All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
I liked the overall story for this short and the execution was fairly good. However, there were a couple of areas that I thought had issues.
On page 7 the back and forth between Des and Janet came across as too melodramatic and then went to exposition driven. I would play around with that dialogue a bit more or maybe have Des attempt to kill Martin, have Janet stop her then have Des insist Janet do the killing to get her life back - something like that.
On page 10 the stack falling is too much of a coincidence and comes across as Deus Ex Machina. I would either foreshadow it or have a more believable accident occur.
I have to admit I did enjoy this little tale. Some fine storytelling. There's many ways to tell a story like this one - but this-- "they were obviously expecting the story to center on compassionate 'assisted suicide'... to be honest so was I, but-- I'm glad you didn't go that route because I would agree -- it is boring and has been done to death.
I liked your use of the baby monitor here. And Des was a very interesting choice, for obvious reasons.
Having said that -- I don't try to overthink shorts, they are what they are... just that.
Yeah shorts are a great excuse to practise writing in genres one probably wouldn't attempt as a feature. Certainly not worth over thinking and if anything should just be entertaining. Features can turn into a headache with arcs and plotlines not adding up. Shorts are a welcome break. I'm glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for commenting. Oh and Des was definitely the only choice...
Pretty good. Shame it doesn't have more reads, but I know why. I scan the boards frequently and see the arguments. Just here returning the favor because you read So Pretty... Pssst, if you check that thread, it's already been filmed. I can't really make the changes you suggest, but thanks for the read.
Your dialogue far outshines your action prose. I really liked this all the way until the ending. My issue with it is that I didn't hate Janet enough for this outcome. Sure, she says some mean shit, but sounds like an outburst from a frustrated wife taking care of an invalid husband for ten years--which you repeatedly made clear.
It is what we DO that defines us, not what we say. I think you should have Janet do some really piss poor shit to Martin to give the audience some sense of retribution when she falls into his exact condition.
I will assume Des was a part of her subconscious? Again, almost like we can't blame Janet herself. She was talked into killing him. And you made it seem as though Martin wanted to die so I thought she was making the right choice.
Only my thoughts, to each their own. I think this could easily be filmed and do well if you just give the audience what they want... Satisfaction.
Pretty good. Shame it doesn't have more reads, but I know why. I scan the boards frequently and see the arguments. Just here returning the favor because you read So Pretty... Pssst, if you check that thread, it's already been filmed. I can't really make the changes you suggest, but thanks for the read.
Your dialogue far outshines your action prose. I really liked this all the way until the ending. My issue with it is that I didn't hate Janet enough for this outcome. Sure, she says some mean shit, but sounds like an outburst from a frustrated wife taking care of an invalid husband for ten years--which you repeatedly made clear.
It is what we DO that defines us, not what we say. I think you should have Janet do some really piss poor shit to Martin to give the audience some sense of retribution when she falls into his exact condition.
I will assume Des was a part of her subconscious? Again, almost like we can't blame Janet herself. She was talked into killing him. And you made it seem as though Martin wanted to die so I thought she was making the right choice.
Only my thoughts, to each their own. I think this could easily be filmed and do well if you just give the audience what they want... Satisfaction.
James
Thanks for your thoughts and now that you mention it I see exactly what you mean. I need to show her being slightly more selfish... as that is what the film is meant to be about. With my shorts I tend to go twilight zone style and Desdemona is in reference to the Devil's Daughter... so is a figment yes... but more a manifestation of one's own selfishness. I need to make that more obvious.
Well done on getting So Pretty filmed... good luck with it.
Are all your script titles variations on classic films? I’ve done it a couple of times too in the past but with me it’s because I’m crap at coming up with them myself!
The wordiness is a bit more of an issue in comparison to “The Greatest Escape.” There’s too much padding in the prose, pair down the sentences to the essential details while still making sense. Terse language with punchy visuals.
Take the opening of the script for example:
INT. HOUSE - DAY
“JANET (40's) arrives home, places her keys down on the table and takes a deep breath. A baby monitor kicks into life, a gurgling sound can be heard coming from the tiny speaker.”
I would rewrite it something like this:
INT. HOUSE – FRONT DOOR - DAY
Janet (40s) enters, places her keys on the hallway table, breathes deep. A GURGLING sound emanates from a BABY MONITOR somewhere in the house.
