Hey Jeff. Here's the review I promised you.  I read 'Fade' back in January and it was pretty good. The re-write seems much tighter and smoother. Good job.
I better mention I 'm not really into the horror genre that much. I like some of Stephen King's older pure horror novels but I haven't seen any of the Saw, Hostel, Wolf Creek type movies. Actually I don't go to the movies at all or watch Dvds - i don't really have time or want to sit and watch stuff when I could be writing or playing Pirates online! I only saw one movie last year, the dark knight and i thought it was average.
But i know a fair bit about films, current or otherwise, through a good memory, IMDB and other sources.

Anyway, 'Fade' was well written for its type of movie. I haven't re-read the other comments on this(too many!) but i remember some from past readings. It does still have a fairly slow beginning. you have edited a lot of the conversation in the bar , which helps but some of the girls - Megan, Nicole and Lisa -  seem almost interchangeable still. does that make sense? I dunno, it might be the names. I notice when I read scripts with common type names, they all sound alike. Maybe you could have two characters with more 'exotic' names. Then, they are easier to picture.
The killing scenes were good, great descriptions. the scene where Officer Jacobs comes in was the best of the script IMHO. Danny's quick thinking was really believable and this would translate well on screen. I liked the scene where the dog suddenly appears in Danny's face! I wasn't ready for it and I imagine the audience would jump too!
I noticed a couple of things grammar wise: you used capital letters on normal words that didn't warrant them. I think 'Fucking Freak' was one and Goddammed' and 'Hell' were more.
Also I notice you write 'alot' instead of 'a lot'? You did this in the review of 'Sent'. Is that an American thing?
Anyway buddy, it was a good script to read. Although I'm not into the subject matter, I like to seek out the different styles people at SS have. I understand you have sequels planned for 'Fade". Good luck with them. i hope these comments help. See ya, man.

PS  just remembered.  Some of Danny and Carlie's lines during the killing spree seem a bit odd. they are cracking jokes and being silly but it jars with the graphic deaths. It almost becomes like a Scary Movie type parody.

Hey man,

Meant to read this a while ago, but never got round to reading it... I'm not a huge fan of horror (actually, that's an understatement... I watch very few horror movies - Probably one or two a year, max), so I went into reading the script not knowing what to expect... I was pleasantly surprised.

Below are my comments made whilst reading the script:

Haha love it already - What other nationality would a killer be if he wasn't German?

I have to hand it to you, the first 5 pages were amazing man. Killing a kid? Frikkin' amazing - hats off to you for havinf the balls to do that dude.

Page 7 - I didn't like Rosie's dialogue ("... I think you'll make great parents..."). I don't know why, but eh, it didn't read well for me. Felt a bit too un-natural. As did Danny's "beautiful" dialogue.

Page 37 - The action line - "The Escalade has stops up ahead" - doesn't make sense mate. Maybe cut out "has"?

Page 47 - Should the action line read; "Danny shakes his head in approval"? Shouldn't it read; "Jake shakes his head in approval"? Because Danny says a statement, so it doesn't really make sens that he shakes his head in approval of his own statement...

Awesome man, really didn't expect Danny to be the attacker... Well played there, you really caught me off guard.

Megan and Nikki... Don't taunt a man like this haha

Page 56 - The action line - "Lisa and Carlie stand in front of a big window" - Needs a full stop at the end.

The scene where Danny batters Lisa reminds me of a scene in 'Irreversible' - you seen it?

Page 70 - Danny's line; "Honey, I'm home!" sounds a bit odd... Baring in mind it's not his home? "Honey, I'm back" or something would sound a bit more natural.

Booya, we have R rated nudity! Damn you for ending the lesbian scene so early! Damn you, good sir! Haha, you've redeemed yourself by having a naked Nicole...

Page 81 - Some phonecalls you do as V.O.'s, some you do as O.S.'s - Both are correct, but I'd recommend sticking with one way, otherwise it get's a bit confusing, ya' know?

Page 96 - Danny's speech - "And how about you Ociffer..." - "ociffer" should be "officer"?

Page 101 - The action line - "The second officer reaches down, grabs the dogs leashes" - "dogs" should be; dog's.


Okay, so I finished it, and I did enjoy it. Not being a fan of horror, I'm not too familiar with the usual structure of horror films, but I'll do my best to make some appropriate comments

I'm aware slasher films aren't meant to be the most though provoking, 'meaningful' movies, but I did have a problem with Danny and Carlie getting away scot-free. The message of this movie was therefore (for me), a bit questionable. I would have liked something happen which could maybe hint on them being caught... Maybe have Jill witness one of the killings, then when she lives, we therefore think that Danny and Carlie may get caught. Or maybe have either Danny or Carlie leave something behind which could incriminate them. Something subtle. But I'd like to think that they would get their commupance.

Also, I didn't like the cutting to credits for 20 seconds... I think that would get pretty annoying to watch, ya' know? I did, however, like the flashbacks. I also liked the scene showing us how Tobias and Danny/ Carlie are tied together, I was wondering how you would do that. I was originally thinking that Danny and Carlie wwould be copy-cat killers... I'm not sure, I think that may have orked better here. But what you did was still cool. I, however, think Xavier's motives should be made a bit clearer. Okay, he likes playing God... But why? I think he should be talked about a bit more in the script... You seen 'In Bruges'? If not, check that out. Ralph Fiennes' character, Harry, is talked about a lot before we actually see him. He's a main character, although he only appears in the movie in a handful of scenes, towards the end of the film. I think you could interweave his motive a bit more explicitly into the storyline, maybe through Danny and Carlie's dialogue.

Apart from that, I didn't have many problems with the script. For what it was, it was an enjoyable read. As I said, I'm not a huge fan of horror films, but I would seriously consider seeing this film. And I would most likely enjoy it.

Good read man, keep up the good work. Oh, and one final improvement... Make the lesbian scenes longer Well... a man can hope, can't he?

Toby.

Thanks for the read and comments, Steve!  Much appreciated.  I’ll give you some responses to your comments.

The slow feel in the beginning is completely intentional.  The flow and feel is meant to drastically change, once Danny swings that sledgehammer.  I personally like movies that start off slow and build, and then go crazy.  As long as a movie ends on a high note, so to speak, I think it works.  That was my intention here all the way…almost like 2 completely different movies in one.

