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.

Can someone explain the US rating system?

In the Uk we have U...which means Universal...for everybody.

PG Parental Guidance...anyone can go, but there may be some dark scenes some parents may feel are unsuitable for very young children.

12. 12A. Means someone younger than 12 can't go without an adult.

15.

18. Presumably what R rated is?

R18...special category for violent, abusive porn, or porn that may encourage paedophilia..eg role play with adults as children.

Since 1990, the MPAA movie ratings have been as follows:

G- General Audiences
    All ages admitted
    (1968–present)

PG- Parental Guidance Suggested
    Some material may not be suitable for children
    (1978–present; between 1972 and 1977, the word "children" instead read "pre-teenagers.")


PG-13- Parents Strongly Cautioned
    Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13
    (1984–present)

R- Restricted
    Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian
    (1970–present; during 1968 and 1969, the designated age was 16)

NC-17- No One 17 and Under Admitted
    (1996–present; between 1990 and 1996, the wording was "No Children Under 17 Admitted")

     

If a film is not submitted for rating, the label NR (Not Rated) or UR (Unrated) is often used. Many older films have the label NR or UR, but merely because a film is labelled NR or UR does not always mean that it is suitable for children.

Interesting.

I find it quite odd that Hostel is only R rated.

What kind of films have made NC 17?

I'm pretty sure the remake of "I spit on your Grave" was NC17.  You could most likely do a google search as well.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Interesting. I find it quite odd that Hostel is only R rated. What kind of films have made NC 17?

NC-17 typically gets dragged out for sexually explicit films.
For instance, the new McQueen/Fassbender collab is a tale of sexual addiction.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1723811/

E.D.

**SMALL SPOILERS***

"This script, for the most part, walks the line of pg 13."

Um - agree and disagree on this one, Kev!  Until the final acts, I'd agree.  But the ending conflict?  By *no means* would I consider it PG 13!  Unlike some of the other reviewers, I really don't have a problem with the kid getting killed.  Considered it no worse than a million other scenes in produced horror films that can get brutal at times...  I'm a little surprised that some have a problem with it (though I respect their right to set their own limits...)

I do agree - you'll have to address the issue as to why Kara didn't simply call the cops when she couldn't get through to her family.  Though she could do both - call the cops, and then race home anyway...  No reason that both actions wouldn't be appropriate...  (Once the cops arrived, they'd find nothing was wrong and simply leave...)

Yeah, I had not thought of it until Ryan pointed it out. Have to come up with something. She would call 911, which would get her Boston police. Then she would have to explain to them that she saw an intruder on Skype at her home in Groton, Ma. They would then have to contact Groton police. Obviously I can't show show all that on film.

I could have her call the police after she calls Marcus, but only show the beginning of the call. The problem with this is, what would be her first reaction? Call the police, or call for a ride? So it's a problem.

Another issue is why her mother doesn't call her back. It's already a little of a surprise, but certainly it would be hard to explain that after the cops show up.

Actually, I don't think it needs to be complicated or overly explained.  Kara calls the MA police, gives them the information.  But she refuses to wait to find out the results second hand - and calls Marcus to get a ride.  She figures, her family's going to need her., either way.  As for her mother not calling back...she's kind of busy - after all, the cops just knocked on her door!  

Once the power to the computer and phone shut off, I assumed the entity had done it.  You write that "The screen goes black. DIAL TONE on the phone."  Combine that with the fact that Kara saw a figure moving through the room, and I think that's definitely sufficient reason for Kara to call 911.  When she calls, just have her tell the skeptical 911 dispatcher that she saw an intruder in the room.

What you might want to do is have the power to the computer go out after the figure looks into the webcam, and then have Kara try to call her mother and get voicemail.  That way you don't have to worry about the mother not returning the call.

Also, one of the problems I had with that sequence was how long it took for them to get to the house, which was right around page 30.  The reason mainly being because Marcus has to jump on the train, meet James and have his flashback.  I'd consider moving that flashback forward in the movie, like before Marcus enters the party at the apartment.  The beheading was a cool scene and would help to break up all that dialogue in there.

After Willy stabbed himself in the eye it seemed like a non event.

The lab, and the lizard, feels like a genre change. The whole tap at the window is a spooky kind of thing and the lizard is science.

Kara and Father Conner, the after us thing. Not fitting. Not consistent, this "after us" that science can not explain. It's like an after thought in her life that comes forward as the main thrust here. Like, she first realizes now but there is no set up or chase for me to think something is after her.

All this weird stuff is happening to Kara but she is not freaking out about any of it. She is not like wtf? The best example I can think of are the soldiers in the first Transformers that see and record the Transformer that destroys the base and then battle the transformer scorpion in the desert (one of the coolest scenes in movies). They are trained soldiers that have discipline in the face of danger and battle. So it's set up, but they still freak out in their own way and it's shown. Kara sees stuff that is way weirder happen and she keeps on keeping on with nary a thought about it.

Okay, the conversation between Kara and Conner is where this breaks down for me. Explaining way too much? The whole science thing being explained.

The beginning 49 pages are different than what follows.

George buys a round of beers? In the wake of what is happening, they pause to drink beer?

Done.

I have to think about this since I read it in two sittings with days between.

It's disjointed for some reason.

It's like the beginning could have been cut out and I wouldn't have missed much.

I see what you mean about how you've written Melissa in and how Kara is true to her word and saves her.

Willy stabbing himself in the eye could be lost.

I think I might have to skim back over to get a whole feel for it. However, I've broke like this in scripts before and haven't lost a beat. I think it's a story issue for me.

I don't really care too much about any of the characters because the story seems to be more about the event more than about how the characters go through the event.

Have to think on it some more.

Wonka: yeah, agree, and that's what I meant, though poorly worded. A good chunk of the script is pg13 ish, but a few scenes are definitely not. So as it stands, it could not be pg 13 unless I removed those scenes.

Thanks for jumping back Ryan and Clorox.

Clorox, I did enter this as "sci fi horror", so it is both genres. This was kind of the first story I wrote when I began writing about a year ago, but it's a rewritten version. Melissa was not a character in the original, but I brought her in to try to add some more horror. That might be part of what disjoints it. Could be other things too.

It was definitely not a character piece, To be honest, I was thinking in many ways about creating some trailer scenes that might attract a low budget producer and trying to string them together.

As far as Kara freaking out, has that much happened to her for her to freak out? With the baby scene, she does freak out. But not much freaky happens to her, except the retarded kid stabbing himself. She freaks, though I cut away from the scene. Should she remain in a freaked out state, though? It's more about she is determined to get to the bottom of this and fight back.

The bar was just a place to meet and plan. Getting a round of beers was not a party but just something you do in bars. I ran bars for 20 years, and this is natural for many people. The bar is a hub, a meeting place before important activities. When there, people get beers. Remember, they don't know what James is doing to Marcus. They need time to get in touch with other people to help and come up with what to do.

But I appreciate the read, guys, really do.

Hi Kev,

As promised, I'm going to do my best to check this out. I'll post in chunks, rather than just do one long review, dealing with things as they occur to me.

Initial impression based on title and logline.

Title. OK in of itself, but doesn't give me a sense of either the specific story as suggested by the logline, or a sense that this is a dark, scary story.

The title seems more at home in the adolescent horror genre. As a matter of fact I can picture it on a bookshelf...luminous green writing, with a goblin face at a window.

That's the kind of thing it evokes in me.

Suggestion: Endangered Species.

This works in two ways...the almost extinct antagonists OR the humans who are about to come under threat.

I like the premise/logline. It has a bit of everything. Mystery, suspense, irony, threat to humanity.


On to the script.

EDIT: This is going to come across as incredibly harsh, just to warn you. I think there's a lot of good stuff in the script, some inventive scenes, some good writing, but I found it very incohesive. Funnily enough, it was quite an easy read, despite that. There's the heart of a good story in there, I just think you need to find what it is you're really trying to say....and when I say good story, I mean one that could be a strong, produced film.

Small point:

Sabre Toothed "Tiger" (Smilodon) fossils have been found in North America and South America.

There are other species of Sabre Toothed Cat that lived in Africa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saber-toothed_cat

Each one lived in a different time-line and became extinct at different times.

This may seem petty, but it's your opening scene and you're about to try and incorporate a new species in human history (I'm presuming from the log line and opening scene). That being the case, I think it's important that you get the species right...in the absence of SUPERS telling us where and when we are, it's also important because it places us in the historical setting.

Other than that, I quite like the opening scene. I am wondering whether we would want to see more of whatever it is that's causing the terror. I don't mean see it straight out, but maybe something coming through the undergrowth, or just some scary eyes coming out of the darkness.

We then go to a strange scene with what seem to be modern day Arabs. It doesn't seem to lead either thematically, or logically on from the opening scene.

