BryMo

Thanks for the post. I have read some of your work too.

I remember really diggin' "Toy soldier", it was one of the first scripts I read here. Sorry I was too lazy to leave a comment, similar to the logline situation. I'll see about getting one up & check some more of your stuff.

Cheers.

Col

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Toby_E Cheers for the comments, man. They were all relevant points you made on the grammar and I will be making some alterations. On some of the remarks you made: "The whole Dave dialogue by John and Helen seemed irrelevant... dialogue is meant to move the story forward, or reveal character. This scene seems to do neither" That's a common thing said & it is true the majority of the time but what makes Tarantino's or K.Smiths scripts so great? It's part because of the arbitrary conversations between characters that have no relevence to plot or lacking in character development but the convey a human, buddy touch to the person, a deeper understanding of their "everyday" loves, peeves whatever. Plus its a chance for the writer to have fun, air opinions, basically talk some shit.

I agree 100% with that mate- Tarrantino and Smith are easily two of my favourite writers, mainly down to their dialogue. But, when writing a short, every word, every piece of dialogue, every action should be crucial to the story, as you are trying to get your story across in the shortest time possible.

Tarrantino and Smith have 90- 120 mins to tell the audience their story, so they can afford their characters to speak some absurd, and random dialogue. But in a short, we don't always have that luxery.

Cheers, Toby.

Hey colkurtz8,

Just finished reading this and I have to give you props. I'm not really into screenplays like this, but this was well written. The dialogue was good. Even though there was a lot of information and history discussed between it's characters, none of it really sounded forced or fake. Good work.

It was a simple screenplay, not exactly plot heavy, but you make your characters engaging enough to care about. You make us care about their past relationships. I have to say though, that Mark being Helen's boyfriend and Elaine being married to John - and Helen having a past relationship with John and Mark with Elaine - it's very coincidental. But I'll buy it. The only thing is that I expected a lot more at the end of the story, like another twist based on the coincidental twist.

But nevertheless, I did like the ending how Mark lies to Helen, Helen lies to Mark about John and Eileen. It shows what type of relationship they have. Then how John and Eileen interact at the end - they seem to have a healthier relationship. Though I expected a "bigger ending" to the story, I was satisfied enough with what you had. I kind of like those type of endings where it is left open for the audience to wonder.

Nice work.

Michael Joseph Kospiah

Toby_E

Again a valid point I'm always trying to keep myself in line & not get too carried away with "irrelevant" conversation as I know I'm guilty of.

spesh2k

Thanks for the comments, man. I agree the whole thing is extremely coincidental but that was the story I went for. Thats what fiction is all about, you have the freedoms to sacrifice stark, dare I say boring, humdrum realism in order to conjure up some dramatic situations/confrontations.

As Mark “Chopper” Reed says “Never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn”

Great to see “The Suicide Theory” is getting some comments, it is definitely one of the best features I’ve read on the site, Good luck with it.

Cheers.

Col.

I have to start out by saying that, there aren't enough references to Champions League Football in writing today. Loved the sharp dialogue, and the way in which a single word or look can trigger downpours of emotion. The human condition never surprises me. I did feel though, that she was a touch too dramatic in her anger. So be it. A nice simple story that allows it's narrative, to find it's pacing from the get go.

Gonna go read some more.

Alex

methusela

Thanks for the post, man. You must be new here, welcome. If you have anything up here let me know, I'd love to read it.

Cheers.

Col.

Hey Col,

Just finished "A Seven Backed Up By A Two", and first I'd like to start off with the title. You really have to be into poker to get the meaning of the title, and you also really have to want to connect the title with what goes on in the script for the title to work. In my opinion the title should be changed, not to something more dramatic, but at least to something more suiting.

Anywho, on to the important thing - the script. I liked the overall tone of the script and the way it starts off on a very low key. I wasn't to sure what to expect but it certainly grapped me. I also liked the sort of uncomfortable moment John and Helen have at the beginning (those moments suck, don't they) and the way you reveal the characters' back stories.

Both women really have some issues with the two blokes but what I didn't like is that it's pretty much the same kind of scene twice. I know that that was what you were gunning for but, in the long run, the scenes do come off a bit repetitive to an extent. Both Helen and Elaine take out the frustration on John and Mark in almost the same manner (though Elaine seems a bit more feisty).

John and Mark are very different characters which is good, and while Mark seems like a regular asshole, John appears to have genuinely changed. That's why I would have like to see John a bit more defensive and maybe even snap at Helen.

Overall I think the script works but I also think that it could be a little tighter, especially the dialogue. Some of it feels like monologues. Also, maybe throw a little action in there. I don't mean a fight scene or a car chase but something that takes them away from just standing still - it's all very static.

