptions do a very poor job and communicating geography of characters and just the lay of the land in general. I was constantly trying to figure out where Willow was and exactly what's going on.
I'm getting extremely burnt out reading scripts like this so maybe my mind is starting to wonder but still. When you first refer to the SUV and Willow watching them, I thought she might be watching from a distance from a stationary SUV. I mean, it was just for a second and perhaps that was dumb of me but couldn't you have written a normal description like "An SUV drives by" or something? I mean, these issues were just rampant.
The dialogue was also a killer for me. Before Willow meets Uly, she's basically talking to herself. That's an issue in and of itself but jeez, does every line she spout out have to be either cute or some kind of awkward zinger? I mean, she's very much in danger for a good spot here. Maybe her mind'd be better suited doing something other than trying to look clever... or cute? I could never figure out what you were going for with some of these lines.
The ending descends into basically a myriad of slapstick shenanigans and by this point, I'd already tuned out. It was a slog to the end, basically. And really... is page 10 just going to read FADE OUT and nothing else? Come on! You KNOW you could've gotten that on page 9 with just a tweak here or there before!
All in all, a frustrating read. But hey, maybe I'm just losing steam here, you know.
No comments read before. Non-native speaker – take it or leave it.
Willow's bewitchment
Hello!
I read through very quickly this time. It has a reason. It seems to me, that you did write that script exactly as fast as I read it. I can feel some passion, because of that. Because of you keep the writing in flow. The story is the opposite of that fact. It doesn't work. I see no structure, plots, goals, motives and everything.
I miss decisions you have to make before you start. The genre and theme are stated here, but there are more choices to take before, or to reflect between the writing process. I don't see them here, but honor your passion.
This one had an interesting combination - mixing zombies and witches. There are definite possibilities here. And a few little bits of dialogue made me chuckle. Even the main conceit - that of Uly luring in Willow for nefarious purposes had the potential makings of some serious conflict (whether written for comedy or not). But...
Overall, the comedy didn't do it for me. And - given the bizarre setup - there really needed to be far more explanation of what was normal in this world. Where did the zombies come from, what are the odds that two sets of witches would run across each other, etc...
So - this one wasn't for me. But an okay read, nonetheless.
Even though this had a bunch of typos and awkwardness, it still has some sound writing at its core. I enjoyed reading it, but I don't know how well this translates to film considering the characters dialogue and interactions.
It had a criss-cross of solid ideas, and for some reason came across like one of those disturbing Punky Brewster episodes I used to love when I was a kid. "Willow dashes past the kitchen where Mama zombie wails for her son, in both loss of and hunger for."
Awkward writing or not, that's one hell of a line!!
11. Willow's Bewitchment by Seven - Horror - Poor, sweet Willow the witch deftly escapes the horrors of inhumanity only to face a worse fate! Brief - Witch evades zombies, charmed by desperate warlock, escapes
Location(s) - Countryside road, farmhouse interior & exterior Cast - Protagonist(s) - WILLOW, 20's, thin, blond, and organic Antagonist(s) - ZOMBIES 10X WILLOW, 20's, thin, blond, and organic ULYSSES, 50, a bent, mountain of a man MAMA ZOMBIE DADDY ZOMBIE Genre & Marketability - Action Horror. Action is very marketable, but the witchcraft is a bit understated. Comments - Casting and costuming all those zombies is going to kill the budget and exactly how you begin to understand the difference between writing pie-in-the-sky stories and stories that are budget minded = likely to be produced. Witchcraft is pretty light/thin. Only story I've seen so far where the witch isn't an antagonist. A hundred zombies, eh? Script format - fair. Final word - Nice, but too expensive.
$5,000 - $10,000 Lo/Hi Estimated Budget Range / 9.0 Screenplay Pages = $555 - 1,111 Estimated Cost Per Screen Minute
Adherence to Given Criteria: Modern Witches and/or Warlocks - Yes, but it's a bit light Horror - Yes
p. 1 -- Willow, 20's, thin, blond, and organic... --
Introducing a main character this way screams amateur. As soon as one sees a writer reaching unimaginatively into his bag of physical traits...fat, skinny, short, tall, blond, brunette...we are 100% sure we are reading an amateur work. You will simply never see this in a pro script. You need to flex some creative muscles, don't be afraid to show the world you are a writer. Paint a memorable image of Willow.
