Man Watcher by Anthony Hudson (alffy) - Short, Drama - A man wakes to find a stranger in the room.  Who is he and what does he want? (2 actors, 1 location) - pdf, format

Unpleasant, but effective.

Spacing on p6. Tsk.

A talking heads for 8 pages - good on you for keeping the tension up.

Didn't spot any real grammatical howlers, so well proof-read.

I got a good sense that these guys were different people - not so many pull that off well.

Very cheap to film too, what with the O.S. going on.

Well thought out - a nice piece of work. I'll see what other people have to say.

Anthony,

An interesting piece, I love a good psychological mystery. There are a few things that hinder this script from reaching it's full potiental.

After my first read, I was switching the order of who get's introduced first in my head. Even though Micheal is the focal point here, it felt more like Davidson's story as it progressed.  It's just a suggestion, but I think if you flip the order, it could strike better.

Page 1, "What, who, who are you?" The 'what' reads awkward to me because it is in the same line directed to Davidson.  I think maybe a description of shock or surprise could be just as effective.

Page 2, He looks down at his semi naked body. Is there a reason you went with semi instead of full? I'm just curious, a full nude body mixed with the tone of your script could say alot IMO. I wouldn't want to see his junk though LOL!

Page 3, "I'm out of here, you can't keep me here." Doesn't read well.

Page 6, the spacing is off, unless you were trying to grab the reader's attention about the important dialogue that follows.

I like the concept of 'The Man Watcher's' program, but the name comes of a bit generic.  The ending was really good, I love the idea of the broken mind, routines, decsions and consquences.  

Final line - "You gouged out my daugthers eyes with a pencil, Michael." Would have read better if Davidson was yelling. Try, "You gouged my daugther's eyes out with a pencil, Michael."

Wow! I have a million things running through my mind about what Michael did to his 'company'. Great job!

A few comma's missing and some forced dialogue here and there.  It didn't take too much away, I enjoyed it.

Johnny

Hey Buddy

So as far as errors go, besides the obvious space(As Simon mentioned) and also, perhaps i'm wrong, but wouldn't the policeman be V.O? As it is, he not only off-screen but also out of the scene(not in the hotel room) and Davidson at the end would be O.S because he's at the location of the scene but not  in the camera frame.

Page 1

Michael

WHAT, WHO, WHO are you?

Michael

Do you hear me, WHO are you and
WHAT the hell are you doing in my
house?

MICHAEL
WHAT, how do you know me?

WHERE am I?

Page 2

MICHAEL
WHAT have you done to me?

WHO are you?

My wife, WHERE'S my wife?

WHO are you waiting for, WHO'S
going to call?  Is it about Beth,
have you got her too?

Page 3

Michael

Acquaintance?

What’s going on?

I'm not trying to beat on you here, Anthony and I realize he is in a situation, but I got to half way on page 3 before he didn't ask a question. in fact 95% of his dialogue is questions, even his one word answers had a question mark... I just think it's a little unnatural, again that's my opinion.


I liked the twist at the end,  because it had all the makings of  a Pysch ward, doctor and client... So I'm glad it didn't end up way.

In nineteen ninety, John Fullerton
attended the Saint Anthony
Secondary School..                   Good old Saint Anthony

Your actions and descriptions are very well written and you built the tension nicely.

For a short it was great effort and read very easily, you really are a good writer.

Mark

Hey Anthony.

Usually the first page isn't numbered.  Thought I'd point that out.

Must have been a rough night for Michael eh?!  So starting off, Johnny #1 pointed out Michael's awkwardly written line.  I suggest the "what?" starting off as he wakes before he discover Davidson sitting on the corner.

I'm not sure if he's completely naked but on page 2, instead of that "semi naked body" part, I suggest having him look beneath the sheet then demanding to know why he's naked.

MICHAEL
"What have you done to me?!"
(looks beneath sheet)
"And why am I naked?!"

Just an idea.  Davidson's dialogue reads a bit strange at the bottom of page 2.  Instead of "nobody's got you", I'd write "nobody took you."

Page 5, his hand "itches" toward his jacket.  I think you were going for "inches" toward his jacket.  Davidson's dialogue reads funny again.  Is he asking a rhetorical question when he says, "Last night, I think it happened again?"  If so, just use the period.

Wow.  Brutal ending.  So I'm guessing Davidson called the police and stayed there to keep Michael from escaping.  Perhaps it was a taste of revenge for him killing his daughter.  Waiting years for Michael to slip up just so he could be there before he's taken in.  A bit of action on that last page describing Davidson body language would go a long way IMO on clearing up his motives.  A solid short.  Good job.

Alffy, this was a bit of a headscratcher for me.  On the one hand, I like the fact that it all takes place in a single setting with, which makes it very easy to shoot, with only the two characters (and one O.S. voice).  There is an element of mystery throughout the entire short that isn't revealed until the very end, so I like that as well.   The dialogue had a slow start to it but picked up steam towards the end, so good finish as well.

Now, some things that made me go "hmmm."  20 years of following this guy?  Are the Man Watchers a government agency, privately funded or what?  That's a long time and a lot of money invested in this one guy.   I probably could have bought it if the guy was older when he had committed the act, but he was 6 years old.  It just seems weird that a parent would hold a grudge against a 6 year old who didn't know what he was doing and then commit a ton of resources to following him around for 20 years hoping he would screw up.  I'm sure I'm over analyzing this point and it defeats the dramatic effect to think it out this way, but it just didn't ring true because of that.  Maybe if the act had taken place when he was 16 instead of 6, I would have bought into it more.