We then jump to another place...this time 18 years in the past. This scene is nicely written. I particularly like the "secret words" thing and you've set up a nice conflict between faith and reason, and between mother and father.

Another jump to the present day. There appears to be no way of knowing that this is still the same girl. There's no visible transition, and no SUPER telling us it's the present day.

It's a bit confusing.

At this point we go into some hardcore exposition about just about everything...who Marcus is, and his traumatic background, a spate of scizopherinc cases in the area, a rehash of Kara's "Tap at the Window" problem. Feels like you're just trying to throw everything out there at once.

Almost all of it is not revisited for pages and pages, if at all. Why are the likes of Justin, Bonnie and David even in this thing? They don't seem to ever reappear....

We've spoken about exposition before, and how it's required for certain genres. It just is. Watch Minority Report by Spielberg and there isn't a single line of dialogue that isn't pure exposition.

The problem here is that people are talking about stuff that isn't even on the screen. People watch films, they don't listen to them. It's fine to explain what we're watching....maybe a later experiment and what those weird graphs mean, for instance...but when you're giving us lots of info. about characters we've never even seen then there's a problem. The audience will simply ignore it because they haven't got a frame of reference.

For instance...let's say we meet Marcus in the lab. Someone tries to speak to him...he's a bit weird. You see a conversation between Kara and the other, with Marcus in the background.
"What's his problem?" Kara: "That's Marcus, go easy on him OK?  He's a genius, but he's got something of a...past".

That's not perfect, by any means, but it allows you to explain a situation whilst the situation can be seen and understood by the audience.

Of course, you can just suggest these things. when someone in the lab asks Marcus about his past...he just says "I don't like to talk about it". Something like that tells us he's got a secret. It creates a mystery without having to explain it.

Think about your transitions as well. Kara is still talking about the tapping at the window. You have the perfect opportunity to transition directly from the previous scene into this one by having the same thing happen to her...this instantly allows us to transition between the time frames..telling us it's the same girl, and cuts out the need to tell us that it's still happening.

Not liking the Ouija board thing. Not only very old hat, but seemingly out of place. Seems these people are scientists, yet they've got the ouija board? It seems like a very weird mix. I was expecting these young researchers to be finding stuff out through research, but instead it's through the occult.

From page 11 onwards things start getting more interesting.

It feels like a different script though. This could be page one of the story. Why have all that exposition, and all that hinting of something just to outright reveal these sinister beings are already around and others are aware of them?

The next scene is very effective by itself with Melissa. I'm very confused by the story at this point though. Here we meet a new character for the first time, find she's going through what Kara went through.

It's scary, it's good...but I'm completely lost. There's no throughline to be found in any scene. We keep getting introduced to different characters and then things happen to even newer characters.

P18.

Marcus says: Kara, everything's riding on this
experiment. Everything we've worked
for.

We've seen Kara as a child. We've seen her in two flats. At no point has she ever been seen working on an experiment. It was only briefly mentioned once. For something so important this seems bizarre.

The logline is very succint. "Two young researchers, determined to bring back recently extinct species, discover humanity is threatened by ancient entities planning their own return".

But it doesn't appear to have much to do with the story. They don't really "discover" it in any way. They're sort of vaguely becoming involved it, whilst other people (and even the audience to some degree) know what's going on.

They could be actors, or bin men or politicians and it wouldn't impact on what's happened so far.

There is an implicit irony in the logline that doesn't seem to have made it into the story so far...that they are trying to find a way to revive/save endgangered/extinct species and in doing so they awaken a threat to humanity itself.

Why aren't we seeing their research?

P19. Seems odd that he's willing to abandon the experiment (thus realising how important the situation is), just to fall asleep.

You then pick the strangest time to go to a flashback about Marcus' past. At the point you've cranked up the tension about the sister, you jump out to focus on yet another character.

Then back to Kara briefly. Then yet another deviation to Father Conner and more new characters...

Then we have incredibly long talking scenes before we finally get back to Melissa. By the time we get there it's been about 16 minutes. I couldn't care less what's happened to her at this point. Not sure most people would even remember who she was.

At this point, I'm backing out for a little bit.

Like I said earlier, I do think this is a good concept, and there's a lot I like within the body of the work. I'm just not following the logic of it.

The vast majority of films tend to be incredibly simple. We follow people on a simple journey from one scene to the next scene which grew organically from the last.  This just seems to be unneccessarily complicated, too many time lines, too many people.

Seems to be crying out for a simple story whereby they are at the lab, finding out new ways to restore species, weird stuff starts happening, they discover they're linked, there are a few shadowy characters seemingly trying to influence the experiments, a breakthrough in the lab leads them to meet Father Conner..etc. Just a simple, strong throughline that you can hang the action on.

From my own POV it would go something like this: Opening scene in North America (not Africa). Next scene North America in the present day...ie linking the first shot with the present...the exact same place, just in a different time. This creates a sense of foreboding....the past is about to affect the future. (All the best films the opening shot tells the whole story...ypu just don't realise it at the time).

Kara reading a tale about Prehistory to her DAUGHTER Melissa...consistent with the story, Kara's character, the theme and the opening shot. Tells her the secret words, and that there's nothing to be scared of and how everything has an explanation. (Same scene you have, just different characters). Then see Kara in bed with window tapping and her holding the rosary...establishes everything in much shorter time....that she's going through the same thing and doesn't quite believe what she's telling Melissa herself. Next scene is in the lab where we find out about their work and meet Marcus and JAMES...who can be the Head of Operations in the Lab and is secretly guiding their work...as we find out later.

This is just a quick example, but would this kind of thing help to condense the story and keep it more centred? You can cut out numerous characters and a few scenes and not lose anything. It's certainly the way I would play it, but that's not necessarily the right way.


Another couple of drafts should knock this into a better shape. It's definitely got real potential.

Rick.

Excellent remarks, Rick, and thank you. Convincing on all or most points.

I guess several things led to problems in this draft. First, of course, is my own talent limitation. Another issue is that this was a rewrite of what was one of my first scripts, written before I had found SS and developed at least a little clue. For the rewrite, I decided to pretty much start over keeping many of the same characters, the premise, and some scenes. But this led to a poor concoction, perhaps. Bonnie, Justin, and David had much larger roles in the original. I just couldn't find the space for them here.

Melissa was created for the second draft with the goal of adding more horror scenes.

Other issues could be trying to blend sci fi with horror, or at least that type of horror.

Thanks for pointing that out about the saber tooth. I just have to find another extinct cat people will recognize. It does have to be Africa, however. The gist of the story is that there was once a species of predator, long before man, that dominated the planet, but was wiped out by a natural disaster. From the spiritual plane, it plots to return in physical form. Over time, the stronger of the entities learn how to possess, but the real goal is bringing back their own kind. The recognized a way to do this in the intelligent apes they found in the jungles of Africa, apes which had one thing they needed in a species: hands.

So the entities terrified and guided the apes, molding them into a civilization that would one day develop the technology to bring about their return. They've been with us guiding, and terrorizing, us all along.

I don't know if that's a good idea or not, but I do know that it creates the problem of exposition. The African scene shows them being spooked from the jungle, and the second scene shows an early civilization which they influenced. While they are guiding us, there is also an evil inherent in what they do, and this recalled by the Bedouin in their own legends. They avoid the buried city.

I could go the research route, as you suggest. But I do fear that would require even more exposition, so I don't know.

Thanks man! Appreciate the help!

I took very detailed notes on this (21 pages!) and sent them directly to Kevin, as I was a bit worried by the harsh tone that it should remain something that only Kevin sees.

Rick, Ryan, and Clorox have already brought up many issues that I did, and in times, using the exact same words to describe the issues that I did, so if nothing else, I feel a bit better about what I said.

I also want to agree that there are many positives in the script, especially early on.

Kevin gives alot of reads and support here on SS, so hopefully, he'll get that back here with his own work.

I get the non-character element, I thought about that. The point isn't to fall in love with these characters, it's to be frightened out of your seat.

I got an overall thought...

We can't really beat these guys except for Conner's ritual (why didn't Conner devine Melissa?) and a shot to the head (if they are in a human body, are they really dead or just on the other side waiting for another body?). So the protags are defenseless and as a result there is no battle between the good guys and the bad guys. They have not figured out how to defeat the creatures or really figured who the creatures are. But Conner has known from the beginning and he has not trained Marcus or Kara in ways they can win. The end shows that the creatures are not defeated, they've just withdrawn but I don't see why. Maybe I missed it.

I think if Kara and Marcus had some battle time, I would be more interested. They don't fight which makes them passive. I like Conner, he's the muscle, but maybe it would be cool if he could mentor someone to wave a figurine around? Maybe Kara? She could save Marcus?