Anyway, my two cents.

Cheers
Rob

Hey Rob

I appreciate the comments, you make some good points here regarding the static nature of the piece, the similarities between the two girls the dialogue turning into monologues.

All relevant observations although I like the simplicity of the four characters having it out, no frills or gratuitous "action" to distract or fill gaps. Just a good old fahioned confrontation with emphasis on the character protrayal & immediate conflict & motivations.

I doubt I'll change the title.  I have already explained above the meaning behind  & if people don't get it thats cool. I should be looking into getting a logline attached instead (I've been lazy about it).

I don't think John has any grounds to snap at Helen after what he's done. He must take this on the chin.

The fact that he "appears to have genuinely changed" as you put it  should back up my decision. Cos if he's changed it means he knows he was wrong in the first place so "snapping" at Helen would be contradictory.

Having said that I wanted to protray John as an inherently good person, who just wasn't ready to commit at that time in his life. Unfortunately his method of solving the dilemma was a little cowardly to say the least.

Thanks again for your opinions. I'll read some more of your stuff & leave a comment & if you get a chance you mite return the favour.

Cheers.

Col.

Quoted from Colkurtz8 The fact that he "appears to have genuinely changed" as you put it  should back up my decision. Cos if he's changed it means he knows he was wrong in the first place so "snapping" at Helen would be contradictory.

Well, the way I understood his backstory was that he was a drinker and a guy who, at one point, simply wasn't ready to commit to a relationship. I didn't see him as a loud mouth abusive figure so, from that point of view, I don't see it as being contradictory.

Mark, on the other hand, would be a completly different story.

Rob

It is never suggested that John is a drinker.

He just wasn't ready to tie the knot but left it till the last minute before bailing out on Helen.

I think you are confusing him with Mark who has all the above undesirable traits you've mentioned e.g habitual drinker, loud mouth, abusive etc.

Basically, what I'm saying is John was totally in the wrong in what he done to her. I tried to get this across from his body language & abrupt replies, that he KNOWS he went the wrong way about it & hurt Helen deeply in the process.

This is why I wasn't goin to have him go on the defensive, it just didn't fit his persona. Helen was the one with all the pent up anger, this is her stage to let rip.

I should have said "unjustified" instead of "contradictory" my bad.

Thanks again for taking the time to discuss this, Rob. If you have ny other questions/remarks, don't hesitate.

Sorry, I mistook some of Mark's dialogue as John's (about him cutting back on drinking). My bad.

Thats cool, at least you have an opinion. I just came across your infamous "Second Draft" (I was completely ignorant to this until I clicked on your script link (I am still relatively new to the site)

Lookin' forward to checking it out later on the basis that the few comments I've read about it have been unanimously positve...very positive. I'll hit you back when I get around to it.

Hey Col,

Like most everyone else I enjoyed the dialogue in this one, not just the content but how they spoke (maybe that’s just the Yank in me talkin’).  I usually get all bent with contrived coincidence, but for some reason this one didn’t bother me at all.  Only minor point being with Mark saying he saw Elaine on the plane.  With his personality I would have thought he’d have approached her then, or at least buy her a drink and send it over, instead of waiting for baggage pick-up.  Perhaps if one of them was bumped to first class, or he was in the back of the plane and he never saw her?

I had a similar reaction as Sniper about the conflict between the two couples.  At first I thought that it was going to be a contrast between Elaine and Mark at odds, and John and Helen feeling an attraction.  When Helen abruptly unleashes on John on page ?? (yes, specs should have page numbers!), I felt like this came out of nowhere.  It’s also where my interest waned somewhat.  This is where it became about two women just going off about past grievances.  

I don’t mind the quiet ending, but the problem, I feel, is nothing’s changed, no one’s made a choice, or made a discovery.  More than being static physically, the characters and events are static.  There’s conflict and emotion, but no story.  I know this is the type of thing you prefer, more character portraits played out with a random event, but at some point you should consider introducing storytelling elements into your work.  I think doing this would really put your shorts over the top and harness the power of your characters in a purposeful way.  But somehow I suspect you’re going to stick with bucking the old school and going your own way.  

