All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Michael, overall your writing is just stellar. Just perfect in terms of clarity, space and style. A breeze of a read.
There is a ton to like about this script. I didn’t spend the time commenting on all the things that I thought were great to keep that in mind is you read the comments on things I thought need reconsidering. This was a really, really solid effort.
Anyway:
OPENING SCENE
Pretty much perfect. Riveting stuff. I had two nit issues:
Pg. 2 Frightened, she slowly looks up at him. This seemed a little unnatural to me – he just banged the table, startling her. She would already be heads up and in a defensive posture.
Pg 4. OSCAR You want that knife, don’t you?
A little OTN for me and I don’t think you need it. I’d just delete the line.
IN THE HOUSE THE NEXT MORNING.
99% of folks are probably going to love the Oscar is not quite dead bit. I’m not one of them. I’ve just scene this so many times that it’s lost impact. For me, you can keep on the nudging of the body stuff, I just don’t care for the miracle he’s alive! Again – I’m probably in the minority here.
WE MEET MALTIDA
Liked most of the scene. But this string of dialogue:
MATILDA I should call the police.
Dejected, Stella just shakes her head. STELLA He is the police.
MATILDA I could call my Dad. I know for a fact he can’t stand Oscar.
STELLA I can’t make you do that.
Did not ring true to me from Stella’s end. It sounded exactly like the chat that we would have before Stella killed him. Not the one they would have after. Maltilda’s lines are fine because she doesn’t know. But Stella’s seem off somehow. I know that the intent here is that Stella is not going to reveal what she did. But I think you can achieve the same goal with just a little misdirection. Just as an example:
MATILDA I should call the police.
STELLA It’s too late…He’s gone.
MATILDA I could call my Dad. I know for a fact he can’t stand Oscar.
STELLA I don’t need you to do that. Please.
Or something like that – just something to indicate that Stella is wrestling with this inquiry from Matilda because, unlike Matilda, she knows there is a dead dude on her floor.
I also thought it might be a nice touch if there was a speck of blood on her shoe from when he nudged Oscar and Matilda noticed that – Stella had to explain it away.
WE MEET THE BLUMPKINS
Perfect – loved everything about it.
NEWTON AT THE HIGHSCHOOL
Perfect – loved everything about it.
BUFORD REJECTED FOR JOB
Only nit issue I had here was with the header.
INT. EMPLOYMENT OFFICE - LATER THAT DAY
It made me think we were in like the unemployment office rather than at an establishment. I’d change it to something more specific. INT. FACTORY - OFFICE or whatever type of establishment this was.
STELLA MEETS BUFORD AT DINER – WE MEET THE CREW
Really good stuff. I love how the Honey Mustard is the memory trigger.
A logic issue here.
MATILDA (to Donnie) Keep it in your pants, Cosby
So as I am reading the previous high school scene I notice that they are smoking rather than vaping, no one has a smart phone, etc and was about to write a note that this seems to be dated. Then I re-read the logline and saw that this was 1980s. Okay – perfect. But then I see the Cosby reference – and I assume it is a Cosby rape reference – and we are back in modern times. Am I missing something???
THE LAST RETURN OF OSCAR
Okay, don’t like this for the same reason I didn’t like it the first time – it’s only a surprise that he is alive because it’s so implausible and it creates logic issues like this:
Oscar, almost at her feet, gradually slides the knife from out of his throat...
He waited all day and night to pull the knife out so he do it at this exact moment?? Doesn’t land with me.
But I see now that you have a plot point you need to serve here – someone is going to witness Oscar’s demise. I think there is a better way to do it. Have Oscar still conscious after the first attack – but weakened enough for Stella to bind him up – e.g., duct tape, using his own handcuffs against him or whatever – doesn’t matter.
BACK AT THE DINING ROOM
Liked it – but it did strike me as odd that we didn’t see Chad at all in the first scene. I’d be tempted to having him there briefly and having to leave to make a bank run or something.
CHAD CONFRONTS STELLA
Here I think Chad is blending too much into the Donnie and Bo characters here. Like this dialogue:
CHAD I don’t give a good fuck what kinda day you’re having. We’ve had enough shit Yelp reviews this week, okay? One more, your ass is fired. (mocking Ebonics) You feel me?
Is where you lost his unique voice for me. When you first set him up with the Buford chat, I thought he was perfect – kind of like a Neidermeyer from Animal House. Now he’s kind of like Belushi. I’d keep him like in the first scene – too proper for his age – swelled ego – don’t devolve him to the Donnie/Bo level.
FINDING THE WALLET
Like the scene – but a slight logic problem. Buford would have had his wallet with him when he paid his bill – yet she finds it in the seat. Yeah, I know – nit issue.
Loving the use of Oscar in these scenes.
THE SHERIFF SHOWS UP – DICK HARDLEY
Love it.
Nit:
But he notices one of the pamphlets on the ground.
I’d call it – missing teenager pamphlets – just to remind us.
CHAD DEAD AT THE DINER
Okay – didn’t see this coming. That explains some of the harshness from Chad towards Stella earlier – I’m intrigued.
Oh – Christ – they’re all dead.
Nice scenes here.
