Hey Michael --

You're obviously very passionate abot this script and I respect your choices. Just so we're clear, I was not implying I was right and you were wrong. Just giving my honest opinion.

Even though it's in the horror section, I never considered it as such. There's enough blood and gore to argue it is I guess. Just felt more like a thriller to me. Don't remember any jump scares or really creepy stuff? Though, again, I'm not going to argue with you. It's your script. You know it way better than me.

Quoted from rolo Hey Michael -- You're obviously very passionate abot this script and I respect your choices. Just so we're clear, I was not implying I was right and you were wrong. Just giving my honest opinion. Even though it's in the horror section, I never considered it as such. There's enough blood and gore to argue it is I guess. Just felt more like a thriller to me. Don't remember any jump scares or really creepy stuff? Though, again, I'm not going to argue with you. It's your script. You know it way better than me.

All good, man, I was just providing a counterpoint to your opinion on some of the aspects you weren't high on. Most of what you commented on were specific choices I made that I have thought out and about considerably, knowing the risks of making those choices. In the very first draft, I was considering having Newton help Stella but it just felt too easy. And it's done so much in horror films that it's practically a trope. Just my opinion. And, with flashback, opinions vary. Same with voice over and a whole bunch of other shit. I've read scripts where flashbacks were very distracting -- it'll start with a flashback and then jump forward and then go back to a flashback and continue from there. And then there'll be a flashback within a flashback and it gets very confusing. But, it's also been VERY effective in movies (Godfather II, which was a prequel and sequel at the same time, Kill Bill, Unbreakable & Signs, Eternal Sunshine, Usual Suspects, Citizen Kane, etc) -- some, yeah, it does stop momentum, even in those films I've mentioned. But they're always placed at the right time -- either when there's a revelation and/or when the momentum of a scene is brought to a stop (via being knocked unconscious, character getting killed, when a character goes to sleep, etc). Or at a key emotional  and/or revelatory moments (when a character remembers something that relates to the current scene). Overall, I think the use of flashbacks as a feaux pas is another myth created by screenwriters, just like the title page myth (using different fonts), the voice over myth, etc. Just like anything in a script, they can be well done or executed poorly. Maybe I executed my flashbacks poorly, maybe I didn't, but I'm pretty sure it didn't fuck up the pacing THAT much, if at all. I just think that there's a preconceived notion with flashbacks and if there's more than one, a lot of people will automatically dismiss the flashback as something that fucks with the pacing and isn't necessary, regardless of how the flashback plays out. Especially with other writers, they just see a flashback and point at it and say "You can't do that!" It's not just being passionate about THIS script in particular, it's something I feel strongly about when I see writers critiquing other scripts.

The only thing I really thought you were "wrong" about was producers being turned off by a 15 year old getting chainsawed in a horror movie. There's plenty of good points here (telegraphing Buford's reveal in that conversation with his son is a BIG one).

RE: This being a horror film vs thriller. It's a very thin line and you can probably say most horror movies ARE thrillers. Especially if you're flipping through Netflix, Hulu, etc, you see a lot of horror films in their thriller section. I think the gore alone makes it horror film, especially the gore in the opening scene.

Thanks again for checking it out, man.

-- Michael

Quoted Text Some readers prefer no flashbacks at all -- many, just because they've heard other people say flashbacks are a no-no and believe that any flashbacks whatsoever show weakness in storytelling, which I think is absolute horseshit.

My experience is that they are part of the triumphant:

FLASHBACKS
VOICE OVERS
NARRATOR

On this and other sites I have seen - don't use (any of the above) and I have never understood why any of them are frowned upon as I have seen tons of movies where they were used quite effectively.

Quoted from eldave1 My experience is that they are part of the triumphant: FLASHBACKS VOICE OVERS NARRATOR On this and other sites I have seen - don't use (any of the above) and I have never understood why any of them are frowned upon as I have seen tons of movies where they were used quite effectively.

Ain't that the truth.
Ridiculous.

Quoted from eldave1 My experience is that they are part of the triumphant: FLASHBACKS VOICE OVERS NARRATOR On this and other sites I have seen - don't use (any of the above) and I have never understood why any of them are frowned upon as I have seen tons of movies where they were used quite effectively.