Format/Mechanical Notes:
General: Your use of the ampersand (&) everywhere drives me nuts.  Feels lazy and makes it awkward to read.
General: Most of your ellipses can be replaced with periods or commas.
Pg. 1: “C.U” should be “C.U.” (missing second period in two spots)
Pg. ?: “H.R” should be “H.R.” (missing second period)
Pg. ?: “Both are standing next to each other...” – since you change scenes on us here, should be “John and Helen stand next to each other...”
Pg. ?: “A voice...calling out ETAs” – If we hear this, you need to put it as dialogue.  If it’s not that important, maybe just drop it?
Pg. ?: “How’s your Mother keeping?” – mother should be lower case.
Pg. ?: “The Doctor said...” – doctor should be lower case.
Pg. ?: “MARK(CONT’D” – missing closing ), but you can drop these (cont’d)s all together.
Pg. ?: “supposed to be n...”  should be “supposed to be n--” dashes show interruption, ellipses show pauses or trailing off.
Pg. ?: “a coward.” Should be “A coward.”

Thanks for an interesting read.  Good luck!

rjbelair

I appreciate your feedback you made some interesting points that I will take into consideration. Just a few things on what you said:

I have been told more then once that page numbers are NOT required in spec scripts.

My idea was to have Helen's freakout come as a shock as she had been keeping it together, but when you find out more about their past & circumstances I think she is well within reason.

You say that nothing has changed, I have to disagree. The two women get a chance to get things off their chest & to some degree are the better for it.

Elaine is reluctant at first, she would prefer not to have to deal with mark but when she does let him have it & even though he maintains himself enough to deride her just before the meet the other two we know Mark has been shaken & sees he isn't dealing with the same push over as before.

As for Helen, she just never got the opportunity before, this is what she's been waiting for .

Given the situation & location, I think this is enough & more importantly closer to what might happen in real life. I'm not interested in having to come to some sort of a quantifiable resolution or a lesson, a big revelation. Unfortunately things rarely turn out like that...except in movies of course & we've seen enough of them.

Saying that both women are too similar is a fair point but aren't they -- I won't finish that one. (note the use of dashes as opposed to ellipses, I'm catching on)

In terms of storytelling & shorts scripts. My perception of a short is, its like you walk in on the characters, a fly on the wall that only sticks around for a snippet of their lives In that time you try and make the brief interaction count whether through comedy, drama, horror etc.

When I set out to try & write a short (the keyword being "try" here), the story or plot isn't what first interest me not the greater plot. I'd prefer to save that for feature length screenplays.

Some shorts on here show potential for expansion & development into a greater story, others dont but this doesn't detract from the latter.

Some of the best stuff I've read here has been the one off scenario premise...but like everything, each to their own taste & that is whats great about this site.

About the technical discrepancies you mentioned:

In the majority of scripts I've read, ampersand is commonly used. The only rule is: Don't have it in dialogue only prose. I wouldn't put it down to laziness, man it's only an extra two characters. Tho it does save space, that's why I do it.

I realise I use ellipses maybe too frequently( & incorrectly as you rightfully pointed out) But they help phrase what the character is saying for me. Breaks it down & allows the reader to grasp how he/she is delivering the line( I know we are moving into Director territory with this) But ya I probably need to tone them down a little.

I wouldn't give the ETA announcer is own line, just change it to something like "The muffled, inaudible voice of the announcer is heard over the intercom"  Maybe drowned out by people passing by.

Again you are correct on the capitalisation  that is a result of lack of concentration.

In a screenplay format article on the BBC writers room web site they refer to the inclusion of (CONT'D) if its a new page or if a character is to speak again after he/she is cut off with a line of prose or whatever.

Plus I think its easier for the reader not to get confused & know the same character is talking.

Thanks again for your comments, always very observant & helpful.

Cheers.

Col.



  

Quoted from Colkurtz8 I have been told more then once that page numbers are NOT required in spec scripts.

I'm sorry, but this one still absolutely baffles me.  I've been monkeying around with screenwriting for years now, read scores of books, participated in many forums, and talked to a few professional screenwriters, and never have I ever come across the idea, or even the suggestion, that you shouldn't use page numbers.

Logic alone should prevail here.  What do you say when you're talking about your script?

Col: How'd you like the exploding balogna scene?
Agent: Ah, yes, about that...let me turn to that...can't find it...
Col: It's somewhere in the middle.
Agent: What page?
Col: It's a spec.
Agent: Uh, okay, what page is the scene on?
Col: It's right after the scene with the dancing cats and the electric banana.
Agent: What page!?
Col: Just before the aliens kidnap the mud wrestling amazon.
Agent: Page number...
Col: I told you it's a spec, you moron, it doesn't need page numbers!
Agent: I've got to get to a meeting, don't call us, we'll call you.

Is there a specific source you can reference for this tib bit of advice?  I'd love to see where this is coming from!  I suspect this is some sort of clever trick you Brits are trying to put over on us obnoxious Yanks just to make us look silly!



Cheers,
-RayB