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.
I agree. A film that shows pedophilia in a positive light is absolutely wrong.
A film or script that depicts a 1,000 year old demon in the form of a 14 or 16 year old girl does not do that. It's two completely different situations. That's like arguing that Voldemort and Harry Potter are essentially the same character because they're both wizards! And I can assure you, the character of Hanna was not created for shock value. It was part of a carefully constructed personna (which yes, does have shocking elements - but that's not the raison d'etre.) And obviously - many other readers didn't take it that way.
Which doesn't mean you can't dislike it - for whatever reason you choose. But I can - and will continue - to respectfully correct anyone who argues that the script *does* espouse pedophilia, or send a pro-exploitation message. It doesn't. The character is simply not a child.
I don't actually get turned off in a script. 99% of the time, if I spend the time to open it, I read it through, regardless of how bad. Content never bothers me. My issues are more about the fundamental bits; grammar and spelling above all. Wooden dialogue also bothers me when I read it, but it's hard to make dialogue sound good when you're just reading it and don't have the luxury of hearing the lines spoken in the way they should be. Beyond that, I'm cool with anything else, so long as the read is relatively quick.
A film or script that depicts a 1,000 year old demon in the form of a 14 or 16 year old girl does not do that.
It is not visually a demon... it is specifically a 14-year-old girl. Or was. It was changed to 16. Why was it changed? I might as well ask you, you know it all.
Quoted from wonkavite
It's two completely different situations. That's like arguing that Voldemort and Harry Potter are essentially the same character because they're both wizards!
It isn't anything like arguing that at all!
Quoted from wonkavite
And I can assure you, the character of Hanna was not created for shock value.
That isn't what the author said. It obviously was done for shock value.
Quoted from wonkavite
It was part of a carefully constructed personna (which yes, does have shocking elements - but that's not the raison d'etre.)
Maybe sexualising a 14-year-old girl is fine with you. Where I'm from it's quite shocking.
Quoted from wonkavite
And obviously - many other readers didn't take it that way.
Many? What do you know of many? You mean reviewers? Anyone that considers the image of a 14-year-old girl dressed in hardly anything fawning over a 30-year-old man is a good image to see on film then good for them. To me, it isn't right.
Quoted from wonkavite
Which doesn't mean you can't dislike it - for whatever reason you choose.
Why thank you... much appreciated.
Quoted from wonkavite
But I can - and will continue - to respectfully correct anyone who argues that the script *does* espouse pedophilia, or send a pro-exploitation message.
You're not correcting. You are stating your opinion... which is wrong.
When Hannah is being flirtatious with Michael, or trying to kiss him, it's sick and twisted and makes me want to take a shower.
And it's not because she's 14 or 16, but because she's a 1,000 year old demon.
So let's get this straight. You actually block out the image of 14-year-old Hannah altogether and just see the demon? You're not seeing a scantily dressed little girl... you're seeing the ugly demon she really is.
The concept and/or writing is puerile / teen fantasy.
I'm unable to discern who the market for the film would be for.
I'm unable to reconcile the film's production expense with the film's market.
Writer is grossly ignorant of what he/she writes about.
Trying-too-hard and juvenile, over-the-top characters or scenarios.
Screenwriter is paying less attention than I am.
Just plain effing boring / "It get's better the farther you get into it." Effffffffff meeeeeeeee. Sigh... I promise it gets a whole lot better when I click on the little red square in the upper right-hand corner of my screen.
It is not visually a demon... it is specifically a 14-year-old girl. Or was. It was changed to 16. Why was it changed? I might as well ask you, you know it all.
- I already answered this in a recent post. Didn't you read it? It was changed to prevent any other readers who might react similar to you. While you have been to date the only one to feel this way, that doesn't mean you'll necessarily be the last.
It isn't anything like arguing that at all!
- Yes, it is. You're cherry picking facts about the character. IE: the physical form of a teen girl - and ignoring other salient facts. IE: that the character's clearly defined as a 1,000 year old demon - and therefore not capable of being exploited or taken advantage of. I'm sure 1,000 year old demons are far beyond the age of consent!
That isn't what the author said. It obviously was done for shock value.
- Then you read Phil's quote wrong. What I said was that the character wasn't written for shock value as it's raison d'etre. And Hannah wasn't. She has shocking elements, yes. But the character herself is actually extremely sympathetic. Imagine being a young fourteen year old - killed in the middle of the Crusades due to her faith - then spending 1,000 years in hell. Frankly, *I* find that a pretty emotionally gripping situation. One of the reasons I love the character.
Maybe sexualising a 14-year-old girl is fine with you. Where I'm from it's quite shocking.
- Sexualizing a 14 year old girl is horrible. Sexualizing a 1,000 year old demon is absolutely fine with me. Depending what they look like.
Many? What do you know of many? You mean reviewers? Anyone that considers the image of a 14-year-old girl dressed in hardly anything fawning over a 30-year-old man is a good image to see on film then good for them. To me, it isn't right.
- Translation of "many": of all the reviewers who read the script - you are the only one who reacted this way to the character. What that says to me is that other reviewers don't interpret the character as a human girl. But rather, as the centuries old demon that she is.