I’m actually very surprised you say that you feel Lisa, Nicole, and Megan are interchangeable.  They’re all so completely different, actually.  Lisa is by far the blandest character, and she’s supposed to be.  She’s nice, polite, and easy to get along with, but doesn’t jump out as anything more.  Nicole and Megan are pretty much polar opposites, in both looks and personality.  The fact that they are a “couple” makes it kind of funny, I think, but then again, you know what they say…opposites attract.  Nicole is outspoken, loud, obnoxious, and aggressive. Megan is shy, quiet, polite, and easy going.  Nicole is a bleached blonde with a fake tan, while Megan is red haired, and porcelain skinned.  Again, polar opposites all the way.  Not sure why that didn’t come through for you.  I don’t want to use exotic names for the Hell of it   I made sure every character is addressed by their name (or nickname) several times.  Some have commented that I intro’ed everyone too much, but I personally hate when I watch a movie and have no clue what the characters names actually are.  I went out of my way to do this.

I love the 2 scenes you mentioned as well.   The finale is intended to be just that…a real, in your face, balls out scene that should have people on the edge of their seats for a prolonged period of time, and an ending that people will remember for sure.

Steve, I capitalize anything that is working as a “name”, in dialogue.  I do that so people understand how the word is being used.   I also, always cap words like God, Jesus, Heaven, Hell, and some others,  I do it all the time to keep things consistent.  Some others are probably capped to show that they’re being said with emphasis.  I spell “a lot” as “alot”.  It may not be technically “correct” at this point, but it is a commonly understood ‘word” in English slang.  It saves a space every time, and for me, is completely OK (OK is another “word” that I spell in caps).  Maybe it’s just a Bushism, but that’s the way I do it, and I’m sticking with it.

Yeah, I hear ya in regards to some of D & C’s interaction in intense situations.  It’s the way they are.  It’s not meant to be a parody at all.  It is meant to somewhat counteract the intensity though.  It’s their way of “dealing” with it, so to speak.

Thanks again for the feedback. Glad you enjoyed it even though you aren’t a horror fan.  Take care, bud!

Jeff,

Ok, I'm about 20 pages in and wanted to stop and give my initial thoughts.

First, you've got your descriptions down cold.  Very concise.

Second, you started off very strong.  A crazed killer (where you don't hide his face!) going around killing off a whole family reminds me of those messed up horror films from the 80's.  "Silent Night, Deadly Night" is one, I believe.  And killing a kid?  That's going to get people shifting in their seats a bit.

Third, the characters are good.  You've set up a likable couple that I can only assume we'll be routing for throughout.  The only minor problem is the ton of characters you introduce at once, but that's only in script form.  On the screen it won't be a problem.  By the way, the scene where Johnny is telling a story is VERY well done.  It read perfectly; with people talking over one another, little tangents, etc.  Good job.

I'm eager to finish the rest.  Not sure if I will get to tonight (cause it's pretty late) but I'll push on a bit further before hittin' the hay.

"You've set up a likable couple that I can only assume we'll be routing for throughout." - Me 1 hour ago

HA!  Wow, did not see that coming.

Ok, so it's about 2:30 in the morning here, and I just finished up your script.  Way to make it so I didn't get any sleep tonight!  

Anyway, I think it's a really strong script that will have a big appeal to hardcore horror junkies.  It's got some good kills, twists, and a demented set of killers.  The way that the two of them talk cute to each other throughout their killings is really twisted.

I'm not sure how I feel about the actual ending with Xavier, but I guess it doesn't bug me too much.  For a minute I thought you weren't going to explain it and they would just be too crazy people, which might actually be even crazier.  But the ending works, and I liked the intercutting you did with the credits.

You've got yourself one disturbing little film here.  You give us a reason to like almost every character and then you kill them off in horrific ways.  Everytime I thought "Oh, this person is going to save the day"....nope, they're killed.

I can't honestly suggest any real changes to it.  It's a solid horror film.  Good job.

(Apparently this is too long for one post, so this is part 1 of 2)

Okay, here we finally go. Sorry to keep you waiting on this one, Jeff. I hope you'll consider it worth the wait! I've skimmed through the reviews of the latest draft, so hopefully I won't JUST repeat what's already been said. Also, I see you're not one to be overly affected by criticism, which is good, because it means I can just say what I think. Oh, that sounds like I hated it, doesn't it? I didn't hate it. You said in your email it was a ‘love-hate’ script, but I didn’t react either way. I enjoyed it, but have quite a few thoughts.

I know you to be vocally anti-structure, anti-convention, etc., so I wasn't sure what to expect from this one. I liked the title, didn’t like the logline (I really think you should change it, for a script so well-written it’s very badly written), and although horror’s not my genre of choice I have no problem with it. Let me just say one thing straight away that I know you’ll strongly disagree with: this IS a slasher film. I know you don’t want that label, and certainly this isn’t your average slasher film, but that’s the category I’d slot it into, for three reasons: your victims (in the main body of the film) are a group of largely attractive young adults, they’re in a pretty remote location (lodge in a snowstorm), and they’re killed with ‘hands-on’ weapons. Those three characteristics, in my humble opinion, make this a slasher. That the killers aren’t super-human, that there are two of them, that one of them is female and that they get away makes this an unusual slasher, but a slasher nonetheless. However, the funny thing about this script is that there seem to be about three scripts in it all fighting to accommodate each other, and the ‘slasher’ element is only one of those. I’ll come back to that at the end.

Right, now that’s out the way, let me get on to breaking this down a bit more. This isn’t going to be brilliantly structured, but I want to cover everything, so bear with me. I’ll break it down into sections, to make it easier to follow.