Second, it was never explained clearly why he had two different names. Had Michael changed it himself?  Was he in a protection program?  Not a big deal, but you make it a minor plot point, so I guess I needed some clarity.

Beyond that, I thought the writing was clear and concise, other than the dialogue at the beginning that could be sharpened a little, but otherwise, nice effort.

Gary

This was interesting and easy to read, but it left me with many questions.  

Who are the Man Watchers?  
Why was Michael being watched?  
Why was it so important that Michael know how he killed his friend, before the cops came in?  
Why was Davidson just sitting there, without a care in the world?

I feel like I just watched an episode of Lost.  It was a good episode, but what the hell just happened?  I mean that in a good way.

Jordan

Hey Alffy,

Read this yesterday on circalit, didn't have time to respond. Glad to see it here.

Sorry no notes to hand so just a few thoughts.

1) like the idea - strange man In a hotel room - good for tension and easy to film

2) dialogue, I wasn't as bothered as others with the early exchanges, they seemed fine for a confused person, sitting up out of bed, by hey we all read things differently

3) Man watcher - now there was something intriguing about this but as Jordan has pointed out, it actually left quite a few questions for me which took away from the script. Not everything has to be answered but when you are left with so many questions I think it distracts a tad.

I almost feel there is something longer in this, but still a short, but possibly to do with Michael being set up - I assume this is not how it is at present and I have just missed it - by a fake organisation only to discover it is the father who has tracked down his daughters killer. Michael is then considered insane as well as a killer.

All the best.

Hi, Alffy.

Read your short. Man watchers is an interesting concept and I like it plenty. So, everyone with dual personality, bipolar disorder perhaps would be on their watch. And I liked how you gave the man a personal reason to be angry at your main guy.
You did it at the end - and I wonder if it would be more effective if you let us know earlier, then let us wonder if he kills him or lets the police get him.

I liked the set up - Michael with Davidson and Michael doesn't know what Davidson wants of him.
I didnt' like some of Michael's lines - repetitions like "What, who, who are you?" I think just "Who are you" would be more effective. or "My wife, where's my wife". and then, bottom of p3 again "Who, what?". I think you better say "I don't know who you are" or something. and again "What...who" on p4. I think these need some cleaning.

The idea of a stranger in a room wanting something of another man was well explored in one of the shorts here - it's called The Killing Gene and was part of an OWC once. I can't find it for some reason.
I think you could look it up. Not like yours is worse or something - just because they are somewhat alike at the beginning.
I liked yours very much. Just thinking it misses some of the punch and not sure why - maybe you ought to rethink the placement of the twist.

Jez, I didn't even know this was up so seeing so many reviews already was nice.

Okay so I'll say to everyone, don't know what happened on page 6 with the spacing...schoolboy error there.

I'll try answer some questions:

Quoted from Forgive I got a good sense that these guys were different people - not so many pull that off well. Well thought out - a nice piece of work. I'll see what other people have to say.

Thanks.

Johnny, it never crossed my mind to have Michael naked but if this was ever produced the actor might not want his arse out lol.

Quoted from oJohnnyoNutso Final line - "You gouged out my daugthers eyes with a pencil, Michael." Would have read better if Davidson was yelling. Try, "You gouged my daugther's eyes out with a pencil, Michael."

A good idea, the change from Davidson being calm throughout to a sudden outburst might work well.

Mark, you've got a point about Michael always asking questions.  I wanted him to come across as paniced and wanting answers but I maybe over did it lol.

Quoted from RegularJohn Page 5, his hand "itches" toward his jacket.  I think you were going for "inches" toward his jacket.

I did mean 'itches' as it's a term I use but I can see the confusion, perhaps I'll change it for your suggestion.

Quoted from RegularJohn Wow.  Brutal ending.  So I'm guessing Davidson called the police and stayed there to keep Michael from escaping.

Thanks, and yes you're right about Davidson.

A few more answers

Quoted from Gary in Houston 20 years of following this guy?  Are the Man Watchers a government agency, privately funded or what?  That's a long time and a lot of money invested in this one guy.   I probably could have bought it if the guy was older when he had committed the act, but he was 6 years old.  It just seems weird that a parent would hold a grudge against a 6 year old who didn't know what he was doing and then commit a ton of resources to following him around for 20 years hoping he would screw up.

Quoted from Nomad Who are the Man Watchers?   Why was Michael being watched?   Why was it so important that Michael know how he killed his friend, before the cops came in?   Why was Davidson just sitting there, without a care in the world?

Thought I'd try and answer these together.
The Man Watchers are victims who have taken it upon themselves to 'watch' released offenders in a hope to stop them doing anything again.  this is why Davidson struggles to follow Michael and doesn't get to the room in time.
Michael was a minor and deemed 'ill' so was not fully convicted of his crime.  His name was changed as this is something that does happen to  minor's who offend and are released so as to keep their previous actions secret and therefore doesn't hold them back from a new life (something that is not always well recieved by the public).
Some victims would argue that if their child was taken that making sure the offender never did it again was not a waste of time.  Also Davidson was waiting for the cops to show up and I tried to make him seem jumpy at Michael's actions.
And breath...lol.  Hope this cleared some things up.  It's a bit of backstory that I couldn't/didn't want to add as it would make the short too long.