There are these predators on the other side, the spirit side, but that's all that lies over there on the other side? We aren't over there after we pass? There is only evil, these predators on the other side?

However, as I'm thinking about this, in Jurassic Park, the heroes had no hope of defeating the Raptors and T-Rex so all they did is run until they escaped. But they fought back at times, outwitted at times, there was somethings they tried and in the end it was the shot in the head (T-rex munching on the Raptors) that gave the chance to escape. The heroes weren't passive even though they seemed doomed. They stompled, kicked, and shouted.

I definitely did not want Kara to be passive. That is why early on she exclaims she's not going to just lie back and wait. The first step, wants she decides this is not an issue science can deal with, at least by itself, is to visit her childhood priest, Father Malone.

Growing up, Kara had two influences: her mother is the strict Catholic who believes in Satan and all that stuff. Her father considered that superstitious, was a man of science. He encourages Kara to use science as a way of overcoming her fear of what she senses watching her.

Once she realizes science alone cannot explain these things, she turns to her priest. However, Father Malone is a Jesuit priest, more science than prayer. Many if not most Catholic priests are actually like that. Highly educated, not overly superstitious. He sends Kara to meet with Father Conner, who he knows deals with these types of things.

Her taking these steps is suggestive of an active character. Granted, there is not much she can do to actually defeat the demons, but in the end, she does defeat the one within her sister. She is aggressively pursuing the goal of protecting her sister, and then leads the charge to rescue Marcus.

Is there a way to ultimately defeat these things? Perhaps not. Their strength ebbs and wanes, but ultimately they have moved forward with their plan. Father Conner's order has studied them and battled them for thousands of years, with very limited success. Entities vary in strength, he can't beat the stronger ones. He can't always recognize them either. Not only does he not recognize Melissa, but Kruger as well, who he considers a friend.

As for other spirits on the other side, sure. Presumably every one and every living thing is there in some way. But these were the first really intelligent creatures on earth, and have been around far longer than man. It took them eons just to learn how to possess a man. They are far stronger because they are far older.

This was my idea when I first concocted the story, back when I knew absolutely nothing about screen: the goal was to get people to sleep with the light on.

Now, if we have a story where a young woman is haunted by the spiritof her evil great, great grandfather who was a Satan worshiper, that could be scary. But unless one also has such a grandfather, this story does not cause them any fear after they leave the theater.

The Exorcist, on the other hand, is scary because if little innocent Regan can be possessed, anyone can. That's what made that truly terrifying to a generation.

I also wanted to tap into childhood fears. Monster in the closet's been done to death. And no adult thinks there's a monster in their closet. But the idea of someone or something watching in your bedroom window I thought could resonate. Even adults can go home after the film, look at their window, and get creeped out.

So the hope was to come up with a story that people could on some level buy into the notion that maybe something watches them. In the original version, entities were assigned to every human born. They watch you at birth, watch you walking home from school, they watch from your window. And they build their strength, bide their time, look for a moment of weakness.

I dropped that part as it was too difficult to explain of come up with a reasonable mechanism. So now it's more that there COULD be an entity watching you. That's why I did not want to have just one entity that stalks Kara. There has to be a legion of them out there that plague mankind.

I would like to be able to frighten people to the edge of their seat, but that is beyond my talent at the moment. But I do have a thought on that, and Rick might recognize I have said this kind of thing before. For something to really scare someone, whether it's a story told by a campfire, or a film, I think it has to create some credibility in your mind where you say to yourself, "hmm, maybe that could happen." At least a little part of your mind anyway. That to me is why The Exorcist is effective. And if you ever told stories as a kid to scare people, you know that if you make the story too unbelievable, you won't scare anyone, no matter how horrible.

I don't see enough movies, but the modern horror I do see usually has the problem of no credibility. It has gore and death and horrible monsters, but it's usually not even remotely believable.

I am not saying I achieved that here, not at all. But I was trying to construct something that had some plausibility that one could buy into. I had to construct something that stalks from the window, that could stalk any of us. This was what I came up with. Because I sandwiched to scripts together, and because it is two genres, and because of my limited talent, it comes of as disjointed. I'm not sure if I will rewrite, because I might be better off just spending my time and energy developing simpler premises rather than trying to fix older, more complicated ones.

One last thing. It seems to me the formula for most horror, and this is also a reason many don't like horror, is to spend 3/4 of the script building questions with the audience that feeds its imagination. Even horror novels work this way. You create questions the audience wants answered: what haunts those dark woods, what are those voices on the wind, what do those dreams mean, what killed the young woman with the long legs. The really good horror does an outstanding job of creating those questions, of capturing our imagination. However, even with the good horror, very seldom does the resolution or explanation of events live up to the build up. A Sixth Sense is awesome because it achieves that resolution and leaves us satisfied, but this is the exception. In fact, the better the build up, the more disappointing the resolution usually is because it's so hard to match the build.

I think if you can get an audience to the end of the story, drive them their with enough intrigue, as long as the resolution is not terrible, you have something. That is not the case here, it seems, as people have trouble much earlier. But I think a successful story can be built that way, especially if you have enough trailer moments.

Thanks for the discussion, ladies and gentlemen!

You have the elements, all of them. The first pages are intriguing and build very well. This sense of mystery and foreboding. I got that. Because I don't do horror you did a good job of drawing me in.

If I recall corectly, it's in a dream that Kara defeats her sister's demon?

Yes, correct Clorox(sorry, I don't know your first name). She defeats the demon in a dream. The demon was trying to trick her into sacrificing herself by its pretending, in the dream, to be her sister. I was thinking that might be tricky to understand, but if I've lost the reader before that point, I guess they are unlikely to want to figure it out.

I think an interesting thing about scripts is they can appear 'talkier' than they are, generally speaking. For example, let's say we have a horror story where two characters talk for a minute about a ghost legend with the house they are in. That dialogue could take 2 pages of script. Then they hear a noise in the cellar. They creep down the stairs with a lantern. In the dark reaches of the cellar...tap, tap, tap. They navigate piles of junk and reach an old wooden bulkhead. Behind the bulkhead...tap, tap, tap. Steeling themselves, they rip open the bulkhead...

The dialogue took 2 pages of scripts and less than a minute of film. The trip to the cellar took 2 minutes of film and a half a page of script. If a much of a script looks like this, at a glance it will seem very talky, but not so much in film.

Clorox is good

That's why I say Kara is not active. Dreams are an easy way out as they are not reality in a sense. You have to REALLY establish that things can be done in dreams as in INCEPTION. In your case dreams don't work. All demons previously are taken care of by Conner and his motions. That is the set up.

Your script does not come off talky except when expanding on the science of the events or the break through. Speaking of break thoughs, the break though and the little critter really don't do anything for the story, do they?

All these cool elements but getting them together in the best way is the challenge.

I make a damn good martini, but not with Clorox!

I think Kara is active because she aggressively pursues the answers and a way to fight back. Passive would be if she sat back waiting for events to unfold. She does not. She faces the threat head on, even though it turns out what she can do seems to be limited.

It is the only dream sequence shown, but not the only time it is used. There are two others, both with Father Conner, though it's kept purposely vague. First, when Conner interrogates the imprisoned child, he sits in the chair and allows the entity to hunt. The idea is he is opening his mind. Later, he does something similar when he shows one of the weaker entities how to open the electronic lock. But I agree, since we don't see those, it could be seen as out of left field. I could not come up with a better resolution, to be frank about it. Ran out of ideas.

You are partly right about the critter. In my first draft, that did not take place. I added it so the scene would be a little more visual since the scene is very expository.

BTW, the science behind this is not completely crazy. I actually researched it. I'm not saying I believe it, but it is not the case that I completely invented it. Ervin Lazlo's Akashic Field Theory is behind much of it, and a few others.

It's a challenge to make expository scenes feel less expository. I wanted the scene to explain just how it is their research could be used to bring back an extinct species. It's Jurassic Park, but a different science used. I also through in Melissa and James to try to reduce the expository feel to it. I guess it's considerations like that which force me to do things that I otherwise would not.

Hey Kevin,

Sorry for the delay, I have been reading this over the last couple of days when I found the time.

I honestly think the overall problem with this script is the structure of the story. Characters seem to come and go throughout so it's very difficult to feel anything for them.  

Characters such as David and Bonnie came and then disappeared as quickly. Some we never saw again as in Justin or the first Entity (little boy) Conner went to see.

Some scenes also felt out of place. The first scary incident and one of the best parts for me was the skype scene with Kara, that was tense and spooky. We then went to Marcus and had a little backstory for him. This killed the tension you had set up excellently in the previous scene.

Conner was another character which had great potential, he seemed like the only one who could fight these entities. But again after a good intro in the bar, he disappeared for long sections and only really came back in the final third.