Okay – rolling along until here:
INT. BUFORD’S LIVING ROOM - MOMENTS LATER
I got confused. I didn’t know what the two girls on the screen meant. I was confused by:
BUFORD (CONT’D) How much we talking about here?
GERTRUDE Enough. More than enough. She can barely hold back her excitement.
BUFORD So, we don’t have to sell the house? Right...?
I’’m really lost. Are they selling the two girls???? Did they get an offer on the house and if so why is that they don’t have to move??
Also – logic note: So far Buford hasn’t realized by now that he lost his wallet???
BUFORD AND HIS WIFE TALKING ABOUT THE WAITRESS/TIP
This was so effing good!. What a great scene.
THE ALL OUT BATTLE
Digging it – when we get here:
GERTRUDE
Maybe if we just tell her to leave?
I’d love a sarcastic response from Buford (e.g., a Yeah, that would work – or a “why didn’t I think of that? Type thing. It’s such an idiotic request from Gertrude it deserves a snappy response.
IN THE BASEMENT FOR THE FIRST TIME
Okay, they are selling girls – so the logic issue I mentioned above doesn’t apply. Thought I would leave the comment there so you would know I was confused at the time.
BACK IN THE BASEMENT – STELLA TIED UP.
This:
GERTRUDE
It’s the dark web. You’d be surprised by some of the sick shit they’re into.
Was little OTN for me – he already knows this – they’ve been selling girls.
ALL THE WAY TO THE ENDING
Hmm. A little confused by the ending in NY. Seemed a bit tacked on. Obviously, she got off for Oscar’s murder. But the implication here is that she’s going to go off on the lack of tip/ranch dressing stuff when that is not at all why she went off in the first place – it was because Buford killed all those people. It left me a little confused.
I would have thought that the Millennial couple would have been more in the vein of he was abusing her and that is what would set Stella off. Anyway – will come back and read again later to see if I just missed it.
Hey David, thanks a lot for taking a look. You made some suggestions that nobody else pointed out, a few things I didn't even think of.
Quoted Text
Pg 4. OSCAR You want that knife, don’t you?
A little OTN for me and I don’t think you need it. I’d just delete the line.
For some reason, when I wrote that, I had flashbacks of Butch and Zed in "Pulp Fiction" when Butch says the same line, but with a gun -- "You want that gun, dontcha?"
Quoted Text
IN THE HOUSE THE NEXT MORNING.
99% of folks are probably going to love the Oscar is not quite dead bit. I’m not one of them. I’ve just scene this so many times that it’s lost impact. For me, you can keep on the nudging of the body stuff, I just don’t care for the miracle he’s alive! Again – I’m probably in the minority here.
It was kind of a running "gag" throughout the script... rather playing off a common horror trope. And it was a bit of foreshadowing, too, when Buford suffers a similar throat injury but lives.
Quoted Text
WE MEET MALTIDA
Liked most of the scene. But this string of dialogue:
MATILDA I should call the police.
Dejected, Stella just shakes her head. STELLA He is the police.
MATILDA I could call my Dad. I know for a fact he can’t stand Oscar.
STELLA I can’t make you do that.
Did not ring true to me from Stella’s end. It sounded exactly like the chat that we would have before Stella killed him. Not the one they would have after. Maltilda’s lines are fine because she doesn’t know. But Stella’s seem off somehow. I know that the intent here is that Stella is not going to reveal what she did. But I think you can achieve the same goal with just a little misdirection. Just as an example:
MATILDA I should call the police.
STELLA It’s too late…He’s gone.
MATILDA I could call my Dad. I know for a fact he can’t stand Oscar.
STELLA I don’t need you to do that. Please.
Well, Stella says "I can't make you do that" because she knows Matilda doesn't talk to her father anymore.
As for the "He is the police" line, Stella's goal is just to get past her questions, to convince Matilda just to leave it alone.
Quoted Text
I also thought it might be a nice touch if there was a speck of blood on her shoe from when he nudged Oscar and Matilda noticed that – Stella had to explain it away.
That could be a cool little detail to include.
Quoted Text
BUFORD REJECTED FOR JOB
Only nit issue I had here was with the header.
INT. EMPLOYMENT OFFICE - LATER THAT DAY
It made me think we were in like the unemployment office rather than at an establishment. I’d change it to something more specific. INT. FACTORY - OFFICE or whatever type of establishment this was.
Yeah, I should've said EMPLOYMENT AGENCY.
Quoted Text
A logic issue here.
MATILDA (to Donnie) Keep it in your pants, Cosby
So as I am reading the previous high school scene I notice that they are smoking rather than vaping, no one has a smart phone, etc and was about to write a note that this seems to be dated. Then I re-read the logline and saw that this was 1980s. Okay – perfect. But then I see the Cosby reference – and I assume it is a Cosby rape reference – and we are back in modern times. Am I missing something???
I describe it as an 80's style horror slasher ala "The Guest" and "Drive", where they do use cell phones. And the use of cell phones is fairly prominent in parts of the 2nd and 3rd acts. And I'm pretty sure people still smoke cigarettes. I do. And I always have high school kids asking to bum one off me every time they see me smoking one.
Quoted Text
THE LAST RETURN OF OSCAR
Okay, don’t like this for the same reason I didn’t like it the first time – it’s only a surprise that he is alive because it’s so implausible and it creates logic issues like this:
Oscar, almost at her feet, gradually slides the knife from out of his throat...
