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.
I wouldn't call Res. Dogs a shock tactic film. That wasn't Tarantino's thoughts when he made it. While there were a couple of such scenes it, there was a story to it and it was extremely well told.
Basically it could be offensive to christians/catholics and also deals with child murder and necrophilia.
I think The Exorcist comes pretty close to your description, more then 30 years old, hailed as a masterpiece. So I wouldn't worry too much.
It's best not to think about if you might offend people, because there will probably always be some people that get offended by what you're writing, and it might seriously block creativity. I read this somewhere: "If you're living in a democracy, you WILL get offended every now and then. So just accept it."
Imagine James L. Brooks and Mark Andrus being worried about offending people when they were making 'As Good As It Gets' :|
.:An optimist is nothing but a badly informed pessimist:.
I would back up what has been said by adding that there is really no such think as "unmarketable" because everything has a "market." It's usually referred to as "demographics" or "target audience" or something along those lines. The only concern I would have is that you brought up first that the story deals with these things, and then changed your tactic to it only containing these things incidentally in the first half. Which is it?
There are films unmarketable to a certain audience. For instance, you couldn't reasonably market porn to kindergardeners or The Happiest Little Elf to hardcore WoW gamers, but filmmakers tend to have a clue on how to match their niche to their target audience...or rather, their target audience finds them.
And while I haven't seen the cup girls, I do know ABOUT them, and it turns my stomach. Reservoir Dogs was an excellent film. Hostel was completely pointless (though strangely, its sequel was an improvement and dare I say, interesting).
Just make sure that these "shocker" items you're worried about play such a vital role in the fabric of your story that no one could possibly strip them out.
For example, as dumb as the movie "A Night At The Roxbury" was, it ranks as one of very, very few movies where the sex scene actually moved the plot of the story forward and wasn't just "watch these people go at it under the covers and behind cleverly blocked camera angles" where all the filmmakers are doing is laughing because they know there are no nipples to see, but know you're looking for them.
Gratitousness should be left behind. Stick to plot and character.
I don't think something is unmarketable due to content. It's only unmarketable if the story sucks.
Even that's open for debate. One man's junk is another man's treasure.
For that to apply, we'd have to be talking a universal level of suck, which is infinitely impossible based on the simple fact that the person who wrote it doesn't believe it sucks, and there's probably someone out there in the same mindset with the means to produce it.
For that to apply, we'd have to be talking a universal level of suck, which is infinitely impossible based on the simple fact that the person who wrote it doesn't believe it sucks, and there's probably someone out there in the same mindset with the means to produce it.
I think The Hottie and the Nottie proves you wrong, Mike.
Sorry, been away. This is the first chance I've had to reply to the newer posts.
George, in response to:
I would back up what has been said by adding that there is really no such think as "unmarketable" because everything has a "market." It's usually referred to as "demographics" or "target audience" or something along those lines. The only concern I would have is that you brought up first that the story deals with these things, and then changed your tactic to it only containing these things incidentally in the first half. Which is it?
The story itself is not designed to be a "shocker". It has child nechrophilia in the first half, on more than one occassion. Its not designed to be shocking, just an action, based on historical events (which we find out about later). It is designed to ridicule religious extremism and the secretive nature of the catholic church. The child necrophilia (murder etc) is a by product of it, not an indepth look at the emotional and physical actions. Does that make it clearer? Or do I just need to get the editing done and post it, so you can see what I mean.
Box? what box? No-one told me I was supposed to think inside a box!
Originally I thought this thread was a shameless ploy to get reads based on the shock and awe of the idea. it will probably work unintended by the poster or not.
I will agree with you pippo that "unmarketable" films have a target audience and if the target audience enjoys them but everyone else hates them is that a measure of success or a failure?
No ploy was intended with this thread. I genuinely was a little skeptical of how the whole child thing would be taken. I know it can be a big issue for some. I never meant to imply that my script was a "shocker", it's not! As for the religious insults, well that I wasn't too worried about.
This was my first attempt at writing a script and didn't know that pretty much anything goes. (obviously if it's designed to be a "shocker" then anything goes). I don't expect you all to read it (when I get around to posting), after all I haven't written loads of posts myself(and the ones I did, got wiped through some computer screw up). I'd just like some constructive criticism as to whether to pursue the script thing or stick to writing stories. I should state that this is based on a story I wrote a while ago and thought would make a good film.
Box? what box? No-one told me I was supposed to think inside a box!
No ploy was intended with this thread. I genuinely was a little skeptical of how the whole child thing would be taken. I know it can be a big issue for some. I never meant to imply that my script was a "shocker", it's not! As for the religious insults, well that I wasn't too worried about.
I think based on the stuff posted that I have seen anything goes and nothing is really shocking.
Will your script get a content warning from Don? I only know of one script/person who got that based on the content of the script.
Necrophilia works best for comedy purposes. Actually showing it would in no way be part of a story. Same with child murder. When someone makes a film they can find tasteful ways to shoot scenes of that nature so that they aren't snuff films.
I think The Hottie and the Nottie proves you wrong, Mike.
Not that I can see. The person who wrote it doesn't think it sucks, or at least they didn't when they wrote it, and someone with the means to produce and finance it (apparently, Paris Hilton) did so.
By products and incidental actions are usually where your "shocking" topics end up (and as comical stand-ins, as also pointed out). In those contexts, they aren't shocking at all, any more than anything else happens to be. Shocking is all in the eye of the beholder, after all, and those who would regularly practice such things would may find them as mundane as grocery shopping.
After all, we may find human sacrifice to be horrifying and shocking, but to those who practice it, it's simply another part of everyday life.
Pages: 
Author
Unmarketable scripts
Logged
Locked Board