Lie Detector by Brett Martin (electric dreamer) - Short, Action, Thriller - A polygraph expert tests an evasive witness with a hidden agenda.  10 pages - pdf, format

Brett,

This one borders between okay and pretty good for me. I hope you net a good deal of reads from it and some good advice. You deserve it.

I liked how Carson turned the tables on Peter. It was interesting.

I don't think they would let Carson bring his own sandwich into interrogation without at least looking at it.

notes as i go....

No FADE IN:??

I don't like wyrlies in dialogue. To me, this is direction, not screenwriting. It's almost like camera angles. Trust your actors are good enough to interpret the lines IMO.

PETER
Melissa. Sean. -I think these should be question marks. Not periods. At least the way i picture Peter saying this.

PETER
You forgot to cut the bread. - This felt like and odd statement for Peter at the time. He had already lost the high ground. Wtf does he care about whether the sandwich is halved or not.

I thought his reaction was very light to the finger. Think it needs to be intensified. Also, would think Peter would stop right there and call his family.

The ending came off a bit over the top for me. Bad guy taking off on rope latter from a helicopter? Why does the bad guy need to get away? Why can't he be a sacrificial lamb for his employer. Just happy to get his message across and go to jail...

Like I said, thought this was pretty good for a mostly dialogue piece. Had fun reading it.

James

Brett,
I liked it. I don't know why you would want to resubmit this. If it was the wrong script, then Okay but I did find this enjoyable.

The banter back and forth between the two was very good. There was a couple of times where the dialog was a little on the nose but for the most part, it read very smooth and was enjoyable.

If you post the "better" version, let me know because I thought this one was just fine.

Shawn.....><

Brett, E-Mail me the better version so I can so I can read it now, while I'm not sober!

I've got 30 minutes to kill and am ready for a quick read!!!

This thread is locked.   And I've done away with the link of the script until the correct one is uploaded.  EDs wanted the thread deleted but I didn't feel comfortable doing that since this is berts board.  

The revised script is up.

Don

Quoted from jwent6688 Brett, This one borders between okay and pretty good for me. I hope you net a good deal of reads from it and some good advice. You deserve it. I liked how Carson turned the tables on Peter. It was interesting. I don't think they would let Carson bring his own sandwich into interrogation without at least looking at it. notes as i go.... No FADE IN:?? I don't like wyrlies in dialogue. To me, this is direction, not screenwriting. It's almost like camera angles. Trust your actors are good enough to interpret the lines IMO. PETER Melissa. Sean. -I think these should be question marks. Not periods. At least the way i picture Peter saying this. PETER You forgot to cut the bread. - This felt like and odd statement for Peter at the time. He had already lost the high ground. Wtf does he care about whether the sandwich is halved or not. I thought his reaction was very light to the finger. Think it needs to be intensified. Also, would think Peter would stop right there and call his family. The ending came off a bit over the top for me. Bad guy taking off on rope latter from a helicopter? Why does the bad guy need to get away? Why can't he be a sacrificial lamb for his employer. Just happy to get his message across and go to jail... Like I said, thought this was pretty good for a mostly dialogue piece. Had fun reading it. James

James,

I'm much obliged for the quicksilver read, comments and your note.
I think the proper draft, now available, addresses most of what you wrote here.
When you refer to wrylies you mean the "beats"?
They are something I'm messing with as I wrangle my format.
I see the conclusion needs some clarification perhaps.
As your interpretation of was not what I intended.
If you have the time, check out the draft that I should have submitted.

Thanks for the read and keep writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

I did not look at the original script you put up, E.D., nor have I read any of the comments.  For those confused by E.D.'s original snafu, suffice to say that I have been privy to the full story, and his excuse is an acceptable one.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Just read this.

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.  

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.  

Quoted from bert 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.

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

I thought this was a fantastic story!

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

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.

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

Hi E.D.
Thanks for reviewing my script on the other thread. I just read yours and these are the thoughts:

It ends quite abrupt for me. I was waiting for some kind of closure... not that I was confused by the story but still could not understand what Peter did and if Carson was lying and why he mentions the "long flight" at the end. I also could not understand which one is good and which is bad, which one should I root for.
Real fussy notes: Carson calls him by the name (he says "Mr. Briggs") bit too often. Also I did not believe Peter actually would go for the sadwich - but these are easily fixable bits (if you choose to fix them, of course)

2 actors - you may shop around for it perhaps.

Hey Brett

I have mixed feelings about this.

I liked Carson. I liked the interaction between the two. Your descriptions were appropriate for this short.  

I disliked that it ends abruptly. It feels more like a scene to a bigger story. I would probably suggest to expand it more. Make it to a feature or a longer short.

That's what i can come up with so far.

Hope this helps,

Gabe

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.

Quoted from khamanna Hi E.D. Thanks for reviewing my script on the other thread. I just read yours and these are the thoughts: It ends quite abrupt for me. I was waiting for some kind of closure... not that I was confused by the story but still could not understand what Peter did and if Carson was lying and why he mentions the "long flight" at the end. I also could not understand which one is good and which is bad, which one should I root for. Real fussy notes: Carson calls him by the name (he says "Mr. Briggs") bit too often. Also I did not believe Peter actually would go for the sadwich - but these are easily fixable bits (if you choose to fix them, of course) 2 actors - you may shop around for it perhaps.

