Mistakes - Page 2 - license should be licence, the first is a verb the second is a noun.

Overall I enjoyed this. I did see some similarities with the lie detector in Balde Runner and The Day The Earth Stood Still, but not enough that it wasn't unique. Your characters had motives, history, nice exchanges, etc. I guess my biggest problem if any was that this piece was static, a talking heads piece. It seemed like part of an exercise you set yourself in dialouge and characterisation? Overall, thumbs up for me.

Brett,

This is my first real review so I don't know what my opinion is worth really, but here we go:

I really liked the dialogue in this script. It was wittier and more alive than a lot of the dialogue I have read here on SS so far.

I guess this does qualify as a talking heads piece, but I like that sort of thing if the dialogue is well written as this was.

This biggest problem I had was Peter seemed a little too composed after all he went through in five minutes. He set off a bomb and found what may or may not be the severed finger of his child. He needs a bit more reaction out of it I think.

The ending gave me trouble as well. It seems that it could be expanded on much more, either into a longer short or a feature. I didn't really get any sense of closure, it felt like the start of a really cool movie.

Over all it was clever and pretty well written.

-DietCokehead

Hey Dreamer,

I liked this. Here are my comments:

Amp up Peter’s character a bit. He’s a former hard ass DEA agent who quit his job because he had a conscience.

Peter needs to react to the kid’s finger and wife’s ring.

Carson was a delicious bad guy, always two steps ahead, but the ending was over the top (literally) with the helicopter.

I liked the way you revealed Carson’s boss and his reason for being there. But did it really take since 2005 to exact his revenge? I wasn’t clear.

I saw a similarity to Blade Runner’s opening interview. If you had just put in a tortoise stuck on his back in a desert, I’d have known it was on purpose.

No need to explain your story and your goals before we read it, takes all the fun out of a fresh read.

Good story, I can see the calm, collected Michael Westin character from Burn Notice in Peter and his take any risk side in Carson.

This would make a great intro for an action adventure script.

If this is what you write when you drink... pour another!

Gary

Quoted from bert For this one, whether it was intentional or not, I noticed an uncanny resemblance between your opening scenes and the opening interview with Leon in "Blade Runner."   I am just putting that out there in case it was an instance of "subconscious lifting" -- we all do it -- as opposed to an intentional homage of sorts. If it was intentional, you should also know that, unbidden, I could not shake the image of Carson and Peter as Leon and the other guy (whose name escapes me now).

Bert old buddy! =p

Much thanks for the read.
Wow. Blade Runner *never* entered my mind the entire time I worked on this.
I am amazed and a bit embarrassed at the same time.
I guess that was the last movie to start with a polygraph test.

Quoted from bert Being a Florida native myself, I am not sure what you mean by "candy cane palm trees".  Are you implying Christmas decorations?  Better to be specific there, I think.

Yeah I got all fancy pants with the decorations. Guilty.

Quoted from bert And just as I was going to commend you on such a simple setting, you go and introduce some challenging SFX into this.  I think it works, though, and it is clever in that you never actually show the explosions or the chopper, so the script is not totally out of reach, either.  I also liked the finger haha.  That is also fairly simple, but could work very well.

I would have stayed simple had I was thinking of shooting this as a short.
And it could be very easily modified to suit that purpose.
I intentionally wanted to create a short that could easily go both ways.
A teaser for an ambitious director of shorts OR enticement for a full feature.
I also like the implication of not showing copters or explosions...
As if to say the gravitas of these two men is far more important than SFX.
The "fireworks" in the room are far more potent than anything else.   

Quoted from bert While much of the dialogue was good -- tossing about the concept of who is lying to whom for very good effect -- I must admit that I was ultimately left a little confused about the scenario being played out here.  Specifically, I mean the relationship between these two men.

Was there something on the page that felt off, or is it a matter of things left unsaid?
My intention was to end this with just enough to suggest than to telegrpah.
Part of that thinking was to entice a producer to expand this into a feature.
But if there's something directly on the page that's bollocks, please tell me.