1. THE START
Seems a good place to start. A few reviews have liked it, a few haven’t. I think that while it certainly got my attention, it seemed a little TOO out of the blue. You give us what, twenty seconds of normality, and then a guy’s stabbed through the neck with a fork? Also, I have a couple of other questions: are the naked couple the Pattersons’ daughter and boyfriend? If so, would they really be fooling around naked in the pool when Mom and Dad could walk in at any point? I understand that horror films require nudity, but even so. Having him kill them while they have sex in their room would be more believable, although I suppose less visually satisfying. Joey’s death raised an eyebrow, but I suppose that was the intention. ‘To show nothing and no-one was sacred’, I think you said. Tobias does get his reward for that offence in the end, so fair’s fair. The final transition, from the shotgun blast to the white screen and title card, was nice.

As a start, I liked it, but it feels slightly out of place. Which leads me on to point two.

2. AFTER THE START
I think overall, while you have a good beginning, it has a negative impact on the flow of the movie as a whole. You start on a real peak, and the only way to go is down. What I mean by that is that the level is not sustained. Obviously it couldn’t be, otherwise you’d have ended up giving up Rambo Goes Skiing, but hopefully you can see what I mean. The bar scene, the plane scene, particularly the ski-shop scene...I was wondering when things would return to the level of the start, and they just didn’t. The kill of the complete random whose name we never even learn did nothing to assuage my impatience, either. I kind of get a feeling that the kill was put in there in response to people saying there hadn’t been a kill in a long time...but in my opinion, it just feels a little bit random. Even introducing the guy for a bit longer, having him stagger out of the bar and share a few lines of dialogue with a waitress disgusted by his approaches – something – might have made me not go ‘huh?’ when he was randomly whacked.

The bar scene has provoked a lot of analysis. It does take a long time to play out, and I feel your argument that it creates an ultimately false sense of security is a non-starter because of the opening. People are going to die in this film. Even children aren’t safe. The killings are being reported on the news in the background – so where exactly is our sense of security? I KNOW that there are going to be more killings, and keeping me waiting for the next batch doesn’t have the effect you think it does. Once we leave the bar things pick up nicely, but the bar scene is a problem. As a piece of writing introducing us to characters and suggesting various tensions between them, it’s great. But it feels out of place in this film.

3. CHARACTERS
Now I’ll do characters. I didn’t hate Danny and Carlie. I think I agree with you that in the right hands, they could be perfectly likeable. I do think at times they’re a little bit cutesy-wootsey (and having other characters comment on this fairly regularly only makes this worse),  but it’s not overwhelming. I can stomach it, but I can see why some can’t. Also, there came a point when I thought, “Ok, I understand that the idea’s supposed to be that this is a normal, cute couple, and that makes their killing spree more twisted. But enough already!” I think you might want to tone them down just a shade. Not too much, but maybe a little. Having it be your protags who go around butchering people is a nice angle, but at times their ‘aw shucks’ factor became too distracting.

The friends were fine. I actually really liked the trio of Marty, Janelle and Johnny. Their scenes at the bar were some of the best. The Nicole-Megan lesbian relationship felt a little gratuitous, but then that’s a generic expectation, so I’m fine with that. I’d have loved to have seen a little Psycho homage with Nicole being stabbed to death in the shower, by the way. I was convinced you were going to do it, and when you didn’t I was really disappointed! Lisa wasn’t very memorable, but I saw in one of your posts she wasn’t supposed to be, so I suppose well done on creating a forgettable character?
What was the point of Bobby and Jill, other than a plot device to get the cop up to the house? I liked them as characters, but I wondered what they were doing there. Every time we cut to them I wondered if they were going to be involved in any way. Either include them in the main plot, or cut them, I say. At the moment they’re a sub-plot-that-doesn’t-actually-have-a-plot. You have Bobby completely vulnerable, unable to leave his chair – use that and kill him!
Tobias, and particularly Xavier...hmm. I’ll get to them later when I focus on the ending.

4. THE WRITING
The actual writing was actually really good. It’s obvious this has been through a few drafts, because it’s pretty darn tight. The sense of action, spacing, location were really good. I knew at all times what was happening, and could visualise it onscreen. That’s REALLY important, so good work there. It felt very visual, very cinematic.

The dialogue was for the most part absolutely fine, natural. The constant stream of nicknames is something I would look at – just taking a few out would work – but I see you’ve disagreed with others about that, so I’m not going to argue that point too much. I think, however, that at times the dialogue does break down a bit, particularly with people’s death-lines. They come across as ridiculously calm. Jake’s is the worst. He’s just been hit by a sledgehammer, which would have shattered his ribs, very likely punctured a lung, and generally not done much good to his internal organs, and yet he keeps his cool enough to not only say, “What the fuck are you doing?”, but taking the time to spit out a mouthful of blood so Danny can hear him?! WHAT?! Isn’t it obvious what Danny’s doing? He’s beating you to death with a sledgehammer! Stop asking him what’s he doing and start either pleading for your life or screaming for help! The final conversation between Janelle and Danny is a little silly, too. Janelle’s seen Marty shot, Johnny’s caved-in head and a bleeding Megan, and she’s asking where everyone else is?! Isn’t it obvious?

Obviously I’m not going to go through the whole ‘no scene transitions in a spec script’ thing, because I know they’re there for a reason. However, there were a couple of instances where the ‘fade to white’ didn’t work for me. I wouldn’t like it if I saw it on screen. The first one with Tobias is great, especially with the title card. But a few others just felt unnecessary. I think you really need to be careful there. Used properly, it’ll come across as a neat trick. But if you over-use it at ALL, it’ll seem silly, and be distracting to the audience.

(To be continued...)

(Part 2 of 2)

5. THE ENDING
Hmmm...this I wasn’t sure about. It makes more sense when you said that this was envisioned as the first in a series, but the thing about sequels is you have to earn them, obviously financially but also narratively as well. I liked the appearance of Blackbourn, it took me by surprise. The credits thing I wasn’t so wild about. I didn’t even really notice that there were scenes missing, to be honest. Does it really matter why the Jeep’s tyre blew? It could have just been coincidence. And the whole garage thing went straight over my head. So what if they had to park outside?

Oh, by the way, I know that this is fiction, and absolute adherence to reality isn’t required, but would Danny and Carlie really have gotten away scot-free? Surely the amount of forensic evidence scattered across that house would have been colossal? There must be blood, sweat, fingerprints...their DNA must be everywhere. Not to mention the abandoned Jeep, which must look a bit suspicious to the police. I find it hard to believe that they would have stuck around the next day to go skiing, considering the events have made the news and police must be everywhere. If I were them I’d be on the next plane out of there!

