Sorry to hijack your thread alffy, I haven't reviewed your script, I suppose that's something to do with a long thread in place, but if you do a rewrite and need a check, let me know. I'll go at it with fresh eyes.

Kevin - SS will not be as good a place if you only Pm your comments. It would be a real shame, I have learnt so much reading yours and others reviews which are thankfully available to read.

Hope you think again.

I stay off SS for 24 hours and come back to this lol.

Kev, Thanks for checking this out and sending me the helpful notes.  It's greatly appreciated.

Bill, I've just finished the rewrite but wanted to take in Kev's thoughts before posting as I thought I could work on a few things he might have picked up on.  I'll hopefully get it submitted this week.

Thanks to everyone who has checked this out and given their thoughts.

For anyone interested, the new draft is up and I just spotted a typo on page 2! Gosh darn it, I knew I should have used dropbox.

Ill check it out alffy

Mark

Hey Alfy

Took a peak at the new front 10. Runs much cleaner.

Only suggestion I have is the old ladies at the front of the bus. Why do we need all their names?

I think we really want to always look for ways to avoid giving the reader names he doesn't need. These 5 old biddies don't have any dialogue in this scene. We already have Susan and Colin, the 3 boys, the bus driver, the tour guide, and the police officer. And we have the 5 old biddies.

I just can't think of any reason why we need their names here. I think only a couple of them ever speak in the script. No reason their names could not be given then. I hope this is not being dictated by some "rule" about character introductions. The only rule that counts in a spec script is making things clear and easy for the reader.

I like the new tone setting scene with the killing. Brief and to the point.

Clean writing! Good work.

Clean writing but for the mistake on page 2 lol.  I took the names out for the old biddies and then put them back when they started turning up later on as I thought it would be easier to follow which was which.  I guess I could have left them nameless.

Mark, thanks in advance.

Should I not reply to anything quickly, I have just stuffed my laptop with something bad.  No desktop and can't fathom password to run fix.
Now only working in safe mode   Typical as I have a day off tomorrow and my writing plan is out the window.

Alf, my advice is to always name characters when they're going to be involved in your script.

Some will call it a rule, but for me, it just makes sense to intro each and every character as soon as possible.

People always complain about there being too many characters, but to me, that's horseshit.  Readers do not need to instantly "know" each and every character, but the cool thing is that by using all CAPS when a character is first intro'd, the reader realizes this immediately.  Then, when the reader sees a name or names later that aren't CAPPED, he knows they've already been intro'd, and hopefully, their pee sized brains can remember back to who this character is.

Just my 2 cents...

The writer spends months with his script.

If it goes into production, the director and others producing it will be closely familiar with every detail.

But the people we are trying to impress, whether it's a studio reader or a producer looking for a script, read hundreds of scripts a month if not a week. You want to flood them with unnecessary character names, knock yourself out. And when the producer puts the script down, well, darn, I guess it's his fault and his loss isn't it?

The script is not the end product, it's not the goal here, and the rules people don't get that. The end product is the film. The goal of a spec script is to find it's way into the world, to become a film, by impressing someone who is in a position to get it made.

Alfy, however you choose to go, do what you think gives this the best chance. If that means naming the characters from the start, and naming every character in your script, then do it. Whatever makes things clear and easy for the reader. Whatever keeps the story moving so he keeps reading and doesn't put it down.

Just don't do it because rules people, who don't make films generally, or even sell scripts, are making a lot of noise. They are playing a different game. They are not trying to write scripts to become films. Their primary goal seems to be to write some elusive version of the perfect script, one which conforms to all the "rules".

I recommend in this case merely describing the old ladies in the front of the bus with a couple of lines.

In the front of the bus, FIVE OLD LADIES, one knitting, one napping, the others chatting away.

Then, a few scenes later, when two of the old ladies sit at a table talking, just make that clear.

Two of the old biddies from the bus, GWEN and AGNUS, share a glass of port at a table in the corner.

            GWEN
Probably not much variety on the menu here.