And organic? That just means she consists of life based matter.
I just opened a random Black List script(El Tigre) to look for character intros. The main character has a very long intro, so I'll spare you that. But the wife has one that as very much along the lines of the short intros you prefer. Here it is:
His wife, APRIL (early 40’s), subtly attractive in that busy mom kind of way...
No need to say she is short, skinny, fat, big breasted, or red haired.
p.1 How do we know the car is moving? We don't until she sees the 'mangled zombie body getting smaller' in the mirror. And of course the body does not actually get smaller, so the writing is sloppy here.
p.1 the church bus suddenly appears in the scene, seemingly out of nowhere. Occupants should be capped.
I don't like to focus on writing, but p1 needs a total rewrite. The flow, the clarity, the wording all need a lot of work.
The rest of my comments will focus on story.
-- surprised at the tone...Willow's comments with her "mr.zombie" and "will you get a life" suggest this is going to be comedy, not horror. -- made it to the end. I can't really think of anything to add, I'm afraid.
A 20yo thin, blond, organic female: Fine. Her hair can be auburn. Happy?!
And for a short to be actually cast and shot, not as a piece of literature, just how much narrowing of the actor pool should readers demand through elaborate character descriptions by writers?
p.1 How do we know the car is moving? We don't until she sees the 'mangled zombie body getting smaller' in the mirror. And of course the body does not actually get smaller, so the writing is sloppy here.
Code
But WILLOW, 20's, thin, blond, and organic, watches them
from the safety of her SUV without amusement.
BAM! GADUNK-GADUNK! Her car lurches.
Seriously?
I have to spell it out for readers after they've just read the SUV on the country road at night just went "BAM! GADUNK-GADUNK! Her car lurches" that the SUV was moving?
Ray, I've taken time to give you honest feedback, I hope you know that these notes are given in the spirit of constructive criticism.
Regarding character intros, I have given you an example of how it can be done in a few words. Not literature...but create a character, not a stick figure with some stock characteristics. I'll repeat the example I found in a Black List script:
His wife, APRIL (early 40’s), subtly attractive in that busy mom kind of way...
Hair color is not relevant, nor is her weight. Those things CAN be relevant if you are building a character with them.
Regarding the traveling vehicle...yes. You have to spell it out. You're more of a rules guy than I am, so I'm really surprised you don't think so. But even by the rules of simple story telling, how can I tell from your noise effect that the zombie didn't just run into the SUV?
There were other spelling mistakes and even a lone quotation mark. No need to point them all out, OWCs have imperfections.
Regarding story, I want to mention the all important issue of tone. The dialogue by Willow in her very first lines completely undo any expectation of horror. Especially since a lot of spoof movies are done with zombies. Establishing and maintaining the tone that's appropriate to that genre is critical. There are horror comedies, of course, so that's ok if that's the intent. As I've said, IMO horror is a pretty big box.
During the actual OWC, I did stop after page one for the reasons cited, in case that helps.
A 20yo thin, blond, organic female: Fine. Her hair can be auburn. Happy?!
And for a short to be actually cast and shot, not as a piece of literature, just how much narrowing of the actor pool should readers demand through elaborate character descriptions by writers?
Blueprint. Not literature.
Code
But WILLOW, 20's, thin, blond, and organic, watches them
from the safety of her SUV without amusement.
BAM! GADUNK-GADUNK! Her car lurches.
Seriously?
I have to spell it out for readers after they've just read the SUV on the country road at night just went "BAM! GADUNK-GADUNK! Her car lurches" that the SUV was moving?
The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards. Third - Honolulu Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
I really don't want to continue or start another argument, but felt compelled to chime in here.
First of all, Ray, Kevin's points, in mnay ways are correct, and I do have to say, your script is not well written out of the gate at all. The Slug is wrong, the action taking place underneath the Slug is wrong, your opening sentence is missing an important comma, the intro is awkward, and as Kevin said, the stuff about the car moving just isn't properly and/or visually written.
