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.
Hey Alffy, thanks so much for the unexpected read and review. Good stuff. Really glad this worked for you, and your compliments are very much appreciated.
Did we have a disagreement lately in the OWC? I’m sure it was my fault (LOL), but I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to. Let me know if there’s something you’d like the favor returned on.
Again, thanks for the compliments here. I always try to write in a very visual way, even if the scene is rather static. I come from a novel and story writing background, so I guess I have a tendency to write in a “flowery’ way at times.
HaHa, a few others have also questioned Cyndi and Marshall’s relationship. They are husband and wife. Marshall is Lloyd’s son, and Joey is their young son. They’re spending the Holidays with Marshall’s parents at their spacious Steamboat mansion. Maybe I should try and include something so this is clear, but I really didn’t want to worry too much about any details in this intro.
Many have disliked Carlie’s shopping ways, but IMO, it’s actually quite normal behavior for someone like her. She’s a shopper…and a spender…and used to being able to do what she wants, when she wants. Just as an FYI, the Durango airport is south of the town of Durango, while the ski resort is north of town. So when you fly into Durango, you have to go through town to get to the mountain, and each is about 15 miles from town, on opposite sides. So, it’s quite normal to hit town after flying in, and then driving up to wherever you’re staying, near the mountain. It’s also quite normal not to hit town again, until you’re leaving, as 15 miles or so of mountain roads after a day of skiing (and partying) can be a bit much, and there is nightlife and the like at the mountain.
Cool! Glad you liked the snowflake transitions. I think they’re pretty cool as well. I’ve always been a fan of these sorts of transitions, and wanted to come up with one of my own.
Thanks, yeah I really put some effort into making the meeting and all the exchanges as natural and realistic as possible. It’s a talky script, so keeping it real is key, IMO.
Yeah, the “twist” introduced about midway through is meant to hit hard, so to speak and come as quite a shock. Glad it worked for you.
Good point about the “SPLAT!”. I’ll give it a look.
Glad the whistling worked. I also really like the effect it has and done properly, would really sound eerie and be a cool vibe.
Early on, Bobby’s character was played up a bit more, as misdirection, and a possible antag. His character was cut down quite a bit in later rewrites. I like misdirection for sure and also like how his scenes play out, as early on he just seems like such an ass, but he really isn’t. He and Jill actually have a great relationship and play around with each other a lot.
Carlie really doesn’t try and strangle her, it’s just that she got the jump on her and it was her first thought to immobilize her and gain control. Maybe it’s just me giving Carlie an opportunity to add to the violence by smashing her face into the mirror before stabbing the shit out of her naked body? Probably a bit of both, I presume.
My take on Officer Jacobs is twofold. First of all, Durango is a quiet little ski town, without much “action” or crime. Also, in his eyes, D & C were clearly the victims here, so he had no reason not to trust Danny. Also, Danny was handling the situation much better than Janey…he was calmer, and being older, he probably has a more trustworthy look to him.
Ha! This “typo” has been pointed out numerous times, but it’s not a typo actually. It’s a little joke on Danny’s part. He’s messing with Jacobs with an exaggerated “slur” of “Officer”. You know, the old classic situation…a cop pulls a drunk driver over, and the driver does everything in his power to seem sober…first thing out of his mouth, he slurs “Officer” with “Ociffer”, and he’s hauled to the slammer.
Thanks again for the compliments here, Alffy! Really glad you liked it. On paper, I agree with you that it seems a bit long, but I feel it will play out faster onscreen with all the dialogue, and the fact that the vast majority of the dialogue is quick staccato back and forths.
X is indeed Satan, and people aren’t really getting it. I think with visuals, it will be much more clear. The late intro is just another one of my attempts to buck the system, and steer well clear of standard conventions and structure.
Cool! Really glad you liked the missing scenes in between the credits. Have you seen “Wild Things”? It’s a great example of how this kind of thing can really add to the movie, as well as keep butts in their seats while the credits are rolling.
Thanks again. This means a lot to me. Let me know if I can return the favor.
I wasn't sure about the oficcer typo or not lol. And yeah I've seen 'Wild Things' but it was a while ago and I didn't remember the end til you mentioned it now lol. Your probably right about this running shorter on screen than on the page too.
You can read anything you want of mine, I'm not a fussy person lol.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Did we have a disagreement lately in the OWC?
Yeah I think we did, but it's water under the bridge mate.
Check out my scripts...if you want to, no pressure.
Your formatting was fine. There wasn’t anything that detracted from the story.
Plot
Your story started out strong but fizzled quick. There were about 40 or so pages where I was waiting for something to happen. When they did, not of it really felt motivated by the prior scenes. The murders felt random. And when they did start happening there wasn’t any tension because too many characters had been introduced, so I was unable to identify with them. The ending was a let down. It was very deus ex machina. So, someone outside the initial chain of events had created the situation, it just felt very unsatisfying. In a script, every scene and bit of dialogue should further the plot or reveal history. When developed like this, a plot develops naturally from the events and resolves itself based upon the character’s actions. In order to develop plot you should start with a protagonist (a), give them a goal (b), and then put obstacles in their way, (c). a + b + c = plot
Characters
Way too many for me to really sympathize with any of them. By the way, who was the protagonist? Danny, Carlie? If so, they are also the antagonists.
Dialogue
Could have removed 2/3rds of it.
Movie speech might sound like real speech, but it is not. It only approximates it. Excerpt from The Screenwriter’s Bible on What Dialogue is
“Dialogue is not real life speech; it only sounds like it. It is more focused, less rambling than real-life speech. Yes, it contains fragments and short bits, but anything extraneous is pulled out, including the ans and uhs. You might say that dialogue is edited speech. It is organized and has direction, but it retains the style of real-life speech.” “Dialogue should be lean and short. Avoid long speeches. Try to keep to one or two lines. (Bold added by me) Remember that in a movie, people have to understand what’s being said the first time through.” “Take a look at your script and ask yourself: Is there a better, leaner way to say this? Am I writing more but the audience enjoying it less? I’m not saying you can’t write long speeches; I’m only saying they must be justifiable.”