Thanks for bringing these points up though.

Interesting point, Bill.  Never crossed my mind to add more to the story.

Quoted from khamanna The idea of a stranger in a room wanting something of another man was well explored in one of the shorts here - it's called The Killing Gene and was part of an OWC once. I can't find it for some reason.

I'll see if I can find this, thanks.

Thanks to everyone who has checked this already, you have given me a lot to think about.  I wanted to write a short with 2 characters and 1 location and this is what I came up with.  I've not got a good few suggestions to improve it, so thanks again.

Hey Alffy,

Good to see some more work from you, always happy to jump in and give you a read.

Unfortunately, this one didn't quite hit the mark with me. Two talking heads which isn't always a problem if the dialogue flows but I thought it held it back here and spoilt what is a nice idea. Questions are thrown out in abundance while the exposition felt so forced because you needed to get out that back-story for the ending to work.

Also, some of the dialogue is confusing and it tripped me up on a few occasions. This instance for example:

"You had a disagreement with a school friend,
and you had an episode."

"When the teacher found you, you’d
cleaned yourself up and even drawn
her a picture."

"You killed her, Michael."

Because you only state the teacher as "her" that is who I thought Michael had killed. Obviously, later on its revealed that it was indeed the school friend but little things like this kept tripping me up and disturbing the read.

I also thought that Davidson's dialogue was contradicting at times.

"After your release you were put on
the Man Watcher’s program."

"Twenty four seven?"

Which Davidson nods to in response but later on...

"Unfortunately we can’t follow you
everywhere, we’re not the Police."

What happened to someone watching him twenty four seven?

So let's get on to the Man Watcher's program and I'm sorry but this part of the story doesn’t work for me at all. For starters, it's such a hilarious name for a program that I could see Ben Stiller or Vince Vaughn using this for a comedy movie that obviously would be rubbish and not funny at all. The important thing is that they tried, though.

I mean, at least call yourself the M.W.P or something. I can't imagine how embarrassing it will be when someone asks poor old Davidson what he does at a party. Unless of course he isn't able to say a word about the program - you know the old "If I tell you then I would have to kill you" type deal.

I mean who are these guys who watch people all day - some might even call them stalkers but no it's alright... this guy once had an episode and it's my job to watch him all day. I feel sorry for the poor bastard who just sits outside his work all day from 9 to 5 everyday.

And don't tell me that Michael never once noticed the same car, person or whatever following him for 20 odd years.

As you can tell, it wasn't working for me and just left me with loads of questions about whom or what this Man watcher's program is? Like I say, it came off so comedic to me that it ruined the tone of the piece.

And then we move on to the biggest flaw for me which is Davidson. This guy has watched this boy/man who killed his daughter for over 20 years and when he finally thinks or knows that Michael has killed again - he calls the police! What an anticlimax. Think about the 20 years of hurt and anger that has been building up in Davidson, there is no way in hell this guy would just sit back and let the police take him, I can't see it. I actually think he deserves some revenge, don't you?

I think this story would have worked better if Davidson had been searching for Michael for years, you know with the name change and all that. When he finally finds Michael, he sees that he had a wife, kids and a job - a normal happy life.

Now conflicted, Davidson starts to watch Michael, has he changed or still the same kid who killed his daughter? Obviously with the killing of the woman in the bathroom, this gives Davidson his vindication to extract revenge... this man hasn't changed at all.

Okay, this would mean going down the cliché revenge route but it would make more sense than the Man Watcher Program for me. Just a thought.

There was a few other little niggles for me like the pen at the beginning - was it supposed to be lying in water? It didn't fit in with the final line and I think it would have worked to have it lying in blood which fits in with the way he killed the school friend. Maybe it had no relevance what so ever so that would raise the question of why it was even there?

The writing was okay overall, a few things really read awkward and the opening page needs to be looked at. You've numbered it for starters and there was a massive space before the fade in - maybe something to do with your software.

Why no day or night in the slug?  I gather its day with the slither of light coming through the curtains but still... wouldn't have hurt. I see no reason to not have it in your slug, actually think morning would have been appropriate.

The opening description of the room was odd, bland decor and walls, move on to the bed and table and then the doors which are opposite each other for some reason. Then back to the bed to intro Michael. Just thought it was odd not to intro Michael with the first visual of the bed. It all came off random to me. Was all the info needed? Like I said before about the pen?

The writing came together after that opening though and there were only a few little things “His hand itches (inches)" that stuck out to me. I'm sure previous posters would have mentioned the big gap on page 6. I could say it became repetitive with lots of nodding but there is only so much you can do when you set the scene in one room and it's mostly dialogue.

Oh, I did want to point out the last bit of action which didn't read right to me for some reason.

"His eyes almost burst from their sockets with shock."

I don't know, feels very cartoonish and doesn't complement Davidson's final line about gouging out eyes, IMO. I did like that you didn't reveal the bathroom though, leaving all the gruesome details to the reader's imagination.

It has potential no doubt but the awkward dialogue and little story elements that I feel need more background or believability (Man Watchers) made this one a baffling read. Like I said, I really feel this would work better, yet maybe more cliché as a revenge tale.