Quoted from bert That started around page 4, when Peter asks if his life is in danger.  I think this is where the conversation makes a big "leap" -- and it is hard to follow Peter's logic for asking such a question. It is also a little difficult to understand why Peter would feel culpable for the explosion.  I mean, it kind of makes sense in the quick-logic world of this scenario and the script -- but not if you pause to really think about it.

There was a bit more color in the last draft about the death of Costa's son.
Peter took the desk after being repsonsible for the death of an innocent child.
Setting off a bomb immediately took him back to that, hence the projected guilt.
I can see where you're coming from, perhaps that beat should go back in.

Quoted from bert We can assume that Carson is some sort of assassin, and the big change you have made to this set-up is that nobody dies.  Everybody knows that a hit-man script is supposed to end with somebody dying!  Either the assassin or the target.  I am kidding, of course, and note that you end here with the implications of a larger story about to begin.  This works in one way, but is less satisfying in another way.  It will likely come down to reader preferences.

I realized that some would feel I cheated a bit at the end.
Admittedly, it was intentional, but to keep options open for the story.
To me, this is a very Lincoln Logs kind of script.
Depending on interest from where, its easily adaptable to suit production purposes.
But hopefully has enough zip that someone may see a potential feature there.
So I created what I thought was an open end with a taste of resolution to the "test".
It's a tightrope walk, but I wanted to try and see if I could have any success at it.

Quoted from bert Me, I liked it just fine as it is -- knowing that these two were going to continue interacting, albeit somewhere unseen.  The dialogue is snappy, though I found Carson far more entertaining than Peter -- when one character is particularly strong, the other character usually suffers.  That is difficult to avoid I do not want to suggest changes simply for the sake of suggesting them.  To me, the work is fine as it stands, and it reads well -- unless you have some ideas about cementing the actual relationship between these two men rather than leaving it sort of ambiguous.

I tried to give Peter some snap, he isn't a clod or a coward.
But he is a family man with a chip on his shoulder.
In future refinements, I will endeavor to tweak him a bit.
The thing that most pleases me so far in is the lack of mechanical critiques.
I've put a lot of effort into improving my craft mechanics for this piece.
Lie Detector is a riff, a vibe, a breezy fireball for snappy entertainment.
I wanted to keep it moving and dangerous, but never take itself too seriously.
That late 80's early 90's action vibe.
Where the villain would let the audience know its okay to have fun.

Now get to work on Dry Lightning!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I thought it was well written and easy to read. Like Bert, I had no idea what a candy cane palm tree is, but I assumed it would be one of those that have circles around the trunk. On the very first page, I almost expected Carson to say "what are you going to do? Charge me with smoking?". Bert saw Blade Runner in the beginning, I saw Basic Instinct.

Pia!

Much thanks for the read!
How's Finders Keepers going?
My big goal here was to wrangle my verbose action description into shape.
And hopefully learn to stop getting in the way of my own storytelling.
I dig how evocative of other successful films this scenario is.
It's fascinating the see the correlations readers make that never crossed my mind!
The actual inspiration came from two sources, neither of which are a film.
1) Babz's request for Action! Action! Action!
2) I watched my fave budget spy show that day, "Burn Notice".
    Michael Westin took a polygraph test that day on the show.
I wanted to see if I could start writing right after lunch with no notes, just an image.
An image of two guys "facing/off" over a polygraph test.
I've never stared down the Great White Beast and just started typing.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I was a little confused about the story to be honest. I hate when other people say this about stuff I write, but I feel I have to here and that is that this felt like a scene out of a much longer piece rather than a stand alone story. We don't find out what this really is about and the ending is not an end... Can't remember the word I want to use here, but maybe you know what I'm trying to say. Carson was far more interesting than Peter. Peter has a bland name and a bland personality, IMHO. ...and don't worry about posting scripts while drunk. I've done that many times.

Lie Detector was intended to be able to go either way, expansion or short production.
To that end, I consciously tried to mix resolution with the potential to continue.
It's an uneasy marriage, sure to not satisfy everyone, but I made the choice.
I tried to "resolve" the testing process, as if to say...
You've made it this far, your family is still alive, let's move on to level two.
You are right, it's not an end, but I tried not to totally disenfranchise folks.
In further refinements, I think I can do this better.