David Trottier, page 51 – 52
Overall
The scenes lacked motivation as did the characters. Your turning points for the three acts were not clearly defined. All in all, if I was a reader for a production company I would pass on this script. It just wasn’t organized and didn’t draw me in. Stick with the most important events of your character’s lives. Give them clear motivations and goals. Devise obstacles to prevent them from reaching their goals, and you have the makings of plot. Which was a weakness in this piece.
Misc.
These scenes read like a transcription of real life. Like you were sitting in a room and just writing everything the people around you were saying.
You start out with a murder and then nothing happens. Something felt like it was going to happen when the tire blew out. You have not tied in the original characters by page 47, the German guy, et al… You just keep creating new characters and scenarios which don’t tie together.
Your movie would make a good drinking game. If the person watching it had to drink every time someone in the movie drank, they would be obliterated by the end.
Each line of dialogue should reveal or further the plot. I’m a firm believer screenplays should be lean, tight, and each aspect should move the story forward or reveal character traits. To engage the audience, this should be done in an active and engaging manner. The long character intros did not engage me, nor further the plot or move the story along.
PAGE 12: Character introductions. Instead of focusing on describing the character to typify them, you should show them acting so as to create an active personification. It’s the same concept in narrative fiction for character introductions. To show their character traits, show them behaving in this way.
PAGE 17: Nice set up on the story for backstory, but the delivery was a bit anti-climactic. Check out the stories from Good Will Hunting for inspiration in set-up and delivery of anecdotal backstories.
PAGE 23: Danny and Carlie should be handled as dual dialogue. (Example)
PAGE 25: You could trim about 50% – 75% of your dialogue and still keep the intent.
PAGE 25: Once a master scene heading has been established you can use tags to identify the new location. (Example)
PAGE 28: Here’s the thing. For a screenplay, your dialogue doesn’t work. But, I like it. You get to hang out with the characters, it feels more episodic (television) to me. If I could make a bizarre recommendation. Revise this as a spec script for television pilot. Or even a MOW (Movie of the Week). The formatting for these scripts are drastically different than a screenplay.
Here’s a link to an example of television formatting. Remember, when pitching a script for a television show, formatting varies from show to show. When in doubt, always ask for a couple production drafts of the show. And the show’s bible never hurts either.
PAGE 36: When your tire blows you normally stop to change it. I actually felt like something was about to happen here in the script, and it didn’t.
PAGE 37: Carlie’s cute giggle and everybody’s sweet reaction is just too feel-good.
PAGE 37: “There is money here, a lot of it.” I didn’t understand this description. Was there piles and piles of it, just laying around everywhere? Your descriptions should be curt and visual.
PAGE 50: Jake’s death had little meaning for me because I did not feel like I knew him. I didn’t know him because there were too many characters. Stick with one lead character (your protagonist) and a sidekick, a confident, just somebody who they talk with for most of the story.
PAGE 63: The second scene you have where somebody’s knee gets wrecked. Give each character their own death. That’s something I just realized recently. Watch a horror movie, each character has a unique death. (Tied into their part in the story line)
PAGE 65: The tune he whistles could be better than ‘Somewhere Over the Rainbow.’ In successive rewrites you might even want to retitle this, using the song he sings as a play on the title or the title itself.
page 78: Shouldn’t Carlie be sexed up or something? Turned on by the killing? A lot of serial killers equate killing with the orgasmic release associated with an orgasm. For them, killing is more satisfying than the sexual urge. (You see why serial killers need to be separated from the general population?)
PAGE 78: Okay, Danny and Carlie are the killers! Awesome, I finally got it. Then, what the hell is up with the German guy in the beginning? Also, why are they killing everybody?
PAGE 80: If you feel like you’re having script problems then maybe starting at a different spot might help. I feel like you should have started your story right about here.
PAGE 84: Action/murder scenes should include reversals. For example: A man gets pushed out of a plane, but he’s got a chute. REV: The shoot doesn’t open. But he’s got a reserve. REV: Which tangles. On and on until her reaches the ground. This creates tension, which your murder scenes are lacking. There’s no suspense, just another murder.
PAGE 87: This has started to feel a little bit like ‘American Psycho.’ Which, to me, is good. I like the movie, but there is a specific point to all of his murders. He does it because he can, because he is rich – and the rich get away with murder.
PAGE 92: Officer Jacobs shooting of Megan doesn’t feel right. I mean, aren’t police trained specifically on how to identify targets? Someone begging for help doesn’t seem like a target to me. And I’m not even a cop.
PAGE 106: It is way too late in the script to introduce Xavier, yet another character. He should be in the beginning scenes. Especially if he ties in as heavily as he does.
Hey Daniel, thanks so much for the read and very detailed review. I totally appreciate it.
Ouch! This is a very painful review, though. Damn, I feel like I just took a few hard gut shots. Seems like it didn’t work for you on any level, which is too bad. As always, I’ll respond to your comments and maybe that will help clear some things up, and let you on to where I stand on some issues.
First of all, I don’t want it to seem like I can’t take criticism, cause I can. I actually enjoy differing viewpoints and ideas. I do want to make it clear that I disagree with pretty much everything in here, but that’s OK, right? If we all thought exactly the same way…well, you know how it goes.
OK, let’s get into it…let’s just skip to Plot, cause those low scores are killing me!
The slow build up is completely intentional, and the waiting that you were experiencing is exactly what I was after. I’ve said before many times, that the feel should be something akin to the first half of Hostel, Wolf Creek, and Rogue.
The murders, in a way are random. This killing spree is not planned out. It’s take out who you can, when you can, and get out.
I completely disagree with you about too many characters being intro’d. To have a big body count, you need a lot of bodies. I do not believe in taking out random people, moments after they’ve been intro’d, like many horror movies do again and again. Much of the reason for the long, slow build is to let you get to know these characters. It may seem like a lot of meaningless banter, but there is also a lot of characterization going on, that you may not catch on paper the first time.
Sorry you didn’t like the ending, either. One other reviewer thought that it was deus ex machine, as well. I disagree with this, but I hear what you’re saying. The chain of events was created by D & C and their random meeting with the group of kids.