I don't how to explain this but the first half felt like a mysterious horror with demons and exorcism. The second part turned into sci-fi horror with reptilian creatures and dreams. This became quite confusing for the overall plot and again another reason why some scenes felt out of place.

Also one scene at the bar ended too soon for me. They were fighting over Kara when Frank pulled a sawed off shotgun and suddenly we jumped to another scene before it had played out to it's entirety IMO.

The child dying also felt superfluous to me, it could have been just as scary without having to kill him. While i am not bothered, i think a few people will be but this is a risk you take i guess.

The conclusion also felt unrewarding, there was a lot happening but for some reason it didn't quite work for me.

And the pub scene at the end just doesn't do it for me I'm afraid to say. In saying that, it was an intriguing ending with Kruger, leaves it wide open for a sequel.

I won't go too much into formatting or grammar as i am nowhere near experienced enough to have gone through a whole feature length script and spot everything. A few things i did see.

Page 2 - DAD, 40,  intro then used Mr Coughlin in dialogue. I would just use Mr. Coughlin or give Kara's parents first names.

Page 7- " David passes a bottle of tequila" I'm not sure where he's passing it? I thought they were drinking beer?

Page 14 - "stairs" should be "stares"

Page 17 - A lot of "We" in the description which reads awkward IMO.

I noticed you change (o.s) to (o.c) a few times. I don't think this really matters but it helps to be consistent or do I just find the most pettiest things to complain about? Probably the latter.

Page 103 - "Melissa opens her eyes, finds herself standing with Melissa" should be "Kara opens her eyes"

I think your writing is good overall and you have a lot of talent (jealous) and if I'm honest, i have turned to the "Untouchables And The Undead" on many occasions to help with my own work so I know how good your writing is. I think a complicated story with too many characters is the problem. It does have potential and some very promising things going for it. I just believe it needs to be more simple than what it is at the moment.

I think i need to give this another read in one sitting. I think doing this over a couple of days hasn't done it justice and took me away from the story a bit, so that's what I'm going to do.

Hope this helps.

All the best and a happy new year.

Steve

Thanks Steve, appreciate it.

I wouldn't worry about putting another read into it, seems this needs some big issues addressed. I have another feature posting soon, maybe you'll be able to glance at that one.

I use O,C. when the character is in the room but off camera. O.S, would be when the character is off screen, so for example, up the hall, in the room next door, that kind of thing. V.O. is more like a narration.

I avoid using we's, and I think there are only a couple here. I use them when it's the most efficient way of describing a shot. Directing a shot in itself is something to generally avoid, but it's sometimes necessary for the way a scene plays out.

I never really could think of a decent ending. Actually, there's the ending, and then the ending, if you know what I mean. The second ending is that final twist where Kruger is revealed for what he is. I like that part. But the resolution of freeing Marcus and Melissa was tougher.

Thanks Coop!

Made it to 75.  Gotta say, the structural problems continue to plague the script.  Your first act ended on page 36, as I saw it.  That's just too long and it gave the first part of the story a very bloated feel.

On page 35, I'm not sure of the significance of the "Moments Earlier" in the slug line.  Why not just show that scene beforehand?

No mention of how they fix Marcus' car.

On 37, this read awkward: "She senses something, a sixth sense."  

The baby in the fridge is a memorable visual.  Creepy.

Typo on 43:  "They stand their staring at her."

Not sure about the child killing, mainly because I'm still not sure exactly what these entities are.  I understand now that they're the spirits of bygone predators that once roamed the earth, but I'm still not sure how they're hanging around.  If you do keep this particluar scene, definitely ditch the french kissing line.  Really sounded out of place.

I understand now that Sharon is the sister who died along with the father in the car accident, so I'm hoping this has a payoff further down the road.

But speaking of roads, the Sacred Heart church is back in Groton, right?  So, how did Kara get there when she was just back in Boston?  Does she have a car now?

Father Conner disappears for a full 35 pages, making him a virtual nonfactor in the script.  By the time he shows back up, it's hard to remember what he was doing last we saw him.

David doesn't feel like a necessary figure in that bar scene.  It seems like Kara should have sought out Conner by herself, and also gotten to him much quicker to bring his character back into the story.

On 64, "they that cannot be mentioned" sounded too Voldemorty.

The five page flashback beginning on 69 is about five pages too much.  Right when Marcus' reality finally starts to get interesting, as he winds up in the nuthouse with the self-pleasuring possessed people, this extended lesson on the history of voodoo in Haiti pops up.  You give us an interesting bit of history, but at a major cost to your momentum.  Narrative pit stops like this really grind your story to a halt.

So, stopping on 75.  I wish I could say the script drew me in more throughout this second act, but in some ways I'm more confused than ever.  The story has a real scattershot feel, and the pacing is very unsteady.  It doesn't feel like it's building toward anything and I'm not sure what the stakes are here.  Between the metaphysical stuff and the scientific jargon in the lab scene, this felt like a swirl of ideas in search of a more cohesive story to bring them together.

Will finish up in the next reading.

Hey Kevin,

No worries mate, I would be only to happy to look over more of your work.

Thanks for clearing up the (O.S) and (O.C), that helps me a lot.

Steve.

Not to start up a debate or argument or anything, but Kevin's use of "(O.S.)" and "(O.C.)" is not standard, nor is it something new writers will want to do.

First of all, standard procedure is to use "(O.S.)"...period.

The way Kevin is describing what he's doing, is admitting to totally trying to direct the shot, which again, isn't something new writers want to do, and something established writers should only attempt very infrequently, and only when it really makes a big difference.

When a character is in the scene, they;re dialogue should be normal, like every other character.  There's no reason to play director and tell your readers that the camera is not on the speaking character so the dialogue is "(O.S.)".

Just a heads up and clarification for those who're interested.

Ryan

Hey, you caught the car thing! I'm impressed. I caught that myself after I finished and mentioned to someone who gave a private read, wondered it anyone would catch it here. Pretty good eye for detail that you caught it.

Jeff

Not sure if we should have a format for new writers and a format for veterans. Like many aspects of screenwriting, such as wrylies, asides, close shots...they should only be used when needed. But that is not to say they should never be used. If they increase the writer's ability to tell his story, and make for more effective story, then they should be used. Rules don't exist for their own sake. They exist to guide story making.

Let's look at the example in Tap. Marcus is asleep on the subway. He wakes up to see Jamaal across the way. After a brief exchange, James interjects. This is also James introduction to the script.

Is it directing the shot? You bet. I don't want the initial focus on James, but on Jamaal. And, importantly, Marcus does not see James until he speaks. So James speaks(O.C), then his character is introduced.

Could (O.S.) be used? I don't know. Sure. I suppose it doesn't matter. I think this is technically more correct, however. (O.S.) would be used, I would think, if James is not on the subway car and then enters it after he speaks. That's the what makes sense to me, anyway.

A writer does not want to do much of this, as it certainly is directing the shot. But it's important to how the scene plays out here because Marcus has been asleep and did not see James board the train.

In the end, Coop, it's up to you to weigh the various approaches and decide what's best for your script.

Thanks, gentlemen!

Kevin, we're talking about a Spec script here (as we're always when it comes to SS'ers).

Directing what is on camera is not a Spec writer's responsibility in any way.

Using a seldom used abbreviation for a character's dialogue we haven't been intro'd to yet, is asking for trouble and confusion on the reader's part.  There's just no way around it.

My point for the initial reply was because Coop was asking for clarification, as he is a new writer who's trying to learn.  Obviously, anyone can write any way they choose to, but we need to be clear on what's proper screenwriting format, what isn't, and why.

Rules exist for numerous reasons.  The reason one should follow them is twofold - because it's expected and understood, and/or because it makes sense.  And really, many discussions and debates aren't really over "rules" per se, but what makes sense, what doesn't, and why.

It is the goal of every Spec screenwriter to write a script that is simple and enjoyable to read and easy to visualize.  If you can do that, you've already won half the battle.  The other half being a plot/story, and everything else that works for each individual reader...and I say "each individual reader" because we all know no one can please or satisfy everyone with plot, story, characters, and everything else that goes into a script.

Strong, effective writing is tough to discount or argue over...either it is, or it isn't.  Why make things more difficult on yourself?

Kev, I only just noticed you had a new one up! You shoulda emailed it to me bro!!

I'll give it a read in the next few days.

Due to the holidays and my sister been up here, my own new script has fallen to the wayside. Its been busy!

But things will be back to normal tomorrow - Saturday - and i can catch up on stuff.

I still my Xmas present to watch yet - the 12 disc Lord of the Rings extended edition!!!

Incidentally I've been watching the Scorcese doco about George. Its great from a Beatle nut POV but not sure why a well known film director did it. The clips and interviews are not 'movielike' in any way and its just like watching 'Anthology'...