             AGNUS
Anything washes down with good wine!

People that read scripts for a living DO complain about too many characters. If you're in a position to film your own movie, don't worry about it. If you need to win one of these readers over, consider it.

Again, I like the recent improvements to Pub Lunch, and I don't want your thread hijacked, so I'll drop it after this. I respect whatever you decide, and best of luck!

Not too sure where that rant came from, but it's pretty clear where it's aimed.

I haven't read this new version, so my comments and advice was based on general "rules".

I don't know how much these old biddies have to do with the script and story, nor do i know if they actually speak on the bus or later.  If they do, why one wouldn't name them, is beyond me.

Does a name matter for secondary characters?  No, it doesn't, and the reader can tune them out all he wants to, or just think of them as old biddies, or Old Biddie 1, Old Biddie 2, etc.

That doesn't read very well to me and I really can't see how anyone would enjoy that kind of prose.  And in reality, not naming them actually will take up more space and words.

Not naming your characters is lazy writing, IMO.  If a character doesn't warrant a name, should they really even be included in the script?  And, of course I'm not recommending naming all characters who are simply sitting or standing around in a scene.  If they're background players, leave them be and don't worry about them.  But if they're actually a character that has character, no reason not to name them - IMO, of course.

Guys, guys, calm down.  Lets all agree to disagree and says some people do things one way and others another.  Lets just man hug and move on.

Hey, I'm finally getting to read it. Sorry it's taken so long.

Couple of things first off: IMO the opening scene might have more impact if it was the girl running and so on then the kitchen. Might be just me, but I think it would flow better into the bus scene too. Plus I'm sure (O.S.) is written before the sound if you wanted it like that, but remember - I'm no expert.

Your second slug on page 2 has a double space below it, which to me is off putting.

IMO - Gav and Muzza's banter on the bus goes on a little long. Shorter might work better.

SUSAN, (36) perfectly style blonde hair - styled.
She reads a woman’s magazine - missing full stop.

MOZZA (O.S.)
I’d give her one, right up the
back alley.

^^liked it - rude, but good line, made me laugh. Didn't think you needed the (O.S.) here though. Maybe the way your trying to portray would work better with (V.O) - you can see the back of his head in the shot or something like that.

Patty, Gwen and Peggy continue to sleep. Edna sucks hard
on a sweet and watches excitedly out of the window. Doris
continues to knit, oblivious to the distraction. - This came across as redundant.

Pg 7: crackles into life. - crackles to life?

GAV
I was a limited budget. - It was.

^^thought the dialogue here with Russ might have fit better in the first part of the bus scene between the banter going on with Gav and Muzz. If I'm right, that's the way you wrote the first version and it worked better - IMO.

Pg 9: with adjoining beer garden. - with an.
The village is quiet and empty of locals. - drop the 'of locals'.

Gav's dialogue at the end of page 9, IMO, is enough to move onto the next scene.

Pg 10: JESS, (44), overweight and bearded, stands and stares. - doesn't explain who he is.

Pg 12: KELLY (19), the bar maid - barmaid.

Colin sips from a pint - where? At the bar or a table?

Mozza enters. - this line put me off a little cause you already play the scene out as if everyone is already in the pub - or at least that's how I saw it. Same goes for the Russ enters line.

Pg 14: Why does Russ look unimpressed then chuckles after Mozza says Gav's gonna get some?

Pg 18: When Susan says 'checked on' is it supposed to be checked in? Didn't know if this was a mistake or the way you wanted it.

Don't know whether I missed something, but on page 19 I think it needs to be added that Russ sits alone at the table because one minute Mozza is there then he's not - I know Russ asks later, but I was still confused at the start of that.

Pg 21:  hold the telephone - holds

Bit confused first off with Allerston Arm’s and Abberston Arm's - took me a couple of times to read over it and notice the l's from the b's.

JASON
Yeah, one of the old dears passed
this morning so we thought it
best.

^^ I've read it before so I know where it's going and why this is a lie but may be confusing for the first time reader and a little insignificant.