Again, I disagree whole heartedly with your comment that every scene and bit of dialogue should further the plot or reveal history. I am very against such “rules” and I feel that these “understood plotlines and mechanics” are the cause for all the garbage that’s dumped into theaters year after year. Everything is the same, feels the same, moves the same, and is so predictable because of it. Everything about my script is meant to feel different…meant to play out differently…and meant to break every rule in the stale old screenwriting book. Anyone that follows these beliefs is not going to like my script, and this may be the case here.
Again, the old a + b + c = plot thing ain’t gonna fly here. I have purposely muddied the waters in who are the antags and who are the protags. I do believe that my plot develops very naturally though from the events and also is resolved based upon the character’s actions.
Daniel, as I said, literally everything about this script goes against everything that any screenwriting book will tell you. There’s no 3 Act Structure, there are no clear antags and protags, there isn’t even a clear plot until the very end of the script. Everything about it is meant to be different. I’m not one that plays by the rules, and I never will be. I don’t follow the path of least resistance; I’d rather blaze my own trail, and see who follows.
Characters
Sympathy isn’t really what I’m after with the characters, for the most part. When we’ve whittled the number down, I do hope you’re concerned with the fates of those that remain. But, I’d bet that many will be cheering for D & C to not only survive, but even get away.
Daniel, you know who are antags and who are protags. The cool thing is that up until about page 50, what you thought to be, turns out not to be. Everything really hinges on that working, and if it doesn’t work for you, then nothing here will.
Dialogue
This is a very talky script for sure, and it’s intended to be. The pace and feel is intended to be different than you’re probably used to. IMO, if handled properly, slow talky scenes can convey great suspense.
Yes, you could remove 2/3 of the dialogue, but then you’d have a very different script and movie…not one that I’d be writing or seeing, because it would be just like every other script of this genre.
Daniel, once again I am not a proponent of the Screenwriter’s Bible, or any screenwriting book, actually. I’m not knocking them, and I agree there is much to learn within, but I don’t feel that things need to be followed to the T, in any way.
It’s actually another one of my pet peeves when it comes to movies…terrible, fake dialogue! ARGH! Drives me crazy! This script is supposed to be played real in every way, dialogue, actions/reactions, everything. Most of my favorite movies are those that include lots of meaningless banter.
Overall
As I said above, if you’re basing your feelings on standard plotting, etc., you’re not going to like or understand this. There aren’t 3 Acts here, and if there are, they’re mixed up and go back and forth inside each other.
I’m surprised you feel the scenes and characters lacked motivation. Maybe it’s that most of the character’s motivations are too simplistic. D & C want to ski, kill, and escape unharmed. The group of kids wants to party, ski, and have a good time. Simple as that. To me, that’s the beauty, but I can also see where someone like yourself would say that’s the big problem.
Misc.
Most of the script plays out in “real time”, making it a real time thriller. Actually, I call it a horror hybrid, because it contains numerous aspects of different genres. I’m actually happy you felt it came of like a transcription of real life, cause that was one of my goals here…reality…real life.
Actually, I start out with 5 murders in the first 4 minutes. There’s another murder 7 pages later. From there, things really slow down, but I’m introing a big cast. It’s an intentional lull, with some hopefully funny lines and sight gags going on. Something did happen when the tire blew…D & C’s plan was put into motion. Tobias goes missing the entire script, which again, is quite different from anything you’ll probably see. BUT, he’s always on your mind and you’re most likely thinking that he’s going to show up and start taking people out.
HaHa! Yes, if you drank every time someone in the film drank, you’d be wasted just like most of these characters get. Or, what about if you drank every time someone swore? That would work also.
We seem to have 180 degree different thoughts about what a script should and shouldn’t be, but that’s OK, in my book. I’m sorry this did not engage you, or work for you. That’s the only thing that bums me out here.
Character introductions/etc. – I made a serious attempt to show each and every character acting in his/her own way, thus showing their personalities. Lots of subtle things here and there that you may not have caught. Onscreen, I think they’ll be very apparent.
Jake's story is definitely something that most do not like. I completely understand that. It’s there for several reasons though…definitely not ground breaking stuff by any means.
Danny and Carlie’s “dual dialogue” is handled this way because they’re saying the exact same thing at the exact same time, meaning there isn’t any reason to show both names with the same dialogue underneath them.
You could trim about 50% – 75% of your dialogue and still keep the intent. – Agreed, but I’d lose an awful lot of subtle little things that come into play later in different ways.
I’m a stickler with Slugs, Daniel. And I like being old school and using full Slugs all the time unless I’ve got a tracking shot going on that moves into a different room. Personal choice, I guess. I’m just not a fan of mini Slugs.
I’m glad you do like the dialogue to a degree and get the feeling I’m after, about hanging with the group. This ain’t no TV show by any means, and isn’t going to be one, sorry to say. Snowing too hard to worry about changing the tire. The kid’s house was very close by. Danny’s not the kind of guy who does this sort of thing himself…he pays someone else to do it for him.
Carlie’s cute giggle and everybody’s sweet reaction is just too feel-good. – many have said the same thing. If the right actress was involved, I think you’d see it’s not as far fetched as it comes across on paper.
“There is money here, a lot of it.” – This simply means the house is very well appointed and set up with expensive furniture, artwork, etc. This was as curt as I could be.
Sorry Jake’s didn’t shock you or work for you. Again, I totally disagree about having only 1 lead character (your protagonist) and a sidekick. IMO, that makes for a very boring and predictable horror flick.
I think that each character has their own unique death. It’s something I spent a lot of time on, actually. Lisa may have been killed in the wood shed like Jake, but her demise was much different and plays out much differently because at that point, you know she’s in trouble when she goes out there with Danny. With Jake, you had no clue what was going down.
I actually love the song choice of Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Why don’t you like it, or why do you feel a better choice cold be made? This is something that each individual may feel, but the song I chose has meaning in that it’s such an innocent song, in a such a fucked up situation. I don’t foresee anymore successive rewrites, sorry to say, and naming the script based on a song, or really even using actual songs is a big no-no. Since he’s merely whistling it, no problem, but anything else and you’ve got legal rights to worry about.