Xavier’s entrance, and the reintroduction of Tobias, felt a bit sudden. And also a bit confusing, considering that they’re shown afterwards, but temporally that scene actually occurred before the narrative of the film. Obviously Xavier would be a central character in any sequel, but here I was just confused by his sudden entrance, particularly since I couldn’t remember having read any mention of him before Blackbourn starts name-dropping him as if it’s supposed to mean something to us. My search showed me I was wrong – Xavier is mentioned on page 9 – but that reference just passed me completely by (probably as much my fault as yours). He’s the Man behind the Curtain, the one actually pulling Danny and Carlie’s strings, and yet he’s oddly absent throughout. He needs to be more of a presence, in my opinion. I would have this be the ACTUAL ending to the film, not just in the credits. It’s one of the most important scenes in the film, and I think placing it in the credits risks people missing it altogether. Also, its time in the context of the story is a little confusing. I know it’s supposed to happen between Tobias’ killings and the couple’s arrival in Durango, but it’s not immediately obvious. I know placing it at the start would ruin any sort of suspense over the identity of the killer...but even so. I think it’s in the wrong place at the moment. I just can’t work out where it SHOULD be.

6. ‘...almost like 2 completely different movies in one’
Ha! Remember how I said earlier that this script seemed to be trying to cram in about three different scripts? Well, turns out you had the same thought (the above quote is from one of your posts on this page). Which reassures me that I’m not crazy. 2 different movies? Make that 5 or 6.

There’s a few different stories going on inside this one script, and at times they almost appear to be competing to be the centre of attention. We have the slasher element, where the attractive young friends are picked off one-by-one by the relentless, merciless killers. But we also have a kind of real-time thriller feel going on at the lodge, considering this all happens in one night. There’s a whodunit element that doesn’t last very long because you reveal the killers immediately with Jake’s death, but it’s still there for the first half. Meanwhile, back at the bar, we have the love-triangle, which seems to be doing something completely separate but just disappears into the main plot once the three reach the house (seriously, all that attention point to Johnny and he’s dead within twenty seconds of arriving at the house? I felt almost cheated). We have the Jacks’ scenes, which don’t quite feel like they tie in. And then there’s the beginning scene with Tobias and the scene at the end at Xavier’s mansion, which feel like they come from ANOTHER movie altogether. Lots of different strands there, all in the same script.

The effect of this is a funny one. It makes everything feel...over-eager? No, that’s not quite right, but it’s far closer to what I mean than ‘cluttered’ or ‘messy.’  Someone else said that you pay too much detail to stuff that’s ultimately not that important to the overall story. I feel that’s a similar sentiment to what I’m saying. There’s a veritable shoal of red herrings here. At times I was wondering what you were going to throw in next.

Don’t get me wrong – I applaud your attempts to flesh out your characters. I really got that. It’s just I think you come close to OVER-characterising, OVER-detailing. You suggest that Jake can be a violent guy – presumably that’s supposed to make us wonder if he’s the killer, but then element of mystery about who the attackers are doesn’t last long because he’s the first to die. You make a point of setting up the red nylon bag, but when it FINALLY makes a reappearance during the credits it wasn’t particularly interesting. How would Danny have gotten a bomb on a plane, anyway, particularly in hand-luggage? Was Jill ever found? Does it matter?
Things get close to being over-complicated. Your ending is intriguing, but the scene in Xavier’s mansion is cheating, in a way, because it means that you leave the film as a straggle of loose ends that need another film to tie them up. You have to EARN sequels, not get them by leaving a bunch of stuff unexplained in the first film.

7. CONCLUSION
So...I think I’m pretty much done. I see I’ve written about 3000 words! Hopefully some of it’s useful, and sorry if it all sounded negative, because here’s my conclusion: this does feel very much like a script someone could pick up and film. The visuals are strong, the writing good, the characters clearly defined. It definitely has commercial appeal. I can definitely imagine it onscreen. Whether it’d get the success to give it the sequels you’re hoping for is another matter, but I can definitely imagine this as a film. Which is a great credit to you. I think it would have problems as a film, but I have no trouble imagining this in the cinemas.

I see you like to respond to comments and make your own argument, which is great. I’m ready to have this review torn apart, as long as you don’t dismiss it or tell me I’m missing the point. I get it – it’s different. You’ve certainly achieved writing something that’s not a by-the-numbers horror flick, and that deserves respect. But there are problems here, ones that, for the most part, I think you can fix with more re-writing.

Hope all that was worth waiting for!

Jon

Hey Toby, thanks so much for the read and well thought out comments and feedback.  I really appreciate it.  I’ll give you some comments back, as I always do.

Glad another non horror fan came away pleasantly surprised with this read.  Thanks.

I’ve taken some heat about Little Joey’s death, early on.  A few have commented like you did, but most were appalled, which is exactly what I was after.  Glad you appreciated it.

In earlier drafts, Rosie had a lot more lines, and the ones that survived made more sense early on, because she had more interaction with D&C.  I hear what you’re saying.  Same thing with Danny’s “beautiful “ lines…there was more initially.

Great find on this mistake!  God, it drives me frickin’ crazy that there are still mistakes that I’ve missed.  I’m an editor, by education, and it’s just amazing how things slip by.  I think the main issue is that there have been so many changes over time, that sometimes, when some lines get dropped or changed, something like this slips in. Great find though!!!  It’s supposed to read, “The Escalade has stopped up ahead”.  It’s fixed now.

This line is correct as is, and is referring to Danny shaking his head as he looks around…as in he likes the place.  Originally, again, there was a lot more banter back and forth in this section about the shed itself.    It was dull and didn’t need to be here, so it got axed.

Cool, glad you were taken by surprise.  That’s the plan here for sure.

Yeah a few others have said the same thing about Meg and Nikki.  Just trying to be a tease, and wet your appetite, I guess!

Again, great find there with the missing “period”.  Another scene that got some major cuts.

No, never seen or even heard of “Irreversible”.   I’ll check it out on IMDB.

A little homage to “The Shining” here.