I'm really thrilled to hear my pages are getting easier to read.
I'm applying the same sparseness to the latest draft of Red Sun.

Thanks for posting and don't let those producers give you a hard time!

Regards,
E.D.

P.S. That new avatar is friggin priceless! <3

Quoted from jwent6688 Brett, I was going to bring this up as well. Just started to feel like I was throwing too many negatives at you. This script has a good deal of questions due to its complexity. I think you should lose the explosion, Carson bailing out on a rope latter. Just concentrate on the dialogue here and shorten it. I've read both versions. My comments for the first still stand. This has great potential to get filmed if you leave those theatrics out of it... James

James,

Your critiques and movie reviews are always a blast, no worries, pal.

This short was designed to be able to go a few potential ways:
1) Trimmed a bit and made into a one room short. Or...
2) Shot as a SFX laced teaser as is for a potential feature. Or...
3) Continue the script if there was an interested party that wanted a feature.

To that end, I realize it leaves a few stones unturned that will stick out to folks.
What I wanted to do was put enough elements in play for any of those to work out.
You are absolutely right, James. Your way would make this an effective short.
I wanted this script to evoke potential from a variety of industry types and enthusiasts.
Someone can read this and see any of those scenarios as a possibility.

And if someone wants to do a one room indie shot, I can make those changes fast.
And if someone wants a feature script, I have notes to that end already.
I just hope these open "possibilities" don't turn too many folks off.

Thanks as always for your thoughtful commentary.

Regards,
E.D.

I will reply more when I can! Your guys rawk for the mega reads over the weekend!

Hey Brett, sorry for taking so long to get this back to you.  As I mentioned in a PM, I did read this a few days ago, but never got around to writing my thoughts down. So, here…we…GO!

I’m actually going to read along again and jot things down as I go.  You are such a welcome addition to the SS community, Brett, I feel like I want to go as in-depth for you as I can, time permitting.  You do a lot of reading and reviewing and it’s only right that the favors are returned.

General Note - I understand your intentions for writing this in a way that it could appeal to many for many different reasons.  Some of my comments will not be taking that into account, so apologies up front.

Overall thoughts – Good, clean, crisp writing and dialogue.  Well crafted story with an intriguing setup.  As you’ll read below, it didn’t really work for me overall, based on a number of issues, but I can easily see why so many like it for what it is.

Page by page details - Page 1 – In a perfect world, where budgets and other film making limitations don’t exist, I think it would be far more effective to start with an EXT scene of the “skyscraper”.  You have a dialogue reference at the bottom of Page 1 about being on the 10th floor, which is good, and then on Page 2, you give us the panoramic view from the office, so production costs are thrown out the window there anyway, so to speak…why not start us off this way and give it a bigger feel and more powerful kick off?.

Opening passage is awkward, IMO.  “sits in a chair”  “He is hooked…” – Neither line has much life and I think you could have started this off much more effectively.  Now that I think about it, I have a feeling that this played into my less than favorable thoughts when I first read this.  It’s just bland…stagnant.  IMO, if you start outside the building, or even with a “panoramic view” through the windows behind these two, you’d be starting in a position of power (visually) as opposed to what you chose to do, which is rather weak, IMO.

Opening dialogue lines are good.

“Peter forces a smile. He adjusts his glasses.” – IMO, this should read as, “Peter forces a smile, adjusts his glasses.” – Obviously nothing world changing here, but I think it reads cleaner, faster…better.  It’s something that is quite simple but will help your writing overall, if you take it to heart.

“Carson takes a breath. He relaxes in the chair.” – Exact same thing here, Brett.  There’s just no reason to have 2 sentences here, as well as a character’s name and then “He”.  “Carson takes a breath, relaxes in his chair.”  -  Just so much cleaner and easier, IMO.

I don’t like Carson’s dialogue about the sandwich.  The whole thing sounds weird (and not weird like in, Hmmm, what’s he up to?  The word choice doesn’t sound real to me).  Like others, I also have to seriously question the ability of Carson to bring in literally anything to this interrogation, let alone what we know to be in the sandwich.

Page 2 – Dialogue exchange is good here at the top of the page!