Khamanna,

Thanks for the read!
I will work on making the relationship between the two less ambiguous.
Perhaps clarify the threat Carson brings to the table more somehow.
I did leave out certain details and only hinted at the history.
Part of that was because this is a story that could be expanded.
And I wanted to tease the reader, but not confuse.
I'll take a good look at that before I start the next draft.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from Mr.Ripley Hey Brett I have mixed feelings about this. I liked Carson. I liked the interaction between the two. Your descriptions were appropriate for this short.   I disliked that it ends abruptly. It feels more like a scene to a bigger story. I would probably suggest to expand it more. Make it to a feature or a longer short. That's what i can come up with so far. Hope this helps, Gabe

Gabe,

Much thankage for the read.
I knew that I risked alienating some folks with the choice of ending. My apologies.
I wanted to leave it open as a potential teaser for a feature.
I had hoped that resolving the polygraph might be just enough closure.
As if to say, "Okay, you've completed level one, let's move on."
I guess that didn't work for you and I can see why.
It's something I'll pay attention to in subsequent drafts.

I'm pleased the character interactions and descriptions worked for you.
My mechanical formatting has been a weak spot I've been trying to improve.
I wanted to create a "Face/Off" like dynamic between the pair.
Crafting entertaining popcorn is not as easy as it looks on the screen.
It takes just as much effort as it does to create any other story.
So, might as well write a good script, takes just as long to write out a bad one.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from Eoin 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.

Hey Eoin,

Much thanks for the read.
It kills me that the Blade Runner reference never crossed my mind.
I have to laugh about it, because it's on me favorite movies of that decade.
Funny how the brain's wiring, or lack thereof, allows things like that to pass.

Good catch on the license/licence thing. That will change next draft.
I did realize I was basically doing a talking head scene.
I figured that if I jazzed it up with some devices it would play okay.
The polygraph in itself becomes a character at times.
As if a third person was there confirming or denying scenarios.

There are exercise like aspects to Lie Detector.
It's a lesson for sleek tech formatting for easy readability.
I wanted to see if I could run and gun on the page with no notes, just an idea.
And to see if I could leave it open enough to be expanded into a feature OR...
truncate it a bit and make it a one set short, it could go either way.
Inserting that level of flexibility does hinder the story a bit, I admit.

Thanks for the comments!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from grademan 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.

Hey Gary,

I appreciate the read!
As to Peter, are you saying I kinda wimped him a bit?
Too mush husband? Not enough DEA agent?
I thought I brought him back to that with the reaction to the bomb.

Quoted from grademan 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.

Carson is a fun character for me, he's the one audiences look to.
A strong villain can "allow" your audience to be entertained at the hero's expense.
Villains are key to a fun action movie, I'm tired of dark and dreary action flicks.
So, I wanted Carson to be more of a Hans Gruber or Howard Payne type.
When villains are having fun, the audience is having fun, they are the barometer.

I indeed went over the top, literally, with a helicopter. It's a go for broke moment.
I swung for the bleachers, might as well since I'm running the bases.
Perhaps there's another way to get them out of the building.

As to the five year thing...
I took out a line about Peter's kid being five, not sure it needed it.
Given your comment, perhaps it does.
Peter killed the drug dealer's five year old kid.
So now that Peter has had five years with his son, it's time for payback.  
What do you think? Does it play better with it in?

Quoted from grademan 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

Again with The Blade Runner, I feel like a dolt for not seeing it before.
Then again, if I had, I may have balked at writing the script.
I think Lie Detector is different enough that it's not derivative of Blade Runner.
Would be wild to be derivative of something I never thought of while writing!

I see your point about coming into a story fresh.
I had a comment there about not reading the previous incorrectly uploaded draft.
So I changed it to something else to let folks know I fixed my mistake.
In the future, I'll save my goals for the comments.

I am a whore for Burn Notice. It's the kind of efficient popcorn that intrigues me.
Effective popcorn is so hard, but looks effortless on the screen.
It's that kind of efficiency I wanted to capture on the page for Lie Detector.

I had hoped this opener may tease folks enough to want to see the story continue.
Be it a valued member here on SS or a producer or agent across the desk.

Thanks lots for the great input! I'll endeavor to put it to good use.

Keep writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

Hi E.D.  I haven't read any scripts for awhile, having been on hols and too busy. So thought I'd get back into it with one of yours - you have been giving a lot of reviews(all very insightful too)

I liked this! The writing was good, formatting good, no probs there. You say you were inspired by watching BN - have never seen the show so can't comment on your initial impetus.
It started like a normal interro scene - we presume that Carson is some sort of suspect, maybe just a witness. There is a distinct lack of authority and urgency about Peter, so I gathered Carson wasn't even a suspect, just in for routine questioning.

Obviously though, he is more than a traffic offender and the tone changes pretty quickly. I realise now that Peter was being cautious, fishing for info, without trying to jeopardise the bigger picture - which turns out to be his family's very lives.

Things happen very quickly now, perhaps too fast - Carson is seen to be a pretty full on killer/assasin type.
A few people commented on the ending being left hanging - I guess that can happen when you have an idea and get it written while its hot.

Its still an interesting little 'scene' and could be expanded or incorporated into a bigger project. Actually, it almost read like an OWC or something!

Cheers stevie

Quoted from Dreamscale 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. 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.

Jeff,

Thanks truckloads for taking the effort to go through my work.
I admit, I was bummed when you bailed on Red Sun a while back.
But that draft was completed before I joined SS and got some great advice.
Instead of being upset about it, I went back to the drawing board with my format.
I've spent the bulk of the last few months focusing on that issue.
Lie Detector being the ultimate exercise in format economy for me to date.

Personal taste aside, I'm glad to hear I've made some progress with technical craft.
Even if it's not working for folks, I still wanted it to be a clean easy read.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

You had me at EXT. Skyscraper. This is an excellent point. Next draft, in it goes.

Quoted from Dreamscale “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.