Hey Stevie

12 discs? Man, that's a lot! What the heck is on those? Behind the scenes stuff?

Jeff

I made the best case I could in my previous post. I'll leave it there and let Coop choose his path. Doesn't matter to me whether OC or OS is used in that instance, but one of them must be. I want the reader to experience the scene that way because Marcus does, waking up. That's not just an issue of directing the camera, but if how the story itself plays. And there definitely is no clarity issue there. But thanks for making your case!

Off camera (O.C.) is used when a character speaks off camera in a television show.  Off screen (O.S.) is used for the same reason in a movie.  Both can be used in their appropriate mediums.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe Off camera (O.C.) is used when a character speaks off camera in a television show.  Off screen (O.S.) is used for the same reason in a movie.  Both can be used in their appropriate mediums.Phil

But neither should be used in a Spec script when the character is actually (and obviously) in the scene.

Thanks, Phil. I did not know. I will change it to O.S.

No problem.


Phil

Looks like I opened a can of worms with that question.

Thanks for all the input.

Steve

And finished.  Starting up on page 76.

At this point I'm really wondering if this phenomena is only happening in Boston.  As far as I remember, there's no mention of it happening anywhere else in the world.  Again, I'll reiterate that the stakes don't seem clear.  I'm not sure what's going to happen to humanity, or if we're all threatened or if it's only select people.  It seems like you'd want to create a sense of dread and panic in the streets by this point with people being taken over, but that never happened.

On 84, we get a first good look at the powers these predators have when Melissa stretches her neck and body parts.  Couldn't help thinking of Reed Richards there.   One problem with scripts like this is that you have to deal with the "invisible bad guy."  Until their tongue comes shooting out, they look just like us.  This concept works in something like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, because the stakes are established very quickly and soon its just these two humans running from a mob of pod people.  I don't think it works as well here where the "takeover" is just in its initial phase.

p 85 typo -  He shakes his leg fusiously.

"Straight jacket" should be strait jacket.

I know I'm getting a little redundant about the dialogue, but it really feels that the dialogue is the main mover of the plot.  Some expo dialogue is necessary in a script like this, but in carefully selected places.  Too many times here it runs on for pages.  James' dialogue on 90-91 is an example.

What exactly was the calamity that nearly wiped out the predators?  Is that referring to the same event event that killed the dinosaurs?  It would really help if you could put a name and face to this lost race.  Describe in detail who and what they were and do it visually.

The pub scene on 92 was a bit of a wtf moment for me.  The Boston area, quite possibly the world is being taken over by entities and suddenly it's Miller Time?  Felt like you really needed to crank up the momentum at this point, not slow it down.

You're riding the line between demonic possession and alien takeover here, but never commit to either.  At some points, you have priests chanting old spells that have an Exorcist-like effect and other times you have the predator-possessed people talking about how superior their race is.  I think it would work better if you chose one of those notions and stuck to it throughout the story.

I think the Kruger character is intro'd far too late.  He is an interesting character and I wish we saw more of him.  On the other hand, the script felt overpopulated by minor characters like Bonnie and David at times.

The jungle scene where Kara rescues Melissa sort of reminded me of Insidious where the dad has to go into the dreamscape to save his son.  The "demon reptile" I guess shows us the predator in its true form?  If that is the case, they just don't seem like the ultimate predator to me.  More like a dinosaur hybrid  that the earth shook off its surface eons ago.  For the story to work, we really have to believe that these entities had an intelligence and technology that would enable them to hang around in the spiritual plane for all this time.  I'm still not sure how they accomplished this.  

p 103  some kind of typo in this paragraph, as it sounds like there are two Melissas here:  "Melissa opens her eyes, finds herself standing with Melissa in an embrace, the others watching from the same positions we last saw them.

She gently pulls away just enough so she can look at Melissa's
face, just as Melissa opens her eyes."

typo on 103: Is it it over?

The reveal of Kruger didn't hit me too hard because as I mentioned I thought he was intro'd too late.  If he was there from the beginning, it would have had much more impact.

on 105, didn't get who Conner was referring to when he said "I will find her."

So, at the end, I'm left with a few questions.  What was the deal with the baby in the fridge?  I liked that visual, but I'm not sure how it fits into the story.  Why were these entities so focused on Kara?  What is it about her that makes her special?  Why exactly do these things tap on the window?

I think you need to clearly define the scope of the quickening.  Is this only happening in Boston?  The story you presented felt too small for the subject matter.  Really felt like it needed to be expanded.

In hindsight, I'm not sure if having Melissa possessed was a good idea.  She gets as much screen time and turns out to be a more interesting character than your lead Kara.  More stuff has to happen directly to Kara and she needs to become more active.  The story should revolve around her and why she is the key to the quickening.

But more than anything, I'd say that you need to define the predators more.  What they are, how they used to live and hunt, what caused them to physically leave the world, how they are able to remain in spirit form.  The central idea behind the script is intriguing, with the entities quietly guiding human history the way they want it to go.  But, it doesn't really seem like the most practical plan.  Waiting hundreds of thousands of years for apes to turn into humans so you can take over the bodies.  Why does the quickening happen now instead of much earlier, like as soon Cro-Magnons evolved?

And for a race of superior beings, they were defeated rather easily by this motley crew of humans.  After all that time waiting around and tapping at windows, seems like they would have had a grander plan for the big takeover.

So, I liked the idea behind this much more than the execution.  A superior race living right under our noses and outside our windows.  But I think you need to flesh out this idea and completely restructure the script for it to work.  Good luck on the rewrites.

Ryan

  

  

Hey Ryan

Thanks for taking all that time to raise the issues you found. Really appreciate it.

On my way to a basketball game, so I can't respond more at the moment. I will post answering some of these issues later. Up to you if you want to check back, obviously you've already gone above and beyond the call of duty in your remarks. I hope you check back because I think one of the interesting things I'd like to consider are some general issues in the realm of sci fi and horror. So while I'm sure you've just about had it with this script, you might be interested to pitch on a couple of these general things.

And anyone else who wants to discuss, especially those who like sci fi horror. We could even more that to a general thread, I suppose.

Off to the game! Later, and thanks/

Hey Kev,

I know I've read parts of this story in a different form.
Is this a new draft of that script I read a year ago?

Or does this one go in a completely different direction and should be treated as new?
I can't seem to locate the notes I posted on this a while back for some reason.

Regards,
E.D.

Hey Brett

I had that draft removed months ago. That was written when I new LESS than nothing about writing. Now I just know nothing!

I decided to rewrite Tap using the basic characters and plot, but more or less from scratch. However, once I began, I couldn't resist reusing certain scenes. That could have been part of what caused some problems, though I'm sure there's more to it.

This is about 80% new, I'd say. Up to you if you want to check it out. I would caution that I really did not bother with structure here. In fact, I had a structure sketched out, and I abandoned it. I was more concerned with creating trailer moments, to be honest.

Another problem was this: in looking at horror films, it seemed to me that there is a certain basic formula. The idea is to spend 3/4 of the film building questions with the audience, in a tense or spooky type setting of course. A lot is left to the imagination, and this part of the film, the build, is the best part.

The problem with the formula is that you finally have to tie it all together in a way that does not completely piss off the audience. I think audiences know that the ending explanation and resolution almost never lives up to the build. In fact, the better the build, the harder it is to do that. So you increase your chances of having a bad ending by having a good beginning.

I'm not saying that is the only or even primary issue with the script. I'm explaining the approach I took. I deliberately created loose ends and questions throughout the first half of the story. It's not that I didn't have answers to these things, it's just that I think it's the building of the questions that matters most. And when I finally do resolve them, I don't answer them all because there's exposition enough as is.

So this would be a tough one for you to get through; though I know you've managed to slog through worse, since you got through the original!! My aim was for low budget horror producers, who I hope will see a strong buildup with scary scenes and intriguing questions. Your highly esteemed opinion is welcome as always, but please don't feel obligated. I know this work would aggravate you. I do have another version of Messiah coming out soon that is quite different from the first, and much more important to me. I'd rather you poke through that one, but up to you. And no, it is not really a religious script, and I am actually atheist. I'm cool whatever you decide. Thanks!

Quoted from leitskev Hey Brett This is about 80% new, I'd say. Up to you if you want to check it out. I would caution that I really did not bother with structure here. In fact, I had a structure sketched out, and I abandoned it. I was more concerned with creating trailer moments, to be honest.

Hey Kev!

Oh, you're in my queue, rest assured.

I just wanted some context that might facilitate a more effective read.
And you just gave it to me, much appreciated!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from leitskev My aim was for low budget horror producers, who I hope will see a strong buildup with scary scenes and intriguing questions.

Kevin, in no way is this low budget.  Are you seriously thinking it is?