“Behind Carson, a panoramic view. Beach front skyscrapers and candy cane palm trees.” – OK, Brett, check this out, as I’m a little confused (I’m not talking about the “candy can palm trees, either, but you should definitely lose that description for sure!).  We’ve had numerous shots of Carson up until now, and I’d have to assume a good number of those shots were “head shots” of him talking, etc., meaning the camera is in front of him, and we’re looking directly at him…which means that we’d also see what’s behind him…the panoramic view. See what I’m getting at?  This goes back to my initial comment and something that I say (in different ways) all the time.  IMO, a good writer sets his scene immediately.  Anything of importance (or of visual magnitude) that will obviously be seen (or come into play later), needs to be intro’d right off the bat.  You haven’t mentioned a thing about the view from the window until now, and we’re a minute into the film already.  It’s an issue, IMO.

OK, so Carson calls Peter by name, but the next line alludes to Carson reading Peter’s lanyard and getting his name from there.  Is that right, or why are you directing us to Peter’s lanyard and name tag.  And maybe a better question, does it make sense that Federal agents would be wearing name tags while interrogating dangerous criminals?  I’m not sure personally, but this reads a bit strangely and I’m not sure what I’m supposed to make of it.

At the bottom of the page, Peter says, “phone calls are not allowed during the test”  However, earlier, he told Carson that this was not a test or interrogation, but an interview.

Page 3 – I have some issues that start here, so let’s address them…

“Peter studies the screen.” – What screen?

OK, so Peter tells Carson that they have his phone (which makes sense), yet they let him bring in his “pack” and didn’t even bother to check to see what’s in it.  This doesn’t compute and is a glaring error in logic for me.

Carson’s next dialogue is odd and confusing for me.  He mentions “the lobby” and that he “knew it had to be around here somewhere”.  What is this supposed to even mean?  That his phone is in the lobby, or that the lobby is around here somewhere?

OK, then a few lines later, Peter asks Carson if he’s “here today to give sworn testimony”.  Now I’m confused.  At first, Carson asks if he’s being tested. Then Peter tells him it’s neither a test nor an interrogation, but actually an interview, and now it turns out that Carson is here to give sworn testimony.  Either you’re purposely hiding what’s going on, or you are unclear.  I’m definitely unclear!

The stuff about “the panic button” doesn’t work for me as you never set it up, nor have you even shown such a thing.  I think you need to show his finger hovering over a button, so we’re all clear on this.

Page 4 – The dialogue on the top of the page is pretty good.  It’s now unclear who Carson is…or if he’s even Carson Briggs at all (but that’s another story altogether).  It works well here the way you most likely wanted it to.

Back to this screen again.  I guess it’s clear you’re referring to the laptop screen, but without really showing it ever, it’s confusing to me. I think you should show it early on (as in – “ON LAPTOP SCREEN” and describe what is actually on there).

“Laptop webcam/mic activates.” – I don’t have a clue what this means or what we’re supposed to be seeing based on this line.

The next dialogue exchange either works or doesn’t work, depending on exactly what’s actually going on here (and I don’t know, personally).  Based on Peter’s line of, “So, why are you here, then?”, it’s now very unclear what this entire situation is.  If Carson is there under his own free will, his own dialogue and questions early on don’t make sense…nor do Peter’s.  But maybe I’m missing something.

Then, all of a sudden, Peter asks if his life is in danger.  I don’t get it, nor do I buy it.  Again, as in the above questions, this either makes sense or doesn’t, based on what’s actually going down, and we don’t know and never find out, but if Carson actually read Peter’s name off of his lanyard 9and therefore didn’t know him), this makes no sense now.  And for Peter to ask this question, he has to know Carson, otherwise, why in the world would his life be in danger?

Now we go into the back-story of this Julio Costa and what did/didn’t happen in 2005.  Hard to really say much here, as everything is unclear and impossible to decipher, but I will say that it seems like quite a stretch that a man of Peter’s background, would go from being a DEA Agent to a Polygraph “expert”.  Not sure exactly, but I’d say mastering the Polygraph would take quite a long time.

Page 5 – I don’t like Carson’s line about picking the tie, and there’s a typo in there as well – “you” should be “your”

Hmmm…now to Peter’s family, and then back to the Polygraph not being foolproof stuff, which I’m just not quite following.

