For The Love of Satan by Al Gore - Short, Horror, Action - A man must sacrifice his wife for the love of Satan. - pdf format

Writer interested in feedback on this work

Well you're a sick puppy. But I can't fault the writing. And it certainly has something I've never seen before. I think I'm only five in on my alphabetical review system, but I've got the most entertainment value out of this so far.

I'd say this is more comedy horror than action horror but whatever. A contender.

I'm never been a big fan of telling actors how to speak exaggerated words.(p4) When you intentionally have to misspell a word in order to get the desired pronunciation effect, in my mind, it's not just a spelling error, it's actor instruction on top of it. Endless Excessive trailer trash profanity also gets a bit grating for me. Shock value only goes so far. It has its limits.

Crazy gore, crazy characters, now I'm getting looney too. What was this about again? I don't think there was much of a story here.  Sorry.

Well written for what it is. A slash and splash gore fest, for sure. One prob is that there's not much story behind it all. For the party being over, there sure were a lot of visitors that walk in like they own the place. Pumpkin was known by Doc but her visit seemed a little off. I didn't understand the cut to Skeleton's phone with 911 being dialed but left in his car.

I'm pretty certain I know who wrote this (good job).

You've got some edgy dialogue from Doc and supporting cast. Jazzy narrative in places to complement the genre. Downside is that deaf persons can sense loud vibrations without hearing. All the crashing and clatter and gunshots might not be heard, but it could be sensed as tactile vibrations. That would give away Doc's actions. The audience has to suspend too much disbelief. And it gets over the top. Too bad the ending doesn't have more of a twist, say, Nurse does the shooting for good riddance.

Holy shit. This one is pretty fuckin' nuts! I loved it.

Some of your action descriptions were a little awkwardly written, but the rest of the writing read pretty well to me. It was a fast read, so that's a plus.

Solid character work and some really good dialog.

Criteria has been met. Not much else to say. The best one yet.

I liked the premise of a deaf wife - clever. Somehow this didn't do it for me. Did not enjoy the read. Part of the problem for me was that it seemed almost impossible that Nurse, even though deaf, would not be aware of what was going on - and yeah, I got the ending - but Doc assumed she didn't know what was going on as well. A lot of gore for gore's sake.

This is crazy and imaginative and exaggerated - all of which is good because your descriptions did it for me. Dialog too - crazy enough to match your crazy characters.
But man... I couldn’t understand the point. It actually started when I realized I was not invested as much. Cos u didn’t introduce the problem, the thought behind it I think. At least for me that’s how it felt - unfocused.

Thank God you added that last line. Deaf, not blind.   I was thinking the same thing...

Still, this is unnecessary:

COP
Some poor girl. Dressed like the
Devil and she’s sure as shit been
through hell. Sexually assaulted
for sure but my God ... what the
twisted fuck did to her after ...
no one should die like that.

- And over the top. A mistake in he tone of the comedy-horror, imh.
Loved her, oblivious, washing the glasses surrounded by utter mayhem. Loved him confessing to his affair falling on deaf ears.

Hit and miss for me.
Could be a hit with some strategic editing.

Holy crap this is one of these rarities that appear in the OWCs from time to time that's so hard to judge, because it's either a work of genius, or the rantings of a lunatic. Tough to tell which...

There is a difference between "its" and "it's". Do you know what it is?  Yes.  Ah, hum...a refresher then.  Ok, "its" without an apostrophe is possessive. "The dog lost its collar." With an apostrophe, the word is a contraction of "it is". "I think it's too dangerous to chase Santa." (Translation: "it is too dangerous.") Note that when the pronoun "it" is possessive, it does not have an apostrophe, unlike nouns, which do have apostrophes when they are possessive.

Ugh. Honestly, I feel like apologizing for lecturing you on this,  but I would not even have mentioned it except that you did it a couple of times.  You had a few other minor issues, but I will not go into them.

I'm not too crazy about writers who wink at the audience.  Meaning... cutesy descriptions. A buff-body in a costume tighter than a hipster’s jeans....as liquidized organs leave a melon-sized exit wound, etc., truthfully, can be cut.  But it seems they're a part of your voice.  So... fair enough.  Personally, I like to think of screenplays as documents for people who hate to read, so save them as much reading as possible.

I'm not really into gory stuff.  Normally I would have skimmed over those parts, but that's personal taste, not a comment on your writing.  You write well and there is something compelling going on with it.   That said, didn't hate it by any means, didn't love it, either, entertaining, yes.

Phew!  I really hope this is helpful. Good luck!-Andrea

The title grabbed me immediately. Al Gore. Nice horror pun. Tell Tipper to lighten up about music.

I just noticed no FADE IN:

Not a good sign.

Bold slugs. Some people like 'em, some don't.

Why is Champagne capitalized? And no space in P. Diddy.

"blood-spattered" needs a hyphen.