But, what I also want to say is that Kevin (no one, actually) should throw out examples from Pro writers or well regarded scripts and say, "See how they do it? That's how you should do it too." I am so against this philosophy, I literally can't contain myself.
We all have our opinions on character intros and that's cool and the way it should be. There are rights and wrongs, but sometimes it really doesn't matter, sometimes the rights could actually be wrong, and other times, beleive it or not, the wrongs could actually be right.
Kevin likes to use unfilmable asides to show his character's character, immediately, which I completely disagree with. BUT, yes, many Pros do it this way.
Others like to use some sort of physical trait(s) so that readers can picture and differentiate characters.
Hights and weights rarely are necessary, unless they come into play in some way or any way. But, let's be honest, if a weight or physical shape is given by a good writer, there's most likely a reason for it, if for no other reason than to show a pesonality trait that may be important somewhere down the road.
I don't mean to be a dick and I hope this makes sense.
Jeff, in this post you have not been a dick. I'm not sure how this helped Ray in any way, though.
Beginning writers, and I know that does not apply to Ray, tend to use what I call the Mr. Potato Head approach to introducing characters. They struggle to describe the character, so they grab a head and start attaching stock physical characteristics: height, weight, hair color. And they proceed to do this with most of their characters. And as Ray said, you like auburn hair, substitute. These characteristics are interchangeable.
That's how many amateur scripts look. No pro scripts look like that.
The example I gave above does not have an aside in it, unless one has such a ridiculously narrow version of what an aside it that "busy mom" is considered unfilmable. If that's the case then that's so absurd there is literally no hope and I'm wasting my time. Good luck with that.
As far as pro scripts, it's not my position that every pro script is well written. But it IS my position that most of them are far superior to amateur scripts, and I've read a lot of both. In fact it's downright laughable for amateurs in the ranks to be sitting down here snidely laughing at successful pros who have written numerous scripts and experienced success. In any other profession that would be a joke.
But everyone should do what they think works best. I'm not twisting anyone's arm. Do as you see fit.
Ray, I've taken time to give you honest feedback, I hope you know that these notes are given in the spirit of constructive criticism. Ah, we're good. I can still fit into my big boy panties.
Truly, your observations and remarks simply echoed much of what's already been said, so likewise, please take my remarks as more addressing the general readership here rather than being focused exclusively to yourself.
Constructively: The folks here at SS spend waaaaaay too much brainpower on writing screenplays as literature to win contests rather than to get a product on the market. No one with the financing + equipment demands all the "refineries" you guys demand out of your screenplay construction.
Regarding character intros, I have given you an example of how it can be done in a few words. Not literature...but create a character, not a stick figure with some stock characteristics. Believe me, a stick figure of a stock character description is more than adequate to cast an actor. What you guys demand IS literature. It looks good on paper. It's completely wasted when sitting behind a table listening to 58 auditioners from craigslist.
Regarding the traveling vehicle...yes. You have to spell it out. Nuts and bolts: No one in a role of responsibility to actually get things done and up on screen is quite that stupid. I beg to differ. No, you don't.
Directors and producers are pretty smart people.
You're more of a rules guy than I am, so I'm really surprised you don't think so. Yeah! Because - you don't!
Ya'll are giving yourselves a self imposed impediment. The best I can figure out is to win literary awards for screenplay competitions. Seriously.
Ya'll are writing equivalents to this: It's great for show, but not very practical.
What directors and producers require is the equivalent to this: Something that gets the job done. Doesn't really matter how pretty it looks. Pfft.
But even by the rules of simple story telling, how can I tell from your noise effect that the zombie didn't just run into the SUV? Because... you read the whole story and see the whole thing in your mind, not just reading it line by line like a computer?
Now that you've read that disdainful first page, could I put a camera on a tripod in your hands, point you to a SUV, give you a map to the location, two actors, and say "Go shoot the first three slug lines. I'll green screen in the other zombies later"? I bet a smart fella such as yourself could do that. I bet all of the folks who complained about "confusing descriptions" could. Why? Why would they complain about it if they could shoot it? WHAT do you guys think a screenplay is?
There were other spelling mistakes and even a lone quotation mark. No need to point them all out, OWCs have imperfections. Thank you. Yep. This one is replete with them, and they get worse the closer to the end I got. I'll own that one. No contest.
