Tap at the Window by Kevin Lenihan (Leitskev) - Horror - Two young researchers, determined to bring back recently extinct species, discover humanity is threatened by ancient entities planning their own return.
Pitch and Synopsis - pdf, format

Up to page 20. So far so good.

Hey Kevin,

Great to see more work from you, will hopefully give this a read tomorrow. it's Christmas day!

Merry Christmas.

Steve.

Thanks for taking a look, guys. It's kind of a sci fi horror. Hopefully it's an easy read.

Christmas in Down Under. Talk about dreaming of a white Christmas! Happy holidays everyone.

Damn...and I thought I wasn't getting anything for Christmas...

Kevin, as you know, I've been anxiously awaiting this script, as you didn't give me the early look this time around.  Considering my oh so big and thrilling Christmas plans...oh wait...I don't have any fucking Christmas plans, I may just be reading this bad boy tomorrow.

We'll see if I've been naughty or nice and whether this turns out to be a true gift or a lump of coal.     Just messing with you, Kev.  I look forward to reading this ASAP.

Merry Christmas, bro!

I didn't want to bug you with this one. I've been a burden enough this year on you! And I had the sense you get more enjoyment from sharing your reviews with the public, and plenty of folks love reading 'em.

I know I still have some passive language that slipped through, 'ing's and 'ly's. If I can, I'll clean em up this weekend.

Thanks, man! Merry Christmas. It's all up hill from here, Jeff, I promise. 2012's gonna be a good year.

SPOILERS



Okay, page 49. I'm done. Can't do children getting killed like this. I don't do horror anyway but you created a nice suspense that I wanted to read on. Good pacing but in the end this kind of thing creeps me out. I read somewhere that you don't kill pets and you don't kill children. Maybe I read wrong.

The only thing I would want is maybe to know what I'm up against, or what Kara is up against. It's a mystery still, which in this case is not out of line since you created such good suspense and mystery.

I think someone who likes this type of thing will give you decent feedback on the whole story. Otherwise you had me going until I could read no further. Such a shame. I want to know what happens in the end. Interesting characters.

Merry Christmas

Hey Kev,

Good to see a new one from you.  The title caught my eye.  I was able to read up to 35 yesterday, so I'll give you my notes as I keep reading.

Interesting opening scene.  The sabre toothed tiger obviously tells us this story starts way, way back.   Not sure about the use of the word "nervously" to describe the tiger watching.

Also not sure what that short scene with the two Arabs was about, or what time period it took place.  It's a very jolting jump from that to suburban New England.

You intro the father as Dad, but use MR. COUGHLIN in the character slugs.  Personally, I think i'd just give the parents first names.

p 5 I wouldn't call people in their mid-twenties "youths."  Has a very old-fashioned ring to it.

So far, there's a whole lotta talkin' going on.  Like when Justin casually drops the fact that there's a huge surge in Schizo cases in Boston, where the hospitals have been overwhelmed.   Seems like you could have found a way to show us this instead of dropping it into dialogue.

I have to admit, I cringed when they pulled out the Ouija board.  It's just been done to death.  But since it is a pivotal scene, the triangle thing is actually called a planchette.  The NYU reveal didn't have much impact on me, mainly because it came through dialogue.  I think a physical reveal would have worked better here, like if Kara pulls up her sweater to reveal an NYU T-shirt on underneath.

Lotta Irish Catholics in your stories, I notice

On p 13, "An inhuman laugh emits from Ray" sounded awkward.  Probably because you used the phrasing inhuman laugh just a few sentences ago.

p 14  Melissa "stairs"  should be stares.

p 14 Santa Clause should be Claus.

Phone convo between Melissa and Kara felt a bit long.  

Good, suspenseful setup with the webcam scene.  At this point, this is something I think the script needs more of.  Less repetitive dialogue among the characters and more genuine scares.

p 17 "We see the window behind her. We know she listens. We wait for it."  Read awkward.  I'd take all those "we's" out.

p 18 "Yours too" should be "Your's"

p 18 "You wanna mess with someone? Come mess with me! A Coughlin doesn't run!"  That line rang extra cheesy to me.

One question is why Kara didn't call the police at this point.  She believes her sister is in mortal danger, she can't get through to her mother and she decides to roust up Marcus?  Didn't make sense.  She would've called the cops, IMO.

The flashback scene with Marcus was harrowing, but it felt like all the tension you created with the webcam scene is now long gone.

Very Exorcist-like scene with the priest  talking to the possessed kid.  But, for me, your story seems to be coming off the tracks a bit here.  The Kara, Marcus and Father Conner storylines seem like disparate tales that keep intruding on each other instead of intertwining into one solid narrative.  

p 26 "off the hook" sounded like a dated reference that I don't think someone in their twenties would use(at least not when referring to a phone).