This is relatively low budget. Producers can be very creative when it comes to filming within a budget. Most of this script borders on no budget. Then, depending on what what budget is available, they decide what to do with the other scenes. Some limited CGI would be required, but CGI is not expensive anymore.

This is not as cheap as just shooting someone running through the woods for most of a film, but it's still low budget, IMO.

OK, bro, but I'm going to have to completely disagree with you.

You've got a multitude of unique settings.  You have a cast of well over 100, including lots of exact wardrobe requirements.  You have lots of police vehicles, firetrucks, and even military stuff, including a "shelling" of an institution.

Your CGI is fairly extensive as well, including kills, creatures, and most likely even sets.  Virtually all your kill scenes require quite a bit of both CG and practical effects.

To do this script the way it's written, you're talking about a bare minimum of $10 Million.  To do it "right", you're looking at over $20 Million, IMO.

That is far from low budget in my book.

Hey Kev,

Thought I'd crack this one open in lieu of that new Messiah draft you've got coming.
My recollection of the previous draft is pretty null.
I recall scenes at a coastal home, reminded me of Hull, MA.
Great view of Boston from the water's edge.

I'll take notes as I go and sum up when I stop.

Your opener felt like a hybridized Exorcist/2001 vibe.
Was the animal reactions and appearance of the city related?
I only ask because one happened at night, the other in day.

This dialogue on page three reads awkward to me:
Your mother doesn't remember what it's like to be a kid.

If it was prefaced with something like, "Why doesn't mommy believe me?"...
I could see that as a potential response.
As written, daddy comes off rather douchey, IMO.

Daddy's speech at the top of page four feels too overcomplicated for a six year old.
Strip mine that for the core concept and I think it will feel more plausible.

The schizophrenia exposition really stick out on page seven.
Seems an odd topic to jump to after poo pooing work chatter.

Page eight...Bonnie's reaction to the gale feels contrived to me.
She's been all slutty then immediate gets serious with Kara.
Perhaps teasing Kara with that exposition would make it more convincing.

Ouija scenes feel so execution dependent to me.
They read hokey, but occasionally look good on film. I'm skeptical.
I feel the whole apartment sequence is burying me in exposition.

And the final bit with the sweatshirt is the kicker.
Why not make that into a visual cue instead of five lines of dialogue?
Kara wigs out, then reveals she's wearing the NYU sweatshirt.
Something like that might help balance out the intense exposition.

Is Melissa a new character? I don't recall her in the previous draft.

Typo. Page Fourteen.
Melissa stairs fearfully at her window

A ten year old girl getting excited about a night light reads awkward.
Why would someone hide a gift under a bed not knowing if it would ever be found?

Stopping on page seventeen today.
The Skype set up didn't grab me, I'm not sure why.
Perhaps I would've felt more involved in the room with Melissa.

I guess I wish the scene didn't  automatically go to this formless scary thing.
Tend to prefer entities that charm/lure wee ones to danger.
Even better if the audience sees it on Skype before Kara does.

I know there's a better way to do that scene, just haven't figured it out yet.

I'll pick this up as work allows. Hope this helps.

Regards,
E.D.

Hey Brett

The opening two scenes are related to the premise. Normally I wouldn't reveal it since you are early in the read, but I don't think it will bother you to know. The entities that are the villains here are the disembodied spirits of a species that died long ago. They have long sought a way back into the world, and they see in man's ancestors that chance. They learn to torment and influence man, spooking him from his forest lair, and their ability to influence man grows over time. Eventually some of them are able to possess, and they guide men to build civilizations, and eventually the science and technology needed to bring their kind back. The Exorcist feeling is understandable, but really pretty different. It would be more closely akin to 2001 Space Odyssey. I have not scene the more recent Exorcist, was that 2001?

I don't think I would want to preface the conversation with her father in that way. The mother has strict rules: no lights. She forgets how kids are afraid of monsters in the closet and under the bed. Her father understands these things. I don't at all get the father as being douchey either, and that is definitely the opposite reaction to anyone who has read this, even those that in general don't like the script. To most people the father simply comes across as gentle and understanding.

You are spot on about the exposition in the apartment scene. Some I had to find a way to get in. In fact, the part about the schizophrenia was inserted after the scene was written.

The nightlight is not too hard to understand, IMO. Kara had had similar problems when she was little. She knows her mother's rule about lights out. She leaves the gift under the mattress knowing that if the situation requires, she can give her sister some comfort with this over the phone.

The Skype scene is another one that has generally worked well with other readers. Many of us can identify with the helplessness of watching something threaten a loved one and not be able to do anything about it. Nothing wrong with entities that charm or lure, but that's a different story, at least at this point.

My starting point for this story was to try to capitalize on a basic fear, something we all can identify with. Monsters in closets have been done. Many people can identify with being a kid and seeing shadows of trees on the wall, fearing imaginary things at the window. And even those that can't might identify with the notion of something looking in on them through the window, pretty creepy. It also plays from the possession angle, where you have entities looking enviously from the outside of this world trying to get in.

Thanks for picking it up, like I said, no hurry or urgency with this. This was the first thing I've put together that made little effort at character arcs or anything like that. I just wanted to string together trailer scenes.

Quoted from leitskev Hey Brett The Skype scene is another one that has generally worked well with other readers. Many of us can identify with the helplessness of watching something threaten a loved one and not be able to do anything about it. Nothing wrong with entities that charm or lure, but that's a different story, at least at this point.

Hey Kev,

I hear ya, pal. And those words sound....sound.
But, my mind went to those cheesetastic Japanese school girl horror shows.
Z grade Ringu tpye stuff with mini skirts, knee high socks and lots of screaming.

I found the scene irksome, I wanted to be there with the girl.
Guess I've seen too many "watch someone get killed on internets" horror clones.

I'll pick this up in a few days, work's being annoying.

Regards,
E.D.

I haven't seen any of these films. Man, you manage to see all kinds of films. One thing that has good about SS is that I have been able to get opinion from both sides of the spectrum, and you need both. On the one hand, I have intelligent people like you who are immersed in film theory and have seen a ton of films. But sometimes that can handicap your ability to evaluate as well. Everything you watch tends to feel like something you've seen before. You tend to view everything through that type of lens.

It has also helped me to find people here who are kind of new writers, who love movies, but have not read script books are seen an exotic range of movies. If you can find someone like that whom is intelligent and honest, it's extremely valuable, because they are not seeing the script through the prism of theory or of past films. They simply react to what works and doesn't in the film.

It's really good to be able to get both, like I said. And I've been very lucky in that regard recently. It's given me a wealth of insight as well. The learning curve must still be steep, because I learn something everyday! Sometimes I feel I am learning different lessons than everyone else, or drawing different conclusions, but learning is learning.

Annoyed at work? I know what you need: an OWC! Always breaks the monotony.

I'm currently reading a book called Prey by Graham Masterton.

It's kind of an "update" of H. P. Lovecraft's Dreams of Witch House (which has been made into films several times).

Basically about an Evil Witch with a familiar who is a rat with a human face and hands. It's got a nice time paradox thing going on as well.

The reason I mention it, is because it has a similar type story in the background...the witch is from an old race of beings that used to have a civilization in pre-historic times (in the book, they prefer sulphurous fumes to clean air) and she's trying to restore them to power in the Age of Renewal.

It's a good book, considered amongst the better horror books according to online polls.

I mention it because I thought there might be something to gleam from it in terms of getting info. across more effectively.

It's very much as you discussed on this thread...starts of building suspense with starnge goings on and a creepy atmosphere, then starts wracheting up the action and stakes (and the absurdity a little bit as well tbh...but I'm thoroughly enjoying it despite that).

Sounds like a unique story. Definitely much easier to get across the expostion you need in a novel. One of the questions I faced is obviously what to include and what to leave to the imagination. Ryan, for example, in his review, called for more info on the entities, what cause their demise, and so forth. But that would be yet more exposition.

Some people have disliked the opening scenes because they think it's derivative of The Exorcist. But actually it's employing 'show it don't say it', though that has to be explained still later. I wanted to show that these things have influenced us since before our final evolutionary state, and then continuing into the rise of our civilization. When you read those scenes, you don't know what they're about right away, but you do know the evil that will be seen in this story is ancient, as its relationship with us.

I recently posted in another thread that what a story is about should be established early. But in many ways I took the opposite approach here. My thinking was the horror, classic horror, is often just kind of a cheap trick formula. The idea is that you spend at least half the film just creating questions and leaving much to the imagination. You catch glimpses of something, but that's it. At some point before the end you have to tie it all together, and usually that ends up being a disappointment.

I'd be curious to see if they adapt that story to a script, and what they do with it.

Hey Kevin,

Read your script.  I liked the concept behind it and I think your writing is mostly good but I think it needs a bit of work story-wise.