Best of luck with it.

Steve

Just for my own state of mind... Can someone point out if I'm right or wrong about the use of  O.S and V.O

Thanks

Matk

Hey Alffy,

This was an intriguing read, and for what's essentially just two men in a room you manage to build up a good bit of tension and mystery. I do think that when the situation is so simple, the dialogue has to be really good and unfortunately yours just wasn't snappy enough. I totally agree with Mark - you definitely need to rework Michael's dialogue and cut down the constant questions.

Most of the little errors I picked up on have been mentioned by others, but I also spotted a couple of other things:

Page 1
There seems to be a lot of space above 'FADE IN:'

'Male and female clothes strewn the carpet' didn't read right to me. Should it be 'Male and female clothes are strewn on the carpet'?

Page 3
'Davidson slowly ejects his empty hand from his jacket.' The word 'ejects' doesn't really suit the sentence, as 'eject' means to forcibly remove something. Simply saying 'Davidson slowly removes his empty hand from his jacket' would work better.

Page 4
You have Michael rubbing his head, and then seconds later rubbing his brow. Try to vary up his actions a little.

The last piece of dialogue on the page should be said by Davidson, not Michael.

As I said, this was pretty well done & I enjoyed it. I just feel that the dialogue exchanges between the two characters need to be a lot stronger. However, I did especially like how you didn't show us what was in the bathroom at the end and kept whatever it was that he did the previous night a mystery.

Quoted from irish eyes Just for my own state of mind... Can someone point out if I'm right or wrong about the use of  O.S and V.O Thanks Matk

I would go with O.S as the character is there, just behind the door- they could open the door and enter.

V.O for me is like a narrator/or voice down a phone etc, but curious to see if others agree. worth asking.

Quoted from irish eyes Just for my own state of mind... Can someone point out if I'm right or wrong about the use of  O.S and V.O

Wrong ... The actor can be in the scene, and still be V.O., as long as the seen actor is not the one seen speaking.

With O.S. the actor is in the same time/place -- even if he is outside the room/house - but the ones on screen can hear him speak, which could not be true of V.O.

It is 'screen' that counts more than 'scene'.

A few more questions to answer...

Steve (coop), I wonder if you wrote this after the match last night...stinging lol
Sorry this didn't work for you.  The 24/7 thing was meant to be taken literally so I guess I could drop that bit, I thought that with Davidson saying it, it would have a harder impact on Michael.  Some of the points I've answered previously but I'm glad you liked this...only kidding, sorry it wasn't for you.

Steve, thanks for the read.  I guess something happened with the spacing at the beginning?  Think must have happened when converting to pdf as it was fine on Finaldraft.

Quoted from SteveUK You have Michael rubbing his head, and then seconds later rubbing his brow. Try to vary up his actions a little.

I did, I had him rubbing his head twice lol.

Quoted from SteveUK The last piece of dialogue on the page should be said by Davidson, not Michael.

erm...well spotted, steve.

Thanks for checking this out.

I guess I need to strengthen the dialgue a bit.

Quoted from alffy It's a bit of backstory that I couldn't/didn't want to add as it would make the short too long.

That's a great backstory.  If you could drop some hints as to all of this, the script would be much better.

I'll re-read it and see where you might be able to fit some of this in.

Nice job.

Jordan

Thanks Jordan.  It would make more aense if I could get this in but I'm not sure I could achieve it without a large segment of waffling (talking).

I'm confused about this tale.

SPOILERS! (Forgot to add spoilers)

I like the tension. For a second there, I thought Davidson was one of Michael's personalities. I'm curious to know how the Man Watcher got out without getting caught by the police? Did he fake being a agent?

We don't know much about the Man Watchers. What's they're purpose? Maybe finding out about that will help with this script.

I'm neutral about this. Didn't hate it, but didn't like it.

Gabe

Hey Gabe,

Quoted from Mr. Ripley I'm curious to know how the Man Watcher got out without getting caught by the police? Did he fake being a agent?

Not sure how to answer this one.  Davidson would just tell the police he worked for the organisation and hope he wasn't arrested lol.  After all he called the police and had to explain his fears on the phone.

Jordan brought up the fact that we need to know about the Man Watchers and although I have the backstory in my head, I didn't include it.  I'll try and fit it in though as a lot of readers suggest it would help.

Thanks for the read, Gabe.

Hey, Alffy, notes as I go...

Page 1 - Top margin is way off.  Don't number Page 1 - leave it blank and start numbering on page 2 with "2".

No time frame in opening Slug - not good!

Opening passage is not good at all.  First sentence isn't a sentence at all, as there's no verb.  2nd sentence is extremely awkward and again, not even a sentence. - not the way you want to jump out of the gate.

I thought they were in a hotel?  Why would Michael ask why Davidson is in his house?

Passages are not properly broken up.

Dialogue does not sound remotely believable.

You're going to be pissed, but I'm stopping already.  None of these lines contain sentences and they're all so awkwardly worded.  Lots of completely unnecessary description as well.

Sorry, mate...

Jeff, I think something happed to the file when i created the pdf, that's my excuse for the strange gaps here and there.

No excuse for the sentences.  I will of course thrash myself a number of times for these mistakes.