Yeah, stuff like that just really gets my goat (I sound like my grandfather).

Didn't mean to sound aggressive at all when responding to Rolo's comments -- he had really great points in regards to the script. It's just whenever I see these screenwriting myths come up, I kinda just lose my shit a little bit lol. The title page thing (you can only use 12 point courier) is one that pisses me off immensely. The flashback and the voice over myths are another one. Then there's things that newer screenwriters learn and regurgitate. And when they see it done differently in a script, they immediately think it's wrong because they don't know any better. But they think they do. For instance, on Script Mother, I had someone tell me that it's a rule that description must always be Character Name (age, description). I added more description through the character's action after that -- and he told me I was dead wrong. Everything has to be inside the parentheses. Not sure where the fuck he got that one from. But it IS extremely annoying. The rest of the review was littered with stupid fucking things he learned from someone else who claimed the "rule" as gospel.

Now, this isn't a shot at Rolo, I thought his comments were well thought out and definitely worth considering even though there were points I disagreed with. These are just my general thoughts and overall opinion on the subject of flashbacks: Most other writers on sites like these that comment on flashbacks can never articulate why it doesn't work. They usually just say "It messes with the pacing" or "it takes us out of the story", which to me sounds like they're just repeating something they heard from someone else about flashbacks. They can never explain HOW it messes with the pacing or takes us out of the story. The critiques on flashbacks are generally pretty general and vague.

Rolo at least had a well thought out opinion beyond that, though it's one I disagreed with based on this: Yes, often times flashbacks can be very distracting in some scripts -- usually, those same scripts are pretty poorly thought out and poorly written. And yes, I'll read a poorly written script where the flashback has no purpose and doesn't provide any new information, emotional impact or relate to anything in the scene -- which would make it unnecessary. But, if they do include those things I just mentioned and are placed properly (during a beat in the action/story or at a key moment where the flashback provides new information), I think flashbacks can be extremely effective. And, if they're effective and have an impact on the story or how we got to that current point in the story, they're necessary in the script IMO. If it were filmed, I don't think they'd be able to cut that scene out of the film. Also, just my opinion. And, of course, I'm biased lol.

But, yeah, just the mention of flashbacks, voice overs and title pages riles me up and makes me have flashbacks of my own lol. Maybe I'll write a blog about it, but there are so many screenwriter myth blogs out there already debunking these myths, you'd think they wouldn't be myths anymore.

-- Michael

Quoted from spesh2k Yeah, stuff like that just really gets my goat (I sound like my grandfather). Didn't mean to sound aggressive at all when responding to Rolo's comments -- he had really great points in regards to the script. It's just whenever I see these screenwriting myths come up, I kinda just lose my shit a little bit lol. The title page thing (you can only use 12 point courier) is one that pisses me off immensely. The flashback and the voice over myths are another one. Then there's things that newer screenwriters learn and regurgitate. And when they see it done differently in a script, they immediately think it's wrong because they don't know any better. But they think they do. For instance, on Script Mother, I had someone tell me that it's a rule that description must always be Character Name (age, description). I added more description through the character's action after that -- and he told me I was dead wrong. Everything has to be inside the parentheses. Not sure where the fuck he got that one from. But it IS extremely annoying. The rest of the review was littered with stupid fucking things he learned from someone else who claimed the "rule" as gospel. Now, this isn't a shot at Rolo, I thought his comments were well thought out and definitely worth considering even though there were points I disagreed with. These are just my general thoughts and overall opinion on the subject of flashbacks: Most other writers on sites like these that comment on flashbacks can never articulate why it doesn't work. They usually just say "It messes with the pacing" or "it takes us out of the story", which to me sounds like they're just repeating something they heard from someone else about flashbacks. They can never explain HOW it messes with the pacing or takes us out of the story. The critiques on flashbacks are generally pretty general and vague. Rolo at least had a well thought out opinion beyond that, though it's one I disagreed with based on this: Yes, often times flashbacks can be very distracting in some scripts -- usually, those same scripts are pretty poorly thought out and poorly written. And yes, I'll read a poorly written script where the flashback has no purpose and doesn't provide any new information, emotional impact or relate to anything in the scene -- which would make it unnecessary. But, if they do include those things I just mentioned and are placed properly (during a beat in the action/story or at a key moment where the flashback provides new information), I think flashbacks can be extremely effective. And, if they're effective and have an impact on the story or how we got to that current point in the story, they're necessary in the script IMO. If it were filmed, I don't think they'd be able to cut that scene out of the film. Also, just my opinion. And, of course, I'm biased lol. But, yeah, just the mention of flashbacks, voice overs and title pages riles me up and makes me have flashbacks of my own lol. Maybe I'll write a blog about it, but there are so many screenwriter myth blogs out there already debunking these myths, you'd think they wouldn't be myths anymore. -- Michael