27-28 was really talky, further taking away from any suspense.

The car crapping out in the middle of nowhere is another one of those horror chestnuts that's been done a few too many times.  When James shows up, it seems like Marcus would be way more shocked and reticent to get into that car.

p 28  Who is Sharon?  If she was mentioned before, I must have read right over her.  But this is another example of the characters talking about something happening instead of us seeing it.

The Groton reference was very confusing for me because I thought they were suddenly in Connecticut.  You might want to choose another Boston suburb.

p 32 "did you watch"  Capitalize did.

p 33 "How's school."  Should have question mark at end.

I'm stopping there for now.  I have to be brutally honest here...I don't have a clue what's going on.  If not for the logline, I'd really be lost.  It just felt like the story had no real focus and relied on dialogue to move things forward instead of memorable scenes and incidents.  The webcam scene is a notable exception, however.  Hopefully, you're just "front-loading" the script with story so the rest of it can take off.

I'll get back to this ASAP

Clorox

Thanks for reading as far as you did. I hear what you're saying, too. I was worried about it. In fact, the people I gave this to read before posting, I asked some of them that very question. I didn't know if there was a rule against it. I didn't know if it made a difference that the kid is killed by a kid rather than an adult. I decided to go with it because I think the things that are the most scary are familiar things, pleasant things, particularly pleasant things from childhood that become menacing. So you have a childhood game that becomes horrible. But it's possible you can't do it in film. I don't know. It's the only example of that in the script. Again, thanks for taking a look!

Hey Ryan

Thanks for taking this on! Always get useful suggestions from you.

Some of that stuff I caught myself this afternoon so should already be fixed, but other stuff I missed, so much appreciated.

We all know we shouldn't use 'we's'. Unless they are needed. I felt they were here. I didn't want a close up on the window. I wanted Kara in the shot, the window behind. It's directing the shot, another thing we shouldn't make a habit of, but in reality, there's no rule against, and if it helps the reader, or more importantly, the potential producer, imagine the shot, I think it's worth it.

I didn't think of her calling the police. Hmm. Gotta think about that. What would she say? I can tell you I've called 911 many a time(job), and the dispatcher wants very detailed info before they dispatch a car. Would Kara know that? I don't know. I guess she could tell them she saw an intruder. Of course, she would not be calling 911 anyway, that would get her Boston police. I don't know. Will think it over.

There are scenes that seem familiar, but I think there always are in horror. It's part of the genre. Anytime there are kids possessed and priests, people will think The Exorcist. The fact this kid has been held for a couple of decades as a prisoner of the monks takes this to a different place, I think. But, perhaps others will find it too familiar as well.

Thanks man! I'll work on the stuff you mentioned that I can address.

Quoted from leitskev Clorox I decided to go with it because I think the things that are the most scary are familiar things, pleasant things, particularly pleasant things from childhood that become menacing. So you have a childhood game that becomes horrible. But it's possible you can't do it in film.

You can do anything you want. I don't know what the end game is here, but there were interesting things set up that obviously pay off later. The fact that there is a priest means we are dealing with angels and demons, maybe? Could you pull back on killing the kids? Is it integral to the story to have children involved like this? As I read I was moving along quite nicely without the introduction of children in the way they were. I don't know, maybe I, and the multitudes that think as I, would watch it if those things were different.

I read the synopsis and what is the demons goal? To live in a fleshly body? To control the world? Who/what is their obstacle? Are there angels as well? What is the significance of extinct species coming back to life?

The idea is that long before the evolution of man, there was an intelligent species that dominated the earth. A natural disaster wiped them out. There was one among them who foresaw the disaster, and also saw there would be a way for them to return from the spiritual realm. He foresaw the rise of an intelligent ape, and ape with something indispensable, something they could use to engineer their own return: hands.

So the disembodied entities guided these apes from their jungle lairs, guided them to build cities and a civilization, pushed this civilization until it developed the technology to revive lost species. So it could allow their return.

So there is actually no devils or angels, or Satan of God. The priest uses whatever is available to combat them, including an old Celtic talisman.

I will definitely take under advisement your objection to that scene. It's the only one like that, but I do think it's pretty scary, and this is horror. It was a tough call when I wrote this, and your bringing it up makes it tough again. I'll see if anyone else has an opinion on it.

Oh, the entities, the stronger ones anyway, do have the ability to possess humans. But the ultimate goal is to return in their own form. A complicated scenario which required exposition, which comes in pieces.

