As you may or may not have seen, the selection for this Script Club is Armored. This script was chosen because it is a produced script written by an unknown and it got attention. We're going to take a week to read it, and then discuss it for another week (or until the discussion dies down.

What we're mainly looking at with this is not so much a review about the script, but more digging into why it sold at all. Personally, a heist story is nothing new, so there must have been something about this script that was special. We want to figure that out along with the usual banter over its general worthiness to grace our presence.

The script is not online so just PM me with your email and I'll send it to you.

This thread will self-destruct in... I mean, this thread will be locked until probably February 8th. As far as I know there won't be an OWC during the time frame we're doing this...though I could be wrong.

Through a combination of demand, necessity, and lack of opposition, I'm opening the script club for the opinions to drop and the discussion to begin. In the past, we've tried to restrict the daily discussion to specific elements, but that has caused some people to fizzle out and thoughts to be lost to the nether regions of their minds, never to be shared. We're going to try just a wide open "go" and try to figure out why this thing was cool enough to sell.

Initial thoughts:

Great script, I enjoyed it a lot. After Rocky, it was probably the most enjoyable Pro script I've read. (Most enjoyable, not necessarily the best...) It flowed easily and clearly and was an exeptionally fast read.

It's kind of a text book script, holding all the elements that the screenwriting gururs have emphasised through the years.

It has a clear protagonist, clear antagonists, a ticking clock that helps to build tension and a clear theme.

It's a simple story, well told.

It sets the scene very early, telling us all we need to know about Ty, he's broke, works different jobs, is under pressure at home with his younger brother who is going off the rails and wants to get married and sort out a better life for all his loved ones. Then we jump straight into the story and it stays in gear all the way through.

This is a story that I would have enjoyed directing myself and would definitley have been interested in if I had the opportunity.

The negatives of such a script are kind of intrinsic in this traditional approach. It's fairly obvious what the overall story arc is going to be. That's not something that is a problem for me in genre films. I don't think anyone doubted John Maclane would overcome his adversaries in Die Hard. The fun is in how it happens, not in whether or not it will happen.

The only thing that didn't work was the idea that these trucks wouldn't have GPS. That was a stretch and something that could surely have been avoided with a little thought.

I can easily see why there was a battle for it between numerous bidders.

1. Strong marketable genre: The Heist movie
2. Well written with a strong, positive ending
3. Easy to make. Just a few people, a warehouse and two trucks.

This is a film that a company based in LA could have made almost overnight in truth. There is almost no reason not to make it. Everything they need is right at their finger tips.

The film is very low risk, and would have seen a decent return on its investment had it been faithfully translated to the screen, I'm certain of that. I'll go into the film version and its mistakes at a later time.

I thought this was a really good script. I'd never heard of it or the film so went into completely innocent(?)
It seemd like we'd seen it all before but the writer gave it something that pushed it above cliche. i was amazed that two-thrids of the story take place in the abandoned factoy. But there's never a sense of boredom, as too much is going on. a very quick read.
A couple of gripes - i thought it unlikely the crew would confide in Ty so quickly. He could've been a police plant for all they knew, like an air marshall or something.
And it seemed almost incredulous(to me anyway) that these guys all of a sudden were gonna risk everything to steal the money. I assume they had families and stuff. Maybe if the writer had shown how desperate some of them were. Perhaps one had been sacked and wanted revenge. It just seemd unlikely how sort of...easy the robbery was(until things went up Shit creek)
Dec mentioned the film was vastly different and basically they fucked up a neat little script. That's disappointing, as it reads well and filmable as is.
I checked out the film on IMDB - some well known actors in it. Surely they could've shown the director how it would be better.
Perhaps Hollywood was the problem. I can imagine this script being a good film in the hands of UK actors, even Aussies. Even a US cast of unknowns would've done better. I picture this as a grainy almost doco type story. The scenes of Ty barricaded in the arnoured van would be great filmed with a handheld, showing the panic and that. nd I know fuck all about film making.
Anway, good script. I liked it.

I read the script.

I think it’s good. It’s well written, although it has a few errors in it. Nothing that really disrupts the read. It moves along nicely. It’s essentially a low budget claustrophobic Die-Hard.

I never really felt all that connected to the main character. Or to any of the other characters for that matter. I guess that’s okay for an action flick.

There were also some very unrealistic circumstances, even for an action flick.

According to IMDbPro, the budget was $25M and the worldwide gross was $16.6M. I don’t know how much its accidental Playstation Network release by Sony hurt its box office business, if at all.

So what were they looking for when they bought it? I think Rick probably hit on it. It’s a low budget action picture so linear and simple a child could follow it. According to an interview with the writer, he had reps to help facilitate the sale. He had placed in the Nicholl Fellowship in the past. I don’t know if that’s how he came in contact with his reps but it seems likely.

I haven’t seen the movie. And the script, while good, doesn’t excite me about seeing the movie. If I ever do see it, it’s the type of fodder I’ll forget. I can take it or leave it but I can certainly understand why someone would buy it. Seems like easy money when you read it.


Breanne

Sorry guys, I haven't read it yet, but I will ASAP.

Glad Bre brought up what I wrote personally to George...this is not a low budget movie, in any way.  They spent $25 Mil, and as far as I know, it's release was delayed quite a bit, for some reason.  I'm very curious to know how much this "unknown" writer made off of a $25 Mil budgeted flick.  If anyone knows, please post it.

Sorry, I'll read and comment on the actual script tomorrow or Thursday at the latest.