- It’s shorter, yet all the important information is retained. See about replacing “and” with a comma where possible. No need to say “arrives home” we can work that out from the slugline. I like to make them more specific too, just a style thing. Also, you don’t indicate where the baby monitor is and exactly how does one “kick into life”? How do we know it has a tiny speaker if you haven’t told us where it is? Which is superfluous information anyway.
All through the script there are examples of this type of ponderous writing, I’m not gonna go through each one, just take the above as typical.
Of course you’re free to discard what I recommend, just my opinion, nothing more.
“unable to look at the pathetic bastard.”
- This took me by surprise at first, I couldn’t help but giggle against my better judgement. In all seriousness though, and perhaps I’m being prudish but I would refrain from using expletives in the prose, cheapens it somewhat. Again, just my attitude towards it.
Two pages in and sh?t this Janet is an embittered soul. It’s a horrible situation depicted, heart wrenching stuff and she’s had ten years of it, truly at the end of her tether.
“apparently made of ivory.”
- What? Maybe replace “apparently” with “seemingly”.
Nice twist with lesbian intimacy, purely for surprise value if anything else. How does Des instinctually know Janet’s situation so early on?
“Des looks hard at Janet. Janet nods and takes a hold of Martin's arm.”
- I find it very implausible that Janet would let this stranger use a syringe on Martin with the only words of reassurance being “Trust me”,
DES It's street grade. Works just as well.
Janet looks at her husband and smiles.
JANET He looks so peaceful.
- Again, I don’t believe the conversation would go something like that. I know Janet is fed up with her burden but her compliance still rings false.
DES You already know what I mean.
JANET I'm sorry but I really don't.
Des snorts and leaves the bedroom. Janet follows after her.
- This leering presumptuousness exhibited by Des, also earlier in the line:
DES I think you do.
Is really trying my patience. I mean, who does she think she is?
“Janet looks at her, puzzled.”
- You and me both, girl. I’d be wondering what are Des’s real motivations here and quizzed her on them long before now…definitely before she administers drugs to my invalid husband.
DES I'm the only one that will ever help you.
- And why would that be?
LIVING ROOM
"The clock on the wall ticks by as Janet sits on the settee. Suddenly she cries out and hurries out of the room, heads UP THE STAIRS."
- Is she trippin’ balls here or what? Why did she just suddenly remember what she had done? Although, presuming now that Des is a figment of her imagination, this probably makes sense, she is going mad!
Wow, the ending confused me even more. The loose chimney stack falling on her to exact a piece of ironic fate felt extremely contrived while Des’s last line went over my head.
My reading of the script is that Des is the devil of some sort or Janet’s personal demon, the bad conscience sitting on one’s shoulder type character who forces Janet to carry out her inner but immoral desires. By acquiescing, she therefore damns herself to hell.
As you can see, I had major problems with this, Dustin, it doesn’t work near as successfully as I thought “The greatest Escape” did. My biggest issues being with the believability of Janet and Des’s exchanges this it sent alramed bells ringing that something was amiss with latter (and the former for that matter given her unforgivable critical decision making) and the contrivances of the final scenes,
Overall, a rather misguided and heavy handed morality tale, you can do better I reckon.
Are all your script titles variations on classic films? I’ve done it a couple of times too in the past but with me it’s because I’m crap at coming up with them myself!
I just go with whatever suits the story best. Sometimes that means using variations of other film titles. I suppose it's hard to avoid sometimes.
The wordiness is a bit more of an issue in comparison to “The Greatest Escape.” There’s too much padding in the prose, pair down the sentences to the essential details while still making sense. Terse language with punchy visuals.
Take the opening of the script for example:
INT. HOUSE - DAY
“JANET (40's) arrives home, places her keys down on the table and takes a deep breath. A baby monitor kicks into life, a gurgling sound can be heard coming from the tiny speaker.”
I would rewrite it something like this:
INT. HOUSE – FRONT DOOR - DAY
Janet (40s) enters, places her keys on the hallway table, breathes deep. A GURGLING sound emanates from a BABY MONITOR somewhere in the house.
- It’s shorter, yet all the important information is retained. See about replacing “and” with a comma where possible. No need to say “arrives home” we can work that out from the slugline. I like to make them more specific too, just a style thing. Also, you don’t indicate where the baby monitor is and exactly how does one “kick into life”? How do we know it has a tiny speaker if you haven’t told us where it is? Which is superfluous information anyway.
All through the script there are examples of this type of ponderous writing, I’m not gonna go through each one, just take the above as typical.