No, Carlie is not sexed up or turned on by the killing at all. It’s simply a means to an end. She’s not your typical serial killer, either. They’ve never killed before, and most likely, never will again. They made a deal with the Devil, and that’s that.
Action/murder scenes should include reversals. – Again, this is a by the numbers comment, and this is not a by the numbers script. The tension you should be feeling here is based on that fact that you know who the killers are, but the protags do not. It’s something you don’t see very often, if ever, really. The characters aren’t scared because they don’t realize they’re in a bad situation, but you, the audience does know, thus, you should feel tension knowing what they don’t.
Same deal with D & C in a way…they do it because they can, and they too are rich (compared to most), and yes, the rich get away with murder here too.
Officer Jacobs shoots Janelle, not Megan. Everything pointed to her being the bad guy…she had the knife trained on an injured Carlie. Danny came in limping, saying it was his house. He was the calmer of the 2. He was the more trustworthy character based on his age and the situation. Jacobs is not used to a situation like this.
Most don’t like Xavier’s late intro and reveal, but it’s just my way of bucking the system one last time. If he was intro’d earlier, it would be too obvious what was going down and why. It would have spoiled the feel and I couldn’t do that.
Hey Daniel, as I said, I really do appreciate your feedback here, and whether or not we agree on some points, doesn’t make it bad feedback. IMO, any and all feedback is good feedback, and I love hearing all sides.
I hope I don’t come off as an arrogant A-Hole, but I always give my take on things, and understand that it’s exactly that. Just another opinion. I do enjoy a good back and forth, so let me know your feelings, based on what I’ve said, and we’ll see where we can go with this.
Hey Daniel, thanks so much for the read and very detailed review. I totally appreciate it.
Ouch! This is a very painful review, though. Damn, I feel like I just took a few hard gut shots. Seems like it didn’t work for you on any level, which is too bad.
No problem, Jeff. Sorry my review was so gut-wrenching. I did like the dialogue, who knows, maybe you’ll start a new style - real conversation. I wouldn’t mind it save for the fact that the most intriguing exchanges I’ve ever seen have been on film. And that was only when they removed the extraneous and left the heart of the conversation…the beating, bloody, pulpy, heart…buwhahaha.
Quoted from Dreamscale
First of all, I don’t want it to seem like I can’t take criticism, cause I can. I actually enjoy differing viewpoints and ideas. I do want to make it clear that I disagree with pretty much everything in here, but that’s OK, right? If we all thought exactly the same way…well, you know how it goes.
It’s all good, I’m not offended, and it’s not the first time someone has disagreed with everything I’ve said. I do have a wife…
Quoted from Dreamscale
The slow build up is completely intentional, and the waiting that you were experiencing is exactly what I was after. I’ve said before many times, that the feel should be something akin to the first half of Hostel, Wolf Creek, and Rogue.
I thought you hated formulaic stories? All of those followed the rules of formula…
Quoted from Dreamscale
Sorry you didn’t like the ending, either. One other reviewer thought that it was deus ex machine, as well. I disagree with this, but I hear what you’re saying. The chain of events was created by D & C and their random meeting with the group of kids.
We all know where the term originates from, but I’ll retell it here anyway. In old Greek tragedies, the hero/heroine was beset on all sides, throughout the play, by unbelievable obstacles. At the end, just as there was no way they could escape, an actor playing one of the Gods would be lowered down onto the stage to remove them from their problems. Recently, it has come to refer to a story which does not resolve itself from the original actions of the characters, and therefore, is considered a weak storytelling device. You could resolve this issue by placing some small scenes with the villain placed at the beginning. It would even help to create more of an ominous tone.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Again, I disagree whole heartedly with your comment that every scene and bit of dialogue should further the plot or reveal history. I am very against such “rules” and I feel that these “understood plotlines and mechanics” are the cause for all the garbage that’s dumped into theaters year after year. Everything is the same, feels the same, moves the same, and is so predictable because of it. Everything about my script is meant to feel different…meant to play out differently…and meant to break every rule in the stale old screenwriting book. Anyone that follows these beliefs is not going to like my script, and this may be the case here.
You sound like Charlie Kaufman, one of my screenwriting idols. If you have not seen ‘Adaptation’ then you should check it out. There’s a specific scene in it where he is having problems with his screenplay and goes to see Robert Mckee (we all know him) for help. Mckee yells at him, telling him that plot and drama are derived from real life. “Every day a mother lays down her life for a child, tragedy occurs,” (non-verbatim quote). It is only when Kaufman decides to use the rules that he can finish his script. Then he throws a Deus Ex Machina in our faces, breaking the rules at his own whim.
I wholeheartedly agree rules are made to be broken, but only if you can create the desired effect in a different way. The desired effect would be enjoyment by your audience.
Yet, maybe I’m a little jealous of those who so haphazardly throw convention out the window.
Quoted from Dreamscale
Dialogue
Yes, you could remove 2/3 of the dialogue, but then you’d have a very different script and movie…not one that I’d be writing or seeing, because it would be just like every other script of this genre.
It’s actually another one of my pet peeves when it comes to movies…terrible, fake dialogue! ARGH! Drives me crazy! This script is supposed to be played real in every way, dialogue, actions/reactions, everything. Most of my favorite movies are those that include lots of meaningless banter.
It’s said in those books you despise so much that you should write what you would want to see. You have a good ear for real-life dialogue, like I said, it reads like a transcription of real life.
Think of movies like ’40 Year Old Virgin’ and ‘Pulp Fiction’ and the dialogue in those movies. The dialogue feels and reads so real, yet it is still movie dialogue.
What are some of your favorite movies? Can you give me some examples of where this style of dialogue has worked? Perhaps you have a new convert.
Yo Dan...I'd say Pulp Fiction and True Romance both have an awful lot of this "type" of dialogue. I'd say Inglorious Basterds even does, but I wasn't thilled with the movie overall. I'd even throw Hostel and Wolf Creek into the pile, as well.
Have to disagree again that Hostel, Wolf Creek, and Rogue were formulaic...in terms of standard Hollywood movies.