I haven't had time to read this yet but I can see why it was the subject for a bidding war. The "unknown" writer had an agent AND a manager before he started shopping this around. An advantage few, if any, have on this site. I'm guessing that was half the battle for him.

Haven't seen the film. Read the script many months ago and liked it.

The story is quite simple but engaging and okay for an action/thriller.

The highlight of this piece is how seamless it is. It flows really well, really fast, reads like a movie.

The story's simplicity can be deceiving; easy reading is damn hard writing as the saying goes.

The contained thriller is always an attractive genre to buyers. Keeping the action in one or few locations helps keep the budget in check.

A box office disappointment for sure. This issue was discussed in detail at the twoadverbs forums since the writer is a regular there.

The writer thinks the marketing department dropped the ball on the film. Surely, he's biased, but makes some interesting points nonetheless. Here are some excerpts:

Quoted Text Historically, the weekend after Black Friday is a terrible weekend with overall box office drops of 60% from the previous weekend being the norm. The marketing was, IMHO, one mistake after another and our tracking numbers showed the awareness and interest was generally soft due to the lackluster marketing. Also, there was a LOT of stuff that was shot only to be cut from the film that I think hurt it and damaged its positive word of mouth potential For example, more than half our advertising budget was spent on campaigns for BET and small black colleges. I can only imagine how much more effective it would have been to advertised to a broader younger audience. I can only imagine what our box office numbers would have been if we had opened on another weekend that was not 60% depressed and not competing for attention against movies with a bigger P&A behind them like Twilight, Blind Side, Brothers, Up in the Air and Avatar. Another huge letdown was the limited appearances and interviews of the cast and Director to promote the film. They appeared in a few markets a week before the film's release. That was not enough time to build a buzz and generate interest. Plus, the film's star is Columbus Short and he only appeared on a few late night shows on BET to promote the film. We should have been advertising during Heroes and CSI to reach fans of the actors in our movie. We should have had a larger presence on iTtunes and fan sites such as Ain't it Cool. There should have been behind the scenes featuretes at popular music and movie sites rather than being limited to only BET.

Very interesting, Mr. Z.  Great info!

I think he's fair in what he says, although I am surprised that the situation should arise. You may criticise the quality of the Hollywood output from time to time, but you'd never think they were slouches when it came to marketing.

As far as the UK goes there was zero publicity. The only thing I saw on it was the little poster on the wall in the cinema and that was poor in itself. Just some guys stood there.

In a way the poster seemed unintentionally funny. It's called Armoured and there was just a bunch of normal looking people stood there. It didn't sell it at all. A fearsome looking black armoured truck bursting out at us or something might have been more effective.

They would have been better making the movie for half the price and spending the $10M on better marketing.

However it seems like one of those that they just wanted to wipe their hands of, a bit like Rogue. Someone must have decided it didn't have the legs and just let it die.

The biggest mistake the film made though was that it changed the emphasis on the characters completely. COMPLETELY.

Cochrane becomes Ty's Godfather of all things (they look the same age). He's known him since he was a baby and was best friends with his father. He is also given a line "there's no bad guys here" that he keeps repeating. All of the cut and dried bad guys become completely inconsistent. He goes from a long time father figure to an outright homicidal maniac.

In the script TY is just set up as a stooge, which although still somewhat of a stretch, works well enough, in the film he is suddenly a life long friend of the guy who wants him dead. There were multiple things like this that made no sense and completely undid all the scripts logic.

The film dwells over Ty's past as an Iraq war veteran (where did that come from?) and adds new scenes about Jimmy (that are exceptionally boring) to do with the visit of social services...

In essence the Director tried to turn it into a noiry, shades of grey type film. The script was black and white, the everyday broke guy caught up in the bad guys scheme.

Once you've all seen the film you'll see what I mean. I could go on for hours about the stuff they've incorporated....

They bought a solid, fast paced action flick and seem to have tried to turn it into a character driven drama...at which point judging from what the writer has said (how they cut a lot of the stuff they shot), the studio probably demanded they cut it to make it faster moving like the film they bought.

It's really a mess, it tried to be something entirely different to what it is.

Ah...Rogue...my boy Greg Mclean...another story in itself...and a FANTASTIC movie!

Quoted from Dreamscale Ah...Rogue...my boy Greg Mclean...another story in itself...and a FANTASTIC movie!

Good film, tired premise. That's the problem there I think.

It's been done before, not just once but many, many times...Alligator, Lake Placid, Lake Placid 2 even the lamentable Crocodile by Tobe Hooper.

From what you say Dec, it sounds like they screwed it up by trying to ADD character development.  I bet that doesn't happen often!  

I thought this one was good. Not great, but definitely good. I think Decadence hit on all points.

It was a nice little action thriller, but I was never really in love with Ty. Someone compared it to a claustrophobic Die Hard. I disagree. Die Hard was loads better than this one. I'm not talking about the film, but the script.

This script reminded me of Panic Room.

I had a few issues too, with some of the plotholes. Like where were the GPSs? And when Ty was trapped inside and the cops were outside, why didn't he just toot the horn? That still works doesn't it?

I did like the twist that came though, when Ty learns that he will be killed. Very good way of throwing the protag into a "new upside down world".

Quoted from seamus19382 From what you say Dec, it sounds like they screwed it up by trying to ADD character development.  I bet that doesn't happen often!

And I would bet you're right.

It's very interesting reading the scripts as well as watching the film. You can get such totally different experiences. I was all ready to tear the script apart once I'd seen the film, then totally changed my mind when I read it.

Really a shame and I bet it must be frustrating for the writer in particular.

It makes you wonder how many films are out there that could have been great in different hands.