Yeah, I wanted to have a couple scenes with nudity, and some “good” nudity” at that.  The idea with Carlie and Meg “almost” getting it on was there so that (hopefully) you weren’t sure whether or not Carlie was involved in the killings with Danny…and maybe she was interested in some extra curricular activity with the girls.

Damn, you’re good, bud!  Nice catch!  I cannot believe I fucked up on this!  Actually, they should all be (V.O.)’s for phone calls.  I corrected it.  Thanks so much for catching this.  This was the only place I used (O.S.) incorrectly.

As I’ve said so many times, the “ociffer” thing is correct as is.  It’s a joke…he’s mocking him with an exaggerated slur.  Maybe it’s an inside joke, but my friends and I always used to use that line when referring to a cop.

Another great catch here, but it’s actually dogs’, since there are 2 dogs.  I’ve corrected it.

This does not follow the usual structure of a horror movie or a slasher movie (I don’t think of this as a slasher flick though, although others have said they do).

D & C get away because usually, the killer(s) don’t.  It goes against everything we’ve come to “know” and expect.  Also, there’s a sequel to follow.  They just may get their comeuppance, but it will be in a far different form of “punishment”.

Have you ever seen “Wild Things”? It’s a great example of how these “missing scenes” work very powerfully, over the end credits. It’s also a great way to keep butts in their sets during the final credits.  They’ll start quickly enough that no one will miss them, and also, critics will “warn” in their reviews, not to leave when the credits start rolling.

My main problem is that people still aren’t getting the whole Xavier thing.  As I’ve said so many times, in a filmed version, it will be much more obvious, just based on visuals.  Funny, cause he’s not playing “God” at all.  Just the opposite, actually…he’s Satan, or one of his minions, and he’s buying souls by granting “power”, and money, or whatever the person wants or needs, in return for a killing spree.  This will all become very evident and laid out completely in the sequel, but as it stands now, it is meant to be ambiguous, and is done this way to generate discussion and different possibilities to each individual.  I personally love ambiguous things like this in movies, as it allows me to put my own spin on things.

I have not seen “In Bruges” yet.  I will soon, though.

Thanks again for all the great insight, catches, and compliments.   Your feedback has been very helpful, and I’m really happy you enjoyed it.

Take care, bud and best to you!

Hey Matt, thanks so much for the read and comments.  Damn, man, you sure read fast…and get through a lot of scripts.  Very impressive.

Thanks for the compliments.  Glad things worked for you.

I’ve said the same thing again and again about the bar scene and all the intro’s.  They’ll go so much faster on screen than they appear of the written page.  Cool that you realize that, as I’ve had my fair share of doubters and non believers.

You’re one of the few that enjoy the story in the bar scene.  Thanks so much, as it’s been getting so old hearing the majority rip on this that it’s too long, too dull, unnecessary, etc.  I really like it also, and have tried to stand up for it so many times.

Cool!  Glad the initial “twist” totally worked for you.  It’s meant to be a real wallop and hopefully gets you thinking differently and wondering what else may not be as it seems.

Well, at least you enjoyed the read, so staying up till 2:30 was at least worth it!

I’m very happy you liked all the characters, and were thinking that different ones would survive, save the day, etc.  Totally what I was going for.

Again, thanks so much, Matt for the comments and compliments.  They definitely help, and as you know, it’s so nice to hear what works in your script.

Best to you, man

Part 1

Hey Jon, as I said in my PM, THANK YOU so much for this excellent and thoughtful review.  You’ve outdone yourself here, and it is so much appreciated.

Yeah, I’ve said many times, that writing a logline is like pulling teeth for me.  I need serious help.  This logline is “new”, but probably not any better (maybe worse) than the original one.  Any ideas and help would be greatly appreciated.

As you know, I do not agree with the “slasher” tag.  I do understand that it has many elements of a slasher flick, but I seriously don’t see it as such.  Your points are duly noted on why you think it falls into the category, but again, I definitely would not classify it as such, but that’s an entirely different discussion.

I also agree that there are several different ideas and feelings going on here, and this is completely intentional.  I’ll comment on this again later, when you delve deeper in your various sections.

1.  THE START
This is actually an “intro”, in my mind.  Much like many horror flicks, just kind of setting the stage and starting things out with a BANG!  This is why it is so non detailed and fast paced.   None of these victims matter, so no need for any description, back-story, or what have you.

Marshall and Cyndi Patterson – Marshall is Lloyd’s son, and Cyndi is Marshall’s wife.  Joey is their son.  They’re together for the Holidays at Lloyd’s bigass, beautiful mountain mansion.  They are definitely naked, but not really fooling around, sexually, at least.  They’re a very open family, I guess.  Yeah, I also wanted to throw some nudity into the mix right off the bat.  I think it’ll be a really cool scene, with the floor to ceiling glass, pool, etc.

Yeah, many hate that Joey gets offed, but by not actually showing it, I don’t feel it’s an issue, and yes, you quoted me correctly, and that’s why it’s in there.  Thanks for the compliment on the first “fade to white”.  I think it’s a great transition as well, and really sets the stage for what’s to come.


2. AFTER THE START
You’re completely correct in what you’re saying here, but again, this is completely intentional.  The idea is this…kind of like a roller coaster…the next sequence of scenes (the slow build up) is like the opening big hill you climb.  From the intro, you know, or at least sense, what you’re in for, but it’s a long climb in getting there.  I’m glad you were wondering when things would get going and pick back up.  That was my intention.  I feel that when something is so crammed with action, excitement, and big things, none of those big things (except the biggest) have as big an impact.  I wanted things slow, but still entertaining, so that when we ramp the intensity up, it hits hard.

You’re correct about the first kill.  It was put in there based on feedback, but I also am very happy it’s now there, as it was just too slow, and really needed something to remind everyone that things were about to get going.  It’s also there to potentially throw the viewer off on the killer’s identity.  Is Tobias now in Durango?  Could Danny be somehow in league with Tobias?  Is Danny being stalked?   What’s going on?

I contemplated having the “grizzled man” have more of an intro, actually.  Possibly some involvement with the group at the Horny Toad, possibly bumping into Danny in the alley.  I decided against it to keep things more ambiguous and WTF when he gets laid out.  