Of course you’re free to discard what I recommend, just my opinion, nothing more.
Yes The Greatest Escape was written after this one. I agree a couple more drafts are needed on this story to get things right. My attitude with shorts is completely different to my features. I should have a sci-fi feature listed here in the next couple of days, that i've been working on since November. i suppose I'm trying to say that this short hasn't had much work put into it aside from laying down the story... and it definitely shows.
- This took me by surprise at first, I couldn’t help but giggle against my better judgement. In all seriousness though, and perhaps I’m being prudish but I would refrain from using expletives in the prose, cheapens it somewhat. Again, just my attitude towards it.
I think within context it is fine. The odd one... it can help bring a reader in, create some type of rapport even. Plus it depends on the type of script you are writing. I wouldn't do it in every script, only when I feel it genuinely adds something to do so.
Two pages in and sh?t this Janet is an embittered soul. It’s a horrible situation depicted, heart wrenching stuff and she’s had ten years of it, truly at the end of her tether.
Wow, the ending confused me even more. The loose chimney stack falling on her to exact a piece of ironic fate felt extremely contrived while Des’s last line went over my head.
I know it is weak.. but the ironic twist has to be there. I also agree that the answer is probably in the story somewhere and not a convenient chimney stack falling on her head. Maybe she kills herself with an OD of heroin because of guilt. Actually, that would be extremely ironic.
My reading of the script is that Des is the devil of some sort or Janet’s personal demon, the bad conscience sitting on one’s shoulder type character who forces Janet to carry out her inner but immoral desires. By acquiescing, she therefore damns herself to hell.
As you can see, I had major problems with this, Dustin, it doesn’t work near as successfully as I thought “The greatest Escape” did. My biggest issues being with the believability of Janet and Des’s exchanges this it sent alramed bells ringing that something was amiss with latter (and the former for that matter given her unforgivable critical decision making) and the contrivances of the final scenes,
Overall, a rather misguided and heavy handed morality tale, you can do better I reckon.
I enjoyed this and think it would be good on film.
I do agree with other comments about wordiness but meh, easily fixed.
Will say though the first thing that popped into my head the morning after Janet met des was he's gunna do a Fight Club.
Good work
Michael
Yeah easy fixes... if a student producer wants to make a film based on this concept then we might as well work with this script and improve it as we go. Probably the wrong attitude to have, as I suppose anything we put forward should be perfected as it is a show of our workmanship.
I'll try better with my shorts from now on. Thanks for giving it a read, mate.
I loved the opening set-up for this. It was very powerful, and I could feel the bitterness in Janet and it did make me both feel sorry for her, while still disliking her a lot. (I'm pretty sure that was your goal, to make us NOT like her, since she gets her just desserts in the end.)
So I was really into the story at the beginning.
Then, when Janet brought Des back to her house and they performed in the next room over from Martin, that was an excellent catalyst to propel this into the final part of the story. And I thought things were going to take off from there.
Unfortunately, that's where I thought things fall kind of flat. I don't know exactly what I was expecting, (definitely Des talking Janet into killing him), but I was hoping for something more of a twist. You do have great Twilight Zone-themed setups, but it seems like when it gets to the (I don't know if this is the right word), supernatural, part, that's where things get a little too weird to follow and a little muddled in your intentions of what you want to pull off.
The chimney bricks falling on Janet definitely felt trite and too convenient. Almost comedic.
I like your atmospheres in the two stories I've read of yours so far, so I can't say I didn't like them. It's just those certain elements that I'm not clicking with for some reason.
I'm certainly not detracted from reading any of your other stories I've seen you posted, recently, though. I'm sure I'll click with one of them eventually. :-)
Overall, I liked this very much and I wish you rewrote it. I think that you should not touch the structure but just work on the writing perhaps a bit.
Also in places you have your characters show emotions in very dramatic way. I don't think you need that.
About the writing: p1 "arrives home" you could describe what she does maybe, steps in, closes the door behind. Arrives is a little novelistic for me.
Looks like you're missing double dash after "into"
"looks much older than his years" - I notices people don't like that. Either say 50, or describe him, like unkempt etc.
I don't think you need "it' is clear that he knows what is going on despite his outward appearance." on p2
on p7 you have Janet sink to her knees and cry - I kind of don't believe it. I'd like her just stand there. I think it's overly dramatic. There are a couple of instances like that and I think letting her stand and stare would leave much more impact than sinking to her knees.
The story is very good and the rewrite is a small one in my opinion.