Page 6 – OK, here’s the much discussed sandwich.  The visual is well done and clever, with the finger falling in front of the family portrait, but I still can’t quite buy into this.

I personally don’t like Carson eating the sandwich after a human finger has fallen out of it, but it sure makes him out to be a nutjobwhackocrazyfuck.

More dialogue about the test, which isn’t a test.  I actually think your dialogue here is pretty good again, but I’m having trouble buying into it.

Page 7 – OK, now, you’ve finally decided to show us the laptop screen…too late though.  Much like my earlier comments about the panoramic view, this also needs to be intro’d right off the bat for us to understand what’s taking place onscreen, and especially since you reference the screen several times.

“Muted blast. Building shakes. Alarms sound off.” – This is a BIG scene here and the way you’ve written it doesn’t do it justice, IMO.  I don’t like the short, incomplete sentences, nor do I like how they’re all on the same line.

I don’t like the last 2 lines of dialogue here at all.  Neither makes sense and again, I just don’t buy what I’m reading (hearing).

Page 8 – “A helicopter approaches.” – OK, this is obviously outside the window, and “EXT”. I don’t think it’s written correctly, nor does it read well.

Peter’s line of, “Now that my ride is here, that makes you expendable.”, doesn’t make any sense to me at all.  If you’re hinting that peter is in on something with Carson, then again, all the stuff before this doesn’t make sense, IMO.   I just don’t think this works at all here.

Carson now says that Peter’s family is indeed in jeopardy, which belays all that he’s said before.  I understand that Carson is the kind of guy who lies and kills, etc, but in the spirit we’ve been in, I don’t think it makes sense, nor do I buy it again.

“Stare down. Trigger finger poised. Is he lying?” – Much like the line above I brought up, I don’t like the writing here…too staccato, incomplete sentences all on 1 line…and ending in a big old aside, which I detest.

I also don’t like Carson’s dialogue that follows.  It doesn’t feel the same as what we’ve heard so far out of him.  Kind of clichéd, smart-ass action dialogue.

The following dialogue is good, and ties back into the whole “lie detector” stuff and overall theme.

However, I don’t like the unbelievable exit that’s about to take place, the fact that no other people/agents enter the situation (for God’s sake..a bomb has just been detonated in the lobby , multiple gunshots have gone off, the window has been shot out, and now a helicopter is hovering just outside), and finally, the completely ambiguous ending leaves us knowing absolutely nothing about what happened, why, who these 2 are, what their relationship is, and what’s going to take place now.

I’m all for ambiguity in a script, especially at the end, but this is too much and feels like there really isn’t an answer, thus the sudden resolution less ending.

Howdy, Brett

Lettuce see whatchugots here...

Dont underline your front page title. Just ALL CAP it.

Left justified FADE IN:!
Hoooraaaayyy!!!!
Whatever.


           PETER
    Smoking is not permitted in a
    federal building.
           (beat)
    Are you nervous, Mr. Briggs?

            CARSON
    No. I don't think so.
           (beat)
    Was that part of the test?
Peter forces a smile. He adjusts his glasses.

Oh, yeah.
Blade Runner.
. Big time.


Peter forces a smile. He adjusts his glasses.
Carson takes a breath. He relaxes in the chair.
Peter clears his throat.
You're doing great chopping these down to minimalist action lines.

Behind Carson, a panoramic view. Beach front skyscrapers and
candy cane palm trees
"Candy cane palm trees" didn't hitch me a bit.
I understood A-OK, jussss fiiine.



                    PETER
     Mr. Briggs, it's important that you
     answer my questions with a yes or a
     no response. Do you understand?

               CARSON
     It was just a joke.
            (beat)
     Yes, I understand, Peter.

Peter conceals his I.D. lanyard with his blazer
I like the last name/first name jockeying.


Carson snaps his fingers.

               CARSON
     The lobby. I knew it had to be
     around here somewhere, thanks.  
                 (beat)
     I can't think straight when I'm
     hungry. Let's split that sandwich.
Carson have attention deficit? Or is this some immature attempt to screw-up the test?
Later I see he's just an @ss with the upper hand.