Michael doesn't know he's in a hotel as he has had a memory lapse.

Don't worry about not finishing, I'm not surprised. I'm not pissed as pleasing you seems to be extremely difficult.

Quoted from Dreamscale None of these lines contain sentences

eh?

The vast majority of your action/description lines are fragments, in that they don't contain a verb.  It's not engaging reading at all.

Sorry.  I don't mean to be so harsh.

The harshness doesn't bother me, Jeff, I know you too well by now. lol

Surely you must agree though that all writers write differently.  I've read a lot of scripts in my time here and some overwrite (me normally) and some bullet point their descriptions.  I wouldn't say one was right and one was wrong though.  I understand the opening few lines don't contain a verb but they are just the descriptions of the surroundings.

I liked the script, and didn't really go into any of the writing so much as I felt the story was compelling enough and could sit well as a short - produceable, I guess.

It's always a bit of a judgement call when it comes to writing, and even though it's not supposed to be a  grammar lesson, I guess some stuff should be done right.

So, the first sentence lacks a subject, and the second sentence is passive. This can easily irritate some people, but others might call it pedantic to wheeze on about it too much - and what you're trying to do is create a 'feel' to the script.

I think that finding a way between the two is all part of the learning curve.

Hey Alffy,

Interesting concept, the man wakes up to find a stranger watching him from across the room. The beginning of the story was a bit off for me because when Michael awakes to see Davidson he asks him "what are you doing in my house"? Now that's seems like a natural thing to say and I can't speak for you but I live in a small house with a small bedroom which doesn't have room for a chair + a small table over in the corner of the room. It would seem that Michael's bedroom and hotel room would have to be the same size for Michael to mistaken that. I would think that when Michael wakes up he's first noticing the different bed, shape of the room, then finally Davidson sitting in the corner. His dialogue would then start with Where am I? Who are you? Just me nitpicking.

I liked the story overall, would love to get a back story to who the Man Watchers are.

Take care and best of luck should you expand this to a feature.

- Dirk

Thanks Dirk.

I like your suggestion about Michael realising his whereabouts.  I'm trying to think of a way to include the backstory without dragging it out or in a way that feels unnatural.

Glad you liked the story.

Hey Anthony,

I've been wanting to get to this one for a while and I finally got the opportunity to get to it this morning. I quite liked this. I thought it was a cool little tale with a twist (I think) that worked.

The big spacing issue on page 6 has already been mentioned so I won't dwell on that for longer than I need to.

I loved the opening visuals. Very clear and to the point. It sets the tone for the rest of the piece perfectly. I'm quite big on setting and you handled it brilliantly here. Very good.

"What, who, who are you?" - You have a number of lines like this which I just don't think read naturally. Maybe it's the way I read it but to me it seems a little rushed, than paced. For example, I read the sentence above more like this...

"Whatwhowhoareyou?"

Than this...

"What... Who... Who are you?" - It's a nitpick, I know, but I think using something other than a comma to set the pacing might be the better option, here. To me it just reads better that way.

Other than that, I did really like it. Knowing me, I would have added a couple Flashbacks in there just to really emphasize Michael's backstory. Then again, I'm a fan of Flashbacks and will use the opportunity to use them wherever I can. Each to their own, I guess.

Well done,

Dan

Cheers for checking this out Dan.  I held of with the flashbacks as it would be easier to shoot in its present format; 1 location.

Quoted from alffy Steve (coop), I wonder if you wrote this after the match last night...stinging lol Sorry this didn't work for you.  The 24/7 thing was meant to be taken literally so I guess I could drop that bit, I thought that with Davidson saying it, it would have a harder impact on Michael.  Some of the points I've answered previously but I'm glad you liked this...only kidding, sorry it wasn't for you.

I’m sorry if I was harsh – not my intention. I wrote the feedback the morning after when I saw the result but I promise it didn’t affect my attitude at all!

You can’t get away with not meaning things literally unless it’s hinted at. Normally comedy can do this through sarcasm and what not, but with the type of story you had here with a powerful core, it’s difficult to follow. Maybe it would be best to just drop it and save confusion.

One point you didn’t answer and because I’m a curious bugger; what does the pen laying in water at the beginning mean? Was it supposed to be lying in water? Is it supposed to fit in with the final reveal?

I see you have now explained a little background on the Man Watchers but I still am not a fan of this. So a group of victims get together to WATCH these people that have in Michael’s case caused him some terrible emotional trauma. It’s all a little timid for me – to think that these victims would just watch these offenders in their free time.

Looking back through the comments, it appears I was the only one who had any issues with this so I would take my opinion lightly. If others had similar problems then it may be a bigger issue.

I think it’s also because we didn’t get any background on Davidson and what his life has been like.
And the decision to hand over Michael to the police must have been a difficult one and something which could be explored to give Davidson some substance.

Again, I apologise if I can off as harsh as I was only trying to point out areas that didn’t work for me and ways to maybe improve the story.

Best of luck with it.

Alffy

I always enjoying reading something from you. This had its moments but I don’t feel it entirely worked.

“His eyes catch sight of Davidson’s hidden hand. His knees buckle and he
drops back on to the bed.”

MICHAEL
Jesus, don’t do anything stupid, I
won’t leave, I won’t leave.