First off, your opening image is lovely.  But I'm not sure at this point if I'm going to watch a movie about a disease or not.   I need to be clear about what I'm going to read on the first page.  I'm not in this script.  Plus sabre tooth tigers only lived at the very beginnings of primitive man – there were no Bedouins.

Then you start with the story – child Kara afraid – good stuff -  make it a bit creepier and then this bit should start your script.

Just as a side note: you really don't need the underlines and they frustrate me because I wonder why you considered these thing important.  So it takes me out of the story.

There must be an explanation – to me that's the most important.

Kara, I'm assuming is your protag – correct?   Not Marcus who is almost equal to her in terms of story?  Are they sharing the protag role?   The reason I'm asking is because I think Marcus is a stronger character than Kara.  Marcus undergoes many trials during this script – which he overcomes.  

Kara does not. She should be trying to find an explanation – because there must be one – instead she turns to a priest pretty much right away having given up so very quickly at finding a logical reason (she really doesn't try at all).   I also never felt she went through any change, nor did I feel she was ever in danger.   Both of these last two things  are so important.  

There are so many heros in this story.  Connor, who I dug as a character, has his moments and that's a shame because they could be possibilities for Kara's investigation.  All that backstory for Marcus could be showing us why Kara's Mom is so weird and why they have such a strange relationship.  

And these creatures, for creatures who are subverting man they do such strange things.  Like what was the point of the baby in Kara's fridge – they are supposed to be getting her help, not grossing her out.   It doesn't make sense from a character point of view for a baby to be there.

My suggestion, and you're definitely not going to like it, is to write Marcus out of this script.  Give his backstory moments to Kara and give Kara some action scenes too.  Put her in danger and up the stakes more than you are right now.   Then you'll have a good story to go along with a great concept.  

Hope this helps.

Michael  

Hey Michael

Great comments and an interesting suggestion.

Rick pointed out that there were no sabre tooths in Africa. What I need is an animal that places the time period for the viewer. Something we recognize but that's now extinct. And there is a time leap involved between the two scenes. The idea was to show the entities are haunting the ancesters of mankind, driving him. The bedouin scene is actually modern day. Maybe a super at that point would help, but that could get tricky because then the child Kara scene is in the recent past.

My underlining approach is still under development, but I don't so much use it for emphasis of importantt points as for areas I am afraid the reader will skim and miss.

In my original go at this script, right before I joined SS and knew even a little about this field, Marcus has an insecruity and identity issue that the entities try to exploit. It's hinted at here when he first meets James and James is eating in oreo cookie. As an overweight and scholarly kid, Marcus was teased pretty heavily by other black kids growing up. He had one friend, who died. So Marcus lives in terror that other blacks do not accept him as black. He has a sense of not belonging anywhere. The entities use a combination of terror and seduction to try to coopt him.

Which is kind of the entities approach in general, which I agree is not clear. They are trying to use mankind, in particular these two young scientists, but their nature as predators is also to create terror in their prey, and thet can't really help themselves in that regard. Also, they are entities, plural, individual beings who have independent action, though there is a master and a master plan they are trying to coalesce around.

Good suggestions. Not sure what I'll do with this. It might have been a mistake to try to ressurect something that was written at a very early stage of my writting, something I began before I had any feedback on any of my work. Still learned much for the responses which can hopefully help in future efforts in general. Many thanks!

Quoted from leitskev Sounds like a unique story. Definitely much easier to get across the expostion you need in a novel. One of the questions I faced is obviously what to include and what to leave to the imagination. Ryan, for example, in his review, called for more info on the entities, what cause their demise, and so forth. But that would be yet more exposition. Some people have disliked the opening scenes because they think it's derivative of The Exorcist. But actually it's employing 'show it don't say it', though that has to be explained still later. I wanted to show that these things have influenced us since before our final evolutionary state, and then continuing into the rise of our civilization. When you read those scenes, you don't know what they're about right away, but you do know the evil that will be seen in this story is ancient, as its relationship with us. I recently posted in another thread that what a story is about should be established early. But in many ways I took the opposite approach here. My thinking was the horror, classic horror, is often just kind of a cheap trick formula. The idea is that you spend at least half the film just creating questions and leaving much to the imagination. You catch glimpses of something, but that's it. At some point before the end you have to tie it all together, and usually that ends up being a disappointment. I'd be curious to see if they adapt that story to a script, and what they do with it.

As we've discussed before...sometimes exposition is unavoidable. If you have weird goings on, most people want someone to explain the situation. European and Asian filmmakers tend to leave a lot more to the imagination, or leave clues that you are expected to find for yourself....but 30% of the audience at least seem to complain that they don't get it if IMDb is anything to go by.

The trick is to make it enjoyable, or disguise it in a moment of tension.

I like this script, and I think it has potential, just don't think you've quite worked out what you want it to be just yet.

There's a couple of things innate to the story that make it hard to write.

1. As Michael mentioned the lack of a clear protagonist. One clear POV where we are discovering the story through them would help to clarify things...they become the audiences eyes. Choose Kara or Marcus.

2. You've got bad guys who are both fierce predators and spiritual..this creates a kind of dichotomy where it's hard to understand what they are without being told. I like this aspect of the script, but it makes it challenging.

3. You're delving into wider areas of research than the expertise of your main characters. The logline suggests they are geneticists of some kind...the natural way they would stumble on the "conspiracy" would be through research of that kind...finding some kind of strange gene or whatver. Your opening shots deal with archeology, paleontology, anthropology etc.

I think you'll have to take people by the hand a little more to make them understand what's going on, patticularly with the Arabic part.

I would either streamline the story so that one discipline is the road into the crisis, or change the nature of the research...maybe have them as part of a Human Project...a cross discipline group studying human history so that minor characters can reveal other hidden truths to the mian characetrs as she's researching.

I had labeled this as sci fi/horror, and that could be another problem, trying to be both. I think people expect exposition in sci fi more. Does that make sense? Sci fi audiences are really looking for the explanation. They are used to world building and complex plots, and those have to be explained.

Horror is more about gut feeling. I kind of didn't choose a direction with this, so had too much exposition for horror, not enough for sci fi.

Of course there are films where the two are successfully combined, Alien being the most prominent. But those films are rare, probably. The Thing, if I remember, is really just horror. There isn't a lot of expo about what it is or what it wants. Alien is perfectly crafted. You really don't need the exposition to understand that this is a parasitic creature that uses species unknown to itself to propagate. I think if you examine that premise too closely, it actually doesn't make sense, but for the story it works very well.

The entities in Tap were fierce predators when in the physical world. As hunters, they learned to put themselves in the minds of their prey. This idea is not accepted by modern science, but native peoples would have understood it without question. So there is a psychic aspect to the creatures before they are even extinct. And as is the case with predators, they evolve to take pleasure in the terror they arouse in their victims. Like a cat playing with a mouse it has no intention of eating. It's logical for animals to evolve this way, just like it's logical for animals to evolve with a pleasure associated with sex. The pleasure encourages the activity.

The idea behind their spiritual existence is that consciousness is not dependent on physical form...but it is more difficult without it. The individual consciousnesses of these things has to reorganize itself over time, vast time. Some of them are stronger and more intelligent than others. Those are the ones that learn to possess a human body.

One among them is most intelligent. This one had foreseen the disaster that was to wipe their kind out. He had readied his mind so that it could reorganize quicker after the disaster. And he began to guide primitive humans. As other entities regained a level of consciousness, they were coordinated into the plan. But they still retain the urge to hunt and terrorize, which is a fundamental part of their nature.

What they need from Kara and Marcus is for them to either willingly cooperate with the entities and continue the research, or to surrender and allow themselves to be possessed. Cooperation is what they really need, though, because they need active participation of their minds, especially Marcus, who is the genius behind the research.

What I tried to make clear at the end was that Kruger is the master entity behind it all, and all of this had gone basically according to his plan. The end result is a frightened Marcus working for him and dependent on him for protection, unaware of his true nature.

I had a different story mapped out than the one I wrote. I started really thinking I needed to string together scary scenes, even cheesy scenes, as long as they were somewhat scary in film. Everything else started taking a backseat to that, including character development. I still think that's the way to go, though perhaps I failed with these scenes. I enjoy reading how intelligent people break down horror films, and I prefer thoughtful films myself, but it seems to me that most horror follows a different formula. Maybe I'll hit it right on a future script!

The script I'll be posting soon definitely focuses on the protag, uses a recognizable structure, but is not horror. Probably won't be received well, but I worked a ton harder on that than anything else I've done.

I'm really very impressed with the central idea...it seems a lot stronger than it first appeared to me now that you've explained it.

It's too bad that the central idea has to be explained by the writer.