Hostel's 1st half was completely a different movie than the 2nd half, and as many, many critics said, the first half could actually be pretty much wiped away and the 2nd half wouldn't change at all.
Same thing with Wolf Creek. The first half (or is it more than half) is actually painfully slow and really dull. I actually dislike the first half but feel that it was one of the main facors that the 2nd half hit so hard.
Rogue is probably the most formulaic, but still the first half is very long and slow, and although it is defintely more of a classic setup, Mclean sure takes his sweet-ass time getting to the good stuff.
But that's what I like about Mclean and Roth...they may steer teh ship in all directions on a little sight seeing trip, but they know the direction they're ultimately going to turn, and when they decide we've cruised around long enough, they hit us over the head again and again, and the pain sure feels good.
What always counts in my book is that the ride is well worth the time invested. I tried my best to do the same with Fade
I know I’m new to SS but I felt that just reading your script and saying whether or not I liked it was the coward’s way out. So here goes--
Things I thought worked very well:
The ‘snowflake scene changes’ -- might seem odd to some but I think it not only suits the environment but it’s SO not something you see in a Slasher flick...which is why I really liked it.
The Horny Toad -- I would hang there....for the name alone.
The band name The Snowy Chickens -- cracked me the hell up.
The whistling -- great little quirk for Danny. Actually found myself chuckling every time he started...yeah, I know. I’m a little sick in the head.
The line Danny gives Moses the dog “not what the good doctor ordered” -- as much as it might seem corny, I thought it was damn funny. Totally caught me off guard and laughed my ass off.
The whole Bonnie and Clyde vibe from Carlie and Danny -- Very nice...! Not enough women serial killers in movies, so I really dug that. Plus I found myself rooting for the ‘lovely couple’
What didn’t work for me:
The dialogue was clunky in spots. Too many words used to get the point across. Not all the time, more often than not it flowed just fine. Now I will admit that I use a very different vernacular than other people -- just read any of my scripts -- but still, too wordy in places that I felt could use some serious streamlining. Minor, I know, but that’s really it.
Overall I would not have a problem spending eight bucks to see this flick. I saw a few posts earlier about your pacing. I actually want to get to know the characters and thought your pacing worked well, especially considering where the story was heading. The slow build slasher has been shelved as of late...sadly, and it was nice to see it used again.
After some more thought, I have a few other things to say about this script.
The ending: Nice twist. Personally I liked that you didn't introduce X until the end......because he needs no introduction, it's Old Scratch, Beelzebub, the Dark Lord! Just me, but if I'm thinkin' it, someone else is too.
The setting: Failed to mention this earlier. I'm not sure if anyone else brought this up, but the fact that it's snowing adds to the over all 'creep' factor. Snow muffles sound. When it's snowing, you can't hear shit beyond a few yards or less. Very creepy. Like standing in a sound booth.
Also, the police officer asking his wife to serve him dinner in a French maid outfit...? Are you kidding me?! Damn funny.
Okay -- that was it. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Hey Brian, sorry for getting back to this so late. We have communicated via E-Mail, but I wanted to make it official.
Glad you liked the snowflake transitions. I think they’re cool as well. However, I don’t classify this as a “slasher” script at all. It’s a horror hybrid and there are some slasher elements, but because it deviates so far from typical slasher protocol, I just don’t think of it that way at all.
Yeah, the Horny Toad would be a cool place. Most ski towns have at least one of these kind of places for sure.
Funny, yeah, I get a kick out of the name “Snowy Chickens” as well. Not sure how I came up with that, but once I did, I couldn’t stop laughing about it.
Also love the whistling stuff. It’s creepy and different. The song is so innocent, and I feel it just fits well with the horror that’s taking place. Glad you liked it.
I like Danny’s line also. I tried to make a bunch of these sorts of lines that would be both humorous and memorable at the same time.
Very glad you were actually routing for D & C. I had a feeling some would and I’m glad to hear it. They are a nice couple actually, but their actions here sure don’t show that.
Most agree that there is just too much dialogue. It’s definitely not all necessary. I have actually trimmed it back quite a bit, but I agree a lot of it could go. I’d rather leave it in for now, and if it has to be cut, I’d always rather have too much than not enough.
Most think that the pace is off, or too slow early on. I also like slow builds where you get to know your characters. That was the plan here for sure. Good to see it worked OK for you.
Very happy you like X’s late intro. Most don’t. I’ve thought about this long and hard and decided that this works best, as any earlier intro’s could possibly spoil the twist and plant ideas in the audience’s heads that I don’t want there. Most didn’t even get who X is, so it’s great to hear someone actually did. Thanks!
Agree with you on the snow setting. I love movies set in winter. It’s beautiful and works well on film. Also agree with your thoughts about the sound and lack of visibility. Good to hear, bud!
Yeah, I laugh about that comment from Jacobs as well. Funny, and gives him some personality so hopefully, you’ll be routing for him and not just think of him as some dumb cardboard cop who’ll do stupid shit and get himself killed.
Thanks again, Brian, your thoughts mean a lot and I’ll take them all into consideration.
“Instantly” “Violently” Most of the time, if you cut adverbs like this, your writing will improve. It will sounds more stream-lined, more immediate.
Jesus. Hell of an opening bloodbath. You’ve slaughtered four seemingly innocent people and, we assume, killed a kid for good measure. And we know who your killer is…so I’m not sure where this is going. *note* okay, I’m done reading it. So I know where it’s going. And, as you’ll read, I think you should cut all this.
Don’t do “Insert Title: Fade to White.” Leave that decision to the director.
p.6, you’ve got a good conversation going with subtext between Carlie and Danny. Leave it at that. You don’t need the stewardess chiming in, telling them what good parents they’d make. The audience can figure it out.
p.6-7, I’m not sure the captain and stewardess would carry on such a conversation with Carlie and Danny. Any flight I’ve been on, they’re just “buh-bye, buh-bye” and so on. You can keep the banter about skiing, etc, just make it with fellow passengers instead of the crew. *note* okay, I’m done reading it, so I see where these characters come back at the end. But I don’t think it’s needed.
p.9, every time you have a new scene heading, you need an action line before dialogue.