I loved the opening set-up for this. It was very powerful, and I could feel the bitterness in Janet and it did make me both feel sorry for her, while still disliking her a lot. (I'm pretty sure that was your goal, to make us NOT like her, since she gets her just desserts in the end.)
So I was really into the story at the beginning.
Then, when Janet brought Des back to her house and they performed in the next room over from Martin, that was an excellent catalyst to propel this into the final part of the story. And I thought things were going to take off from there.
Unfortunately, that's where I thought things fall kind of flat. I don't know exactly what I was expecting, (definitely Des talking Janet into killing him), but I was hoping for something more of a twist. You do have great Twilight Zone-themed setups, but it seems like when it gets to the (I don't know if this is the right word), supernatural, part, that's where things get a little too weird to follow and a little muddled in your intentions of what you want to pull off.
The chimney bricks falling on Janet definitely felt trite and too convenient. Almost comedic.
I like your atmospheres in the two stories I've read of yours so far, so I can't say I didn't like them. It's just those certain elements that I'm not clicking with for some reason.
I'm certainly not detracted from reading any of your other stories I've seen you posted, recently, though. I'm sure I'll click with one of them eventually. :-)
These shorts are all first draft with a quick run through for typo's. I admit that if I put a little more thought into them that I could have made things crisper. The chimney stack was a quick fix in my haste to write another one.
Overall, I liked this very much and I wish you rewrote it. I think that you should not touch the structure but just work on the writing perhaps a bit.
Also in places you have your characters show emotions in very dramatic way. I don't think you need that.
About the writing: p1 "arrives home" you could describe what she does maybe, steps in, closes the door behind. Arrives is a little novelistic for me.
Looks like you're missing double dash after "into"
"looks much older than his years" - I notices people don't like that. Either say 50, or describe him, like unkempt etc.
I don't think you need "it' is clear that he knows what is going on despite his outward appearance." on p2
on p7 you have Janet sink to her knees and cry - I kind of don't believe it. I'd like her just stand there. I think it's overly dramatic. There are a couple of instances like that and I think letting her stand and stare would leave much more impact than sinking to her knees.
The story is very good and the rewrite is a small one in my opinion.
Hi Khamanna. Those are all valid points that will certainly help should I choose to rewrite this. Thanks a lot for reading and I'm glad that you enjoyed most of it.
I had some minor issues with this one, so I thought I'd just lay them out as I see them, and you can take your pick.
Maybe this is an old script, but you still seem to be doing that 'repeat the title in quotes thing' at the top of page one. I've not seen it before, and I really don't think it's necessary. Each to his own, though.
New scenes - no description on the house, and I always think it's better to give some description if you go to a new location - certainly the first location I think should get something. (You do give locations better in Adm & Eiv, so maybe its just shorts?).
Still in the first scene, and I'm not sure where Janet is - it seems a little vague, especially with there being a table there - front room? Corridor? Not a major, but it came of a bit loose.
Writing's generally good throughout, no major issues there.
There's the occasional issue of vague writing taking over from more visual writing, so:
She selects the odd one tossing it down onto the bed. --could be She selects a pastel blue frock ... ... which just bring something a little more visual to the mind.
So -- onto the story. Overall, I did like it, but I just got the nagging feeling that it was written to convenience. After your first script was kinda gritty, I half expected an element of that, but you can obviuosly command different styles quite easily.
But Des being some kind of 'evil-thingy' seemed to detract from it somewhat, as I felt that could clearly work should a Des-equivalent be used. That and the 'immediate leabian' touch kind of made it withdraw from reality somewhat.
I wasn't too sure who 'that bitch' was (the help?), but I wondered if Janet and bitch could get together to do some evil deed. Maybe you thought that through already and had your reason, but I still felt there was room to delve into this some, motivations, temptations etc that would keep it real instead of other-worldly. I'm just not sure that it added anything to it.
Aside from that - it a good short, and it'd work well on screen, fairly easy to produce, and there's a lot of elements in here that need to be here.
Simon -------- Just caught some of the feedback, so some of that makes more sense.
Thanks as always for your complete honesty, Simon.
yes, I very much concentrate on features. Shorts are just for fun and that's the way they should stay. Obviously though if somebody should want to produce one I'd be happy to spend a while making it perfect. And certainly many thoughts here, yours included, will be utilised should such an eventuality occur. Extremely helpful. I actually feel cheeky listing it and getting such great feedback. It almost means I don't have to think for myself.