And, I don't mean that in an ill spirited way, either.  But it is what it is.

I just don't know how to get that expostion in.

If you got to the scene where the science is explained about how they plan to reintroduce old species, believe it or not, that's not something I invented. Not exactly. Ervin Lazlo has a theory on what he calls the Akashic Field in which he explains how the universe retains a memory of all things, and that this is what cells use to direct their growth. The science comes from that.

I tried to get it down the bare minimum explanation. Also, I tried to incorporate some other things to make the scene feel less expository. I figured showing the cells multiplying on the screen would serve the show it don't say it principle. That's where the campy little creature came from too. I put James and Melissa in the scene to try to create some conflict. When James throws Marcus out of the lab, the entities now know Marcus will not cooperate willingly, and they try to take it up a notch.

It all comes back to the problem of expostion though. I'm not sure how to solve it for a story like this.

As for the problem of too much dialogue, I know I don't always see it the same as everyone here. Maybe I'll come around eventually. It is an issue somewhat here because the character development is not strong. This is probably not a story where you'd want to watch too much character discussion.

But I actually like films with a lot of dialogue, as long as the dialogue interests me. Those, in fact, are the films I watch over and over. Goodfellas, A Few Good Men, and now maybe The King's Speech. Hell, even Caddyshack! Watching great actors with great lines is much more interesting to me than a car chase. I am definitely learning to appreciate more and more the role of conflict in those scenes. I do feel there are some writers that have a low word threshold. These see a certain ratio of dialogue in a script and alarms go off. Not saying that's bad or they're wrong. I just feel like most films I see have quite a bit of dialogue, but I guess I don't see nearly enough. I would hate to conclude that the only way I can solve the exposition problem in general is to not write scripts with complexity. There's only so much you can show in a script.

Thanks, Rick. If you think of any suggesitons on approaching this plot where I can handle the expo better, I'm all ears. Who knows, if I hear something convincing, I might just start over from scratch again!

Jeff, just saw your post after I hit send.

Maybe you can see from the writer's explanation the nature of the problem. Some things are left unclear in the story, but for me to make them clear will almost certainly require more exposition. And already I seem to have gone well past most people's tolerance for expo. I had the mechanics of the premise regarding the entities worked out within about an hour of first thinking about the story way back last Jan. The challenge has been to try to figure out how to convey in an interesting way using limited exposition.

There's a movie with Richard Gere about Mothman. Surprisngly, it's actually not bad. There's quite a bit of exposition in it, and even still, they leave the question about what the things are largely unanswered. I don't know what you think of that film.

I thought Mothman Prophecies was a decent film...better than I anticipated, based on the negative feedback (not horrible by any means) and low BO returns (although $56 Million WW, vs. a $32 Million budget), which is far from poor.

The thing is it was a Richard Gere movie with some other decent star power, about a subject that should have done much better, at least IMO.

But again, a decent movie is not saying much when you've got a good budget, good star power, and  good subject matter.  It should have been much better.

IMO, the problem(s) with your script are not exposition or excessive dialogue.  If you read my 21 pages of notes, you'd know that.

Hey Kev,

I'm picking this up today. Been a whirlwind week.
But New England has a lot to celebrate, so it's all good.

P. 18  Kara challenging the window came off as hokey to me.
         But I'm not a fan of look at the browser window horror scenarios.

P. 18  BLACK TEENS clowns. Singular form on that verb.

P. 20  in the cars like a slow real of film. "Real" should be, "reel".

P. 21  Overall, it's been a slow read, and I think this is partly to blame...
         The train deposits the HEADLESS BODY...
         Static descriptions of key action are not engaging me.
         An inncoent boy gets mowed down by a train, that's pretty dramatic, IMO.
         Why not focus on that intense action with some power words?
         "Depositing" sounds so clinical, nothing visceral about it.

P. 22  Intercutting Kara and Marcus during the train ride could heighten tension.
         Felt weird to not show her struggling over his sister at the same time.
         Would give s sense the incidents are connected too.

P. 27  Again I think intercuts would benefit this exposition.
         Why not have these plot points unfold while Kara and Marcus struggle?
         I think the reader would benefit from the connections made that way.

P. 28  When Kara suggests they stop meddling with things, I have no opinion.
         Because I don't know what they've been doing.
         Hard to get invested in that discussion when I don't have a frame of reference.

P. 29  James smiles knowlingly at him. Typo. "Knowingly".

Stopping at page thirty-six this morning.
I really do believe you can create some urgency with intercuts.

Regards,
E.D.

Hmm, intercuts. Never really think to us them. Thanks, will consider it for this or the next script.

Is there a reason why this won't open?

My bad, it has opened since my last post!

Nothing happened on my end where it shouldn't open, but that seems to happen sometimes on Dropbox for some reason.

Okay I've read it.

First off the bat bravo, it had this eerie kind of nightmarish feel that some of the best horrors, for me personally have - there aren't many movies that seep in and unsettle me, most perhaps shock me with the odd "JUMP" scene. But I feel this would probably do that if ever filmed.  Other examples of this are Salem's Lot - it has such a nightmareish feel to it as the events close in on the characters and also, strange choice but an old movie Tales From The Crypt: Demon Knight, I think that's correct. I was about 14 when I watched it, but something about it unsettled me in the nightmare-esque way I mentioned earlier.

I can see how people dislike the death of Daniel, it really pushes the barriers (and again with the death of Mrs. Coughlin). Now the seasoned horror fan maybe fine with that, I'd still continue to watch although I would of course be shocked by it. However I know a lot of people who would lost interest or perhaps switch channels, if it were on TV, as it might be a bit too much. Fictional stories are an escape from reality, and while it keeps the reader on the edge of their seat when characters are in danger, the slaughter of extreme innocents - such as children tends to push you right off of that seat and onto the floor - painfully. But still as I say, the seasoned horror vet or moviegoer would probably dig the controversy.

A lot of characters too, it was late when I read it so I was a bit tired but this scene suddenly appeared with David and a guardsman who fired something at the hospital? What was all this about??

I felt the ending was slightly abrupt, but it wrapped up nicely and likeable characters survived, which is always refreshing.

All in all a good piece, and who knows with rewrites and revisions it maybe picked up by someone - if it hasn't already?


EDIT: Reading above, quick note - don't replace Marcus, good character - likeable, non-hollywood action hero-esque lead works well.

Thanks Goose, appreciate the read.

The Guardsmen scene was about creating a diversion. They fired the smoke bombs onto the roof so that the fire trucks would be admitted when they showed up at the gate.

It hasn't been picked up or shopped, but I did consult with someone who has produced/directed a few films, including horror. He believes it has potential, had some suggestions for reworking it. Need to get the cost of some of the scenes down, too. He liked the first half, but felt the second half seemed like a different story, or had a different feel to it. Maybe I can fix it up. Thanks for reading!

Yeah, I think I'd touch only lightly on bringing back these creatures in the story and fully concentrate on the predator creautres.

Hey Kev,

Last week was a bit of a jumble around here.
So, I'll pick this up on page thirty-six...

P. 39
Kara's line.
I don't have one. But whatever it is,
I'm not sittin' around waiting for what
it'll do next. It's time to hit back.

I didn't buy this for a second.
This kind of bravura belongs in an action film.
Feels as artificial as James talking about Marcus's destiny like a common fact.
The baby is more shocking mystery than a call to arms, IMO.

P. 40
Typo.
stands a several inches taller than Melissa.

P. 42
The dialogue borders on mustache curling evil at times, IMO.

We ruled this world, predators like no
other. We WILL rule it again.

It reeks of caricature. An ancient supernatural predator terrorizing children.
What's the point? That's a thrilling hunt? Doesn't sound formidable to me.

P. 44
Aw, not into French kissing yet?
See page forty-two notes. This is mega left field.
I'm really struggling to find a foothold in this world.
Abrupt tonal shifts coupled with devil may care exploitative violence. Not for me.
I don't buy into it when the first forty pages painted a less cartoonish picture.

P. 46
Going from child murder to the heartwarming church retard is too much for me.
I'm sure his weak mind will be exploited soon too.
For me, that would be like watching Sean Penn in "I Am Sam" go all pea soup.
Now that could be funny, but I know that's not the tone you're after.

These elements aren't gelling for me.
Sorry, but I don't think I have anything else constructive to offer this draft.

I maintain this script has the same problem that I have with Messiah...

You've created an intriguing world...
But I don't think you're telling the most interesting story you can in that world.

I feel like you're still circling that crackling narrative that will sizzle the page.
And I feel more of the same with this story, but the tone's a jumble here, IMO.

I've gone through that with Clone Wife to varying degrees.
And I'm still refining the most captivating tale that I can tell there too.

Best of luck with this. I hope the fractured notes have some value to you.

Regards,
E.D.