And you know what? Doesn't matter. Once again: could a sensible person shoot the scene? Yes/No? Pass/Fail?
WHAT is a screenplay for? To make a film, short or feature.
Regarding story, I want to mention the all important issue of tone. The dialogue by Willow in her very first lines completely undo any expectation of horror. Especially since a lot of spoof movies are done with zombies. Establishing and maintaining the tone that's appropriate to that genre is critical. There are horror comedies, of course, so that's ok if that's the intent. As I've said, IMO horror is a pretty big box. I'm... speechless.
Pick one. Horror comedy does or doesn't exist? You can't have it both ways. If it does (it does!) then cute little witch twits in dangerous situations probably qualifies. I don't know where the mutual exclusion of comedy+horror comes from.
Flesh eating zombies? Horror. Flesh eating zombies running amok across the country landscape? Horror. Driving over a zombie in the road? Horror. Zombie stampede toward you or the protagonist? Horror. Zombie horde eating Christians trapped in a church bus? Priceless! - but still horror. Car crash amid zombie swarm? Horror. Trapped between two zombie hordes? Horror. Can't get in the house while zombies attack? Horror. Zombies grab your bag of magick survival gear? Horror. Zombies rip open your blouse? Horror. Redneck answers the door with a shotgun or rifle? Horror. Redneck gets a free gaze at your bare chest? Horror. Redneck WARLOCK has cast a charm on you against your will while trapped in his house? Horror. Redneck warlock's zombie parents are in the house, too? Horror. Redneck warlock has charm cast you because he wants babies? Horror. Redneck warlock and his zombie daddy chase you about the house while dozens of zombies enclose upon the surrounding area? Horror. The only escape is upstairs? Thriller. Trapped by a huge redneck warlock and his zombie daddy? Horror. Zombie daddy bites into warlock son's @ss? Horror. Redneck warlock charges toward thin little witch trapped at the end of an upstairs hallway while outside a hundred zombies have gathered? Horror. Redneck warlock crashes amid zombie horde? Horror. Zombies rend redneck warlock as daddy warlock chews hole in his back? Horror.
So... is it horror or comedy?
Code
WILLOW
C'mon, c'mon, c'mon! C'MON! A pox
upon you, you dirty bucket of
bolts! START!
"The dialogue by Willow in her very first lines completely undo any expectation of horror." is a bit prematurely conclusive.
I STRIVE to destroy expectations in my stories. Nothing is so loathsome as to deliver expectations for entertainment. Expect me to undo your expectations.
During the actual OWC, I did stop after page one for the reasons cited, in case that helps. It is what it is. No biggie and totally cool. God knows I didn't read all of the submissions, as well - but not because the story or format was "confusing" me. I quit only when the budget or story clearly wasn't what I was looking for - or the writer clearly didn't give a sh!t about tradecraft. Karma, baby.
FWIW, I can't recall ever reading a story here at SS that I failed to comprehend and was "confused" about. Ever.
I really don't want to continue or start another argument, but felt compelled to chime in here. That's cool.
First of all, Ray, Kevin's points, in mnay ways are correct, and I do have to say, your script is not well written out of the gate at all. Hmm. Is that so.
The Slug is wrong, My slugs are fine. INT./EXT. LOCATION - DAY/NIGHT
Fine. Indisputably fine.
Do you have any question about where or when any of the events are taking place?
Code
EXT. COUNTRYSIDE ROAD - NIGHT
INT. SUV - NIGHT
EXT. COUNTRYSIDE ROAD - NIGHT
INT. SUV - NIGHT
EXT. COUNTRYSIDE ROAD - NIGHT
EXT. COUNTRY HOME - NIGHT
INT. COUNTRY HOME - NIGHT
INT. BEDROOM - NIGHT
INT. KITCHEN - NIGHT
INT. HALLWAY - NIGHT
EXT. COUNTRY HOME - NIGHT
INT. HALLWAY - NIGHT
Tell me: At what point are you "confused" about where or when an event is taking place? Is the opening scene taking place INSIDE of the countryside road? Is it happening in the daytime? Is the second scene taking place INSIDE or OUTSIDE of the SUV? Is it happening in the daytime? Is the third scene taking place OUTSIDE? An EXTERIOR shot, perhaps? Is it happening in the daytime?