You’re not kidding the bar scene has provoked a lot of analysis!  Damn!  The false sense of security thing I referred to may not be exactly as it reads.  What I mean is that it’s so long and played out, the fact that no one gets in any trouble is confusing.  I’m pretty sure the vast majority were sitting there, thinking to themselves, “what the fuck is going on? When is this thing going to get going?  I compare it to the even longer (and much duller) build of “Wolf Creek”, which I loved by the way.  I think it makes you think that something has to happen any second, and every scene that it doesn’t, you’re wondering again, “What’s going on?”

And of course, as you correctly state, the main purpose here is to intro everyone and actually give them screen time.  I want everyone to have their own voice, personality, quirks, etc.  I wanted to set a few things up between the group, as well as their meeting with D &C.  The story Johnny tells is supposed to do a number of things (although many don’t think it does anything except slow things down).  It’s supposed to be funny…and show these kids have a real relationship with each other.  It shows group dynamics…who’s the leader here, etc.  It’s supposed to set Jake up as 2 potential things…someone who has killed before in a drunken rage, who may end up killing again…or someone who has killed before, and should be a “survivor”, a tough foil, one of the least likely to get taken out without quite a fight.  It’s also the instigating point that gets Nicole “going”, so to speak.  She begins to show her true side after this, because she thinks guys are pigs (and I’m sure the Jager shot, didn’t hurt either!).

You say it feels out of place, and that’s actually kind of what I’m going for…back to my strong belief that movies don’t have to follow any set structure and plotlines.  This is a perfect example of that.  It meanders along, not really sure where it’s leading, or why it’s really even in here.  It is a definite opportunity to get to know our characters, though in a way that we usually don’t have the chance. If you ended up liking the group, chances are good that it is because of this, whether or not you realize it.  That’s my take on it at least.

3. CHARACTERS
I’m glad you don’t hate D&C.  I actually want you to really like them.  They are unique, funny, goofy, and full of quirks, that I think will be very evident on film.  I don’t know what people seem to have against a cute, loving couple, but apparently there’s something.  It’s funny cause I do watch a ton of movies and every now and then, even in popular flicks, I’ll see couples like this (in a way, not exactly, of course), and it comes off well, IMO.  The sudden “change” they go through is supposed to be a real shocker, and for the most part, it seems like that works, so I’m cool with it.  I’ve actually toned Danny down quite a bit.  Carlie has remained her cute, goofy self.  Yeah, the big “twist” I am going for is that D&C appear to be our loveable protags, but then morph into the actual twisted antags.  Something you don’t see too often, if ever.

Cool, glad you like Johnny, Janelle, and Marty. I like them all also.  Megan and Nicole’s relationship may seem gratuitous, but it seems that a lot really like them.  I do also, and I think that angle works well.

Funny about the “Psycho” homage thing.  I was setting things up that way, but wanted to jump in a different direction, to keep things from being expectable.  Nicole’s kill scene actually works pretty well, because I got to throw in some solid total nudity, while brutally taking her out.

Yeah, Lisa is what she is.  I wanted her to be likeable, but I feel that some characters have to be much stronger than others, kind of like the roller coaster comment.  When everyone is so strong, no one really stands out IMO.

Bobby and Jill have also provoked alot of debate about their inclusion.  Some really like them, others think they’re a waste.  They are there to provide some comic relief as well as serving as red herrings, and potential victims and saviors.   Your comment about wondering whether or not they were going to be involved…that’s the whole point.  Hope you understand what I mean.  I considered having Bobby getting killed but nothing really worked out in terms of the timeline or the believability.  So I guess they are, what/who they are.  I also really like Jill’s (near) death scene.  It was an early concept I had and I wanted to find a way to include it.  I think it will really look cool on film!

Continued...

Part 2

4. THE WRITING
Thanks for the compliments here.  It has been through many drafts and edits.  I’ve always been a very visual person and I definitely tried to convey that here.  When I write, everything is first “written” and visualized in my head.  If I can’t see it first and know everything about the setting and situation, I can’t write it.  Glad it comes through like that.

Glad you liked the dialogue for the most part.  Again, I spent a lot of time editing all the dialogue into what people would say, and how they’d say it.  I was definitely going for a realistic, natural feel, which some don’t seem to like.

Others have said the same thing about what characters say as they’re being killed.  I tend to agree with you here, especially with Jake.  It’s something I’ve been looking at, and may just have to alter a bit.

I don’t really agree with the Janelle comments, though.  I actually really like their final exchange.  Janelle didn’t actually see Marty get shot, that’s why Danny actually tells her.  She’s panicking and trying to stall…anything to save herself.  I hear what you’re saying though for sure.

Noted about my fades.  I actually tried to use them sparingly.  I’ll go back and see if I don’t like any.  I think it will be a cool trick, though. I also love the snow flake transitions.  I’m a stickler for this sort of thing.  So often, movies don’t have any transitions at all, and it irks me.  Good point, though.

5. THE ENDING

Totally agree with you that you have to earn your sequels.  But there’s nothing wrong with setting up your script with that in mind and leaving things completely open for such sequels.  I purposely made things ambiguous in my ending.  I think they’re obviously proving to be “too” ambiguous in the written form. I’ve said again and again that in a filmed version, much of the ambiguity in terms of Xavier, won’t be there, or nearly as prevalent.  BTW, X is Satan, or one of his minions, and the whole deal here is that he is buying souls of those that have a propensity for killing, in return for a killing spree.  X is not your traditional Satan, for sure.  He plays fair, so to speak, but he plays by his own rules.  If you saw him, you’d k now immediately that he wasn’t merely some Mafia-type dude, or even a normal human.  I included little things in his descriptions that should have alerted people to this, but I think most of the time, people tend to read over such details and not really catch them.

