Quoted Text Huh?  No clue what this is supposed to mean.

Define weak writing and maybe you won't feel so clueless.

Quoted Text How did we get into discussing "bad writing"?

Follow the transcript.

Quoted Text "Poor artistry and craftsmanship"?  WTF?

Really?

Quoted Text Seriously, this response makes zero sense to me.  Sorry, but I need to say this.

You made a claim that "weak writing" is a result of unfilmables that translates into s**t films. I am saying it isn't. Up to speed now?

OK, Eric, now I remember who you are.  I tried to help you on one of your scripts back in May and maybe you didn't take too kindly to my help?  I don't know, but as I said earlier, I am totally confused with what you're saying here...or trying to say, that is, as it's incredibly unclear.  In your last post, you're being a serious douche.

You are actually the one who needs to check the thread and see where you did not address the issues or questions posed to you.  The only thing that I can see that I didn't directly respond to was your question regarding why I had a problem with 1 example I gave and not the other - but at the time, I told you I didn't understand what you were even asking.

But, for the record, using an unfilmable "adverb" in a character description is incorrect.  Period.

EXAMPLE 1 - "MARYBETH (45, Maxine's Mom) teeters over the toilet." - INCORRECT!

EXAMPLE 2 - "MAXINE (20) helps her Mom, MARYBETH (45), stand up. - ACCEPTABLE!

Do you see the difference here?

As to your last 2 posts, I'm still clueless.  Seriously, check this out and try to explain WTF it means…or is supposed to mean, cause as written, it means nothing.

“I would argue bad writing is a result of poor artistry and craftsmanship not for following "rules".

Most unfilmables are emotion descriptions, and you can translate that in movies."

I literally can’t comment on the first sentence cause it makes no sense.

Your second sentence has absolutely nothing to do with anything discussed in the entire thread!  What are you basing your quote on, here, anyway, about “emotion descriptions”?  I’d love to see that data.  The unfilmables we’re discussing here are not emotion descriptions, which renders your quote completely asinine.

Quoted Text OK, Eric, now I remember who you are. I tried to help you on one of your scripts back in May and maybe you didn't take too kindly to my help?

That's not it at all. I was greatful for your help. So I am not sure why you'd think that.

For the record, if I disagree with you it's not personal.

Quoted Text I don't know, but as I said earlier, I am totally confused with what you're saying here...or trying to say, that is, as it's incredibly unclear.

Point taken. I will do my best to clarify what was confusing about my last post.

Quoted Text In your last post, you're being a serious douche.

It wasn't my attention to come across like that.
  

Quoted Text You are actually the one who needs to check the thread and see where you did not address the issues or questions posed to you.

  I wrote you a longer post but it was accidently deleted. I answered most of your questions.

Quoted Text The only thing that I can see that I didn't directly respond to was your question regarding why I had a problem with 1 example I gave and not the other - but at the time, I told you I didn't understand what you were even asking.

I agreed with your first example, but I didn't see how the second was any different from the first.

Both examples had an "unfilmable" in them. Hence I didn't understand why the first example was correct and the second "incorrect".

Quoted Text But, for the record, using an unfilmable "adverb" in a character description is incorrect.  Period.

Okay, but who decides it's incorrect? A select group of writers adhere to this "guideline while others don't. Thus it's an opinion not a fact. The only way to settle this issue would be to prove it.  

If you said, "unfilmables" are frowned upon by some people in the industry, I would accept that as fact.

Quoted Text EXAMPLE 1 - "MARYBETH (45, Maxine's Mom) teeters over the toilet." - INCORRECT! EXAMPLE 2 - "MAXINE (20) helps her Mom, MARYBETH (45), stand up. - ACCEPTABLE! Do you see the difference here?

No. Example one you sited three "unfilmables", and in example 2 you sited four.

How do you show 45 or 20 years old? People seldon can guess a person's age by looking at him/her. That's why a writer would be wise to aproximate if he/she is concerned over unfilmables.

Names themselves are unfilmables because rarely do we see in movies characters enter a scene with name tags that state their names - so that the viwers are up to speed with what the reader already knows about the characters - that is until we hear them refer to their names.


Hence, logically, it should be no different then if I were to refer to Marybeth as a teacher because we will eventually see this characterization about  Marybeth come up in the story.  