Why thank you... much appreciated.
- You're welcome.
You're not correcting. You are stating your opinion... which is wrong. Yes she simply is.
- No, actually... i"m right. In what possible world would a 1,000 old sentient entity be considered a child?
Dustin, you have every right to feel however you want. And obviously - child welfare issues is a major hot button emotional topic for you. I doubt there's anyone on this board who would disagree with you about the need to protect children from exploitation. But in this case, it's causing you to read a lot of things into a script that just aren't there. But if you can't see the difference between romanticizing pedophilia - and a fantasy script where a centuries old soul plays mind games in her previously human form... Well, then there's nothing more than I can say. Other than that you're too emotionally involved to see the difference.
Like I said, I imagine a demon to be twisted, perverse, wicked, vicious, with a complete disregard for anything.
It's what I said in my previous post.
For all those reasons, that's why.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
So let's get this straight. You actually block out the image of 14-year-old Hannah altogether and just see the demon? You're not seeing a scantily dressed little girl... you're seeing the ugly demon she really is.
Gotcha.
A scantily dressed little girl, yeah... who is really a demon. An evil spirit.
An agent of evil. Pure evil. An entity that revels in ruin and sick shit.
That's what Hannah really is.
This isn't Thistles, where the underage girl wants to bang her 40 year old teacher -- a way more realistic script by Mark Lyons (not saying its better, just more realistic... for obvious reasons).
TDJ is a fantasy thriller or whatever... crazy shit is going to go down, of course.
You mentioned, what would be wrong changing her age to 21? The more I think about it, I'm kinda disappointed that Phil even changed the age from 14 to 16 (ha, as if it's much of a difference). I already think Phil writes too "safe" as it is and he made a change to play it safe just for the sake of avoiding backlash like this. The individual character isn't really 16 years old to begin with. "It" is 1,000 years old. I forget exactly how Phil described Hannah as a character, but maybe it should have been something along the lines of "an ancient demon thousands of years old in the form of a 16-year-old sexy temptress."
Hypothetically, instead of making her 21, would you be OK with a barely legal 18? That would end this whole debate pretty quick.
The Exorcist, a classic horror film, goes for absolute shock value (while still being pretty scary, IMO)
The devil possesses a little girl and makes her scream obscenities ("Your mother sucks cocks in Hell") while masturbating with a crucifix. Who doesn't expect that from a demon (or the devil)? They have no conscience. No moral value. They are evil. Shocking. Hell, they aren't even of this world. It's why the Hannah character is so badass, IMO, but I know you disagree on that one, sooo....
In fact, in most horror movies it is almost always a female that feels the wrath of a demon or the devil the most.
There are notable references (The Exorcist), mediocre references (Stigmata), and forgettable ones too...
Some really great exceptions with DeNiro (Angel Heart), Pacino (The Devil's Advocate), and Gabriel Byrne (End of Days) as male leads. Also, maybe not a lead but Brad Dourif was phenomenal in his small role as the possessed in The Exorcist III.
- I already answered this in a recent post. Didn't you read it? It was changed to prevent any other readers who might react similar to you. While you have been to date the only one to feel this way, that doesn't mean you'll necessarily be the last.
I'm not the only one to date that feels this way. I'm the only one that has voiced that opinion... that is a far cry from being the only person to feel that way. If I'm in such a small minority then there wouldn't be any need to change it. There is such a thing as the silent majority. Many people will have been disturbed by what they read, as it is always followed with the excuse that although it may look like a 14-year-old girl, she actually has the mind of a much older woman so it's OK. She may only be 14, but she acts like she's 21. LOL. Yeah, heard that one before.
I'm happy to say that I don't know anybody that would find this acceptable. In fact I may make a post about it somewhere later and get some impartial opinions.
Quoted from wonkavite
- Yes, it is. You're cherry picking facts about the character. IE: the physical form of a teen girl - and ignoring other salient facts. IE: that the character's clearly defined as a 1,000 year old demon - and therefore not capable of being exploited or taken advantage of. I'm sure 1,000 year old demons are far beyond the age of consent!
But 14-year-old girls are not. I'm not cherry picking anything. I've taken all the facts on board. She has the body of a 14-year-old girl for no other reason than to shock people. Something you claim to hate. Your biased opinion prevents you from accepting the truth.
Quoted from wonkavite
- Then you read Phil's quote wrong.
No I didn't.
Quoted from wonkavite
What I said was that the character wasn't written for shock value as it's raison d'etre. And Hannah wasn't. She has shocking elements, yes. But the character herself is actually extremely sympathetic. Imagine being a young fourteen year old - killed in the middle of the Crusades due to her faith - then spending 1,000 years in hell. Frankly, *I* find that a pretty emotionally gripping situation. One of the reasons I love the character.
Making her bitter and twisted, not flirtatious and sexualised. That didn't read as a horror script to me. It was buffy fantasy. Which is not horror. I can't imagine things the way the author has. It's too soft for me. If I wrote that same thing, a 14-year-old/1000 year old demon after 1000 years of wisdom, she wouldn't be interested in sex. Nor would she be interested in what people thought about her, ie making her wear revealing clothes.