Quoted Text Doc stands shoulder-to-shoulder and watches her dry the blade. Her hands move up and down the metal. It isn’t sensual but Doc’s eyebrows say otherwise.

I love this paragraph.

And the next.

Quoted Text She gives him a “you weirdo” look. Grips the blade by the handle and places it on the side.

You've said so much without dialogue. Excellent job.

Quoted Text Close up

There is almost no reason to include camera direction is a script. That's the job of the director and/or cinematographer. They usually only appear in shooting scripts.

Quoted Text Behind her, Doc grooves around the kitchen-island. Stops and opens a DRAWER The place old keys and bits of wire go to die.

This reads better and implies a new shot.

It isn't necessary to capitalize "your daddy."

You might need a few more commas.

Quoted Text UP CLOSE: there’s fresh fingerprints on the metal handle.

This shot already implies a closeup. Details this minuscule are so small/subtle that only a closeup can truly capture them. That being said, see above about camera angles.

Satan is a proper name and must be capitalized.

Quoted Text DOC She was here tonight. The sexy [] (S)atan. And God-damned she’s hot enough to pull it off. So hot I couldn't resist her. Even with you in the house. We screwed so hard and fast in the garage I ripped her panties to pieces and you know what?

A bit clumsy. And long. Longer chunks of dialogue may or may not be fine, but too many can be a bad thing. Remember, not every character is Quint.

Quoted Text DOC So that’s it. I’m in love. And now I’ve told you, you’ll fly into a jealous rage.

A bit on  the nose. Your dialogue needs work all across the board.

O.C. and O.S. are both acceptable.

"Pyjamas." UK spelling? Nice.

TIL "quieten" is a word.

Quoted Text MRS. CROMBLEHOME Jesus butt-fucking Christ, boy!

I love this line.

I had to Google what a Glock 41 looked like.

Quoted Text She raises the shaking gun ready to fire. She can hear Barky but a loud DRUM SOLO blinds the one sense she can rely on.

Is it In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida?

No FADE OUT. Another bad sign.

Despite this, storywise it was decently written, even though I couldn't really follow the script. That's my fault, not yours. It's late and I'm getting tired. I might have to revisit this.

Hi Al

Logline - not bad, throws up an idea. Of what could play out and we are left with why?

Ok, finished.

I have to say that’s the best I’ve read so far.

It kind of felt like farce meets gore, literally from this writer.

It is a struggle to believe this could all happen, but then again that’s most horror scripts IMO. Think Shaun of the dead - yeah, not exactly believable, but still a fun film

Also, this is tightly contained, has the potential be filmed.

So, it’s weaknesses. Well, a bit like it’s strengths. The main one is whether we get into the genre aspect of the excess. Perhaps some foreshadowing would set the scene.

The end with the girl, which we don’t even see, doesn’t work for me. I would prefer her across the road, as Satan, laughing at the mayhem, as though she cursed him, set him up etc

Also, to make this believable  you may wish to consider brining in the wife’s being deaf at the start and not use it as a punch line.

All the best

Actually really like the idea and vibe you've got going.

It's a bit of mashup, with a sort of Fargo dark humour, coupled with the bizarro frenetic energy of the closing of Cabin In The Woods. That's a very interesting place for a script to be. There are a whole host of influences that totally jive with me. Suspect we would like a lot of the same films and writers.

One issue I had was the steal - intentional or not - from "Hush", with the action going on behind a deaf woman. Whilst you subvert that with the dark comedy, it was hard for me to not feel it was maybe too much of steal. There's not really much you can do with that, because it's a central plot point to the whole story, but I do think it's worth bearing in mind.

Done right, this would be a really good short film. It has all the ingredients to be pretty fucking excellent.

The main problem right now is presumably down to time being your biggest enemy. It's a very awkward read in places, and it verged on being outright frustrating, at times.

There were sequences I had to keep going back to reread, and there were a few jarring descriptions that totally take you out of the read, such as:

"Next to the sink there’s enough dirty Champagne glasses for a party at P.Diddy’s."

"Doc taps his phone. HEAVY METAL pumps out of unseen speakers in a modern living space. Everything is minimalist. Except the interior designer’s fee."

"INSIDE: the place old keys and bits of wire go to die."

That's the type of stuff that will drive Jeff mad, and it does make me see his point about superfluous writing better.

All that said, I did very much like this one:

"The macabre make up can’t hold a candle to the horror on his real face."

That's fantastic writing.

My feeling is the difference between the two is that the last one advances the story, whilst reinforcing the comedy and horror of the situation. I think an actor would read that and it would really help illuminate the scene for them.

Whereas the other examples are unnecessarily flashy writing.

Might just be me, but would be interested to see how others view this.

The pacing feels right, and by page 4, your story really starts to click into gear. The continued appearance of new threats could be repetitive, but you handle that well. It never felt like it was getting old.