It's also opened my eyes to bringing in other writers to make scripts better. Obviously there has to be a little bit of mutual respect... but I can see why a partnership could make a for a much better script.
Yeah I agree on the montage... it does look a little unpleasant to the reader. And yeah, the bit** is just a reference to the Help. Could be dropped for the second draft, I suppose. Thanks again for your thoughts, Simon.
Fantastic short script! Character development from the get go and all through the script I was hooked!
I agree with mcornetto on a couple points though. The chimney brick seems to coincidental.I do like the idea of her ending up in the hospital though with Des at the end though! My other suggestions are all aesthetic little things, for the story it great!
Fantastic short script! Character development from the get go and all through the script I was hooked!
I agree with mcornetto on a couple points though. The chimney brick seems to coincidental.I do like the idea of her ending up in the hospital though with Des at the end though! My other suggestions are all aesthetic little things, for the story it great!
Keep up the great work!
Thanks mate, much appreciated. I like the idea of they ending up in hospital together... would make for a great Twilight Zone ending which is exactly the tone aimed for with this script. And yeah, the chimney stack needs a workaround.
Haven't read this one (yet) - but you *do* realize that it freaks me out every time I see this title?
--Janet (Wonka)
Oh, I see, lol. I read my name in a script yesterday and it freaked me a little too.
I'd appreciate your input if you do manage to get around to reading it. I have great admiration for your character development. You obviously get into each character's head and I really had you down as an old guy, in your 60's. Obviously wise beyond your years. Thanks for looking in.
I picked this script at random and didn't read through it first. A writer can learn as much from terrible scripts as they can from great scripts (if not more). And short scripts... they're tough to write!
"All About Janet" is overwritten. It's awkward, clunky, and unnatural. I mean yes, Janet's initial interaction with Martin is shocking and stirring. But other than that, Janet's f-bombs (and other foul language) are the most stimulating part of the script. Janet, as a character, comes off as very phony. Just because she has a rude attitude, and says some appalling things, that doesn't automatically give her personality. Des' dialogue (and entire being) is equally painful ("You know why I'm here." "You don't have to you know." "You already know what I mean.") As for the ending, I don't know what to make of it. My vague guess is that Des is actually Janet, and Janet is actually demented, or something along those lines? Even that doesn't sound right at all.
When I read a work that's terrible, I usually find myself thinking something along the lines of, "Just because you write it, that doesn't make it so!" For example, just because a writer writes a baffling ending (like in "All About Janet") that does not automatically make it thoughtful, or ripe for discussion. The sign of a horrid writer is someone who has the worst taste. Because the best writers have an exquisite pallet for good drama. Good writers don't give in to hype, or pressure. Good writers know where their instincts are strongest, and when they need to bring in an outside opinion.
So as a good writer one should know what is universal, and timeless, and good, but at the same time they must block out the world, ignore what everyone says, and only listen to themselves. Sound like a contradiction? Figure it out, and you'll be the next Stephen King.
Trying to critique a script like "All About Janet" is impossible. It's like trying to appraise the singing voice of a mute. A contradiction, to be sure.
I picked this script at random and didn't read through it first. A writer can learn as much from terrible scripts as they can from great scripts (if not more). And short scripts... they're tough to write!
"All About Janet" is overwritten. It's awkward, clunky, and unnatural. I mean yes, Janet's initial interaction with Martin is shocking and stirring. But other than that, Janet's f-bombs (and other foul language) are the most stimulating part of the script. Janet, as a character, comes off as very phony. Just because she has a rude attitude, and says some appalling things, that doesn't automatically give her personality. Des' dialogue (and entire being) is equally painful ("You know why I'm here." "You don't have to you know." "You already know what I mean.") As for the ending, I don't know what to make of it. My vague guess is that Des is actually Janet, and Janet is actually demented, or something along those lines? Even that doesn't sound right at all.
When I read a work that's terrible, I usually find myself thinking something along the lines of, "Just because you write it, that doesn't make it so!" For example, just because a writer writes a baffling ending (like in "All About Janet") that does not automatically make it thoughtful, or ripe for discussion. The sign of a horrid writer is someone who has the worst taste. Because the best writers have an exquisite pallet for good drama. Good writers don't give in to hype, or pressure. Good writers know where their instincts are strongest, and when they need to bring in an outside opinion.
So as a good writer one should know what is universal, and timeless, and good, but at the same time they must block out the world, ignore what everyone says, and only listen to themselves. Sound like a contradiction? Figure it out, and you'll be the next Stephen King.