He waited all day and night to pull the knife out so he do it at this exact moment?? Doesn’t land with me.
But I see now that you have a plot point you need to serve here – someone is going to witness Oscar’s demise. I think there is a better way to do it. Have Oscar still conscious after the first attack – but weakened enough for Stella to bind him up – e.g., duct tape, using his own handcuffs against him or whatever – doesn’t matter.
I really, really liked the juxtaposition of the visual set against a quiet rural neighborhood as a grieving mother sticks "Missing" pamphlets in mailboxes. And it's not like he was purposely biding his time to stick the knife out... more so of him slipping in and out of consciousness. And this scene doesn't quite take place at night, though it is further in the day. And, as for logic issues, I don't think one needs to suspend their disbelief too much. If Tim Roth's character in "Reservoir Dogs" can suddenly wake up after taking a gut shot and being unconscious for half the movie, I think this can work, especially within the realm and spirit of a grindhouse style horror flick.
Quoted Text
BACK AT THE DINING ROOM
Liked it – but it did strike me as odd that we didn’t see Chad at all in the first scene. I’d be tempted to having him there briefly and having to leave to make a bank run or something.
Good point.
Quoted Text
CHAD CONFRONTS STELLA
Here I think Chad is blending too much into the Donnie and Bo characters here. Like this dialogue:
CHAD I don’t give a good fuck what kinda day you’re having. We’ve had enough shit Yelp reviews this week, okay? One more, your ass is fired. (mocking Ebonics) You feel me?
Is where you lost his unique voice for me. When you first set him up with the Buford chat, I thought he was perfect – kind of like a Neidermeyer from Animal House. Now he’s kind of like Belushi. I’d keep him like in the first scene – too proper for his age – swelled ego – don’t devolve him to the Donnie/Bo level.
I kinda wanted Chad to reveal his real self -- if you've ever worked in the restaurant industry, whether manager or server, you wear this mask of this character you kinda create when you speak with customers. In front of Buford, he's being obnoxiously PC as a means of keeping control of the situation. Then, when he slips out of his character, he swears like a sailor. Obviously, you can't swear at customers. But you can be a dick in other passive aggressive ways. And that's what Chad was doing.
And I'm not sure if he's blended with Bo and Donnie too much -- Bo has no dialogue. Donnie is sexually harassing the shit outta her. Though I see what you mean w/ the racism there.
Quoted Text
FINDING THE WALLET
Like the scene – but a slight logic problem. Buford would have had his wallet with him when he paid his bill – yet she finds it in the seat. Yeah, I know – nit issue.
Loving the use of Oscar in these scenes.
Not sure what you mean? I know there's some places where you pay up front, but most restaurants and diners, you pay at the table. I've paid bar tabs many times and left my wallet there and had to pick it up the next day.
Quoted Text
INT. BUFORD’S LIVING ROOM - MOMENTS LATER
I got confused. I didn’t know what the two girls on the screen meant. I was confused by:
BUFORD (CONT’D) How much we talking about here?
GERTRUDE Enough. More than enough. She can barely hold back her excitement.
BUFORD So, we don’t have to sell the house? Right...?
I’’m really lost. Are they selling the two girls???? Did they get an offer on the house and if so why is that they don’t have to move??
Yeah, it was a detail that I didn't want to stand out too much as to give away the upcoming reveal. It probably stands out more in the script than it would on film. The goal here was to still not know quite what their talking about outside of the fact that they're making money. She's on the computer earlier, as well and we think she's looking for someone to buy the house... then there's a teensy bit more information the next time she's at the computer.
Quoted Text
Also – logic note: So far Buford hasn’t realized by now that he lost his wallet???
Not if it didn't serve a purpose. I did have a scene where he realizes it at a gas station while he's pumping gas, but I just wanted to get right to the good stuff. Felt unnecessary.
Quoted Text
GERTRUDE Maybe if we just tell her to leave?
I’d love a sarcastic response from Buford (e.g., a Yeah, that would work – or a “why didn’t I think of that? Type thing. It’s such an idiotic request from Gertrude it deserves a snappy response.
Absolutely, good suggestion.
Quoted Text
GERTRUDE It’s the dark web. You’d be surprised by some of the sick shit they’re into.
Was little OTN for me – he already knows this – they’ve been selling girls.
I get that. But the arrangement is that Gertrude handles the business side of it -- earlier when she's at the computer, he's kinda just looking over her shoulder. He doesn't really know exactly how it works. And he certainly doesn't think there'd be a market for girl who's all shot up. She's simply telling him, "You'd be surprised what they're into on the dark web".
Quoted Text
Hmm. A little confused by the ending in NY. Seemed a bit tacked on. Obviously, she got off for Oscar’s murder. But the implication here is that she’s going to go off on the lack of tip/ranch dressing stuff when that is not at all why she went off in the first place – it was because Buford killed all those people. It left me a little confused.
I would have thought that the Millennial couple would have been more in the vein of he was abusing her and that is what would set Stella off. Anyway – will come back and read again later to see if I just missed it.