Compairing to your previous version - I like the suprise of the fingernail in the pie more than the blunt opening of the freezer to reveal the hiker in front of the butcher. The way this one is written is seeming more like a horror to be honest.

The next scene with Colin and Susan doesn't playout right, IMO - Susan gives in so quickly and easily that it doesn't make any sense that she went in the first place, when she already didn't want to go. You could probably even cut that to have a short scene where Susan is walking back by herself, annoyed and muttering to herself.

Pg 24: Bit confused with the whole INT. to EXT. thing - weren't they dining inside to start - or did I miss something?

Kind of felt like Kelly's lie was too honest - if you get what I mean? Maybe just 'special meat' or 'a different kind of meat' and the same reaction from Mozza with the whole 'We'll eat anything."

pg 27: Mozza eyes his two friends. - why?

Pg 29: 'Fucking weirdos the lot of ‘em - missing full stop.

SUSAN
Excuse, is this way back to the
village.

^^Excuse me? is this the way back to the village?

I can't get too nit picky from here, because I don't have the time - sorry - family commitments.

The room scene where Russ comes in to find Mozz and Gav - doesn't feel right that Gav is still sitting there; not in a hurry to leave if Mozz has already told him - kind of feels like Mozz should be the one entering and frantically telling them - in this scene more panic needs to be happening.

Pg 74: EXT. COUNTRYSIDE - FIELD - DAY - didn't think this slug was necessary. The scene would flow better without it because it's kind of continuous as with the slug on 76.

After the bus crash it seems to flow better and become more comedy/horror again - like the other version - liking this more.

Kelly's reaction in this does come across more suited.

All in all, as I've said previously I liked the story, you have something here, but from what I remember the last version was quicker and tighter than this one.
I think all the last version needed was the difference in the start - which you've done with this - and the reaction of Kelly - which you've also done in this version.

Hope this helps and that I haven't been too harsh in any areas ( I don't mean to be)

Renee.

Hey Renee, that was harsh!  Only joking, thanks for reading this again.

Sorry some things worked for you nd others didn't.

I've decide to leave this alone now as I will never finish my new feature otherwise lol.

Off topic but, I continued reding A League Undisclosed but lost the notes when my comp knacked.  Do you want me to read over the second half again and give some thoughts?  How did things go with it by the way?

This is my first post on simply scripts. I realise there hasn't been any action on this thread in almost a year but it's the first script I’ve read on the site so thought I’d leave a quick review. I really enjoyed it! I won't comment on the formatting because I’m relatively new to screen writing (a complete novice). What I will comment on is the story, characters and dialect.
Overall, I enjoyed pretty much everything about it. I love British films, especially comedy/horrors. The two films that came to mind as I was reading it was Severance and The Cottage. The characters were loveable, realistic and funny, although I thought the Russ character could do with a bit more depth. Mozza stuck out for me. I found myself imagining Jack O’Connell playing the part. I could relate as I have friends similar to his character (all right in small doses, can do your head in fairly quickly but at their core a good person). The dialogue didn't feel forced and was full of banter which I like. If this script made it into a film I would definitely be one of the first to go and see it. I don't know if the writer is still about to read this but good job! I hope to have my first script up in the nearish-future if you'd like to give it a read. It will probably be a good example of 'how not to write a script' but we've all got to start somewhere, right? Thanks again for the thoroughly enjoyable read.  
Kyle

Hey Kyle, thanks for the read mate.

I'm glad you enjoyed this and I'd be happy to read over your script.  Let me know with a pm when it's posted and I'll check it out.

Funnily enough I had Jack O'Connell in mind for Mozza too.  I actually started with a Danny Dyer type character but obviously he's too old now so I firmly wrote his character for a O'Connell type actor.  

I've watched, a liked, Severance and The Cottage and they did influence me a bit too.  I just wanted to write a British comedy horror flick and this is what I came up with.  It started as a short on here but I expanded it.

Again, thanks for the read Kyle and welcome to Simplyscripts.