Trying to critique a script like "All About Janet" is impossible. It's like trying to appraise the singing voice of a mute. A contradiction, to be sure.
LOL... so I take it you didn't like it. Thanks for your thoughts. I'll take them for what they are worth.
Dustin, pelgiroux also puts your script up on his script review site so you may well want to decide whether you approve of it being there?
As this was written in 24 hours and I posted it knowing there were weaknesses in the plot, I'm not sure that I'd like it taken as a full representation of my work... but at the same time, a part of me really doesn't mind. Let him have his way with it... not like anyone serious is checking out his site or gives a flying what he has to say. At the same time though, I have to accept there are mistakes and I've left it open. I deserve what I get. Meh.
I believe I owe you a read so I dug this up. Hope you're not burnt out on it. I'll comment anyway.
I'm in two minds about this really. On the one hand it's well written, reads quick, good format. But on the other it doesn't seem to make sense in the respect that, while at the bar, Des just seems to drop in out of nowhere and beds Janet. Not buying it really. Des sounds mysterious, even to Janet, but Janet goes for her anyway. To me it just seems like it's a point a to b scenario, where you need Des to go home with Janet, but you don't quite know how to get her there. It's like you sacrificed logic to get the story to where it needs to go.
Once it gets there it's pretty cool reading, but you still got Janet allowing Des to shoot Martin up with dope, shoot Janet up with dope. Janet barely knows this chick and yet she's allowing her to do this. It doesn't ring true, and it needs a fix.
Now, I saw your radio play on this and started reading but got interrupted. It seems like you fixed up how Janet and Des meet. I will read further on that as time allows.
Anyway, like I said, this is well written but misses the mark in a few areas.
Sorry if I repeated anything. Didnt read previous comments.
Second script I read from you. The first, a short on your site, the one with the lonesome old man, I didn't liked. Here you've done a lot better.
It was an interesting read. You really pushed Martin's disease as much as you could. That's great, because it gives the script a nice touch by telling it melodramatic around such a difficult fate.
My advice would be to walk that line to the end. You should stay minimalistic IMO. In a melo there shouldn't be such a big ironic twist. It changes the pace and mood and feels non-organic. It doesn't satisfy me that Janet has owned her bill at the end. Your statement also turns out to plea for justice. What I mean is, you put the BLOCKBUSTER plotting inside a script where I don't see something like that, it's more sensitive and deserves to be free of conventions. The exceptional situation is strong enough and gives a worth itself. So, the chimney-accident with all consequences, as well as Janet's demonization are my points of critism, here.
You mentioned that you developed Des as a voice in Janet's head. That sounds much better. Janet could build up a schizophrenic, or something like that, herself to follow her goal subconsciously: let her personal nightmare end, what she can't, it's impossible. That's the depth.
Janet is 40, she acts as if she's a bit younger. She could be more serious at all. Her depression should come much more up to the surface. She partly comes around fresh and witty and skittish. I see it more believable if she would be rigid, burned out, empty. She got some exhausting rituals and experiences to handle with her diseased husband for 10 years. I don't mean that you didn't show anything of that points, for example you show her sarcastic. It's just more expendable. Her characterization looks like the most important point in your script.
So, finally I would be more interested, if you would focus on Janet and show something from inside her, because of all these unhappy years. Like I said, these creative grab with the demonization of Janet isn't what I'm really interested in, I would prefer to see what Janet finds in her own fate without this supernatural way. Maybe she got some mental problems- kills Martin and herself.
We both had some very different views on some scripts, not on every single, for sure, so take your worth, if there's any for you.
There's definitely something inside, that's what it's all about... congrats for that and good luck with the script
When they start kissing outside the front door of Janet's house, it seem's too quick and out of place.
I think you need more where Janet and Des are in the Bar. Maybe Des whispering in Janet's ear, telling her what she would like to do to her or touching her leg, just something to start the ball rolling.
You say on page 4 'Tears drip down his cheeks' Tears would run down his cheeks or drip off his chin.
I dont like the name 'All About Janet' because it sounds like a rip off . Also it,s not all about Janet, it's about Martin and Des too.
Second script I read from you. The first, a short on your site, the one with the lonesome old man, I didn't liked. Here you've done a lot better.