The missing scenes over the credits thing is hit and miss with people.  Have you seen “Wild Things”?  It’s a great example of how this works.  When I say “missing scenes”, maybe I’m not really describing this correctly.  They are scenes that fill in logic gaps that you may have questioned up front.  They are simply things that I didn’t show in the original scene.  The fact that Danny blew the tire himself is actually quite a revelation, because it shows that they had decided to kill the kids right after they left the bar.  It wasn’t just random luck that they ended up back at their house (and by the way, it was Lisa’s parent’s house, not a lodge or the like).  The garage scene has gotten a lot of flack, and if anything were to go, it would be this.  I’ve discussed this before and won’t go into it again now, but you’re right, it doesn’t have to be in there and doesn’t do much…it’s also only 30 seconds long though and does provide one more glimpse of everyone before they start to get taken out.

The house they were at was used by many, many people over the years.  The Schaefers rent the house out, Lisa brings friends here often, The Schaefers have parties here, etc.  There would be huge amounts of prints and the like…all over the place.  Remember, prints and DNA are only useful when you match them to someone’s prints or DNA, as in a suspect.  Originally, there was an entire scene of D&C cleaning everything up before they left. Remember, Carlie carried out a trash bag full of everything they touched, and killed with. Part of X’s rules state that they leave no evidence.  Sure they could be caught…sure they may in the sequel.  I will tell you that Sherriff Hawkins plays a major role in the sequel (I see someone like Tommy Lee Jones in that role, actually kind of a cameo in this flick, and then a starring role in the sequel).  Carlie says she’s going to take care of the rental car as soon as she gets back to where they’re staying. There are also numerous cars off the road due to the snow, which I stated, and Officer Jacobs has already checked out the Jeep.

They stayed around to go skiing, cause that was the plan.  It would be a lot more suspicious if they left immediately after arriving, via commercial airplane.  Also, they were both kind of beat up and that would look a bit odd leaving in such a hurry.  There’s no reason to suspect them anyway, as they did not know the victims, had no motive, and weren’t caught at the scene of the crime.  Their footprints were also quickly buried by the falling and blowing snow.

I’ve thought long and hard about X’s scene and where it fits best.  I’ve settled with this as I think it works best here.  Yeah, it is confusing, but I think it’s more confusing on paper than it will be in a filmed version.  Again, it is supposed to ambiguous and supposed to incite speculation, and each person’s thoughts and ideas only serve to amp up discussion and speculation.  I really like movies that don’t end on a definite note. I like to be able to decide what I think it all means.  Some don’t like this, but others do.  I guess it’s personal opinion again.  I do agree with you that most aren’t getting this and are confused.

Continued...

Part 3

6. ‘...almost like 2 completely different movies in one’
Yeah, I went for the 2 different movies in one approach (maybe a few more!).  I don’t know about 5 or 6, though.  I think good stories always have multiple plotlines going on.  I appreciate that sort of ambitious thing in a movie.  Yes, part slasher, part real time thriller for sure, part who’s the killer, which actually goes on about 2/3 of the script (but I’d combine these 3 elements into hybrid horror/thriller/mystery), and the young adult, party element.  I don’t see the love triangle thing, cause it’s really just part of the drama element.  The Jacks’ again, I see as just an extension…2 more characters who aren’t completely connected to the main story, but do definitely tie in (but I see what you mean here for sure!).  The intro is typical horror set up, IMO.  The X ending is simply a new element tossed in at the end to make you rethink what you thought you knew…kind of like some of the Saw endings, in a way.  They work for some, others feel cheated, I know.

Johnny’s sudden demise is again, something that you don’t see coming. You think he’s going to be one that can put up quite a fight and could save the day.  Just another “twist” to throw you off what you were expecting.

Yeah, I definitely wanted a bunch of red herrings, as I think they work well, when properly executed and inserted.  I tried to not go overboard and make any of them stupid when you think back about them.  I wanted alot going on whether or not it really amounted to much in the end, like Bobby, for instance.  The fact that you were constantly wondering what he was up to, or what would come of him, is what I wanted.  Hopefully, you were entertained by his back and forth with Jill.  It is a “funny” thing in a way.  I definitely hear you here.

Same thing with Jake’s sudden demise. I was hoping that you’d think he’d be one of the last to go…or maybe he would turn out to be involved in the scheme.  Remember, Jake doesn’t get killed until page 49, so there’s a lot of time to think about what his role is going to be.

Captain Blackbourn smuggled the bag and explosive device on.  How did he do it?  Who knows, but he did.

Jill was found…alive.  Does she have anything to tell the cops? We’ll have to wait and see.  I can tell you one thing, when D&C find out that there was a survivor, they won’t be too thrilled, and will be pretty shitfacednervous.  I wanted to have someone survive and I decided why not have it be the least likely, and important?  Just another non standard technique I went for.

Again, with the ambiguous ending, I don’t feel it’s a cheat at all.  I wanted people to draw their own conclusions, and if they felt a sequel was necessary, I wanted them to look forward to it…much like the Saw franchise.

7. CONCLUSION
I’d say just about every one of your 3,000 words was extremely useful and very much appreciated.  I don’t find much of anything you said to be negative.  It is all exactly the kind of stuff I want to hear, and is all very helpful to me.  The fact that you found this much to say, makes me happy, cause it means that this script made you think, and you found it entertaining enough to want to write this in such great and well thought out detail.

Thanks for that.  I too see it as being something that could and WILL BE filmed. I really do.  I’ve got complete confidence that I just need to get it in front of the right person or people.  And I am trying.  I’ve got something brewing right now that I’m waiting to hear good news on. God knows I need some good news!

Thanks again, Jon, so much for all this.  It means the world to me…it really does.  If I can return the favor sometime, just let me know.

Best to you, buddy!

right off the bat i have a suggestion.

you open with steamboat springs which gives a rich image already. having that, you don't need to say huge and beautiful. the point is the snow flake. and now that i think of it, i'm reading the word "below." below what? the snowflake. so start with

EXT. SKY - DUSK

A single snow flake floats down toward

EXT. STEAMBOAT SPRINGS - DUSK

one of many expansive homes that line the lower ski runs.