Carlie’s line at the top of page 10…not needed. The audience has already seen the Sale sign in the window. You have a habit of telling us in your dialogue, not showing us. Try not to make each line so obvious.
Here’s an example of a way to improve your writing. You wrote: There's a dance-floor in front of the stage with several people getting down to the tune. Instead, you can write: Several people boogey down on the dance floor. Gets the point across with less words.
p.12, you’ve just introduced us to eight new characters! It’s going to be difficult, as a reader, keeping them all straight.
p.13, I just noticed but you need at least two lines before each new scene heading.
Okay, the puke story went on way too long. It’s not particularly funny enough for that much screen time. Just having the gang toast to crazy shit that happened in Mexico is good enough to establish their group.
Everyone is using their friends’ names way too much in conversation. It doesn’t sound natural. They can use it once, for the audience, but let’s assume they’re all friends and know each other well enough to not use their names in every sentence.
Jake’s backstory about killing the guy with the pipe is actually pretty interesting. However, there has to be a better way to get it out. It sounds like the guys are all blabbing about it pretty openly, which I doubt Jake would approve. Can you think of another way to tell us about this horrible incident? Because right now the story comes from out of nowhere and is pretty tasteless. *note after finishing* this story doesn’t tie into what happens to Jake at the end, so it’s pointless. Why not have Jake be the hero and must overcome what happened in Mexico to find his strength.
I’m thinking you should lose some of the characters. Maybe even two of the girls and two of the boys. You could consolidate your dialogue and actions into less characters and make it easier to follow for the reader. I’m having a heck of time keeping everyone separate in my mind.
p.35, Lisa wouldn’t have time to say those two lines of dialogue. Maybe an “Oh my God!” would suffice.
p.39, Lisa says: “Damn it, Jake. I hate when you do that. Paybacks are a bitch. You remember that.” Your dialogue could use a trim. Try just: Paybacks are a bitch, Jake.
I like the use of the snowflakes falling and moving in different ways. You’re taking something peaceful and making it threatening. Use this!
Wha--? Danny’s a killer? What in blue blazes is going on here?
I’m a bit annoyed with the Johnny, Janelle, Martin scenes. Why do we keep cutting away from the gory action to watch this silly love triangle? I’m feeling like you could cut every scene with this group and not really miss it. As it is, your page count is too heavy. 90-95 is more appropriate for the genre.
And now Carlie’s a killer? WTF???!!!
I actually like the idea of Danny and Carlie continuing their cutesy lovers talk with each other even after they’re revealed as killers. I almost feel a “The Strangers” vibe here.
How the hell is Megan still alive after having her throat slit? This strains credibility.
Okay, the ending. Doesn’t make a whole lotta sense. If Xavier is the devil, or evil, or some other bad thing, it doesn’t make sense for him to get these people to cause such panic and bloodshed on such a small scale. In my opinion, this plot twist is terribly weak. I would drop this scene and character entirely. In fact, drop the opening with Tobias as well. Also, the flashbacks at the end. They’re not particularly surprising and draw out your ending.
You need to focus on the core of your story. Group of people trapped in high mountain house during snowstorm. One or more is a killer. Go from there. There’s a great thriller here just waiting to get out.
Perhaps you can focus on the guy with the broken leg. Open with his ski accident, then have him try to outwit the murderers from his wheelchair. Yes, very Hitchcockian, but it could be fun.
You have a terribly gory film with unlikable characters. Sticking with one location, toning down the violence, might make for a more interesting thriller. I’m not sure that’s what you wanted to hear, but it’s my best advice for making this more sellable.
Hey Duncan, thanks for the read and feedback. As I always say, any and all feedback is good feedback, negative or positive. We’re all different, have different tastes and the like, and see things differently. I don’t take offense to anything you’ve said in here, but of course, I do want to throw out my responses to your various points.
I’m not going to quote every one of your lines and then provide feedback, as the post will turn into a triple before I know it. I’ll just kind of comment in order of your points, so you can hopefully follow along.
I agree with you in theory about using adverbs in a script, but done sparingly, I think they add power to a scene or shot. I doubt I used more than 25 throughout the entire script and I’m sure they never caused a passage to run into an extra line, so IMO, I’m not too concerned about this, but point taken.
Surprised you didn’t like the intro. It is indeed quite a jolt, but that’s exactly what I was after. Wanted to set the rules up front, in that there aren’t going to be any, and nothing and no one is sacred or safe here.
I understand about the insertion of a title, but I just can’t help myself here, and want to get across what a perfect place for the title this is. IMO, showing the first “fade to white transition, and then “fading in” to the title sets things up really nicely.
Many, many people agree with you completely about the inclusion of Rosie on the plane. Her role was bigger initially and she’s been cut down to this. She is definitely not necessary. I think I am merely trying for a more realistic scene, with a little more interaction, and to drive home the point that D & C are cool, likable people. Point taken completely.
Maybe for most, the interaction with various people like this is unheard of, but for me (at least) it takes place all the time, cause that’s the kind of person I am…engaging, likable, and…different. This is how D & C are. People are drawn to them. People like them. People trust in them. However you look at it, it’s an additional 20 seconds or so of film time.
Duly noted about needing an initial action line after a Slug. This scene was rewritten and it got omitted. I’ll throw it back in. Thanks for catching it!
Yeah, I know Carlie’s line isn’t needed…just trying to really set her character. She’s almost child-like in many ways. Again, it’s like 8 seconds of film time, so IMO, it’s no big deal either way, but again, I do hear you here.
Duly noted about using less words where possible, but in this case, the dance floor comes into play several times, later on, so I wanted to make it clear where it is, visually. My sentence is a bit awkward and could use a rewrite, I agree.
It will be much less difficult keeping these 8 characters straight in a filmed version, as they are all quite different. Introing a large group is always difficult, as there are several schools of thought on the best way to do it. IMO, this way provided the quickest, easiest way.
Not sure what you’re saying about Page 13 – I use Movie Magic Screenwriter, so all the format stuff is automatic.
Most agree about the story. In an alternate version, this is cut way down and basically gone. Every time I tell myself to get rid of it, I read it and like the flow of it. I definitely hear you though.