I originally wrote Tap a year ago when I first began writing. I recently rewrote it from scratch. I kept most of the characters, the basic plot, and some of the scenes, but just started over otherwise. I don't intend to base things on such complicated plots in the future because it requires much exposition, but I didn't want to just let this story die. I thought it was worth spending a few weeks rewriting.

Thanks for your suggestions, I'll see what I can do.

Sounds like a good premise to me. John Carpenter's The Thing was horror, I watched that, but I don't think of that as horror like horror is today. Horror today is so over the top it seems to be all about shock and awe, not story. Exposition in pieces as the story unfolds is good.

So my wonder is why have priests? Is it because that is the only way we can understand or deal with these creatures? Why is the priest so strong in the bathroom with the one dude who came in the bar? Gives me the impression that the priest knows how to deal with these things.

Personally I think you can ditch killing kids. It's not original. It's not new. It's not nice. Although it's not about being nice here,  I get that, it's that we have enough real horror going on that entertainment, in my opinion, should not take us where we already are. I'm saying raise your game above that and entertain in a suspenseful and interesting way, not shock and awe. That to me is smarter. And you have an interesting premise that could lend to something very smart, not blood and guts.

If what I read is all there is to whacking little kids, then maybe I can finish it. Hard to get that out of my head though. Need to take a shower after that.

Man, I am glad to hear your description about shock and awe, Clorox. I don't so see enough movies myself(yeah, I'm in the wrong field!), but the "show it don't say it" rule has gone too far, like many "rules". The slice em dice em films have little plot, so little dialogue and exposition, which I guess makes them "better". If a film has complexity, like a decent sci fi, there is going to be exposition, and some of its coming in dialogue.

Question: if killing kids is not original or new, then there must be no unspoken rule against it, right? Just wondering.

I could have the same scene and have something happen where they get away. That would create some problems, though, She has to kill someone in order to be seen as a threat in later scenes. And I don't want something like mom showing up to seem too convenient. Certainly I will think on it the issue.

The priest: originally, I had the priest part of a secret order that battles and studies these things, an order older than the Church but which now exists clandestinely within it. I did away with that idea only because I didn't want to add any more exposition to this. This order knows how to deal with them to a degree. The entities vary in strength. The one in the bathroom was a weaker one.

Thanks again!

OK, got to speak up here about the killing of children or pets.

Yeah, it has been said that you should not kill either, but that was many years ago and and things have changed quite drastically.  There have been many movies in which kids and pets have been killed.  It doesn't happen often, and it's not mainstream, but it's far from "not doable".

It all depends on what you're after, as well as what you're dealing with.  If you're out to shock and appall and you've got a hard R rated script (or worse), you can pretty much do anythign you want, as well as show everything you want.  However, if you don't have an R rated script, you're not going to be able to do or show much of anythign horrific, especially kill a kid.

I'm just up the the scene in question, and for me, it's easily the best scene of the script so far, but I'm much different than Clorox, and appreciate brutality and real horror.  The only concern I see here, with Kevin's script, is that so far, it's not a definite R rated script.  It could easily get away with a PG 13 so far, up to page 41, and if a script can go either way, it will go down in rating, to draw a wider audience.

So, Kevin will have a dilemma on his hands, assuming this upcoming child kill is anywhere near as graphic as Clorox is making it out to be - the dilemma will be that if he keeps the kill in, he'll need to up the anti throughout in terms of R rated material and language, which is not at all prevalent, as far as I can remember.  Or, he'll have to cut everything back and go for the crappy PG13 rating that real horror fans despise, but Producers seem to love.

I hope to be finished with the read later today, although the vast majority of my notes are going directly to Kevin and not being shared here.

It is a tough call. I don't disagree with Clorox that it could be an issue. I don't know. Jeff is correct that this script, for the most part, walks the line of pg 13. The language certainly generally does. I decided not to fill this one with profanity, as some of my scripts are rife with it. Certainly this scene and a couple others would push it toward the R rating.

I though that scene was chilling for several reasons. As I said, you have the innocent childhood game gone wrong aspect. Also, the boy who gets killed has acted heroically in helping the little kid. And finally there is the fact that she does not kill the little kid, but instead leaves him with the horrible memory and implants him with terrible fear of what will happen if he tells anyone. I also like the way she controls him by putting him into the shed even though he is in terror and is bigger than her. We all remember when were kids how one kid, someone a little but older, can take control of the other kids like that.

But the main reason it would be difficult to change this now, like I said, is that Melissa is present in many of the scenes that follow, and knowing what she is capable of is what hopefully adds some tension to those scenes.

I will take all of the comments into consideration, and when I do a rewrite down the road I'll fix what I can. I appreciate the criticism, it really helps, thanks guys.