Good point. BUT... she keeps his wallet and studies the photo ID before Buford ever kills anyone. It's a blink and you miss it moment, but she really was on the brink of completely losing it. I use it as a deception device, but she IS having Oscar hallucinations. Which means she really is cracking. And this suggests that she perhaps maybe even considered taking some kind of action on Buford even before he killed everyone. Not saying she would have killed him... but there may be a possibility that Stella really isn't all there. Matilda getting killed gave Stella's psychotic tendencies focus and meaning.
Thanks again for taking a look! I'll definitely read over this again. It will definitely be useful for further rewrites.
Hey David, thanks a lot for taking a look. You made some suggestions that nobody else pointed out, a few things I didn't even think of.
-- Michael
My pleasure - like I said the pages flew by. Use what you like - discard what you don't of course.
I just went through some of the other comments - love that the genesis for honey mustard was your own personal restaurant experience. Funny how our minds retain stuff.
I just finished a draft of a script that is based on a cruise line dedicated solely for terminally ill people - it had it's genesis in a statement by dying step dad made to me a decade ago when he was in a nursing home - "I'd rather just go on a cruise and have them drop me int he ocean when I die"' - Stuck with me - years later - a script.
My pleasure - like I said the pages flew by. Use what you like - discard what you don't of course.
I just went through some of the other comments - love that the genesis for honey mustard was your own personal restaurant experience. Funny how our minds retain stuff.
Yeah. I still think about that punk kid who wrote honey mustard on the tip line. I had a very bad temper back then and I really, really wanted to find out where this idiot lived -- I was living in a pretty small town at the time before I moved back to NYC. So everybody kinda knew everybody.
But yeah, I kinda combined a few things. I always had a pet peeve about customers touching me or grabbing me to get my attention. Got in a thing with a customer for grabbing my arm as I was passing by -- again, I had bad temper. I almost went berserk on the guy. Being a waiter or bartender can really test your nerves sometimes.
Also, in restaurants, the cooks were also kinda assholes. Almost everywhere I've worked And they used to get away with a lot of sexual harassment with the female waiters, there's no way they'd get away with that shit now (hopefully).
Quoted Text
I just finished a draft of a script that is based on a cruise line dedicated solely for terminally ill people - it had it's genesis in a statement by dying step dad made to me a decade ago when he was in a nursing home - "I'd rather just go on a cruise and have them drop me int he ocean when I die"' - Stuck with me - years later - a script.
Ha! Sounds like a great premise! What genre are you going for?
Yeah. I still think about that punk kid who wrote honey mustard on the tip line. I had a very bad temper back then and I really, really wanted to find out where this idiot lived -- I was living in a pretty small town at the time before I moved back to NYC. So everybody kinda knew everybody.
But yeah, I kinda combined a few things. I always had a pet peeve about customers touching me or grabbing me to get my attention. Got in a thing with a customer for grabbing my arm as I was passing by -- again, I had bad temper. I almost went berserk on the guy. Being a waiter or bartender can really test your nerves sometimes.
Also, in restaurants, the cooks were also kinda assholes. Almost everywhere I've worked And they used to get away with a lot of sexual harassment with the female waiters, there's no way they'd get away with that shit now (hopefully).
Ha! Sounds like a great premise! What genre are you going for?
-- Michael
Dramedy
All the old folks are going to be funny for the most part having a greater perspective on how ones life should end then those that are concerned about them. Course - some got to die since that is what the ship was built for. Title is SHIPPING OUT - got a vomit draft done - needs a lot of work - going to spend sometime later this month
First, let me say that you are a great writer. I've been pretty impressed with the features I've read here lately. You've definitely crafted a vivid and noir-ish world. The narratives are clean and crisp and not overwritten at all, and they rather than the dialogue propel your story forward, so great job on that.
I didn't take page by page notes so forgive me for my comments being a bit scattered. I usually like to review scripts by delving into the writer's, and thus the characters', motivation, and look for any logic problems. Each scene needs to propel the narrative forward, so looking for inconsistencies is the best way to get a good script even tighter.
I think Pia hit upon the fact that you tackle a variety of themes here, so I had trouble figuring out what exactly you wanted to say with this piece. You've given us a lot of messed up people who, despite really detesting their circumstances, seem to want to stick it out in this town, where everyone knows everyone and no one really seems as if they want to improve themselves.
I guess I'll start with Stella, and I'll ask a tough question - does she really need to kill Oscar? I know that you have her reach her breaking point and carry it out so that it serves the misdirection. I'm wondering though, would the misdirection work anyway? She can still be traumatized to her breaking point by the domestic abuse... which is then mirrored by the cooks, and by Blumpkin. IMHO, what you've done by having her kill her husband and then go to work - to a mundane waitress shift, no less - is undermine her a bit as your heroine. The aftermath, the going about your daily routine, doesn't smack of trauma so much as it does careless disregard, for me... I'd be interested to know what the others think.
Carrying that point forward, so by page 32, when Stella is the suspected murderer of not only her abusers, but of her lover, and an innocent elderly couple, I'm reading along saying "okay, I have no rooting interest in these characters any longer." Granted, you take care of it later in the misdirection, however for the next 20 minutes, while I'm waiting for the killings to make sense, I zone out a little bit because I'm not invested in Stella, if that makes any sense.