Point taken, I don't know why I feel the compulsion to start a new sentence.
Perhaps it's the grammar training from school?
Sometimes I go staccato, other times, the second sentence.
I guess I'm zeroing in on what you're suggesting above.
It does make a difference. Even though it's subtle. Good call.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

It's an interview, not an interrogation, but I see your point about the line.
Sometimes when we come up with something early, we get married to it.
In our minds, it becomes sacred, when in reality that's not the truth.
At the very least, the foreshadow of that should delay go away all together.

Quoted from Dreamscale “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.

I'll set the scene at the start, you sold me on that with your previous observation.
LoL, ok, palm trees decorated for the holiday. I tend to get fancypants sometime.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

I'll need to clarify my word choice there, thanks.
There's some scrap left here from previous drafts I need to clear up.

Quoted from Dreamscale Page 3 – I have some issues that start here, so let’s address them… “Peter studies the screen.” – What screen?

It's his laptop. I thought it was mentioned earlier.
I may have edited out a description that clarified that.
Ack! Gotta fire up the grill, the natives are restless.
I'll address the rest of your detailed insights after the meat coma

Thanks for the effort Jeff!

E.D.

TO BE CONTINUED...

Whoa, Porterhouses and bourbon baked beans put me down for the count.
*cracks knuckles*
Once more into the breach!

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

It's a backpack with a sandwich and car keys.
Do you really think they would not allow that inside an office after a manual search?
To me, those items did not seem like red flags.
I agree they would hold onto communication and recording devices.
I thought concealing the appendage inside the sandwich would get past security.
Perhaps if my language was clearer on the interrogation versus interview thing...
that my go a long way for unsticking this point to folks.
I'm not totally married to the sandwich thing, but I dug it at the time.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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?

That's some seriously nitpicky grammar, but I see your point.
It doesn't do any harm to change "it" to "my phone".

Quoted from Dreamscale 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!

I need to be clearer about the interview versus interrogation thing.
In the first draft it was more of an interrogation and I didn't eliminate all that.
There are still hints of that atmosphere I should clear up.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

Are you saying I should show the button before Carson speaks about it?
Because I do show it after Peter denies that he was reaching for it.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

I think a mini slug and a brief description of screen graphics is called for.
To establish early on and to show the webcam being turned on.
I suppose I cheated it with the CTRL + R to cut back on description.
It could use a red light or an image of Peter on the laptop screen.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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?

The lanyard thing was Peter thinking that's how Carson knew his first name.
It's an incorrect assumption. Carson knows him because he's paid to know him.
Carson was playing the innocent type early on to gauge Peter.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

The Costa reveal is in pieces to suggest events to be expanded upon later.
I didn't want to bog down with a lot of exposition at that point.
I did it in earlier drafts and got roasted for it.
Perhaps I could choose the details I do reveal here more carefully.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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”

The tie was on on the day in the latest draft decision.
It's not critical and may go in subsequent drafts.
Thanks for catching the typo.  

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

What don't you buy about it? The earlier security screen thing?
What do you not like about the eating part?
I tried to incrementally turn up the action to maintain some credibility.
I didn't want to create a gritty edgy dark depressing action piece.
There's far too much of that floating around this past decade plus.
So, my plan was to do it in stages to make it more likely to suspend disbelief.
Slowly turn up the heat so to speak, to keep the audience reading.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

I should probably do this when he's hooking up at the start. Good point.

Quoted from Dreamscale “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).

I am a bit guilty of conserving space at the expense of the scene there.
I don't understand what you're struggling with post bomb.
Are you referring to the line about Homeland Security?

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

My mistake. That should be referring to helicopter sounds, not a visual.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

This is Peter threatening to "kill the messenger".
Peter is set to follow Costa's wishes, so why is Carson necessary any more.
There is no intended collusion between Carson or Peter here.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

Is this in reference to the threat of the medical monitor?
I can't figure out what you're referring to here.
Clearly, my attempt at an over the top action story did not work for you.
Suspension of disbelief is subjective and not always acceptable.
I know it's a major undertaking for a short, but I wanted to try and pull it off.

Quoted from Dreamscale “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

I think I covered the space conservation and staccato thing earlier.
I squeezed it a bit much for the sake of economy.
My skills there are getting better, but sometimes I take it a bit far.
I'm still trying to fine tune that and know when to let things breathe too
Are you referring to the s*hit belt comment?
I intended that to be a smart arse action comment.
I can see why that would stick out if i failed to get you to suspend disbelief.

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

I touched on some of your issues here with the stated intent for the piece.
I realize it's open ended, but I was hoping to satisfy some with a scene resolution.
As if to say, "Level one complete. Continue."
That being said, if the story were to continue, that would be the first thing to happen.
Dealing with opposition as they make a dramatic exit from the room.

Seems a lot of the didn't buy sentiment comes from my failure to suspend disbelief.
I know it's a tall order, especially for a short, but I wanted to give it a go.
Set up a fun premise, with twists and turns and an upbeat villain.
I long for the days when action movies were allowed to be fun.

There's a lot of great stuff here, thanks for the effort, Jeff.
In whatever form this continues, it will be better with your suggestions.
I'm glad my action description is drawing less criticism on this script.
It's something I'm also working to improve in the new Red Sun draft.

Enjoy the weekend and have a screwdriver for me!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from RayW Howdy, Brett Dont underline your front page title. Just ALL CAP it. Left justified FADE IN:! Hoooraaaayyy!!!! Whatever.

Howdy Heir Rayness!

Huh, funny how Final Draft 8 wants to underline it.

Quoted from RayW            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.

It still staggers my brainpan I didn't make the connection. At all. Ever. *facepalm*
I guess at least that's why the scene doesn't feel totally derivative of that film.
When you're "in the story" it's funny how you miss glaring similarities like that.

Quoted from RayW 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.

That's big coming from my overactive description brother from another mother! ^_^
Lie Detector was a big exercise in getting my format under control.
I figured tight description would be good for a pot boiler action thingy.