               CARSON
     You are a bad liar, Mr. Morgan.
For character continuity Carson needs to keep calling him by his first name, Peter, as already established.
In fact, consider throwing in a little disrespect and nick it to "Pete".
And if you really wanna be a funny MFer, change Pete Morgan to Richard Morgan and nick it to "Dick".
And if you wanna be extra clever, have Peter/Richard Morgan's ID badge state just a first initial and last name - and Carson already knows it.
Of course shortly we're going to see that Carson DOES already know Pete/Dick quite well, but at this point, the observant audience will go "Hey! Waitaminit!"


The role reverse at the top of page four is VERY interesting.


               PETER
     My family. Is my family safe?

Carson grins.

               CARSON
     Now that is a good question
Nice.


Peter drops the sandwich. He stammers and trembles
Thaaaaat's... a little melodramatic for a mature, retired DEA agent.
He ain't a paper cop.
Although certainly startled, he shouldn't stammer and tremble even though he realizes the gravity of the situation.

Going back up...
(Oh, heavens! A [melodramatic] break in reader continuity! AGGHHHH!!! Whatever.)
A severed finger falls from the sandwich. The small
appendage lands in front of the happy family portrait.
This should state straight out that it's a child's finger rather than just a finger.
And I'm guessing wife's assumed dead since the conversation moves right along without her.
Oh! I see the wife is 'presumed' alive (Carson's a devious bastard).
Need to make all of this section a bit more clear.

Might wanna consider kidnapping the son and cutting off the wife's finger.
Audiences get kinda funny about maiming or harming children.
Or just kidnap the wife, cut off her finger and skip the kid entirely.
There's no particular benefit to the story in this short of using the kid at all.
Wife's good enough.

Also, I think a known associate of a drug manufacturer/distributor being polied in a federal building would likely have some form of security/law enforcement supervising while the test was being conducted.
Just a guess, though.
Bomb goes off, guard steps in, Carson uses Peter's own Glock 22 to put a round through JQLaw's skull.

               CARSON
     That would be the phone I left in
     the lobby. Homeland Security tends
     to frown upon unscheduled flights.
Nice.

Pg 8
     But if the medical monitor on my
That's a little vague.
Try cardiac monitor.



Carson empties the clip into the polygraph and laptop.
... coupled with what appears to be the pretense of "needing" a test in the first place make all of this kinda... odd.

First - Polygraphs have leads going around the chest to measure respirations/breathing, clips to fingers to measure perspiration/sweating, a BP cuff and still more leads for the heart monitoring.
There's sh!t hooked up all over the place.


Not exactly conducive to going straight to hand to hand combat.
Need a line in there about Carson stripping away all this sh!t just as Peter detonates the "cell phone" in the lobby. (I'll just kinda liberally apply movie magic that federal building scanners didn't pick up on that).


Second - This leads to a work-around that the pretense of the poly begins to fade after the bomb goes off. Then he should start stripping off the leads and cuff.

---

Excellent short, Brett!
I really liked the movie feel of this.
It's scenario construction and dialog are well above the usual nube drivel presented here.

From your replies I can definitely see how this would be a good scene to market as an example.
Well done.

Howdy, Jeff

'Stare down. Trigger finger poised. Is he lying?' - Much like the line above I brought up, I don't like the writing here, too staccato, incomplete sentences all on 1 line, and ending in a big old aside, which I detest.
Ah! now I see what you're saying about "asides" which you tagged me on earlier.

From the AUTOMATED thread:
Description/action - Ray, although this is much better and you're definitely on the right track, you continue to use too much in terms of your action/description lines, as well as your character descriptions.  You know I personally detest asides as well, and you've got an awful lot of them in here.  IMO, they simply waste space, pad the script, and don't provide anything for an actual filmed version.
Okey doke.

Yeah...
Sorry, but IMHO I think that's just a style preference rather than a rule breaking pass/fail thing.
They both read pretty much the same to me. I don't care. But I'm a pig, so...


'Peter forces a smile. He adjusts his glasses.' - IMO, this should read as, 'Peter forces a smile, adjusts his glasses.' - Obviously nothing world changing here, but I think it reads cleaner, faster, better.