The other motivation issue I see is with Buford applying for normal employment. I get that you set up his difficulty by giving him a prior - more on that later - but you're asking the audience to believe, essentially, that "human trafficking's not paying the bills, so I have to get me a 9 to 5, or sell my house." Or, is it that he wants gainful employment in order to NOT traffick? I don't think it's clear. This family is definitely weirdo central, but I think they leap onto each side of the fence at times.
And one has to wonder why Stella and the Blumpkins don't view a fresh start in another town as an alternative to going down these very dark roads. I think you undercut the fact that Stella is trapped in the abusive relationship and occupation by showing her in NYC a year later. Did she not have that option before she killed Oscar? To leave with Matilda? I guess you can argue that while Oscar is alive she'd never be free, because he's a cop and being protected by his brethren (speaking of, the line from Hardley about wishing they would have done something about it sooner rings a little hollow in light of the prior 90 minutes of mayhem).
And the last question I have is one that I always either ask as I'm reading, or ask the writer when I'm done reading, which is - what motivated you to write this? I had trouble at first deciding if it was Stella's story, or Buford's. And then I had trouble discerning whether you were going to give us a Thelma-and-Louise-type narrative, or if it was going to go off the rails ala VERY BAD THINGS (which it kinda did), or if you were going for a straight-out slasher film with a unique twist, which again, is where it seemed to go, with multiple people surviving multiple grave wounds, and grisly though entertaining deaths. What was the moral of the story, in your eyes? I think an eventual producer and director would want to know this, so that they can help you tell your story more effectively.
Again, great job in crafting a unique set of characters and situations, and kudos once again on your writing style. You definitely have your own voice, which will set you apart from other storytellers.
Hey AJR! Thanks for reading, these are some great notes!
Quoted Text
I think Pia hit upon the fact that you tackle a variety of themes here, so I had trouble figuring out what exactly you wanted to say with this piece. You've given us a lot of messed up people who, despite really detesting their circumstances, seem to want to stick it out in this town, where everyone knows everyone and no one really seems as if they want to improve themselves.
The themes I used here were mainly contributing factors in Stella's shattered psyche. Though I explore similar themes with other characters, specifically the Blumpkin family. It's not so much wanting to stick it out in this town but rather that feeling of being trapped. Poor choice after poor choice can lead to feeling stuck in quicksand, to the point where it's too much to overcome. I've had similar feelings -- I was stuck in a small town in Jersey for a few years. And everyone would tell me, "just leave". But it wasn't that easy. I've made some bad choices along the way (mostly with money), which led me to being stuck there (kinda like how I'm stuck in the South Bronx now). My way of getting out, unfortunately, was to bank on something big happening. In my case, it was selling a script, which I did. And it allowed me to leave that town. Luckily, I didn't have to resort to robbing banks or, in Buford's case, human trafficking.
Also, sometimes you get so used to feeling stuck that it's become comfortable. Especially if you've accepted that you'll never leave, your goal now is, "How do I thrive in my situation?" Buford's "big thing" was to sell these girls. He doesn't want to, but somehow, it's become the only way for him -- his own fault for backing himself into that corner. He made his bed and now he's living in it. But his goal isn't to leave town, his goal is to not sell the house -- being trapped can limit your goals and "dreams", if that makes any sense. It has a crippling effect on your psyche. It's not until he sees how it's damaged his son the same way circumstances damaged him that he's considering getting the F out and starting over again.
Stella is trapped, albeit differently than Buford. Marrying young to an older, abusive and controlling man even though she's not straight. In this town, she's been programmed, like so many lost souls from depraved towns, that there isn't another way. Unfortunately, for her, it's done so much damage to her psyche, as it's done to many people -- Why does any battered woman stay in an abusive relationship? If life is so bad, why does anybody decide to just live that way?
Her only ray of hope is in Matilda, but that seems like a pipe dream because that's how she's been programmed to think -- they're both waitresses and money seems to be keeping them from running off. At least that's the excuse she's been telling herself. It's not until this in the heat-of-the-moment thing that she's forced to really consider other options.
But, even after killing her own husband, there's still a feeling of being trapped -- she's not free yet, it's not that easy. That's made evident by her hallucinations, seeing her dead husband. Any person in their right mind (kinda) would consider calling out of work, maybe hiding the body. Or maybe just running off. But Stella isn't quite in her right mind. She's killed her husband but she just goes to work and tries to go about her day -- kind of like she's been doing her whole life, being a closeted lesbian... dealing with domestic abuse... she's blocked a lot out as a means of just living with it, trying to pretend everything's normal, sweeping everything under the rug. And with her husband, she's not sure what to do. Can she tell Matilda about it? Maybe. But she's afraid of those consequences and what it may do to that relationship. Oscar still has a psychological effect on her... she's still trapped. And she's so used to hiding things and blocking them out that this is her logical way of dealing with it.
Though I was thinking that maybe having Oscar address this through her hallucinations -- "What's the plan, exactly? Just leave me there and go about your day? You think things will just disappear if you just pretend that it didn't happen?" Something like that.
Quoted Text
I guess I'll start with Stella, and I'll ask a tough question - does she really need to kill Oscar? I know that you have her reach her breaking point and carry it out so that it serves the misdirection. I'm wondering though, would the misdirection work anyway? She can still be traumatized to her breaking point by the domestic abuse... which is then mirrored by the cooks, and by Blumpkin. IMHO, what you've done by having her kill her husband and then go to work - to a mundane waitress shift, no less - is undermine her a bit as your heroine. The aftermath, the going about your daily routine, doesn't smack of trauma so much as it does careless disregard, for me... I'd be interested to know what the others think.