I still like that old man story. All I wanted to do with that story was show how lonely it can be getting old. All of the shorts listed here were written in the same week. Each one was written in 24 hours. There's probably a bit more to chew on with this story... but still, I'm not sure why the Final Loneliness hasn't received any praise. Maybe people are just not old enough to be interested... which would be kinda ironic.
It was an interesting read. You really pushed Martin's disease as much as you could. That's great, because it gives the script a nice touch by telling it melodramatic around such a difficult fate.
My advice would be to walk that line to the end. You should stay minimalistic IMO. In a melo there shouldn't be such a big ironic twist. It changes the pace and mood and feels non-organic.
I see what you mean, but I feel that without that twist it wouldn't be a story. The twist is expected. I think my delivery of that twist is way off and needs to be better worked out. Too circumstantial at the moment.. but I still feel that it needs to be there.
You mentioned that you developed Des as a voice in Janet's head. That sounds much better. Janet could build up a schizophrenic, or something like that, herself to follow her goal subconsciously: let her personal nightmare end, what she can't, it's impossible. That's the depth.
Desdemona does not actually exist in the real sense. The name Desdemona means misery. So she is a manifestation of the Devil, or representative of Janet's own miserable feelings. She is certainly not meant to be a real person. Which is why she doesn't need an arc of her own.
Janet is 40, she acts as if she's a bit younger. She could be more serious at all. Her depression should come much more up to the surface. She partly comes around fresh and witty and skittish. I see it more believable if she would be rigid, burned out, empty. She got some exhausting rituals and experiences to handle with her diseased husband for 10 years. I don't mean that you didn't show anything of that points, for example you show her sarcastic. It's just more expendable. Her characterization looks like the most important point in your script.
Yes, in the radio play I believed I showed/told this a little better. Certainly something that would get reworked on a rewrite.
When they start kissing outside the front door of Janet's house, it seem's too quick and out of place.
Something either is or it isn't. Is the viewer party to the journey home? Is the viewer party to anything else that happened in the bar prior to they going home? The answer to both of those questions is no. They meet in a bar, attracted to each other, then it cuts to them kissing outside her front door. That's all that is needed in a short... or even a feature.
I think you need more where Janet and Des are in the Bar. Maybe Des whispering in Janet's ear, telling her what she would like to do to her or touching her leg, just something to start the ball rolling.
T%his is a short. No more is needed than an initial attraction in the bar, then a cut to them kissing outside the front door. If you want to read a romance, pick up a Mills and Boon.
If you're talking about Des or whatever her name is being the devil inside Janet's head, then It's all about Des, she has the biggest and most prominent part.
The kissing thing outside the Janet's front door is to fast for me, it's my opinion, dont tell me to read Mills and Boons you cheeky f****r, suck it up.
The rip off name thing is 'All about Eve' and 'All about Steve' Apart from that it doesn't project what the story is all about .
THE WANKING CHAIR
Think about it, smoke some weed, Snort some speed It's Des the b**** that'll make you bleed Nasty is the tool. The 5 second rule Dont treat me like no mother F**king fool
Sanding off your finger prints, the wife's out of town Clicking keys, Pants down Hide the python when your mum comes around A pocket rocket, a mini alligator Enough for now I'll catch you later
If you're talking about Des or whatever her name is being the devil inside Janet's head, then It's all about Des, she has the biggest and most prominent part.
The kissing thing outside the Janet's front door is to fast for me, it's my opinion, dont tell me to read Mills and Boons you cheeky f****r, suck it up.
The rip off name thing is 'All about Eve' and 'All about Steve' Apart from that it doesn't project what the story is all about .
THE WANKING CHAIR
Think about it, smoke some weed, Snort some speed It's Des the b**** that'll make you bleed Nasty is the tool. The 5 second rule Dont treat me like no mother F**king fool
Sanding off your finger prints, the wife's out of town Clicking keys, Pants down Hide the python when your mum comes around A pocket rocket, a mini alligator Enough for now I'll catch you later
There isn't any such thing as a rip off title. If I wanted to call the film Top Gun, I could.
You're entitled to your opinion of course, however I'm also entitled to tell you it is wrong. If you want to read more romance, try family sagas.
You still haven't made the logical connection. Yet you can pick out two films with similar titles that also seem to have more than one actor in them and they're just fine. Interesting.
In this draft I've gotten rid of the hospital scene and included a new scene at the beginning. This gives the bonus of not needing to mock up a hospital room and helps give a better contrast between the opening and closing scenes. Makes the ending more ironic.