Quoted from RayW 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.

Ahh, so you're the one that got it. =p
Fancypantisms like that slip through occasionally.

Quoted from RayW                     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.

I wanted to create an uncomfortable familiarity here.
I've noticed it's something villains tend to do when they are "running the show".
Lie Detector was a lot of power shifts through dialogue.
At first, Carson seems subservient to Peter.
Then Carson goes from a nuisance to an unhinged direct threat.
When Peter tries to wrench control back, over the top action ensues.

Quoted from RayW 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 is being a tad immature here.
I'm unsure if it adds to the scene or not.
If I'm on the fence about it, probably not.

Quoted from RayW                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.

Good suggestions! I may permanently borrow one of them!

Quoted from RayW 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.

It's a movie trailer moment, planned from the start. Guilty.

Quoted from RayW 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.

Yeah, I regret putting in that "fatherly" reaction late in this draft.
It will be modified for sure in the next incarnation of the script.

Quoted from RayW 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.

I'll buy that for a dollar.

Quoted from RayW 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.

Hmm, suggestions?
I'll take a look back through that.
I admittedly may have sacrificed some clarity to lower my page count.

Quoted from RayW 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.

The story needs a kid, as it is vengeance over the death of Costa's child.
It may still seem like a self indulgence though, I'll see how it plays for others.

Quoted from RayW 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.

If the script were to continue, outside intervention would be the next step.
There's a small reason why there's a delay in the actual script for this.
No one's caught it, so I guess it didn't work.
The date question at the beginning, it's a Sunday.
So, the office is very understaffed on the Sunday of Christmas week.

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

Thanks, I was surprised I caught flack for this line from a couple of folks.
I guess I failed to suspend disbelief for them to let the action flow.

Quoted from RayW Pg 8 Carson empties the clip into the polygraph and laptop. ... coupled with what appears to b e the pretense of "needing" a test in the first place make all of this kinda... odd.

Sunday, Christmas week, wife and kid are out shopping.
Dedicated Peter comes in to "work a case". He "performs an act of terrorism".
Then disappears along with his family. Looks rather suspicious.
Is it necessary, no? Many set up scenarios in action films are a bit elaborate.
I was hoping to gloss over points like that by keeping things moving fast.
Still, I can make more effort to streamline the plausibility factor here.

Quoted from RayW 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).

Good point about the leads, I can add that in the next draft.
In my mind, the phone was never scanned since they hold onto it.
But yes, somewhere in there is a little movie magic for sure. =p  

Quoted from RayW 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.

Thanks, Ray. I wanted to take a stab at over the top action fun.
Too many action films these days are dark, dreary and depressing.
I miss the action villains that used to bring on the fun!
Speed, Die Hard, Face/Off, the villains made these movies come alive.
The best being when Albert Brooks played Homer Simpson's new boss!  

I wanted this to be a multi purpose exercise, to that end, it needs fine tuning.
But overall, I seemed to accomplish the lion's share of my goals.
I just finished the new draft of Red Sun, now with much sleeker description. =p
Now, I'm staring Valentine's Day square in the face.
I like to floss my brain with a short in between big stuff, so we'll see.

Thanks for the insightful comments.
Keep writing and rewriting and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

P.S. Why isn't anyone reading the Mansour thingy?
       Maybe the title sounds a bit homoerotic? :/

Quoted from James McClung 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.

James,

Thanks for taking the time out to read my work.
You are a solid contributor to the site and grateful for your time.
This short was designed to have some resolution, but open ended to continue.
To that end, I realize that I won't satisfy as many as I could with a real ending.
It's great to hear you picked up on more during the second read.
What did you get out of it the second read that didn't work in the first?

Quoted from James McClung 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.

Ahhh, the over the top reveal didn't work for you.
Hmmm, true, those stakes get used a lot.
It happens because they are a simple primal motivator audiences relate to.
When I pitched my barber, that's the part he responded to the most.
As writers, we tend to eye roll at such things.
But my motorcycle riding barber, he's the guy that buys the DVD.
Perhaps there's a better motivator I can use in subsequent drafts.  

I'm pleased to hear you found it entertaining.
Even though this isn't really your bag you still responded to the character dynamic.
And that's the most important thing to me happening on the page.

Thanks for the read and keep writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

Hey Brett, sorry for not responding sooner.

You're right.  I was a bit overly picky here.  And that's over and above how picky I usually am.  

As I said, I read your script but didn't have a chance to respond right away, so it sat in my mind for a few days, and certain things kept bugging me. When I sat down to write up my feedback, I read it over again, as I wrote, so pretty much everything that popped out at me, was put down in my notes.

It's not that I didn't like it, and it's definitely not that that it was poorly written.  IMO, it either needs more or less in terms of page length and character/story depth.  It needs to have a meaning as well as an ending.  And mostly, I feel like it needs to know what it is and stay true to that throughout the script.  I don't feel that's the way it is currently.

It's good to see all the feedback you're getting, as you deserve it.

Later.

Yo, Bro

That's big coming from my overactive description brother from another mother! ^_^
Lie Detector was a big exercise in getting my format under control.
I figured tight description would be good for a pot boiler action thingy.
You're doin' great.

Ahh, so you're the one that got it. =p
Yeah. Either I'm smart or crazy. Maybe both.

Hmm, suggestions?
Not really.
Just one of those things you curse at because it's clear as the desert sky to you but clear as LA smog to everyone else and you can't really figure out WTH's everyone's prob.
Buncha jumpin' apes are just pointing and grunting.
Bastards!

The story needs a kid, as it is vengeance over the death of Costa's child.
It may still seem like a self indulgence though, I'll see how it plays for others.
Make the kid corollary more evident rather than some "slipped in" suggestion.
Of course, you can't waggle it right in everyone's face either, so...
You know...
Expand - but then tighten it up.
(Ugh.)  