HOW are these slugs "wrong?"
the action taking place underneath the Slug is wrong, How so?
your opening sentence is missing an important comma, OMG! The mind shuts down.
Code
EXT. COUNTRYSIDE ROAD - NIGHT
Under a full moon and clear sky soulless zombies shuffle
across the fields.
the intro is awkward, and as Kevin said, the stuff about the car moving just isn't properly and/or visually written. So, if I gave you a camera, two actors, an SUV, and a map you also couldn't figure out what to shoot? Smart guy like you, couldn't figure out what to do? Hmm. I doubt that. I bet you could.
It's a girl in a SUV driving down the country road at night. She runs over a zombie she keeps going.
Then she brakes.
You could do that. It's three simple shots.
But, what I also want to say is that Kevin (no one, actually) should throw out examples from Pro writers or well regarded scripts and say, "See how they do it? That's how you should do it too." I am so against this philosophy, I literally can't contain myself.
We all have our opinions on character intros and that's cool and the way it should be. There are rights and wrongs, but sometimes it really doesn't matter, Sometimes. Largely. Within certain parameters. sometimes the rights could actually be wrong, and other times, beleive it or not, the wrongs could actually be right. Guess what happens when we audition 58 craigslist actors at the local library conference room on a Saturday afternoon? You. Me. 12pack of Diet Coke. $100 a day for one of these chicks to play "Willow." We gotta pick someone this afternoon. Clock's ticking, Big Guy. I got sh!t to do at 4pm. And we gotta audition 25 "Ulys", and 15 "Pappa Zombies", 8 "Mama Zombies", and just how persickety do you really want that screenplay intro description to be because frankly - mostly the character comes out of the dialog and action - NOT - from the placeholder intro description.
Just how much nuts and bolts weight do you REALLY wannna place on that intro description? Seriously.
It doesn't matter.
Kevin likes to use unfilmable asides to show his character's character, immediately, which I completely disagree with. BUT, yes, many Pros do it this way. Unfilmables are bad form, but doesn't really matter. Just something to ignore, from a director/producer POV. Writers love 'em. Directors/producers don't give a sh!t.
Others like to use some sort of physical trait(s) so that readers can picture and differentiate characters. Bingo. And that's all you need.
Hights and weights rarely are necessary, unless they come into play in some way or any way. But, let's be honest, if a weight or physical shape is given by a good writer, there's most likely a reason for it, if for no other reason than to show a pesonality trait that may be important somewhere down the road. In this story's case - Yup! Willow, like her name, is quick in mind and spirit. Uly, like his name, is huge and slow in body and mind. These are both relevant to the events in the story, which is why (dramatic wryly pause) I put 'em there!
Ta-da! Not so amateur after all.
I don't mean to be a dick and I hope this makes sense. Nope. No d!ckage. You're cool. We're all good.
I think it's fair to say that there's just a completely different, fundamental difference in the way many of you guys are looking at screenplays versus the way I'm looking at them.
What I want... What i want is to get an image up on the screen. And I want to record some intelligible dialog. Clever, thoughtful, if at all possible. I want my horror films to have horror in them. I don't want them to be all 100% serious, because in real life - gallows humor is pretty f#cking normal in seriously f#cked up situations. Nothing's as predictably pathetic as a horror film where no one has any GD sense of f#cking humor. They're all so... MacBethian serious. OMFG. Get over yourselves. LOL!
Jeff, in this post you have not been a dick. I'm not sure how this helped Ray in any way, though. Nah, he's fine. You're fine. It galvanizes my convictions that you guys are writing literature and have little regard for actually getting a story filmed. You have sh!t tons of know-how for writing award winning competitive screenplays. Nuts. Bolts. Most of this stuff ya'll fret over doesn't matter.