Funny - I got into a title page debate with someone the other day. He of the no change in font or size ilk. Told him to wait a few years and it will be standard practice to put the effing poster on the title page

Shout to Libby for the awesome front page write-up! If I sell it, I owe you and Don 10%

https://www.simplyscripts.com/.....y-michael-j-kospiah/

Also, keep an eye out on Script Shadow -- I probably won't win that Greatest Screenplay competition over there, but hopefully just being in the final 44 gives the script more exposure!

-- Michael

Quoted from spesh2k Shout to Libby for the awesome front page write-up! If I sell it, I owe you and Don 10% https://www.simplyscripts.com/.....y-michael-j-kospiah/ Also, keep an eye out on Script Shadow -- I probably won't win that Greatest Screenplay competition over there, but hopefully just being in the final 44 gives the script more exposure! -- Michael

Jesus Christ that was a good write-up!!!!!

Libby ought to be in the treatment business.  I'd pay her.

Good luck on the Script Shadow wing-ding - rooting for ya.

Quoted from eldave1 Jesus Christ that was a good write-up!!!!! Libby ought to be in the treatment business.  I'd pay her. Good luck on the Script Shadow wing-ding - rooting for ya.

I know, right? Much better than my one-pager. Might actually make changes to the one pager using some of this... without sounding like I'm self-celebratory lol, complimenting my own script.

Quoted from spesh2k I know, right? Much better than my one-pager. Might actually make changes to the one pager using some of this... without sounding like I'm self-celebratory lol, complimenting my own script.

Hey - use every arrow in the quiver.

Thanks, guys. So happy you like the review, Michael. It's a terrific script and I wanna know when it gets bites!

P.S. I like that saying, Dave. Not sure I've heard that one before.

Quoted from LC Thanks, guys. So happy you like the review, Michael. It's a terrific script and I wanna know when it gets bites! P.S. I like that saying, Dave. Not sure I've heard that one before.

my pleasure - a terrific job by you

Quoted from LC Thanks, guys. So happy you like the review, Michael. It's a terrific script and I wanna know when it gets bites! P.S. I like that saying, Dave. Not sure I've heard that one before.

Thanks again, Libby! I loved your use of restaurant lingo in the review! I'll definitely be bragging shamelessly if/and/or when it gets some bites. Seeing this up really made my day!

-- Michael

Giving this a bump because it seems to be a topic of discussion on Script Shadow. For some reason, I'm unable to say my peace about my own script on the message board, it only let me post like 2 comments while the rest have been pending for about 4 hours now.

I do disagree with Carson, obviously, but he does have a point about the script going off into slasher territory after page 25. For some reason, I have a feeling that if he saw a movie version, he'd change his mind -- he seemed to enjoy similar films like "You're Next" and "Becky" which had pretty similar tones and pacing. But I could be wrong. Kinda sucks I can't really comment on anything on Script Shadow's sight (Disquis fucking sucks).

http://scriptshadow.net/why-do-scripts-fall-apart/

-- Michael

I haven't read the article yet. We had a fire at work today. Came close to burning down the building!!!!  Anyway, I think Carson isn't a real fan of slasher type scripts, but I could be wrong. I check his blog every day, but only read if I find it interesting. I agree with Disqus though. That's why I can't comment on anything there anymore. Why don't you give us your input here?