I wanted them to use actual names a few times up front so you get to know their actual names (in a filmed version). I don’t agree it sounds unnatural, though. It’s definitely not all the time either. More so at first. They also frequently use nicknames. But in a large group, IMO, sometimes you almost have to so the person you’re talking to understands you’re talking to them. I’ll check it out again, but I’ve read it so many times, I almost know the lines by heart at this point.
Nah, Jake’s no hero here, that’s for sure. The real reason for the story (the actual ending) is to show Jake in a much different light. At this point, you really don’t have a clue who’s who, or even who’s a Protag and who’s an Antag. Now that you know Jake killed a guy in a drunken rage, you (hopefully) start thinking 1 of 2 things…either he may kill again, or he’ll be a tough foil for the Antag. The fact that’s he’s first to go and puts up no fight whatsoever, is supposed to come as a shock.
Totally disagree with you here, Duncan. Each character serves major plot points in the story and action. I believe that a real horror movie (of this type) should have a large body count, and I don’t appreciate killing off random characters that have just been intro’d. Again, if you were watching this, you wouldn’t be having a problem keeping the characters separate. It’s always tough in a written format when there are a lot of characters. This is actually a major reason why I split the group up around this point and continue to go back and forth between them.
Why wouldn’t Lisa be able to say these 2 short lines? It’s like 3 seconds.
In reality, almost all dialogue could be trimmed…especially in this script. It’s chatty, and it’s somewhat “real speak”. Again, it’s a few extra seconds, tops, so IMO, no biggie.
YES! A compliment! Cool!!!! Yippee!!! Yeah, most seem to like the snowflake transitions. I love them, actually. They’d be very cool and unique.
Yep, the big twist revealed midway through. Should come off as a complete shock. One of the main reasons for the long, slow build that seems to be going nowhere. This is really the basis for how and why the script is very unique and has a different feel and flow to it. We now know Danny is a problem, but no one else does. A completely different kind of tension and suspense, IMO.
Have to totally disagree with you again, here, Duncan. One of the things that makes this work, IMO, is that it’s multi layered with several stories taking place at different locations, in real time. Once you know what’s going down at the Schaefer house, you hopefully are thinking about 1 of 3 things…either you’re concerned for the lives of these 3, as you assume they’re going to eventually get to where the action is, you look forward to their deaths when they get to where the action is, or you wonder if 1 or all of them will be able to save the day. Janelle and Martin are my favorite 2 Protags, as they’re the most unique and multi layered characters. Johnny is one that you’d think should be able to hold his own in any situation, and you’re either going to like his confident character or dislike him for that. Without having this change of scenery available, things would get very stale, IMO. Basically, we’ve got the old intersecting/verging storylines waiting to happen.
Yep, another big twist. Once Danny is revealed, it’s a question as to whether Carlie is in it with him, or a potential victim.
Cool, glad you like D & C as goofy, lovey dovey killers.
As for Megan’s survival, I wanted to take the old killer never dies cliché and turn it on its head, and have a surprise revival of a Protag instead. It may definitely strain credibility, but stranger things have happened, and remember, it’s still a movie. It just adds so much in the finale that I feel it’s worth the strain.
Sorry you don’t like the final reveal. Xavier isn’t your ordinary Satan, for sure. Everything about him and what he does and believes is different from what you’re used to. You know that God works in mysterious ways…well so does Satan. What he’s really doing is buying the souls of those that he deals with. He’s getting people that he wouldn’t normally be able to get, because D & C, and also Tobias aren’t cold blooded evil killers. They’re everyday people that made a bad decision and in theory, got in way over their heads.
Surprised you don’t like the excluded scenes over the credits. I’m a huge believer in keeping butts in their seats any way you can. This will definitely do that, and IMO, you learn a lot about things that you may have questioned earlier.
Your suggestion about the core of the story is something that has been done again and again, and isn’t remotely fresh. Everything about this script is supposed to be different, surprising, and unique.
No way…don’t like the idea about Bobby at all. That isn’t anything what this script is. Is it an easy sell? No. Is it something that is proven? No. That’s the beauty, though. That’s the whole idea behind it. I don’t like cookie cutter, been there, seen that shit at all. Most movies that come out are 100% predictable, dull, boring wastes of time and money. I want to change that, and I won’t give up.
It’s supposed to be a very gory, brutal movie. That’s the kind of movie I appreciate…one that has the balls to go for it and pull no punches.
Why do you say the characters are unlikable? Which ones don’t you like and why?
Again, I despise movies that sit in 1 location. Boring, cheap, hate it!
Also hate movies that tone down the violence. Real horror fans want all the violence they can get. This isn’t for everyone, but there are elements that many will appreciate.
Seems like we’re on 2 islands here, Duncan. I’m cool with that and I understand where you’re coming from. I appreciate your feedback very much.
Totally disagree with you here, Duncan. Each character serves major plot points in the story and action. I believe that a real horror movie (of this type) should have a large body count, and I don’t appreciate killing off random characters that have just been intro’d. Again, if you were watching this, you wouldn’t be having a problem keeping the characters separate. It’s always tough in a written format when there are a lot of characters. This is actually a major reason why I split the group up around this point and continue to go back and forth between them. Horror doesn't have to have a big body count. Look at Deep Water, or Wolf Creek as examples. It's more about the violence having an impact. I will give you props for some imaginative, gory deaths. I still think it would be more effective for you to lower the number of characters by two or three, but that's just me...
Why wouldn’t Lisa be able to say these 2 short lines? It’s like 3 seconds.
In reality, almost all dialogue could be trimmed…especially in this script. It’s chatty, and it’s somewhat “real speak”. Again, it’s a few extra seconds, tops, so IMO, no biggie. An extra line here and there, it's only a few extra seconds, etc.... it all adds up to extra screentime and extra pages. You should be around 95-100 pages for this genre. Trust me, it will make your script move like a bullet train, and that can only help you.