Beginning writers, and I know that does not apply to Ray, Meh... It might. I get dinged on some pretty consistent stuff. tend to use what I call the Mr. Potato Head approach to introducing characters. They struggle to describe the character, so they grab a head and start attaching stock physical characteristics: height, weight, hair color. Oh, no. No they don't. Nube writers INCESSANTLY make ridiculous intricate descriptions of their mythic cartoon-esque characters. And in real life there's no possible way to cast someone for all of these ridiculous particulars. Irregardless of budget. A. It's not necessary. B. It's just stupid.
And they proceed to do this with most of their characters. And as Ray said, you like auburn hair, substitute. These characteristics are interchangeable. You wouldn't believe how pointless they truly are. But you gotta give a reader/director/producer a little bone to hold onto. Less really is more - and why I choose to go with rudimantary stock character descriptions.
It's kinda like being a cop in a cruiser looking for a shooter from three blocks over: white/black/hispanic male/female, age, shirt, pants, hat, direction. Dispatcher doesn't tell the officers "White female, 40s, subtly attractive in that busy mom kind of way" ROTFLMAO! WHAT would those two poor officers in the cruiser say if that came over the radio?! LMAO!
That's how many amateur scripts look. No pro scripts look like that. Hmm... You don't say. Pro scripts for what, exactly? Competition or production? Shall we go over to imsdb.com and pull up twenty or so screenplays <5yrs old? Do a little digging?
TOO BAD! ALREADY DONE DID DAT! BOO-YAH! LOL!
Seriously. Intro descriptions don't matter a whole lot in any practical sense.
The example I gave above does not have an aside in it, unless one has such a ridiculously narrow version of what an aside it that "busy mom" is considered unfilmable. If that's the case then that's so absurd there is literally no hope and I'm wasting my time. Good luck with that. Okay.
As far as pro scripts, it's not my position that every pro script is well written. But it IS my position that most of them are far superior to amateur scripts, and I've read a lot of both. In fact it's downright laughable for amateurs in the ranks to be sitting down here snidely laughing at successful pros who have written numerous scripts and experienced success. In any other profession that would be a joke. Okay.
But everyone should do what they think works best. I'm not twisting anyone's arm. Do as you see fit. Cool. Super. You're working too hard at gilding your lilies.
Ray, you are one unique dude, and I mean that in a good way. You are very amusing with your responses and I always get a kick out of the way you say things.
BUT...
You also have a very unique take on screenwriting and movie making, and that, I can't say in a good way.
Listen, bro, we all know there are 15 sides to every coin and some stand on this side, and others on that side. There are pluses and minuses on all 15 sides.
BUT...
There is always a best of all worlds, in which you can please the vast majority of the peeps, and to be able to do that, you have to be able to nail the writing and to be able to do that, you have to understand the basics and what's wrong with this and why it's wrong.
So...
Your opening line - "Under a full moon and clear sky soulless zombies shuffle across the fields." - Missing a comma between "sky" and "soulless"
Opening Slug is EXT, so how does this line work within this EXT Slug? "But WILLOW, 20’s, thin, blond, and organic, watches them from the safety of her SUV without amusement." That is not an EXT shot.
The whole thing about the SUV moving or not is a problem because you didn't properly set the scene and show the SUV moving down the "COUNTRYSIDE ROAD" - instead, you showed things in "the fields" and "the forest", neither of which are on the "COUNTRYSIDE ROAD".
I could go on but there's no reason to.
You question Kevin and I on if you gave us a camera and a map, blah, blah, blah, could we shoot the scene based on what's in the script, and the answer would be, sure we could, but each film would be very different because we'd be guessing throughout.
You seem to "prefer" scripts that are easily filmable and cheaply filmable to those that are well written and require more laborious shoots. And that's fine if that's what you want to do, but that's not what most real writers want from their scripts...at least not this writer.
If the parameters call for a low or no budget script, anyone could write to that, I hope. But if that isn't a parameter, scripts should not judged by that.
It should never come down to which script would be the easiest and cheapest to shoot. It should be which script would make the best movie.
I guess it depends on one's purpose. If you are writing on assignment or writing to shoot your own stuff, it doesn't really matter.
But few people here are in that position. And even those that are, it pays in the long run to learn how to write effectively.
Jeff may not acknowledge this, but one thing we completely agree on is that the goal should be develop the most effective writing we can. We differ in our interpretation in what that takes, but the goal remains the same.
