I'm certainly not going to get into the whole unfilmmable thing again...but there were a few lines like this:

"He sits down in the yard and watches it burn. Devoid of
emotion. The house his grandfather built. His wife and son
SCREAMING from within as blue flames scurry up the inside
walls."

The house his grandfather built? That's too far for my tastes. It's not even relevant to the performance because he's crazy at this point, so it's not like he's watching it burn down unwillingly, which might make more sense.

But, like I say, it's very far from amateur. My favourite part was the big cow tongues licking each other...what a great image.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films I'm certainly not going to get into the whole unfilmmable thing again...but there were a few lines like this: "He sits down in the yard and watches it burn. Devoid of emotion. The house his grandfather built. His wife and son SCREAMING from within as blue flames scurry up the inside walls." The house his grandfather built? That's too far for my tastes. It's not even relevant to the performance because he's crazy at this point, so it's not like he's watching it burn down unwillingly, which might make more sense.

Rick,

I haven’t read past page 10. And believe me, I have no intention of getting into the “unfilmable” debate.

All I’m saying is that there are descriptions like this:

“David is the last person she expected on her doorstep this morning.”

Instead of the above, most writers would write something like this:

“She looks at David in shock.”

They’re both basically going to look the same on film but the first one (from the script) is far more colorful and interesting. The second one is typical and boring and has been seen a thousand times by the average reader.

As with your example about the “house his grandfather built,” the only thing I would point out is that I think you make a mistake a lot of people make when they’re adamantly against “we sees.” You assume that because it’s irrelevant to the character, it’s irrelevant to the reader/viewer.

In other words, although the character may be crazy, I, the viewer, can appreciate that it’s the house his grandfather built.

Just as with “we sees” (another argument I will not get into), although we, the audience, may be seeing everything, the characters in the film may not.

Just some thoughts. I don’t personally have a problem with the description. However, I totally see your side of it and I completely respect your opinion.

As I read further, I may see your point more clearly. And of course, I reserve the right to be wrong.


Breanne

Oh you guys...c'mon now...

Neither of you see any amateurish writing in the first 5 pages?  I think I quickly noted at least 20 things.  Unfilmables galore, which do not offer anything at all except extra lines...poor, clunky writing, tons of 5 line passages, long blocks of dialogue for no reason.  Characters frost intro'd, not CAPPED, the cop talking to someone who wasn't even intro'd, so we'd have no clue who it is he's even talking with...the list goes on and on.

I'm amazed...

Quoted from Breanne Mattson Rick, I haven�t read past page 10. And believe me, I have no intention of getting into the �unfilmable� debate. All I�m saying is that there are descriptions like this: �David is the last person she expected on her doorstep this morning.� Instead of the above, most writers would write something like this: �She looks at David in shock.� They�re both basically going to look the same on film but the first one (from the script) is far more colorful and interesting. The second one is typical and boring and has been seen a thousand times by the average reader. As with your example about the �house his grandfather built,� the only thing I would point out is that I think you make a mistake a lot of people make when they�re adamantly against �we sees.� You assume that because it�s irrelevant to the character, it�s irrelevant to the reader/viewer. In other words, although the character may be crazy, I, the viewer, can appreciate that it�s the house his grandfather built. Just as with �we sees� (another argument I will not get into), although we, the audience, may be seeing everything, the characters in the film may not. Just some thoughts. I don�t personally have a problem with the description. However, I totally see your side of it and I completely respect your opinion. And of course, as I read further, I may see your point more clearly. Breanne

How, when it's never mentioned in the dialogue? For all you know he might rent the house for the summer, no?

As a Director I don't like lines like that because it gives the script an emotional resonance that is impossible to convey with the camera. If it's important, it's got to be mentioned...simple as that.

Writing like that guarantees the script is better than the film. I don't think that should be the point.

But yes, let's not get into that...


Finished the script. It was OK. Reminded me of two films, the Happening and Return of the Living Dead. There's absolutely nothing new here, but it's a fun enough horror story, with a predictable outcome.

I think it could have been better if the reason was more inventive...or if there was no reason at all. People just went bat shit crazy and all hell broke loose. The military angle was very cliche and a pretty dull aside. Might have played better in 1973...but it was more than passe now.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films How, when it's never mentioned in the dialogue? For all you know he might rent the house for the summer, no?

Like I said, I haven’t read to that point so I had no way of knowing it wasn’t mentioned earlier. Assuming it was made known earlier, then yes, I would think that line was perfectly acceptable.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films As a Director I don't like lines like that because it gives the script an emotional resonance that is impossible to convey with the camera. If it's important, it's got to be mentioned...simple as that.

I don’t agree that it’s impossible to convey that type of emotional resonance on film. Had it been conveyed earlier that there was some significance to the house being built by his grandfather, then I do believe that emotional resonance could have been captured on film.

Who knows? It may have been different at one point. Some executive may have come along and said, “Cut that part about the guy talking about how his grandfather built the house. I don’t get that part. We don‘t need it.”