- I had a hard time visualising this, it seems awfully, for want of a better word, chicken sh?t of Michael to react like that. I know he’s just woken up, disorientated, in a strange place, with a stranger but this comes off as too appeasing and too readily intimidated.

Somebody has been catching up on their psychoanalytic literature!

“His hand itches toward his
jacket.”

- Should be “inches” instead of “itches”

Too much spacing at the top of page 6. Get back those lost lines, man!

I’m struggling the belive in the plausibility of this “Man Watcher” agency. Wouldn’t you not think if someone like Michael had that kind of past that he would be under some sort of regular psychiatric evaluation? I recognize that these Man Watchers are there to, yep, watch potentially dangerous, mentally unstable people but it doesn’t seem very effective. It looks like they just wait until someone commits another crime before intervening like what we see here. Which is implied at the end with Michael opening the bathroom door, that he’s just done something equally horrible as his past offense.

MICHAEL
How did I do it? How?

- Is there a need for the repetition of “How”?

DAVIDSON (V.O.)
You gouged out my daughters eyes
with a pencil, Michael.

- I don’t reckon this had the dramatic punch you had hoped for. Contrarily, it reads a little odd to me. Perhaps that was your intent but on the basis of the rest of the script it feels ill-fitted.

Like I said, there are some decent moments in this, the initial set-up asks a lot of questions, the mysterious man knowing everything about Michael, the looking at the phone building up the tension that something is about to go down, unfortunately it goes down the road  of telling us everything, lots of expository dialogue to fill in Michael and the reader about the context of their meeting and the history and back-story of how we got to this place.

I’m always wary of using amnesia stricken characters because then the writer tends to use them as convenient conduits for explaining the plot to the audience. Since the protagonist knows as little as we do, they try to wedge in as much story to explain important plot points.

Maybe think of more exciting way to convey this information; flashback, abstract imagery, visual clues or props.

I wrote a short sometime ago that suffered from the same problem of trying to shoehorn all this backstory into a short script that essentially only chronicled the culmination of these events, the final confrontation if you will. It was only during a rewrite last year that I realised there was enough material in there to make a feature out of it. I think you got similar case here, with all this stuff that Davidson informs Michael about you could probably make a feature or at least a longer short out of it, build everything up to this concluding showdown.

Obviously you can’t flat out give away Michael’s condition so some oblique storytelling techniques would have to be deployed i.e. non-linear and dual/multiple narratives. By the looks of it, Davidson comes off as a more interesting character then Michael so maybe have him as your protagonist with Michael just being one of his many “cases.” This could even work as an opening scene.

Anyway, enough rambling, you’ve got an interesting concept here, kinda reminds me of “The Adjustment Bureau” this idea of people looking out for other people and keeping an eye of them. Or chillingly enough, it’s probably closer to the real world than we’d like to admit in some countries.

However, I question the conventional, talking heads method in which you went about delivering the story, this could be restructured to make it more interesting and filmic.

Regards

Col.

Steve, sorry I forgot to answer the pen in water thing.  It was to show that he gouged out the ladies eyes with the pen then cleaned himself and the pen, leaving the pen wet.
No worries about it not working for you, you're not the only one lol.

Col, cheers for reading this and sorry it didn't work for you either.  I kind of limited myself to write a short in one location with two actors.  I was thinking of re-working it as I've had some good feedback but I got an email the other day from someone wanting to shoot it so, I guess it worked in that respect.  Think I'll see what they do with it first before deciding whether to tackle a rewrite.

Hey alffy,

Sometimes you have to add restrictions to your creativity in order to get something out of it.

Good luck with the shoot. Hope this gets made.

Gabe

Hey Anthony,

Sorry to say I wasn't a fan of this one. I think the minimalist strategy is fine and I understand and respect why many writers try to take this approach. I also support the assertion that limits enable creativity; I'm sure we've all seen it happen many a time before.

At the same time, I think the whole "two characters, one location" scenario can be a trap. I think when under these guidelines, there's certain concepts that most responsible writers will come up with immediately from the getgo, i.e. protagonist wakes up in a hotel room with a stranger. In fact, I'd say this particular one comes up a lot; I know I've read this same script hundreds of times before.

If you're gonna keep things this sparse, it's important to keep them fresh as well. This one felt extremely vanilla. I haven't read anything about Man Watchers before but I still don't think that info really makes the script come off as more interesting.

I wouldn't say the issue is so much originality as it is that the premise is just kinda flawed, dramatically. I mean, here's a classic case of an amnesic character who can only ask questions or react in shock, terror, or confusion to a character who can only ever explain the whole story through the dialogue. It's really not very compelling at all.

I think most people opt to make the stranger cryptic and deceptive so as to up the creep factor and remedy the blandness. A fair attempt, I guess, but again, it happens so often that it can hardly impress anyone. I've skimmed over the comments here and it seems you were going for something different; Davidson was meant to be more jumpy in a "walking on eggshells" sorta way. I think that's at least a somewhat different take and yet his dialogue still seems like he's trying to toy with Michael. "Too many questions." "My name's Davidson, but that's irrelevant." Why would he say his name's irrelevant unless he was trying to convey that he, not Michael, knows what's up and thus he's the one in power?

I'd up the "walking on eggshells" angle. On both sides, actually. If both Michael and Davidson are acting jumpy, not only does it up the tension, it adds mystery to which one is really dangerous.