If one is trying to write a script that they intend to shop, Ray, a script is NOT a blueprint. A real estate agent does not sell blueprints, he sells houses. And even if it's to be built on an empty lot, they don't showcase a blueprint...they showcase and architectural drawing which shows what the house will look like.
A writer is not selling a blueprint. He's selling a story...one which he hopes someone thinks will make a good film.
The writing technique you want to employ is whatever it takes to get that reader...who is endlessly pouring over a mountain of scripts...to be sucked in by your story. No trick is too cheap in that effort if it works.
It has nothing to do with writing literature. You are bringing a preconception to this argument. The intro I quoted from a pro script was not literature. It's short and to the point.
I've read truly novelistic scripts, and I don't at all advocate it. But not because of some rule book or guru guide. It's a problem because it slows the read.
However, when people see a couple of words of description and they start shouting "novelisitic!", their reason for saying so is often more because it goes against their concept of rules.
Be bold! Don't be afraid of rules people. That's how you develop voice.
But do heed Jeff's advice on this one, and there is no one better at fixing those kinds of problems. The writing needs some work, and with a little effort, is easy to fix.
I do agree with Kevin on almost everything he said here.
We do have the same goal and to achieve that goal, one has to be able to write effectively, technically, visually, and just somehow rise above the dreck and mediocrity.
I understand the quote, "No trick is too cheap in that effort if it works.", but I don't play that way, personally.
As to the blueprint/non blueprint debate, I have to say I see it both ways, really. I think a script should be a blueprint, but it rarely ever is going to be. It could be, if it's good enough, but that's rarely the case.
If a good or great writer spends enough time researching, thnking, plotting, etc, a script could be ready to go as is, but the problem these days are way too many hands in the fire, and many of these additional hands don't know what's right and what's wrong, and therefor, we're left with the movies that are made.
Peace out to both. Nice to see a discussion and not a flame war. Well done, peeps!
As to the blueprint/non blueprint debate, I have to say I see it both ways, really. I think a script should be a blueprint, but it rarely ever is going to be. It could be, if it's good enough, but that's rarely the case.
If a good or great writer spends enough time researching, thnking, plotting, etc, a script could be ready to go as is, but the problem these days are way too many hands in the fire, and many of these additional hands don't know what's right and what's wrong, and therefor, we're left with the movies that are made.
And this is where it gets interesting, from an intellectual standpoint. A real estate agent doesn't shop house blueprints...because they are boring. Who wants to see the septic tank plan?
Of course, there is a blueprint aspect to a script, otherwise we could just write a short story or novella and sell that. But since the goal of shopping a screenplay can be undermined by the blueprint nature of a script, crafty writers learn how to "cheat" in order to make the script more effective...less like a stale blueprint.
That's where the occasional use of an aside or a colorful description comes in handy.
Today I was reading Crazy, Stupid, Love. Excellent writing. Not in any way novelistic. But there is an occasional aside peppered in...not many, less than many other pros...but they are there...in just the right measure.
Jeff is like a skilled contractor going to the job and not using all the tools available. It's an unnecessary handicap. They have power drills these days. Use your tool, man!
And this is where it gets interesting, from an intellectual standpoint. A real estate agent doesn't shop house blueprints...because they are boring. Who wants to see the septic tank plan?
Of course, there is a blueprint aspect to a script, otherwise we could just write a short story or novella and sell that. But since the goal of shopping a screenplay can be undermined by the blueprint nature of a script, crafty writers learn how to "cheat" in order to make the script more effective...less like a stale blueprint.
That's where the occasional use of an aside or a colorful description comes in handy.
Today I was reading Crazy, Stupid, Love. Excellent writing. Not in any way novelistic. But there is an occasional aside peppered in...not many, less than many other pros...but they are there...in just the right measure.
Jeff is like a skilled contractor going to the job and not using all the tools available. It's an unnecessary handicap. They have power drills these days. Use your tool, man!
Uh oh...here we go again...naw, just kidding, but I do want to reply.
I was working with an inexperienced writer a few years back and after awhile, or several pages, I said I couldn't go on because the script was just littered with cheesy, cliche asides and unfilmables. He got mad and I didn't hear from him for awhile. A few months later, he came to me and said a number of peeps said the same thing about his script, but he didn't understand what constitutes cliche or cheese.