Quoted from Dreamscale Oh you guys...c'mon now... Neither of you see any amateurish writing in the first 5 pages?  I think I quickly noted at least 20 things.  Unfilmables galore, which do not offer anything at all except extra lines...poor, clunky writing, tons of 5 line passages, long blocks of dialogue for no reason.  Characters frost intro'd, not CAPPED, the cop talking to someone who wasn't even intro'd, so we'd have no clue who it is he's even talking with...the list goes on and on. I'm amazed...

Dreamscale,

This is a current revision of a script from a different writer. We don’t know what the original script looked like. We don’t know what production notes the revising writer was given. We don’t know what draft this is in relation.

When you work on assignment, an executive can request your script at any stage and you are contractually obligated to submit it, even if you’re in the middle of it. Scripts can often look kind of rough in the middle of the process. This one looks like maybe it’s unpolished.

It’s easy to judge this script from the standpoint of a writer who essentially writes at his own leisure. It’s different when you’re in the hot-seat.


Breanne

I dun know bout the script, haven't read it, but the movie is fucking awesome!!!

Quoted from Dreamscale Oh you guys...c'mon now... Neither of you see any amateurish writing in the first 5 pages?  I think I quickly noted at least 20 things.  Unfilmables galore, which do not offer anything at all except extra lines...poor, clunky writing, tons of 5 line passages, long blocks of dialogue for no reason.  Characters frost intro'd, not CAPPED, the cop talking to someone who wasn't even intro'd, so we'd have no clue who it is he's even talking with...the list goes on and on. I'm amazed...

The thing is...it's a film. The cop is talking to Kev, the coffee vendor. It's obvious what is going on.

I don't know...it's like you are so obsessed with technical details that you can't see the woods for the trees at times. Not having a go there, it's just that your desire for absolute regulation to a certain standard seems to prevent you from merely enjoying the story.

A lot of the unfilmmables in the opening part are for the sake of clarity. EG Second generation sheriff, pillar of the community...this gives us the reading for how he acts and leaves no room for doubt as to how people are responding to him...as one of them and not as an outsider.

Quoted from The boy who could fly I dun know bout the script, haven't read it, but the movie is fucking awesome!!!

Haha. Doesn’t this justify the script? I mean, no matter what anyone thinks about the script, if it translates to a successful film, who cares, you know?

Brea

I definitely agree with what decadence and Breanne said about the script being well-written.  My opinions on unfilmmables lean towards what Breanne is saying.

For me, the "house his grandfather built" line gave the house more texture.  You could say it works from a set design perspective.  The image of the burning house became more ominous and vivid as I personally pictured a WIDE of Farnum silhoutted before the blazing house.  Something about it being his grandfather's house would encourage certain choice of shots in my mind.

But maybe that's just me.

Quoted from Breanne Mattson Haha. Doesn’t this justify the script? I mean, no matter what anyone thinks about the script, if it translates to a successful film, who cares, you know?

I do find it pretty amusing when people start nit-picking a produced script and talking about "the rules".

I finished the script and it got much better as it went along. It also seems to be a recent draft because it's almost dead on the finished film(from what I've seen of it). Going to go see the movie tonight!

~Zack~

Quoted from Dreamscale Wow, disappointed is putting it mildly.  What an amazingly poorly written script!  I only got through 4 pages and had to stop.  So many problems, issues, etc.  Really shocking how amateurish this pile is.  I'd have a field day with ti, if I were tor eview and edit it. WOW, What the FUCK?????

Not trying to get one over you here, but it seems you get more fun from 'tearing a new one', than trying to get the essence of the story.

Just reading the script now, and to call it 'amateurish' is absurd, frankly.

I agree with Breanne regards the lines adding emotional resonance. Anyway, a script is a blueprint, and shouldn't the script try to convey as much emotion as possible. Subtle descriptions really help to do that.

Andrew

You guys are aware that this is a remake from a not so famous 70's movie by George Romero, right?  This is not new stuff here...it's a remake, modernized and with a much larger budget that anything old George could put together way back then.

I think the trailers look great and critical word of mouth says the same thing.  I will see it soon, and it's exactly the type of movie I love.  That has nothing to do with how the script was written.

If something in the prose is unnecessary, it's unnecessary...PERIOD.  What's not to understand or agree with about that?

The scene with the burning house is a small one. It has absolutely nothing to do with anyone's Grandfather.  PERIOD.

Just read through the first couple of pages and this must be a rough draft cuz its a bit different then what i saw, the first scene in the film is the town on fire, then a scene at a doctor's office, then it gets to the baseball game, plus some of the dialog is different.  anyways the end result was a kick ass film so it really didn't matter how it was written!

Quoted from Andrew Not trying to get one over you here, but it seems you get more fun from 'tearing a new one', than trying to get the essence of the story. Just reading the script now, and to call it 'amateurish' is absurd, frankly. I agree with Breanne regards the lines adding emotional resonance. Anyway, a script is a blueprint, and shouldn't the script try to convey as much emotion as possible. Subtle descriptions really help to do that. Andrew

It adds emotional resonance that will not make the final film. That's the point.

Watch it, you'll see that the burning farm scene plays out as purely violent and creepy. There will be no nostalgic feeling coming from watching the house burn (if there is , it will only come from your memory of this thread).

You can't portray an abstract thought about it being his grandfathers house without setting it up and certainly not when it is a scene about a deranged guy who has just killed his wife and kid. And not just deranged...but toxically insane.