The date question at the beginning, it's a Sunday.
So, the office is very understaffed on the Sunday of Christmas week.
Totally missed both the Sunday and the Christmas thing.
I don't see a fundamental need for all that.
Just make it a regular day on the job for poor ol' Pete.

I like to floss my brain with a short in between big stuff, so we'll see.
I used to think writing shorts was a pretty stupid waste of time, but I'm wising up the benefits of how they generate both critique experience, writing speed, and develop some pretty cool tangential ideas for features. Not that I'll ever have time to actually write out a quarter of them.  


P.S. Why isn't anyone reading the Mansour thingy?
       Maybe the title sounds a bit homoerotic? :/
If I had low self esteem and wanted to be a big baby, I'd hazard a guess folks don't like me.
Otherwise, either that ugly-@ss logline scares them away, the subject does and/or the writing sucks worse than usual and everyone's being polite by not saying anything ugly.

As you can tell by both the reads and FAVORABLE comments on the WILDLY homoerotic JAN 3WC Children of Men gay man-love is NOT ANY sort of deterrent (As it shouldn't be).
http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-Jan113wc/

Laughed my @ss off when I watched the first half hour of GREEN ZONE, though.
Al Mansour was at the top of one of Damon/Miller's Intel Packet pages.
"That's me! Hi! Blowing up sh!t at a traffic circle near you!"
LOL!

Quoted from Dreamscale Hey Brett, sorry for not responding sooner. You're right.  I was a bit overly picky here.  And that's over and above how picky I usually am.

No worries, Jeff.

I take it as a compliment when all is said and done.
Whether it's decent writing or kharmic payback for the reads I give, it's all good.
For me, I give more detailed critiques when I feel the script deserves it.
There's a core group here that can put together a well written script.
At that point, it becomes more about story structure and other refinements.
The better the overall quality of a script, the more critical I tend to be.
I want to learn from that core group and I do so by deconstructing their scripts.
When I go at those scripts with a critical eye, I learn a lot of things for myself.
Any script I enjoy will draw a long review out of me, I can't help it.

So, when are we going to see some new pages from you, Sir?

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from RayW Yo, Bro I like to floss my brain with a short in between big stuff, so we'll see. I used to think writing shorts was a pretty stupid waste of time, but I'm wising up the benefits of how they generate both critique experience, writing speed, and develop some pretty cool tangential ideas for features. Not that I'll ever have time to actually write out a quarter of them.

Rayment of my imagination,

I'm finding writing shorts in between big projects quite helpful.
I try to shoehorn some format lessons I need to learn into them too.
Lie Detector was written on a whim after eight weeks spent on a new treatment.
And they are also a great resource for feature ideas to jump out at you.
I recently wrapped the fourth draft of Red Sun, four weeks worth of rewrites.
And gearing up for a Valentine's short has put the ink back in my pen.
Stay on that creative treadmill and go go go!

Quoted from RayW P.S. Why isn't anyone reading the Mansour thingy?        Maybe the title sounds a bit homoerotic? :/ If I had low self esteem and wanted to be a big baby, I'd hazard a guess folks don't like me. Otherwise, either that ugly-@ss logline scares them away, the subject does and/or the writing sucks worse than usual and everyone's being polite by not saying anything ugly.

Well, bring your "sick" log line over to Dr. Babz's thread for a check up! =p

Regards, E.D.

You'll see new pages from me when the Feb OWC rolls around in a couple weeks (hopefully).

I'm going through a big, difficult, and stressful move on Monday, 2/7.  Heading back to Scottsdale, AZ from Seattle.  I'll be driving a big truck and pulling my Pathfinder behind me on an auto trailer.

Things have hit the skids for me here in Seattle with my girlfriend/soon to be ex-girlfriend.  We're calling it quits after more than 7 years.  This is breakup # 3, and it will be the final split.  So, my 2 cats and I are heading into unknown adventure.

So, I won't be around SS next week.

I agree with you that i usually write more when I feel the script deserves it.

Take care!

i enjoyed this.  I'm not really well versed in this genre, so others probably had a better time envisioning the entire scene.  Carson is pretty cut-throat, which is actually refreshing imo.

the "shit belt" line was the only one I didn't like.  Carson seemed like a cool, smart character, and that line just didnt seem clever enough for him to say.

Quoted from Sham 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.

Hey Chris!

Thanks for the read!
I think I've read something of yours, if not, point me to something juicy.
I'm glad the read wasn't a waste of your time.
I toggled between short and cheap and big and not so cheap for personal reasons.
I hope it didn't detract too much from the read.
I was experimenting with trying to please both ends of the spectrum.
More often than not, it leads to a level of failure, but I tried anyway.

Quoted from Sham 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.

Those wacky characters are very generous with their time.
And I've learned boatloads going through their material in turn.

Quoted from Sham 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.

I'll go along with both those suggestions for the next draft. Thanks!

Quoted from Sham                  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.

This is my attempt at Peter asking questions in a specific way for his own purposes.
The specificity increases the accuracy of a polygraph reading.
I didn't bring this across well enough in the script.
And because of that, it reads awkward.
I like the idea, but I agree, it needs a lot of work.

Quoted from Sham 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

Thanks for the insights and kind words.
I'll do my best to reciprocate when the opportunity arises.
If I haven't already read you, point me to something you'd like eyes on.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from chelsea 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!

Hiya Martin!

Thanks for the kind words and the read.
I recall some pretty snappy dialogue in your cabbie story.
So, when are we going to see some new pages from you?

Quoted from chelsea 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).