And, it was actually an interesting question, because if you truly don't know what constitutes something being cheesy or cliche, it's hard to explain, other than giving a definition and saying, basically, hey, listen, cliche is cliche because it is and cheesy is cheesy because it is. But if that person has never heard the cliche or cheesy line before, how is he supposed to know it's cheesy or cliche? He really can't, can he?
And that's where using potentially cliche or cheesy asides and unfilmables "could" be a problem.
"He pounces like a hungry lion."
"...her eyes like saucers..."
"...13 going on 21..."
Etc, etc, etc.
You can only read these kinds of lines so many times before your eyes hurt from rolling so many times.
You may well think you're writing unique, entertaining asides, but you'll never know if that's truly the case.
Nothing wrong with a well placed aside here and there for effect...nothing at all. But, it's easy to missfire and it's even easier to go overboard, and that's exactly why I always recommend steering clear and not getting in the "bad" habit of writing like this.
And this is where it gets interesting, from an intellectual standpoint. Nope. Practical standpoint.
A real estate agent doesn't shop house blueprints...because they are boring. Who wants to see the septic tank plan? What house? The house that the general contractor built? Yeah, the GC uses a blueprint. You're right, a real estate agent doesn't.
In film world a real estate agent is more like a distributor. In construction there is no counterpart to the contemporary literary agent. At least none that comes to mind.
Blueprints are for general contractors, not real estate agents. Screenplays are for directors and producers. They should not be for screenplay agents and capricious readers.
If I wanna build a house (and I've GC'ed my own and my father's houses) I don't goto a real estate agent to have her show me photographs out of a magazine of a house some other GC built using blueprints.
No. I go to an achitectural firm or order some premade BPs for my client to modify. (Don't be shocked and amazed that I actually designed both houses - I did. [Whodaman?!!]) And if I'm building a spec house I make those changes myself.
Same thing with spec scripts. I goto a spec script resource, select from the premade base plans the writers have spec written, ask to have some things modified, then build the film.
Spec screenplays are a B2B product. From screenwriters to director/producers. They are not from screenwriters to viewers.
Of course, there is a blueprint aspect to a script, Yeah, a pretty big aspect otherwise we could just write a short story or novella and sell that. No. That's for publishers. In publishing you have a printing cost directly associated with a word count, that aside, you can blather on endlessly But since the goal of shopping a screenplay can be undermined by the blueprint nature of a script, crafty writers learn how to "cheat" in order to make the script more effective...less like a stale blueprint. Now this is the point where I will acknowledge the industry has been perverted into absurdity. Like big rubber tits perverted. It loooooks like one thing, but it isn't real at all. It's absurd.
Can you bring a nuts and bolts base screenplay to an agent to peddle to director/producers with cash & equipment but no ideas of their own to develop? No. Not honestly. You can't. No contest. You're right.
I can't enter a longshoreman in a Mr Olympia competition. But I'd rather have that longshoreman on my construction site.
So, yeah, if you're shopping on the spec screenplay to agent market YOU DEFINITELY DO GOTTA DOT YOUR T'S AND CROSS YOUR EYE'S and add cute little flourishes to your character intros and other such siliness.
Just KNOW that it's all wasted BS.
Call it for what it is. All muscle for show - not a d@mn bit of productive labor coming from it.
That's where the occasional use of an aside or a colorful description comes in handy.
The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards. Third - Honolulu Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
I enjoyed this script. So far it's easily my favorite of the OWC scripts I'll read.
Horror and humor were nicely mixed together. Willow's bubbly personality and her dire situation complemented each other very nicely. I got the impression that you modelled her after Allison Hannigan's character from Buffy: Vampire Slayer
The dialog was probably the weakest part of the script, though not a great problem. When you get the time, you may want to consider reworking it.
Thank you.
Phil
EDIT -- Seeing the discussion about the word organic, I just want to add that, when I saw Willow's description I thought of Mary Jane from the second Scooby Doo movie. A young hippie chick.
Pages: 
Author
Willow's Bewitchment - OWC
Logged
Locked Board