I answered some of this above -- but I do feel that she needs to kill Oscar. My goal was to write a slasher flick, after all, and I wanted to set the tone for the rest of the film... and let it build and build until it got bat-shit nuts. But, for character reasons as well -- trauma comes in many forms and is unique to each individual based on their experiences. Some people just shut off completely. Some people block it out. Some people have panic attacks. I thought this was the way that Stella would deal with it, especially with her mind state continuing to dwindle.
Quoted Text
Carrying that point forward, so by page 32, when Stella is the suspected murderer of not only her abusers, but of her lover, and an innocent elderly couple, I'm reading along saying "okay, I have no rooting interest in these characters any longer." Granted, you take care of it later in the misdirection, however for the next 20 minutes, while I'm waiting for the killings to make sense, I zone out a little bit because I'm not invested in Stella, if that makes any sense.
That makes sense, but that was also my intention as part of the misdirection. I wanted Stella and Buford's story to dovetail and then come back in that first act. And I didn't want people to root for Stella for this portion of the story. I wanted the audience/reader to fear for the Blumpkin family. And to add to that danger, I took a risk by having us believe that Stella also killed Matilda -- this girl is just bat-shit nuts at this point (we're led to believe). Luckily, we find out in the next 15 minutes that it wasn't Stella who killed everybody... it was Buford. I know, in movies like these, we're supposed to root for someone throughout the whole story, but I just wanted to mess around with structure a little bit, kinda fuck with the audience, if that makes sense. And although we're led to believe Stella killed her lover, I tried making the other characters so unlikable that we haven't strayed to far way from Stella -- to make the transition from rooting against her to rooting for her not as rough. And in order to do that, everything we though she did, I made Buford responsible for so that now we have someone else we can despise. I'm kinda rambling, hope that makes sense.
Quoted Text
The other motivation issue I see is with Buford applying for normal employment. I get that you set up his difficulty by giving him a prior - more on that later - but you're asking the audience to believe, essentially, that "human trafficking's not paying the bills, so I have to get me a 9 to 5, or sell my house." Or, is it that he wants gainful employment in order to NOT traffick? I don't think it's clear. This family is definitely weirdo central, but I think they leap onto each side of the fence at times.
I touched on this a little bit earlier, but Buford doesn't want to do this. He tries finding a job but can't because of previous incidents on his wrap sheet. He's kinda backed himself into a corner at this point because of poor decisions -- I didn't want to go through his history of how he got to this point, I think it'd mess with the pacing a little bit. But it's become the only thing he can do in order to provide a better life for his family -- and his son. Though he's looking for a job, they still need to put food on the table. Something to carry them over until Buford hopefully does find something more legit. But it just doesn't work out for him.
And he didn't want this for his son. He knows he's an awful person -- he's accepted that. But he doesn't want his son to be like him and live this evil life. Unfortunately, we reach a point where his son does something horrible -- part of this is probably inherited from his father's traits, but Buford thought that maybe he could steer him differently. However, his own actions have made this impossible.
Quoted Text
And one has to wonder why Stella and the Blumpkins don't view a fresh start in another town as an alternative to going down these very dark roads. I think you undercut the fact that Stella is trapped in the abusive relationship and occupation by showing her in NYC a year later. Did she not have that option before she killed Oscar? To leave with Matilda? I guess you can argue that while Oscar is alive she'd never be free, because he's a cop and being protected by his brethren.
There's ALWAYS that option for everybody. But why does anyone stay in these abusive relationships? It seems crazy to us, but we're not them. I've seen it a million times, I've seen it with my own mother. She's trapped psychologically, not just financially. Many people in abusive relationships always have an excuse to not leaving -- Stella leans on the financial stuff, but there's more to it than that. At the end of the story, she's free. She's exonerated because her crime was justified (with the help of Sheriff Hardley).
Quoted Text
(speaking of, the line from Hardley about wishing they would have done something about it sooner rings a little hollow in light of the prior 90 minutes of mayhem)
Closer to the beginning, we're led to believe Oscar wasn't well liked. Matilda even says that her father doesn't like Oscar. And when Hardley and Deputy Roy are at the crime scene, Hardley says, "He probably had it coming". So they were aware of the abuse -- this happens far too often, people knowing about it but not saying or doing anything about it. It only becomes personal when Hardley thinks that Stella was responsible for his daughter. I probably need to do a better job making this more clear without hitting people over the head with it.
Quoted Text
And the last question I have is one that I always either ask as I'm reading, or ask the writer when I'm done reading, which is - what motivated you to write this? I had trouble at first deciding if it was Stella's story, or Buford's. And then I had trouble discerning whether you were going to give us a Thelma-and-Louise-type narrative, or if it was going to go off the rails ala VERY BAD THINGS (which it kinda did), or if you were going for a straight-out slasher film with a unique twist, which again, is where it seemed to go, with multiple people surviving multiple grave wounds, and grisly though entertaining deaths. What was the moral of the story, in your eyes? I think an eventual producer and director would want to know this, so that they can help you tell your story more effectively.