'Carson takes a breath. He relaxes in the chair.' - Exact same thing here, Brett.  There's just no reason to have 2 sentences here, as well as a character's name and then 'He'.  'Carson takes a breath, relaxes in his chair.'  -  Just so much cleaner and easier, IMO.

'Muted blast. Building shakes. Alarms sound off.' - This is a BIG scene here and the way you've written it doesn't do it justice, IMO.  I don't like the short, incomplete sentences, nor do I like how they're all on the same line.


Seems you and Clorox have differing opinions on this issue.
From the AUTOMATED thread:
Clorox - The descriptions...not so much. They are stilted. Why do you write that way? Just curious.

Ray - Reason is everyone's (fairly righteously) beats and wails on my wooly, novelistic writing.
So I chop my visions down to semi-mono-syllabic grunts with little more than subject + verb fragments often spliced together with commas.

Clorox - ... IT'S FINDING THE IMAGE LANGUAGE TO GET THE IDEA QUICK. MAYBE COME BACK TO THE NOVEL JUST A ITTY BITTY TAD.

And:
THE GOOD ACTION SENTENCES READ WELL BECAUSE THEY ARE COMPLETE SENTENCES. INCOMPLETE SENTENCES DO WORK IN SCRIPTS, WE KNOW THAT, BUT NOT HERE. HERE THEY HINDER THE READ AND STOP THE FLOW OF THE FUNNY DIALOGUE BETWEEN JOE AND YVETTE.

You want chopped sentences comma spliced.
He wants them fleshed out just a itty bitty tad.
I comma splice some, but not always.
Whatchagonnado?

So, somewhere there's hopefully something that will satisfy the bulk of readers.
I've let go of trying to make everybody happy.
Can't be done.
Sorry.
But I'm working on it.

Hey Ray.  Yeah, you can’t please all of ‘em, all the time.  So I say, “to thy own self be true…always”.

Asides are unfilmables.  Asides are comments from the writer, usually smart-ass or “witty” in nature.  They enhance the written material, but offer nothing to the filmed version, which is all and everything a script should really be.  So in essence, they are a waste of space, and in a script, space is very important, as it actually works as a gauge to how long a script will play out onscreen.  The old rule of thumb is 1 page equals 1 minute of film.  This doesn’t always hold true (and especially doesn’t based on the genre, the level of description necessary, the amount of dialogue, etc.) but does hold true in average, when it’s all said and done.  Therefore, anything that artificially inflates or deflates a script’s length, isn’t in anyone’s best interest, and that includes unnecessary transitions, "CONTINUEDs", etc..

You’re definitely correct…it is a style preference rather than a rule breaking pass/fail thing.  Like everything, there is a certain level of acceptability, and/or a thin line that either stays within or goes over the lines of being acceptable…or right or wrong. .


Definitely, Clorox and I have VERY differing opinions on this issue, as do many, many others.  What Clorox is saying with the word “stilted” is pretty much what I am saying in the examples you quoted. Nothing at all wrong with short, terse phrasing, but many times when you omit a single, simple word, the passage reads stilted…or poorly.

Again, IMO, it’s a fine line between being too novelistic or being too short.  It’s a fine balance that most never actually do find.

You know, at the end of the day, many of the things I harp on all the time, don’t really come into play when it comes down to turning a script into a film.  BUT, the problem is that the vast majority of us can’t turn our own scripts into film, based on film making abilities, and more importantly, funding.  So, why not write your script as solidly, professionally, and exact as possible?   Write what you want to see on film and do it in an engaging, clean, and articulate way that leaves nothing to be questioned or complained about.

Yeah, I know..usually a lot easier said then done.

Quoted from Asconch I thought this was a fantastic story!

Hey there!

Thanks for the read, I'm glad you enjoyed the story.
I wanted to create a breezy piece of rolling entertainment.
I admittedly sacrificed some coherence to keep things moving.

Quoted from Asconch I will agree with someones comment about the ending seeming a bit over the top though.

You bet it is, I wanted to suggest the potential for an action feature.
It's been a while since we've had a fun over the top summer action flick.
But it could also be scaled back for a non SFX short, pending interests.
I wanted to build that flexibility into the framework of the story.