Quoted Text As to your last 2 posts, I'm still clueless.  Seriously, check this out and try to explain WTF it means…or is supposed to mean, cause as written, it means nothing.

“I would argue bad writing is a result of poor artistry and craftsmanship not for following "rules".

Artistry = Artistic achievement/ability.

Craftsmanship = A set of skills that demonstrates the mastery of a trade.

Good writing is a combination of artistry and craftsmanship, hence poor writing is then a combination of poor artistry and craftsmanship.

Quoted Text Most unfilmables are emotion descriptions, and you can translate that in movies." I literally can’t comment on the first sentence cause it makes no sense.

"The stars shine like the love of God". Aliens

"Love of God" is an adverb because it describes how the stars shine. Is it an unfilmable adverb? It also appeals to our emotions, because love, an emotion is used to describe a verb.  

Yet we could translate love of God to be brilliant, awe inspiring, or cold and remote.  

Another one.

"A bus rushed through traffic like the chariots of fire".

"chariots of fire" is an adverb, it also invokes an emotion to those who've seen the movie."
By your defination it's also an unfilmable. But for me it translates to daring or reckless speed. I can show that in a movie.  

Quoted Text Your second sentence has absolutely nothing to do with anything discussed in the entire thread!

I admit I was being a little obtuse. I was thinking on the spot and didn't really think it through. Emotion description like an expression that invokes an emotion. I gave you a couple of examples already.

Quoted Text What are you basing your quote on, here, anyway, about “emotion descriptions”?  I’d love to see that data.

As I said before I conveyed two examples. One I thought up on the spot the other from an actual studio script.

Are they actually unfilmables? Maybe that part is debatable.

Quoted Text The unfilmables we’re discussing here are not emotion descriptions, which renders your quote completely asinine.

Point taken, but to get back to my original point. I disgree that unfilmables make s***t films.

Anyways if you want to continue this discussion with me, send me a private message or something and I would love to chat more about it. I think it's an interesting topic.

Hey Shawn,

This one was short and sweet. Nice writing. Excellent flow. I only had a couple of problems with it.

     She moans at the noise. She slowly opens her eyes. She flips
     over onto her stomach. She reaches out an arm, paws at the
     clock radio.

There’s nothing wrong with this passage, but for me, this description is “she”-heavy. You’ve got four she’s in the span of three sentences. I’d see if you can get it down to two.

Also:

          MICHELLE
     Shut the hell up, Gene Kelly!

This wasn’t the best line to set the tone for your script. I’d remove it.

Other than that, this was very well done.

Chris

This short is OK.  I feel there are some obvious mistakes.

If this is all in her head she would have at least acted out the moments of struggle which would have put blood on her boyfriend.  Therefore he would have been woken up by the action.  

How is it that his eyes snap open 2 hours later and he jumps into action.  If he was hung over and groggy as he woke up then this might be remotely believable.

Or, did she just imagine it all, simply cut herself, and get up and walk into the bathroom.  If so, I think it is unfair to the audience for us to see  . . . .  

"Alex stands up and walks to the bathroom door. He tries to
open it. It’s locked. He presses his palm to the door - then
brings his ear to the door...listening."

I don't believe she can see that.  She could "imagine" the door moving and that it must be Alex, she could "imagine" Alex speaking from the other side.  She could even imagine the tip of the blade coming through the door, but when you use the "trick" of showing something that didn't happen outside of the psycho's realm of possibility I think you cheat the audience.

AlbinoPenguin : 1st of all...your screenname is awesome. Thanks for reading this. I probably should add their ages. I thought I had.

InquiringMinds: I hadn't noticed  anything that was written in the present tense. I'll read it over and look for those again.

The sun is not turning them into killers neither is anything on the radio. That's how it was going in but I changed it. ALso, It's up for your interpretation.

I don't think it's always necessary in shorts to explain everything.

ReefDreamer: Thanks for your comments. I hadn't thought about that. Interesting.

Sham: There are quite an awful lot of "She"s in that section. That section. Thanks for pointing that out.

Colkurtz8: Thanks for reading. Glad you liked it.

I didn't like the font for the title.  
I understood the story just fine.  
It could have been better with a couple tweaks here and there but over all it was decent.