Nevertheless, I think you still need a multi-pronged attack as far as improving the scenario. Amnesiacs are always an issue. They enable an "ask questions, get answers" type of rhythm that is utterly expository and conflict-free. Boring, in other words. The stranger can be anyone, essentially. Them having the answers gives them at least some semblance of strength. A character devoid of insight who's forced to ask questions is always dull. I think Michael needs to go about getting to the bottom of things in a different way. I think him having some memory, at least about his day to day life, could remedy things some. If he's in a position to provide some information to the reader/viewer instead of the story being 100% one-sided, that's a start.

The ending was okay. Eye-gouging is always grim. At the same time, these types of scripts always hint that they're going to end with a revelation of murder or some kind of violence/abuse. This was no exception and macabre as it is, you end the script with a line of dialogue. Not particularly strong. I suppose you could show the photo but that's still just a step down from showing the body itself.

Sorry I can't offer anything more encouraging but indeed, I've read so many of scripts with this exact same scenario. At some point, it inevitably gonna get played out. Right now, you've got a great shot at getting produced; it's still a "two characters, one location" package. But it really doesn't do much for me. I think you need to majorly spruce it up.

Hope this helps.

Hi alffy,

Haven't read anything from here in a long time. This was a good place to start. I've not read any of the other comments so bear with me. I liked the basic story but do think you could improve it significantly with a rewrite.

While reading, I thought Michael killed his teacher and I'm sure that wasn't your intention. Also, there's a block of dialogue fr on Michael that should be Davidson, but that's probably been pointed out already. Another small problem for me was the lack of any real action. I thought that Michael would true to use the pen as a weapon to escape. I know if I woke up in a room with a stranger, I wouldn't just ask questions.

I also thought Davidson would want something more after 20 years. He was extremely calm and I thought he would take matters into his own hands. The police arriving didn't really do the story justice, in my opinion.

I did like the general idea, even if this situation has happened in many stories before. It would be really easy to produce, and I'm confident someone will be happy to take this script on. You can tell a good story, and one of your previous shorts is still in my top 3 that I've read.

Good work.

Brian

Quoted from Mr.Ripley Sometimes you have to add restrictions to your creativity in order to get something out of it.

Very true.

James, sorry this wasn't for you.  The general consensus is that this was a bit of a miss but it was something I just wanted to try out and as I type this it's going to be produced, so it wasn't all bad.

I think maybe I'll stick to comedy as they seem to be best offerings lol.

Brian, thanks for the read and you're right, the errors hae been pointed out previously.  Again, sorry it didn't thrill you but thanks anyway for finishing.  Just out of interest, which one of mine is in your top 3?

The Chocolatier. I can still remember it after all this time. I did like Man Watcher, I liked the mystery and I wanted to keep reading. My comments didn't really come across that way because I'm typing on my phone and couldn't take notes. You did a good job.

Thanks Brian, The Chocolatier is my personal favorite as I worked on it a lot.  Something I don't do for shorts these days.

Alffy,

I have nothing new to add as many of these readers did. I do like the concept of the story and i love the ending. I would like to suggest that since Davidson has some kinda vendetta against Michael, he should show less emotion in the beginning. In my opinion, he was trying to calm Michael too much in the beginning. I would rather Davidson be cold.

Irish Eyes,

I would chose O.S or even O.C

Hodan, I see you checked out another short of mine, cheers.

I know were you're coming from with Davidson being quite calm throughout but I guess that's the British in me; keep calm lol.

If you have anything posted let me know and I'll check it out.

hey alffy;

Liked the set up and the concept here; reminded me a little of the Watchers in the old Highlander TV series-citizens keeping tabs on those in society who might present a danger to themselves or others...

Would have expected a bit more hostility from Davidson concerning his connection to Micheal, that he would delight in the fact that even though that crime went unpunished, this crime would not...Perhaps he was set up or at least enabled by Davidson to unleash his fury on the prostitute in order to fulfill Davidson's dramatic need for revenge...He's too matter of fact or sympathetic, given his emotional tie to Michael...

Quite an enjoyable story...thanks!

This script fell kinda flat for me.  Two guys talked in a hotel room for eight pages and the closest thing to action was Michael putting his pants on.


SPOILER SPACE!!!


Your two characters were extremely two dimensional.  Michael just accepted what Davidson told him.  After reading the script, I couldn't describe what he is like; he had no personality.

Davidson just prattled on; he should've been more commanding with a mysterious presence, like Agent Smith in The Matrix or like the Observers in Fringe.  I wondered why Michael began listening to him.

This group that Davidson belongs to doesn'y work for me.  While you tried to be mysterious, you just ended up being vague.  The fact that the group would have Davidson watch Michael as he picked up his daughter is pretty far fetched, IMHO.

Davidson needs a total revamp for this story to work.  And you need to show more than the two characters.  Use flashback when going over Michael's past.  Give us something to look at.

Hope this helps.


Phil

Hi Anthony,

I didnt like the ending. You write

Davidson reaches in his jacket and pulls out a photograph.

THEN

Michael turns the bathroom door handle and swings it open. His eyes almost burst from their sockets with shock.

i think this needs to be rewritten so that there is correlation between the two. Maybe have Michael open the bathroom door first, then Davidson show him the photograph (which I assume is of his daughter?) and reveal the twist.

interesting stuff though, enjoyed it. Have to agree a little with Phil, they both need a little bit more about them, tho i dont feel the need for a flashback or anything.