One of my main objectives with this piece was to keep it moving at a brisk pace.
To do that, I needed to wrangle my over descriptive tendencies into shape.
Just for that alone, Lie Detector has been an invaluable exercise for me.
I wanted this script to have a breezy 90's action vibe.
Poor action films these days are so dark and dreary.

Quoted from chelsea 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.

I'm grateful for the additional reads, what made it better for you later?
The adventure vibe? The polygraph oddly phrased question dynamic?
If you can elaborate, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks again for giving your time to my work.
I look forward to seeing more of your pages in the future.

Keep writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from stevie Hi E.D.  I haven't read any scripts for awhile, having been on hols and too busy. So thought I'd get back into it with one of yours - you have been giving a lot of reviews(all very insightful too)

Greetings Stevie!

Much thanks for the read.  Hope you enjoyed your holiday.
I appreciate the sentiment behind the feedback.
I wanted to lead by example and how that people would offer me reads in return.

Quoted from stevie I liked this! The writing was good, formatting good, no probs there. You say you were inspired by watching BN - have never seen the show so can't comment on your initial impetus. It started like a normal interro scene - we presume that Carson is some sort of suspect, maybe just a witness. There is a distinct lack of authority and urgency about Peter, so I gathered Carson wasn't even a suspect, just in for routine questioning.

I'm pleased the story worked for you.
And yup, the initial casual tone was indeed to suggest Carson is a "witness".
I wanted to start from there to make the arc bigger as the story unfolded.

Quoted from stevie Obviously though, he is more than a traffic offender and the tone changes pretty quickly. I realise now that Peter was being cautious, fishing for info, without trying to jeopardise the bigger picture - which turns out to be his family's very lives.

Yup, that's how I wanted it come across, but it seems I got mixed results.
Some felt the cautiousness came off as stilted dialogue.
I'll have to work on that, but I'm glad it worked for you.

Quoted from stevie Things happen very quickly now, perhaps too fast - Carson is seen to be a pretty full on killer/assasin type. A few people commented on the ending being left hanging - I guess that can happen when you have an idea and get it written while its hot. Its still an interesting little 'scene' and could be expanded or incorporated into a bigger project. Actually, it almost read like an OWC or something! Cheers stevie

Apparently, I wasn't smooth enough when I kicked it into high adventure gear.
I tried to crank up the tension incrementally, but I guess it needs more refinement.
I didn't want to be afraid to go over the top for an all out action blast.
I'm concerned, we, the collective amateurs here, tend not to go for it.
Because we all know it will be much easier to get produced with a modest script.
I get that sentiment, but I wanted to go the other way with this story.
However, the way Lie Detector is written, it can easily scale back for a thrifty short.
Or, go all out into a go for broke action feature length extravaganza.
When you try to please multiple quadrants, some are bound to feel the pinch.

Thanks again for your insights and time.
I apologize for the tardiness of my reply.
If you have a script you'd like some eyes on, please let me know.

Keep writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

E.D

I enjoyed the way it flowed a lot. The chemistry between the two is good. I noticed a great opportunity where the (beats) are used for a small expansion on the interaction. Example (and someone may have already said this)

If we are, we’re having one hell of
a heat wave.
(beat)
No.

That would have been a great chance to offer an exchange between the two. Something like…

If we are, we’re having one hell of
a heat wave.

The interviewer drops his pen, looks up.

No.

Another great opportunity here as well.

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

Maybe could read as…

It was a joke.

He taps one of the sensors.

Is this thing on? Okay, yeas I understand, Peter.

This has a feel to it that reminds me a little of Phenomenon.  The interview between The interviewer and Travolta. I like it.

I like on page 7 when the phone goes off but I wish you had fleshed it out just a bit.

The two men look each other in the eyes, the lights flicker, the windows rattle, then a muted sound of an enormous blast…..

Really pull that moment out for us.

What are you, a shit belt? I thought that was very funny.

Good story my friend. Very clean, very fast read. Thanks for sharing it.

Shawn.....><

Quoted from Ledbetter E.D I enjoyed the way it flowed a lot. The chemistry between the two is good. I noticed a great opportunity where the (beats) are used for a small expansion on the interaction. Example (and someone may have already said this) If we are, we’re having one hell of a heat wave. (beat) No. That would have been a great chance to offer an exchange between the two. Something like… If we are, we’re having one hell of a heat wave. The interviewer drops his pen, looks up. No. Another great opportunity here as well. It was just a joke. (beat) Yes, I understand, Peter. Maybe could read as… It was a joke. He taps one of the sensors. Is this thing on? Okay, yeas I understand, Peter. This has a feel to it that reminds me a little of Phenomenon.  The interview between The interviewer and Travolta. I like it. I like on page 7 when the phone goes off but I wish you had fleshed it out just a bit. The two men look each other in the eyes, the lights flicker, the windows rattle, then a muted sound of an enormous blast….. Really pull that moment out for us. What are you, a shit belt? I thought that was very funny. Good story my friend. Very clean, very fast read. Thanks for sharing it. Shawn.....><

Hey Shawn!

Thanks for the second read, I'm glad the story still works for you.
I dig some of those beat suggestions and will recall them for the next draft.
Especially the explosion stuff, it could use a beat between them.
Sometimes I step on my own action for the sake of economy.
I'm not sure where this story will go, but that's part of the fun for me.

Regards,
E.D.

Okay Brett.

I read it again and I am now in no doubt that for me this is a great James Bond vignette.

From Carson's first words "do you mind if I smoke?" and "No I don't think so (beat) Was that part of the test?"

Along with.....

The nonchalant  arrogance  of Carson mentioning the ham sandwich is imo a brilliant subversive ploy to wrest any power Peter may have, away from him.

It struck me as very  Ian Fleming especially describing Miami as the cocaine cowboy capital of the world....priceless.