A lot of things motivated me to write this. I, myself, have a bit of temper -- not quite to the point of killing of course. But I've been in the restaurant industry for years as a waiter and bartender. The concept came to me when some idiot wrote honey mustard on the tip line instead of a tip -- I forgot his honey mustard. And I really, really wanted to confront this kid. As for the actual themes... I've been unemployed since January, so the money situation rang true to me, so I include that. It's not necessarily a moral to the story -- not all tales need to be Aesop fables, though I see what you're saying. I'm sure "Get Out" wasn't telling us that the moral of that story was to stay away from white girls. It's more of what I wanted to get across, how being abused and being controlled can really damage a person. That's what I wanted to get across with Stella. I also wanted to show how difficult circumstances can effect different people in different ways. Here, we have two characters in Stella and Buford having terrible days (in different ways of course) -- but they handle it differently due to their true natures as people. Of course, Stella's flawed, for sure. But ultimately, she prevails despite the control, despite the abuse, despite the shitty circumstances. She does make a questionable choice at the beginning, and though gruesome, it's somewhat warranted... at least in the realm of a horror film. Buford, on the other hand, goes the other way.
I wanted to take the story into many directions while maintaining a consistent tone. But, ultimately, this is Stella's story. But I also wanted to peek into the lives of the bad guys and show just how much perceptions often can be deceiving. The race thing was included (though I didn't want to make it a huge determining factor into the story's outcome) to make us fear for Stella a little bit more at the end. It was mainly a small detail that I thought would maybe subliminally linger in the back of the mind of the audience when Sheriff Hardley arrives. Will have to take another look at that.
Quoted Text
Again, great job in crafting a unique set of characters and situations, and kudos once again on your writing style. You definitely have your own voice, which will set you apart from other storytellers.
Thanks, AJR, I appreciate that. I know a lot of my responses sound like I'm defending the choices I made in the script, but I just wanted you to see what was going through my mind when writing it and making those decisions. My responses are pretty much just off the top of my head, didn't let all of your notes sink all the way in just yet. But all your notes are definitely worth considering and I'm sure many of them will sit with me and sink in as I go over the script more and more. Of course, not all audiences are going to think exactly like I think or even how the characters, I believe, should think. So everything is worth considering.
I really appreciate you taking out the time and offering some very thoughtful notes that others haven't even touched upon. Really good stuff. Let me know if you ever post anything or if you need anything read -- I have the time.
Of course, I understand you defending your choices, as you should. And sure, I get what motivated you to write this, I was asking more about theme though. Horror films, and films in general, can be cautionary tales. A character makes a bad decision, things go to shit for 90 minutes, they extricate themselves from the peril (usually), and we the audience are left with a big fat "don't do that." And I'm not sure I'm right with my suggestions - it may be better that Stella kills Oscar.
You mentioned GET OUT. Which had incredible subtext, as you know. It was almost mind-bending. The fact that white people wanted to be in black bodies is an extremely sociopolitical statement. And something like NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET - while the film is "about" getting killed in your dreams, the theme is that the children will pay for the sins of the parents, which goes back to the Greek tragedians.
All that said, you can certainly craft a fun romp with interesting kills and an identifiable protag. With this piece, I don't think that the question is "can it be a movie?", because I think the answer is yes; it's about what type of movie, or, more specifically, how well received it will be. Will it be viewed as deep or classic by, say, Fangoria or Dread Central, or will it fall more in the popcorn-y good thrill, rompish kind of bucket. If that makes any sense. And both are cool. I think this is something you can succeed with.
You mentioned GET OUT. Which had incredible subtext, as you know. It was almost mind-bending. The fact that white people wanted to be in black bodies is an extremely sociopolitical statement. And something like NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET - while the film is "about" getting killed in your dreams, the theme is that the children will pay for the sins of the parents, which goes back to the Greek tragedians.
All that said, you can certainly craft a fun romp with interesting kills and an identifiable protag. With this piece, I don't think that the question is "can it be a movie?", because I think the answer is yes; it's about what type of movie, or, more specifically, how well received it will be. Will it be viewed as deep or classic by, say, Fangoria or Dread Central, or will it fall more in the popcorn-y good thrill, rompish kind of bucket. If that makes any sense. And both are cool. I think this is something you can succeed with.
Yes, "Get Out" was amazing. And the fact that it was able to make deep, sociopolitical statements while still being a popcorn flick is a true and rare achievement, especially in horror. "Dawn of the Dead" pulled off satire well as did the original "Night of the Living Dead" and "28 Days Later". Sometimes, however, I feel like forcing an over-arching theme or message can hurt a film, specifically with "The Hunt", which was God awful and painfully obvious. Wasn't much subtext there. The "Purge" movies fell somewhere in between -- though I did enjoy all of them as popcorn flicks. I think it's more "what type of movie" rather than "how well received it will be". Not to say I wanted to create just another empty slasher film that will be celebrated for the kills.
But I still think it can be praised by Fangoria and say, Dread Central -- Dread Central gave my last feature film, "The Suicide Theory" four stars -- although that film had a more deep, philosophical purpose than I intended to create with "Honey Mustard". And it wasn't really a horror film. Point is, I don't believe every horror film needs to be a cautionary tale or satire to achieve critical acclaim.