Have to totally disagree with you again, here, Duncan. One of the things that makes this work, IMO, is that it’s multi layered with several stories taking place at different locations, in real time. Once you know what’s going down at the Schaefer house, you hopefully are thinking about 1 of 3 things…either you’re concerned for the lives of these 3, as you assume they’re going to eventually get to where the action is, you look forward to their deaths when they get to where the action is, or you wonder if 1 or all of them will be able to save the day. Janelle and Martin are my favorite 2 Protags, as they’re the most unique and multi layered characters. Johnny is one that you’d think should be able to hold his own in any situation, and you’re either going to like his confident character or dislike him for that. Without having this change of scenery available, things would get very stale, IMO. Basically, we’ve got the old intersecting/verging storylines waiting to happen. I'll reiterate than in its current state, the love triangle story is not interesting enough to keep our interest. I'd rather just stay with the house, where the tension is, and see what happens there.
As for Megan’s survival, I wanted to take the old killer never dies cliché and turn it on its head, and have a surprise revival of a Protag instead. It may definitely strain credibility, but stranger things have happened, and remember, it’s still a movie. It just adds so much in the finale that I feel it’s worth the strain. it strains credibility because of the extent of her injuries. maybe tone it down, make her wounds those we believe she could recover from. a Sliced bloody neck is not a wound I would assume someone could walk away from.
Your suggestion about the core of the story is something that has been done again and again, and isn’t remotely fresh. Everything about this script is supposed to be different, surprising, and unique. Yes, but how could you make it fresh? That's your challenge! How about Bobby is a park ranger way down the mountain looking at the house with a telescope? He can't get up there, the roads are impassable, and all he can do is phone the house and tell them a killer is stalking them. Just a thought.
No way…don’t like the idea about Bobby at all. That isn’t anything what this script is. Is it an easy sell? No. Is it something that is proven? No. That’s the beauty, though. That’s the whole idea behind it. I don’t like cookie cutter, been there, seen that shit at all. Most movies that come out are 100% predictable, dull, boring wastes of time and money. I want to change that, and I won’t give up. "Is it an easy sell? No." Honestly, and I'm not trying to offend, but why did you write it? If it's not sellable, then it's just entertainment for those of us that read it on this site. Your focus should be on writing the next great horror film. Something like a pick-ax to the face of the genre. You've got bold ideas here, but you really should care about making it sellable. Whore out for Hollywood, as they say. Otherwise, this will just take up space in your bottom drawer.
Why do you say the characters are unlikable? Which ones don’t you like and why? Most of the early twenty-somethings (the main victims) are very unlikable. Too much foul language, sex talk, with no interesting insights into who they are. yes, it's horror, but we should care when they get killed. Reducing your number of characters (sorry to harp on that) will help you define who these people are. Have you thought about letting one of them survive?
Again, I despise movies that sit in 1 location. Boring, cheap, hate it! This reduces the production cost and will make your script more appealing to a studio. My first option was a script filmed in one location. Look at the success of Paranormal Activity! Think about it.
Thanks for taking the feedback. You take those punches like a champ!
Duncan, wanted to get back with you, but I’ve gone through a huge move up to your neck of the woods…Seattle. Finally getting settled, so thought I’d open this up again.
I totally agree that horror doesn’t have to be about a big body count, but some horror stories work well with it. Wolf Creek is actually a favorite of mine, and there are numerous similarities between it and my Fade. The body count, as well as the character count is a huge difference…a difference I like. Do you mean “Open Water”? Low, low budget, but a critical and financial success for sure. Not the kind of movie that you’ll want to watch more than once, though, as very little actually happens. We’ll have to agree to disagree on the character count, I guess.
Again, I totally understand you about extraneous dialogue, but this is supposed to be a talky script and film. It’s different, and it’s supposed to be different. Not all horror scripts have to be under 100 pages. Also, keep in mind that 5 pages of my script are completely after the credits roll, and the “missing” scene with Xavier takes up another 3 pages, so cutting that out, I’m just over 100 pages. I’d much rather have too much than not enough.
The “love triangle” is much more than that. It’s 3 main characters who have a shot at either falling to the antags or saving the day. Way too many movies paint themselves into a corner where nothing interesting can happen, because they’re stuck in a setting and no other characters can come into play. This is the reason for this, and IMO, it definitely works this way.
The point of Megan’s return is exactly that…something you were not expecting. I could tone down her injuries a bit, but I don’t want anyone expecting her to survive.
Don’t like the idea for Bobby at all. Many don’t like his and Jill’s inclusion, but IMO, it adds another layer and brings the cops believably, and also opens up other possibilities, even though they don’t pan out.
Duncan, IMO, this is very sellable. I said it’s not an easy sell, and it’s not, but that’s because of how different it is, compared to all the crap cookie cutter horror movies. I do feel it’s like a pick axe to the face of the genre, but again, that’s what makes it a tough sell. I have faith…I really do. I just need to find a like minded person in the industry who wants to push the envelope more than just a bit…
Well, if you don’t like foul language, sex talk, partying, etc., I can see why you don’t like these characters. I did have a survivor…just not anyone you’d think would survive. Jill survives. No one else does or can, or D & C wouldn’t get away clean, like they do.
Obviously 1 setting and very few characters makes for a cheap and easy production, but again, that’s not what I’m after here at all. Paranormal Activity was crap…all hype that wasn’t delivered on at all. Most cheap movies like this are the same thing. I think it’s wonderful when a low budget movie makes a killing, but I don’t see this script as a low budget affair. Without costly A and B list actors, I see this with a budget of $6-$12 Million (which is actually quite low in terms of Hollywood productions). With a few name actors, the cost could easily rise close to $20 Million. But that’s still OK. A successful box office run would bring in at least $25 Million, and possibly even north of $50 Million. That is of course if it all turned out the way it should, but that’s expecting and hoping for a lot. Got to keep the dream alive though, you know?
When I go, I try to go BIG. That’s just the way I am. Maybe I should actually write a low budget horror flick and try to get some attention with that first, and then move into this later. Who knows. We’ll see what happens.
Thanks again, Duncan for your thoughts and suggestions. Hope all is well, bud.
Pages: 
Author
Fade to White
Logged
that you should write what you would want to see. You have a good ear for real-life dialogue, like I said, it reads like a transcription of real life. 
Locked Board