"That's the spirit Peter, Bravo!'.......................Oh so good!

And during the fight, "nice move.Taken some classes?" just classic 007 for me.

I enjoyed the read again.

Well done....so keep on writing and....oh sorry bro. That's your line.

Best.

Martin.

Quoted from chelsea Okay Brett. I read it again and I am now in no doubt that for me this is a great James Bond vignette. From Carson's first words "do you mind if I smoke?" and "No I don't think so (beat) Was that part of the test?" Along with..... The nonchalant  arrogance  of Carson mentioning the ham sandwich is imo a brilliant subversive ploy to wrest any power Peter may have, away from him.

Martin,

I'm thrilled to hear my attempt at over the top fun worked for you.
I was hoping to suspend disbelief and entertain readers.
Very intuitive about the sandwich, Martin.
I wanted the story to feel like a chess game.
And the sandwich was Carson's "knight", so to speak.

Quoted from chelsea It struck me as very  Ian Fleming especially describing Miami as the cocaine cowboy capital of the world....priceless. "That's the spirit Peter, Bravo!'.......................Oh so good! And during the fight, "nice move.Taken some classes?" just classic 007 for me. I enjoyed the read again. Well done....so keep on writing and....oh sorry bro. That's your line. Best. Martin.

Hmm, your comments make me wonder if I should remove the "sh*t belt" line.
Looking at the words in your post, it seems a better way to go.
We'll see how the next draft comes out!

LoL plagiarist! That's my line!
Have a great weekend and...you know what to do!

Regards,
E.D.

I decided to get to one of yours Brett, let some bygones be bygones and all that jazz. I breezed by the comments above so my thoughts would not be influenced. But I did look at, for a few seconds, your inspired spark. I too, love Burn Notice. Maybe that's why you set it in Miami.


I do like the idea that you reveal we are in Miami when the question is asked. This suggests without calling any camera angles close ups on Carson and /or Peter until the question is asked. Otherwise, we would see the view a bit earlier. Of course, this means that Peter's desk faces the window, and not a door. I think it might look better if the window view was off to the side (right or left) and the other side (right or left) is the entrance to the office.

Then the tables are turned on Peter. I was with this, and the 'Burn Notice flavor does creep in (too close, I think- Carson might as well be an evil Michael Weston; he has that speech pattern of sorts) but there is one thing that does not belong.p8:

Quoted Text Stare down. Trigger finger poised. Is he lying?

To be honest, I don't really know. Why bring me out and ask me? As far as I know, it's the only one of two hiccups here. It's too short to get a firm grip of what's really going on - but if ever Matt Nix & co. wanted a spec for the show...? I could see you giving it a go. Minus the pinky, of course.
Sub sandwiches are fine, so long as there's peppers and mustard...
.
Not a bad effort....but there's that one ...last... thing...

Quoted Text Carson gut kicks Peter. Peter misses with a sweep kick.

An abracabra moment, making the desk (and polygraph, computer, sandwich...) disappear! Also known as a continuity error. No biggie. Just have Peter come around before the smackdown. Just a thought.


-djs

Brett,

I read this a week ago and for some reason didn't much care for it.  But I just read it again and really liked it.  Go figure.   Only thing I had a problem with was the kid's severed finger.   Too extreme, IMO.   I see you've gotten plenty of other feedback so I'll just leave it at that.    

Impressive.   Thumbs up.

For a short, this really does an outstanding job building and maintaining tension. I agree the helicopter escape was maybe a little over the top, and the dialogue could be tweaked in a couple of spots as suggested by other posters, but on the whole, I thought this was exceptionally well done.

*Warning: a few spoilers*

Hi Brett -

Read Lie Detector - and like the snappy dialogue.  Okay, the helicopter was way over the top...but for some reason that didn't bother me all that much.  Kept my interest, despite a few confusing turns.

FWIW: A few items that bugged me a bit:

* Peter keeps his finger poised on the button.  What button?  You mention that he pitches forward in his chair, but that doesn't make it clear that he's really got a panic button that he's about to hit...

* P 5 - "repurposes a promising career."  Just seemed awkward.  You just don't hear "repurposing" enough in everyday dialogue to let that word choice ring smoothly...

*Finally - I'm guessing that Peter had people he was working with, when he set up the polygraph.  Guns go off, glass gets blasted out - where were they?  Honestly, I'm willing to suspend disbelief on this one, because it's a fun story.  But if you really examine it...  

Still - fun read.  Thx!

Here's the thing, and I am probably very, very wrong on this, based on what I am seeing not only in most scripts here, but in movies made in general: there are too many action "props" used. I realize movies are a visual form but in my opinion sometimes way to much unneeded action is inserted.

Many of the most memorable moments in great movies seem to be where there is a tension built on the threat of action, not on the action itself. The tension built in this little short was very effective and didn't need helicopters and shot out windows. It really didn't even need a gun. Carson knew where he was when he went there, surrounded by cops.

The point of it was that he was in control without a weapon. His control came from his hostages, and his weapon was the sandwich. Using hostages like that is not original by itself. But using the polygraph like that is pretty original, as far as I know. When someone claims they have so and so as a hostage, how do you know they are on the level? Carson solved that by using the lie detector test.

But I know less than nothing. If you took out the helicopter and the gun out, to me a very entertaining short becomes even better. However, if a major studio were ever to include this scene in a movie, they would probably bring back the copter and the gun! So you probably have it right leaving that stuff in.

Quoted from DarrenJamesSeeley I decided to get to one of yours Brett, let some bygones be bygones and all that jazz. I breezed by the comments above so my thoughts would not be influenced. But I did look at, for a few seconds, your inspired spark. I too, love Burn Notice. Maybe that's why you set it in Miami.

Hey Darren!