It'd be far more horrifying if she came across as demure until she needed to. No need for the sexualisation, none at all.
The protag in the story has no other romantic interest. If he did, then that could work. As it stands with he being a single man and she being a young girl dressing the way she does, the flirtatiousness, etc... it's the only romantic link in the script. That's not good.
Quoted from wonkavite
- Sexualizing a 14 year old girl is horrible.
That is what is visible on the screen. Deliberately so.
Quoted from wonkavite
- Translation of "many": of all the reviewers who read the script - you are the only one who reacted this way to the character. What that says to me is that other reviewers don't interpret the character as a human girl. But rather, as the centuries old demon that she is.
OK, so you did mean reviewers. You actually stated that you knew what all the readers were thinking. Reviewers/friends don't count. You know that. That's a huge issue with the objectivity of this forum as a whole. People make relationships and form biased opinions. It's unstoppable. As an outsider looking in, I can see that more than anyone. Maybe that's a little much. I believe you see it too, you just choose to ignore it.
Quoted from wonkavite
- No, actually... i"m right. In what possible world would a 1,000 old sentient entity be considered a child?
When, for all intents and purposes, the thing on the screen is actually a 14-year-old girl.
Quoted from wonkavite
Dustin, you have every right to feel however you want.
Why, thank you. I must say it is such a relief having permission from you to feel how I want.
Quoted from wonkavite
And obviously - child welfare issues is a major hot button emotional topic for you. I doubt there's anyone on this board who would disagree with you about the need to protect children from exploitation. But in this case, it's causing you to read a lot of things into a script that just aren't there. But if you can't see the difference between romanticizing pedophilia - and a fantasy script where a centuries old soul plays mind games in her previously human form... Well, then there's nothing more than I can say. Other than that you're too emotionally involved to see the difference.
What you're doing here is called 'projection'. The emotional involvement is yours with Phil, the author, and your need to protect your friend's feelings. I don't even know his name. Well, I do now, obviously. The point is, I can tell him the truth without fear of hurting his feelings. You will butter things over and lie.
I don't have any emotional involvement whatsoever. I'm merely stating an opinion. I don't have anything to gain. I don't care. In fact, I'd actually have the courage to tell one of my friends it was wrong too. Of course I would. I'd be an arsehole if I didn't.
Every person that reads that script will have to wrestle with the rights and wrongs of it. Simple as that.
The Exorcist, a classic horror film, goes for absolute shock value (while still being pretty scary, IMO)
The devil possesses a little girl and makes her scream obscenities ("Your mother sucks cocks in Hell") while masturbating with a crucifix. Who doesn't expect that from a demon (or the devil)? They have no conscience. No moral value. They are evil. Shocking. Hell, they aren't even of this world. It's why the Hannah character is so badass, IMO, but I know you disagree on that one, sooo....
In fact, in most horror movies it is almost always a female that feels the wrath of a demon or the devil the most.
There are notable references (The Exorcist), mediocre references (Stigmata), and forgettable ones too...
Some really great exceptions with DeNiro (Angel Heart), Pacino (The Devil's Advocate), and Gabriel Byrne (End of Days) as male leads. Also, maybe not a lead but Brad Dourif was phenomenal in his small role as the possessed in The Exorcist III.
---Steve
That script was not a horror script. Read like a 12 to me. That means young girls would be able to see it. That sends out the wrong message.
Indeed, because she is 14, the classification board may have a hard time placing it. Could even bump up the classification to a 15. Which doesn't really suit the flow of the script. Viewers will go in expecting more and feel let down when it isn't there - aside from the sexualisation of a 14-year-old girl, which probably isn't what they went to see.
Up the age and this will make for a much better script. Even Carson in his review had to excuse the fact that she was even 16 with the fact that in her mind she's really a 1000-year-old demon. Everyone will have to turn that over in their minds and arrive at a moral conclusion. Why do that to people you want to enjoy your script?
Personally, I'd rather they concentrated on the story and not devices planted there in an attempt to shock.
I think at this point, we're talking in circles. You obviously have your opinion. I have mine. And I think continuing the discussion at this point is counter productive. You're offended by the concept of Hannah. I (and others on the board that have also stated their opinion) see nothing wrong with it - for the reasons already discussed.
Once more... just for the record... I would be 100% against a character or script that promoted pedophilia. I see no way that Devil's Jokebook does that. You do. We'll agree to disagree, and unhijack this thread for the rest of the board!
Incidentally - you're off-base on my reasons for defending this script. I've told (and will continue to tell dogglebe/Phil whenever I feel his writing is off-base or less than quality.) I have absolutely no compuctions about that, trust me. Much to his chagrin. But I happen to feel that Devil's Jokebook is a terrific fantasy script. Deep characters, a complex theme, really nice FX set pieces...and an undercurrent of humor that really works for me. And Hannah? Probably the best character of them all. And part of that is her 14...or 16 year old form. It creates a pathos for the character with a sinister edge - one that would be destroyed by making her older.
Pages: 
Author
What turns you off?
Logged
Locked Board