The visual of Doc speaking the truth of his affair whilst she cleans the glasses was good, although keeping it as a reveal that she is deaf just diverted attention away from the story for me, i.e. I'm thinking and wondering about why she isn't responding, especially with the red herring that he doesn't speak above music level.

Not a big issue, but the reveal itself she is deaf didn't have any real impact, for me, unlike the appearance of Pumpkin, which really jolted the story forward, and kickstarted the pretty audacious form the story then takes.

Then you have the sting in the tail at the end. You tee it up beautifully with the visual of Doc's quizzical face as he realises he's been had. Having her then reinforce her great quip with sign lanuage just works so well. It's a very, very cool and funny visual. I loved it. The kind of thing a director will be desperate to film.

I personally see enormous potential on this one. It's just some of the writing is problematic in the ways mentioned above. I feel you can be more economical and safe with the descriptions, instead focusing on those creative flourishes in the story / visuals / dialogue.

When you do that in this story, it's really, really good.

If you were filming this yourself, none of the above would really matter, but if someone was going to come across the script, you might lose an audience (or someone taking it on to film) early on because of the writing style. And that would be a big shame.

A solid rewrite without such a small timeframe would really breathe life into this, allowing you to finesse the best elements, and to tidy up some of the scruffy parts.

Quoted from Andrew Actually really like the idea and vibe you've got going. There were sequences I had to keep going back to reread, and there were a few jarring descriptions that totally take you out of the read, such as: "Next to the sink there’s enough dirty Champagne glasses for a party at P.Diddy’s." "Doc taps his phone. HEAVY METAL pumps out of unseen speakers in a modern living space. Everything is minimalist. Except the interior designer’s fee." "INSIDE: the place old keys and bits of wire go to die." That's the type of stuff that will drive Jeff mad, and it does make me see his point about superfluous writing better. All that said, I did very much like this one: "The macabre make up can’t hold a candle to the horror on his real face." That's fantastic writing. My feeling is the difference between the two is that the last one advances the story, whilst reinforcing the comedy and horror of the situation. I think an actor would read that and it would really help illuminate the scene for them. Whereas the other examples are unnecessarily flashy writing. Might just be me, but would be interested to see how others view this.

Rarely come back to comment - but your observation one interested me.

There were some lines - like the ones you pointed out - that I thought - brilliant, I wish I could write like that. And there were others - like the P. Piddy reference where I thought - no, just tell me the counter's filled with dozens of dirty glasses.  Same with the drawer - I thought really - it's just a drawer filled with crap - why the extra where keys go to die.

The reason this is difficult for me is that the writer has such a great style in other places, I hesitate to say - don't do this here. I mean, like I said - other places where the same style was used I thought were brilliant.

Guess the best way to put it is there were certain places where I got taken out of the story because I felt the writer - i.e, hey, it's me - here is another clever description. It hampered my immersion. Other places - same style - the writer found the perfect words to sink me right in.

How's that for a whole lot of diatribe without really saying much. Maybe - you have a gift for crafting a description - but throttle back a bit and use them when really needed.

PS - glad I re-read this - somehow I had a much more favorable view after the second time.

Quoted from eldave1 Rarely come back to comment - but your observation one interested me. There were some lines - like the ones you pointed out - that I thought - brilliant, I wish I could write like that. And there were others - like the P. Piddy reference where I thought - no, just tell me the counter's filled with dozens of dirty glasses.  Same with the drawer - I thought really - it's just a drawer filled with crap - why the extra where keys go to die. The reason this is difficult for me is that the writer has such a great style in other places, I hesitate to say - don't do this here. I mean, like I said - other places where the same style was used I thought were brilliant. Guess the best way to put it is there were certain places where I got taken out of the story because I felt the writer - i.e, hey, it's me - here is another clever description. It hampered my immersion. Other places - same style - the writer found the perfect words to sink me right in. How's that for a whole lot of diatribe without really saying much. Maybe - you have a gift for crafting a description - but throttle back a bit and use them when really needed.

Yeah, I think the writer can be a little more judicious with the selection. It could well be my own personal preference clouding my view, though.

My thinking on each example, however:

"Next to the sink there’s enough dirty Champagne glasses for a party at P.Diddy’s."
- I don't know what P Diddy's place would look like. It's a reference based on an unknown about what his place actually looks like. It doesn't really evoke anything for me.

"Doc taps his phone. HEAVY METAL pumps out of unseen speakers in a modern living space. Everything is minimalist. Except the interior designer’s fee."
- An interior designer is charging to make a place look minimalist. That is true, but what does that mean to the story? Could be argued that it's a nod for set dec, but that would be reaching, IMO.

"INSIDE: the place old keys and bits of wire go to die."
- Nicer way of saying it's messy, and could be read as a sign of their marriage, but again, I think that would be reaching.

"The macabre make up can’t hold a candle to the horror on his real face."
- Now this one just hits the spot. We can totally understand how this relates directly to the scene unfolding, and how you would be totally horrified. Using imagery, the writer is able to show and tell us at the same time!