Im happy for it to be mysterious,even after reading it a few times. i dont feel the need for questions to be answered (tho im happy you did answer a few lol) I kinda feel that some people on here may have been reading too much into it. There were certainly some aspects which could be looked at again and tweaked but its supposed to make us ask questions isnt it? I dont want everything to be handed to me on a plate

good job.

-Gavin

Blakkwolfe, Phil and Gavin, thanks for the reads guys.

Sorry it didn't work for you Phil.  I toyed with the idea of flashbacks but I mentioned earlier that I really used this as a personal exercise to try and write something in one location with two actors.

Blakkwolf, I understand that you'd expect more hosility from Davidson but I guess I have him as a broken man who has waited years for Michael to lapse so he can finally get him behind bars, but of course he didn't want the girl to die.

Gavin, cheers for the read, not seen you around so feel free to let me know if I can return the read.  Glad you enjoyed and yes, I didn't want to soill all the beans but I do explain a little more background about the Man Watcher program in an early post if you're interested.

I appreciate the idea of the excercise, but the story was two bare-boned.  It needs to be fleshed out.  There are examples of what you're trying to do on the boards.  One of my favorite scripts, here, is Someplace Nice And Dark, a short that Bert did way back when.


Phil

Alffy,

Thought I'd return the read. Then I forgot about it for a few days. But a few minutes ago I remembered. So I decided this time I'd actually do it.

It was either that or doing the washing. Of my clothes I mean. Personally I'm spotless and fragrant. Well, almost.

I haven't read previous comments. It would takes ages and this washing's got to get done sometime. I'm down to a one sock, a Jethro Tull t-shirt and some yellow shorts. I do hope I manage it before I run out of butter.

Moving on to the actual script... Nearly, comments as I read. I don't even really like Jethro Tull. Bit too flutey.

The start reminds me of those hard boiled gumshoe detective stories. Not neccesarily a bad thing. Just that it's been done a lot before. I think it's the hat on the table that did it. You don't state what type of hat, so I'm probably projecting a fedora. Still, you didn't say it wasn't. It'd be funny if it was a fez. But it might ruin your atmostphere.

I think a character saying 'Where am I?' makes them sound a bit daft. I'd prefer 'Where is this?'

It's a bit pedanty of me, if that's even a word, but you have to be careful with the commas. 'Michael please,' is what you'd say on the phone if you wanted to talk to Michael. Davidson would actually say 'Michael, please. I've told... etc'

Most people would let that go. But I can be a bit of an arse. Then again, most people have no idea where to put commas or apostrophes. They now they should be there somewhere, so they throw them about like a farmer throwing seeds in a field. I don't mean you, Alffy. I was talking generally, probably bigging myself up. Hmm, there's a joke there, but it's too dirty.

At this point in the script I'm getting amnesia from Michael. This is a bit of a trope in films. I'd have preferred Michael rubbing the top of his arm and seeing a small mark so realising he's been given an injection earlier. But it's still early days, so I can't be sure where you're going yet.

I note later you managed to put the comma in 'Please, Michael.' in exactly the right spot.

I keep mentioning what I'd have done over what you did. This is probably down to ego and the fact, unlike butter, I have too much of it. Anyways 'Davidson slowly ejects his empty hand from his jacket.' doesn't sound quite right. 'pulls' would have worked far better. To eject slowly is mixing things. 'Ejects' implies speed. It sounds like something Martin Hannett would say to Joy Division.

I could go on picking on things like words and punctuation. Instead I'll have a dabble at the dialogue. I think you could strengthen it a bit. It feels a bit too friendly. I think it needs to be a bit more tense and sinister. Davidson seems too verbose and helpful with the facts,

There's a big gap on page six. I'm presuming you just carried away with your Enter key.

Finished. The end seems a bit harsh. I'm not sure it entirely fits with the rest. Overall, not a bad idea. But it needs a bit more work. I didn't quite buy Davidson's story. I might have if a relative or someone was paying him. I think the fact it's the first we hear of the daughter didn't quite sit right.

Still, overall not bad. I feel a little harsh myself now. Mind you, I'll get over it.

Now, I'm off to buy some butter. And perhaps another sock.

R

  
  

Ha, rendevous, your review is probably more entertaining than my script lol.  Cheers for the read and the comments.  I intended to go back to this but then I was contacted by a guy who wanted to shoot it so I left it alone...which he seems to have done too

I keep saying this but I do intend to post some new stuff up soon.  I've plenty of shorts just sat on my laptop but I can't be arsed to submit them lol.

This was really good.  It was a fast read, but, it was a bit odd.  I enjoyed it, but, after reading some of the comments, have to agree.  The fact that Michael was so easy to buy everything sold to him bothered me.  And where was the other body?  

I guess I wanted this to be neatly wrapped up, and to a point, it was, but, we have no way of knowing if anything said to him was true.  We don't see anything.

But, it was good tension wise, if what was said was true.

Dan

Cheers, Dan.

You don't see anything as I wanted to write something with two characters in one location, in a hope someone might want to film it...which they did...but then didn't lol.

I'm glad you enjoyed it though, and everything that was said was true.