I would compare this closer to films like, "You're Next" or "Don't Breathe", which I don't believe made any political statements or were morality tales outside of the obvious "don't underestimate the blind" or "prey on the weak" I guess -- it's possible I may have just missed the moral of that story/deeper message and it went over my head. Still, these are films that horror audiences view as modern classics (including myself).
I wanted to create something that was driven by the choices/mistakes of its characters during times of desperation and show how they dealt with the repercussions. With Stella, it was about finding a way to be free, not just from her circumstances, but the psychological prison she's put herself into because of her circumstances -- hiding her sexuality, being trapped in her own mind. And maybe I need to execute that part a little better and explore those themes a little more... while keeping the fast pace and meeting the expectations of a horror audience blood-thirsty for a killer slasher flick. I will explore some of the themes a little more and see if there's a way to make it seemed less forced -- if I CAN add a deeper meaning to this, it'll only benefit the story even more. So it is worth exploring further.
Yes, "Get Out" was amazing. And the fact that it was able to make deep, sociopolitical statements while still being a popcorn flick is a true and rare achievement, especially in horror. "Dawn of the Dead" pulled off satire well as did the original "Night of the Living Dead" and "28 Days Later". Sometimes, however, I feel like forcing an over-arching theme or message can hurt a film, specifically with "The Hunt", which was God awful and painfully obvious. Wasn't much subtext there. The "Purge" movies fell somewhere in between -- though I did enjoy all of them as popcorn flicks. I think it's more "what type of movie" rather than "how well received it will be". Not to say I wanted to create just another empty slasher film that will be celebrated for the kills.
But I still think it can be praised by Fangoria and say, Dread Central -- Dread Central gave my last feature film, "The Suicide Theory" four stars -- although that film had a more deep, philosophical purpose than I intended to create with "Honey Mustard". And it wasn't really a horror film. Point is, I don't believe every horror film needs to be a cautionary tale or satire to achieve critical acclaim.
I would compare this closer to films like, "You're Next" or "Don't Breathe", which I don't believe made any political statements or were morality tales outside of the obvious "don't underestimate the blind" or "prey on the weak" I guess -- it's possible I may have just missed the moral of that story/deeper message and it went over my head. Still, these are films that horror audiences view as modern classics (including myself).
I wanted to create something that was driven by the choices/mistakes of its characters during times of desperation and show how they dealt with the repercussions. With Stella, it was about finding a way to be free, not just from her circumstances, but the psychological prison she's put herself into because of her circumstances -- hiding her sexuality, being trapped in her own mind. And maybe I need to execute that part a little better and explore those themes a little more... while keeping the fast pace and meeting the expectations of a horror audience blood-thirsty for a killer slasher flick. I will explore some of the themes a little more and see if there's a way to make it seemed less forced -- if I CAN add a deeper meaning to this, it'll only benefit the story even more. So it is worth exploring further.
-- Michael
Cool. You are much more versed in this genre than I am, and I think you have a good handle on what you want to accomplish. Refreshing to see such a good writer be able to also talk shop on other films.
In that vein, I'm curious - did you see PEPPERMINT? I caught it the other night. I actually railed against it when it came out. I thought "why do we need a female DEATH WISH?" And when I saw Garner's performance, it broke me. She was SO good in portraying her agony. And then the system trying to buy her off, and her going underground.... yeah, I suspended belief, and bought that she trained herself to become a killing machine. And I thought it was cool how they incorporated social media into the story and made her a modern day Robin Hood. Of course, they fell into the trope of the drug dealer not wasting her at the end, and wanting to "play" and make her suffer... but hey... I watched it twice. And it's SO not my type of movie.
Cool. You are much more versed in this genre than I am, and I think you have a good handle on what you want to accomplish. Refreshing to see such a good writer be able to also talk shop on other films.
In that vein, I'm curious - did you see PEPPERMINT? I caught it the other night. I actually railed against it when it came out. I thought "why do we need a female DEATH WISH?" And when I saw Garner's performance, it broke me. She was SO good in portraying her agony. And then the system trying to buy her off, and her going underground.... yeah, I suspended belief, and bought that she trained herself to become a killing machine. And I thought it was cool how they incorporated social media into the story and made her a modern day Robin Hood. Of course, they fell into the trope of the drug dealer not wasting her at the end, and wanting to "play" and make her suffer... but hey... I watched it twice. And it's SO not my type of movie.
I have not seen Peppermint yet -- I got the vibe that it wanted to be just another femme fatale flick, kinda like another "Salt", "Point of No Return", "Colombiana" or "Proud Mary". And I don't like to put too much into critic reviews, but there seemed to be a lot of hate for it. The most recent of these kinds of movies I was into was "Haywire", which I thought was well made. And my favorite EVER is "Long Kiss Goodnight" -- also one of my favorite titles to a movie. Speaking of another female "Death Wish", I did enjoy "Brave One", too, though it was much more grounded in reality, in line with the original "Death Wish". But, I am pretty bored and have seen pretty much everything during isolation, so if you say "Peppermint" is worth a look, God knows I have the time to watch it. I won't put too much expectation into it, though. The most that I can ask for is to be entertained.
Pages: 
Author
Honey Mustard - feature
Logged
Locked Board