EXT. MOUNTAIN MANSION - DECK - DUSK

The snowflake lands and melts on the balding head of LLOYD PATTERSON, late 50's and distinguished, who he tends steaks and burgers sizzling on a grill.

you could say day, but for some reason night time is important, but then you have the problem of seeing a snow flake in the dark.

anyway, i know you've heard less is more, so by rearranging a few words, you get the same thing but with the impact you want. i take it you wanted to follow the snow flake to Lloyd's head, so follow it. Then see Lloyd. Then see the grill. The way it's written now, you lose the impact of the snowflake visual. unless of course, that's not what you wanted, but i'm guessing it is, why else focus on the snowflake? it's like the leaves in BIG.

my point is i see how to rewrite scenes all the time and take out words to make it read quicker. this is just one example and i barely got started. i think if you take that, you could find other places you could repeat it. generally i don't like to edit like this due to time, but you'll find it works if you're not too invested in your prose, which I don't think you are. with reading so many scripts, it becomes laborious to comment about how to write better. that's why i try to stick to story and character. A guy can burn up way too much time showing someone how to spell, format, or how to lose words but say the same thing.

so back to reading. i'm also reading another script. so i'll be fractured here.

Hey Clorox, thanks for the read. I'm Jeff, BTW.

Duly noted in your comments.  I'm kind of a stickler in terms of slugs.  For someone that is so publicly against "rules" and "structure", I guess I'm kind of a conundrum, in that I like to stick to standard slugs, and I don't go for the prose that leads into a new scene heading.  I hear what you're saying for sure, and see how it works, both in your example and in many scripts I read.

Yeah, it's not day for sure...it's evening, or "dusk" as you said.

I do want to follow the snowflake, but not completely.  I kind of wanted to cut to Lloyd on the deck.

I gotta tell you that I love your insight, and the way you "see" things.  Quality comments for sure already.  Love 'em!  Keep 'em coming, brother!

Tobias killing off those people. Pretty gruesome to start out with. That’s why I don’t watch this kind of stuff, or read it. Better pay off.

Change Carlie’s name. I keep wanting to call her Charlie. Name her Shannon, Cheryl, something real. If you’re married to the name, use a K.

Carlie screaming at Danny while in first class comes off wrong to me. Get rid of your exclamation marks and it might fix it for me. Danny screams back. That’s what exclamation points say to me. Somehow I don’t pick up the tension the way it’s written, so the dialogue doesn’t fit when there are exclamation points. I saw Elmore Leonard recently and he has these 10 rules. One of them is:You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose. I know he’s a novelist, but let’s apply it here. I say let the actor act this one out. If in doubt, leave it out.

Even to the point of deplaning they get along. So now I really say get rid of the exclamation points.

Why does Carlie gaze into Danny’s eyes and trip? Unless it pays off later, cut the scene after Carlie says you’re so mysterious. I’ll try to pay attention to see if Carlie turns out to be a klutz and by being so saves her own or Danny’s life. If not, then it means nothing and needs to go. Leave the scene at mysterious. Which is another set up of sorts. We’ll see if it goes anywhere. By the way, one of my ultimate set up and payoff movies is Ocean’s 13.

Bottom of page 7. All that description better pay off. Slug has “moments later.” It’s night so say night. That way you can get rid of dark sky in the next line. Big and fluffy? How are you going to shoot big and fluffy? Big and fluffy is also warming snow and humid air. Bottom line is that it doesn’t matter. It’s snowing, period. If how it’s snowing is important, then say so. A blizzard means one thing, lite snow means another. The important part about this short scene is the exposition of Carlie and Danny’s relationship. Nothing else. But so much time is spent on other things that gets drowned out during the read. It’s important to remember that. Write what is important. Take that sticker. Is it like the sticker in RED DAWN? The one that said “you can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers?” Then the Russian pries the gun from his cold dead fingers. If it’s not important, don’t write it as if it were. One reason for the sticker might be a contrast to the opening scenes, but we already know what happened.

If it were written in its simplest terms, you’d write: Carlie and Danny drag their baggage and skiis through the snow. Carlie attempts to catch a snowflake in her mouth.

Get in late, get out early. Don’t make me wade through all that description before the interesting part happens, which is the snow flake catching attempt. Keep the part where Danny drops the skiis carrier. That’s all we need to see.

What’s going on is that you’re slowing down something that I don’t want to read in the first place. I won’t be the only one who is reluctant to read slasher stuff. Remember that.

Back to all the “moments later.” Only when necessary. Up in the air, then moments later were deplaning. “LATER”, maybe. I like night and day. Which brings me to bottom of page 9 and FADE TO WHITE: What's with that? How do you fade to white here? It's night.

What follows that is “Up in the air.” Then the highway. How is a highway up in the air? Let’s tackle all that prose again, even when I said I won’t, but you need it.

What do we see? A white jeep driving against blizzard conditions. The slug can say two lane highway and we don’t really need to know it’s 550 because most people won’t know the difference and won’t pull google earth up while reading your script. Again, back to what is important. Then cut to INT. JEEP. Simple. In and out fast.

Now we’re in the Jeep and Carlie and Danny talk like it’s and everyday occurrence. Throw a bit of holy s*** it’s snowing like sonofabitch and fear at me.

Now I want to look backward at when they exited the airport. Jazz that up. Write some dialogue that means something, not let’s make a shopping trip. It should be let’s get to the car before this s*** really gets bad. Then bam, next scene is that it really gets bad. Maybe a metaphor for what they are driving into as well? Have them talk about how s****y snow is when you have to walk and drive in it. It’s f*****g scary sometimes. But it makes for awesome skiing!

Next scene. Durango.

Shops, galleries, restaurants.

One shop has a sign on the door that reads “After Christmas Sale.”

INT. JEEP

Carlie is excited.

Why? We don’t care what side of the street the store is on. Does being on the right matter? No, it does not. Most towns with a main street have shops on both sides, so you don’t have to say so.

INTERCUT INT./EXT. JEEP

CARLIE: There’s a shop. On sale, too. Park, park.

Danny stops the jeep.

DANNY: You go in and I’ll find a spot.

Carlie gets out.

DANNY: And don’t buy anything yet.

Carlie waves at him

CARLIE: Love you.

and shuts the door.

Danny drives off.

I’m going to stop editing here. I could edit every scene for crisper reading. It needs it. You’ll get better feedback from cutting this down reading wise. All the wispy and fluffy snow means nothing. What means something is that the guy got killed by someone with a tire iron in the alley. It’s novelistic and it has to go.

From now on it’s story and character.