Thanks for the read. I'm happy to set the record straight about bygones.
I'll be brief since it seems you're embroiled in a brew ha-ha on the OWC thread.
I was never upset at you, just dropped you from my "must read" list of members.
I never had a personal ax to grind with you over it.
In retrospect, perhaps I should not have jumped on the bandwagon, but I did.
Why? Honestly, I was a little hurt and I shouldn't let personal feelings get in the way.
Everyone has their own reasons for their behavior.
And it rarely has anything to do with others, but more do to with themselves.
I have no right to take personally why someone does not respond to things.
Not exactly brief

Quoted from DarrenJamesSeeley I do like the idea that you reveal we are in Miami when the question is asked. This suggests without calling any camera angles close ups on Carson and /or Peter until the question is asked. Otherwise, we would see the view a bit earlier. Of course, this means that Peter's desk faces the window, and not a door. I think it might look better if the window view was off to the side (right or left) and the other side (right or left) is the entrance to the office.

I went with Miami partially because of the show and I used to live there.
If that story were to continue, my knowledge of the city would help write the escape.
It's a funny sunny city for a fun, sun drenched adventure.
I'm so tired of the doom dark and dreary action films.
Yeah, the city reveal has merit, but it's also a tad confusing to fathom.
Someone suggested a panoramic shot at the beginning of the script.
This script may split into two entities.
A budgeted short and a full blown feature adventure.
To start, I wanted it to be a hybrid short to experiment with potential.

Quoted from DarrenJamesSeeley Then the tables are turned on Peter. I was with this, and the 'Burn Notice flavor does creep in (too close, I think- Carson might as well be an evil Michael Weston; he has that speech pattern of sorts) but there is one thing that does not belong. To be honest, I don't really know. Why bring me out and ask me? As far as I know, it's the only one of two hiccups here. It's too short to get a firm grip of what's really going on - but if ever Matt Nix & co. wanted a spec for the show...? I could see you giving it a go. Minus the pinky, of course. Sub sandwiches are fine, so long as there's peppers and mustard...

Yeah, odd style flourishes creep in some times. What can I say?
In the moment, it seemed like a good idea.
It's hard to resist the urge every time you want to get all fancy pants. Heh.
Mmm, mustard and peppers are nummy.

Quoted from DarrenJamesSeeley Not a bad effort....but there's that one ...last... thing... An abracabra moment, making the desk (and polygraph, computer, sandwich...) disappear! Also known as a continuity error. No biggie. Just have Peter come around before the smackdown. Just a thought. -djs

Ahh, I did have a line of action in there that addressed this issue.
A beat where Peter comes out and presses the Glock against Carson's forehead.
I must have erased it in this draft, that can be rectified, thanks!

Thanks lots for the effort.
Keep writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from screenrider Brett, I read this a week ago and for some reason didn't much care for it.  But I just read it again and really liked it.  Go figure.   Only thing I had a problem with was the kid's severed finger.   Too extreme, IMO.   I see you've gotten plenty of other feedback so I'll just leave it at that.     Impressive.   Thumbs up.

Hey Screen!

Huh. Ain't it funny sometimes how a second read can come off different?
I've had that happen to a few scripts here.
Something clicks in my dumb old brainpan and suddenly, I get it.
A latch onto a visual cue or something and ride it through the pages!
Thanks for the read!

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from leitskev For a short, this really does an outstanding job building and maintaining tension. I agree the helicopter escape was maybe a little over the top, and the dialogue could be tweaked in a couple of spots as suggested by other posters, but on the whole, I thought this was exceptionally well done.

Hey Leitskev!

Thanks for the read!
I deliberately made Lie Detector a hybridized short.
I wanted to experiment with it being a compartmentalized budget short.
But also put in tent pole feature elements to see if they would work.
I thought it might be an effective way to cast a wide net of interest.
A short director may see a chance to tone it down a film it.
A feature producer may look at it and want to crank it up to 11 for a feature.
Next time around, I'll probably separate the two ideas.
I'm glad you enjoyed the read.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from wonkavite *Warning: a few spoilers* Hi Brett - Read Lie Detector - and like the snappy dialogue.  Okay, the helicopter was way over the top...but for some reason that didn't bother me all that much.  Kept my interest, despite a few confusing turns.

Hey Wonka!

Thanks for the read, member input is always appreciated.
Even with the short page count, I was hoping I set it up well enough to go over the top.
In my mind, building the action up in stages then revealing the big prop works better.
It's an ambitious idea and as a result a tad schizophrenic at times, I admit.
I experimented with low cost short and feature adventure potential simultaneously.

Quoted from wonkavite FWIW: A few items that bugged me a bit: * Peter keeps his finger poised on the button.  What button?  You mention that he pitches forward in his chair, but that doesn't make it clear that he's really got a panic button that he's about to hit... * P 5 - "repurposes a promising career."  Just seemed awkward.  You just don't hear "repurposing" enough in everyday dialogue to let that word choice ring smoothly... *Finally - I'm guessing that Peter had people he was working with, when he set up the polygraph.  Guns go off, glass gets blasted out - where were they?  Honestly, I'm willing to suspend disbelief on this one, because it's a fun story.  But if you really examine it...   Still - fun read.  Thx!

* - I could set up the button a bit better, I'll look at that next draft.

* - I used the repurpose line as if it was quoted from the television show.
     Perhaps I could enhance Carson's sarcasm there a bit for clarity's sake. Thanks.

* - I appreciate the suspension of disbelief, it's needed for these types of tales.
     A bomb in the lobby trumps a gun shot on the tenth floor in my mind.
     However, if the story continued, that would be the next hurdle for the characters.

Thanks kindly for your effort.
If there's a script of yours you'd like eyes on, let me know.

Regards,
E.D.