Quoted from Asconch Some of Peter's dialogue seemed a bit stiff as well. For instance:                        PETER         Is there something I can do to make         sure my wife and son remain safe?                        PETER         Does my compliance with your         demands guarantee their safety? Professional or not, if I saw my kid's finger roll out of a sandwich I don't think I'd be asking such proper questions. lol Just my opinion though.

Guilty. I did write those questions stiff with a specific purpose.
In order to get a proper reading from the polygraph, it requires specific phrasing.
The more clinical the question, the more accurate the reading.
Perhaps I need to make this more pronounced in the story.
Thanks for the comments and the read!
I've got your GroundDead in my queue!   

E.D.

Quoted from cloroxmartini Pretty cool. I like the interaction, the reveal, as the two went along. I like the way you ended it, keeping the suspense intact.

Clorox!

Thanks for the read, your input is always appreciated.
I wanted the interaction, reversals an power flow between these guys to be fluid.
So you liked the idea of the open ending with more possibilities? Cool.
I think you're the first to say that. Would you mind elaborating on that?

E.D.

More replies coming soon as annoying dates of birth allow!

I thought the twist on the story was really interesting. Maybe you could've taken it further but I'm not saying you necessarily have to. I read this script twice and with the knowledge attained from the first read, the second allows you to pick up on a lot more.

So your situation is great and really makes your dialogue pop in a way that's hard to achieve. Though I'll admit once the finger and the ring got introduced, I kinda rolled my eyes. Tired of these political/terrorist thrillers with endangered families. I've read them time and time again on this site and can't say that it's starting to get grating because it's always been grating. I've just never cared for that setup. Just cliche and uninteresting, always, for me, especially when characters start throwing around photos, wedding bands, etc. Uber-meh.

So overall, I'd say you put a really neat and intriguing spin on a tired setup. You made it entertaining, at least, though in hindsight, it's still not very interesting.

Hi, Brett!

I thought this was really good. I’d like to say it’d be pretty easy and cheap to film, too, but then there’s that last page where guns, glass, and helicopters come into play. Luckily you keep the majority of it offscreen or just out of sight, like Bert mentioned, so getting some interest in this shouldn’t be too hard.

I see a lot of members have already given you some very solid feedback, positive and negative: RayW and Dreamscale, especially, have given you a lot of information to think about.

I took a few notes myself and wanted to throw them at you.

          CARSON
     That’s the spirit, Peter. Bravo.  
                 (beat)
     But if the medical monitor on my
     wrist stops transmitting, your wife
     and son will be executed.

Take out “Bravo.” It flows better without it, even with the pause.

     Stare down. Trigger finger poised. Is he lying?

I would suggest taking out “Is he lying?” By now, given the nature of this script, this is on everyone’s mind already.

          PETER
     Does my compliance with your
     demands guarantee their safety?

I actually read this part out loud, and it doesn’t sit right with me for some reason. It just seems like such an articulate question for someone who’s sitting in front of his son’s severed finger.

          CARSON
     We have a long flight ahead of us,
     call me Carson.

This should be two sentences.

Overall, I thought this was a really strong script, Brett. Easy to read. Format is pretty much perfect. Clear visuals without overwriting. Snappy, engaging dialogue and character interactions. You did a really great job with this one.

Chris

Hey Bret.

Well, you've had some fantastic feedback and suggestions from the guys but that's nothing more than you deserve with the amount of effort you apply to other's scripts ...including mine!

I thought the formatting was good and the actual story great. The flow and pacing kept me turning pages, which is hard to do. (Believe me I get bored easily).

So, the first time I read this, all in all I liked it, although I did find some of the dialog a little stilted in places.

However, I read it a second time and as I did it occurred to me that you may have written this in a specific style. It really came across to me as very' Bondesque' a la Sean Connery maybe even Roger Moore.

Then when I read it a third time from that perspective it actually moved from great to brilliant! Even the ending fell right into place.

Now if my ramblings are correct then please confirm. If not just leave me happy in my own little escapist world.

Either way, Good job. Hope it gets produced.

Best.

Martin.