We finished auditions on Saturday 3rd May and the main cast have been chosen. We're really lucky to have gotten the quality of actors that we have. It was quite a tough choice in the end.
First rehearsals are on 31st May, with a view to filming on 28-30th June. Locations are set, costumes are done, all involved are excited.
Hey Dustin, great for you! I believe one of the best things writers can do to get better is making their own films. You learn tons.
This is also a very small world it appears. Val Monk is also a friend and client of another SS member, Kevan Craft. He's not been around lately, but I remember he did her website or posters or something. Small world.
Homepage looks very good. From the script, I expected older actors, but it makes sense with regards to achieve a younger audience.
I had a warning with entering the page: Invalid date something...
Congrats. Seems as if you push the right buttons with your projects recently.
Thank you. We went with the people that stood out the most talent-wise. The Nurse is in her 50s. Janet, late 30s, the other two are mid-twenties. Benjamin though is great, he's losing weight to play the part and is determined to show up on set a complete physical and mental wreck, his words.
That happens on FF with the date. Try Chrome and everything works as it should.
I don't know any more if you described Desdemona's hair, or if you producers will finally style her that way of course- this hairstyle is what I thought she looks like.
Thanks again, and nice one Demento for the like. Feel free to link up with me on FB, only do it now, because in a week or so I will have forgotten all about this conversation and could reject the request not knowing who you are.
Prussian, I'm a linux user so don't have IE. IE is the worst browser ever. It's clunky, slow and often hacked. IE users are particularly vulnerable to hackers purely because they are often not as savvy as they should be about the internet. IE is the browser built into their OS (windows) and they never veer away from it.
FF (firefox) are extremely good and used to be my browser of choice, however I have moved more into chrome recently. Safari are quite good too. I will try and figure out what is giving the date error, because it doesn't happen to every site that I have running the same software.
In regards to Des' hair... I don't think that any of us are particularly concerned about her hairstyle.
We wrapped today after a 48-hour shoot. 14 scenes yesterday and one scene split into 5 mini scenes today. Yesterday I was operating the clapper board and helping out here and there with direction. On day one we shot 14 scenes in under 12 hours. Today we were done in 4.
The great thing about this film is that everyone's input has been valued and highly sought. Something of a motto of ours is; if you have something to say then you better damn well say it. It meant that any mistakes were quickly picked up and rectified. So easy to get confused on set, especially when filming scenes out of sequence, it's good to have people you know are going to be using their brains too.
Crazy thing is we had a sound guy bail on us. Got a new guy in who turned out to be worth his weight in gold. Lots of experience making films, producing several features himself. Just a lucky alignment of the stars brought him to us... he thought of shots we would never think of, one of them is a mock CCTV shot. Hopefully we get chance to work with him again.
All in all I'm pleased with the shoot. The editor believes the footage is great and can't wait to get to work on it, in fact, he's starting tonight. Should have the first cut (sequencing only) in a week.
We won't be able to show this beforehand as we will be hitting festivals with it, including a big one at the home of the BAFTAs in November. Get to walk down the red carpet and pretend we're real celeb's. Who knows, we may even be there a couple months later to collect an award for best short.
Right now, we're moving onto the next one. 36 Hours in the Life of a Smackhead, although we will most likely change the title to 36 Hours.
So, hairdressing is done. Good. By the way, I didn't mean the producers should make the actors haircuts or feel deeply concerned about it, whatever. What I meant is that the producers, and with that especially the director, decide about the visual look. So don't make that hairdressing job. Just to clear this up, because you came along with this for the second time.
Anyway, some interesting stuff about the shooting. So, you kept it some kind of: Speak now or forever hold your peace. At least a way avoiding people throwing shit at each other afterwards when everyone had a chance to intervene at first hand.
Anyway, some interesting stuff about the shooting. So, you kept it some kind of: Speak now or forever hold your peace. At least a way avoiding people throwing shit at each other afterwards when everyone had a chance to intervene at first hand.
I prefer to think of it more as a family thing. There are no leaders, but the figurehead is Anthony Niner, he's the guy that gets everyone together and steps down hard on anyone messing around. Not that anyone did, they were all very professional. If there are any knocks to be had then we take it as a team... we learn from any mistakes and move on. We're not even waiting for the edit on this one... obviously we're all a little apprehensive until we watch the first cut. It's in the editors hands now.
We already had the look we wanted. Once you start casting actors for the parts your mind opens up to other possibilities as actors bring their own qualities to a part. I researched, watched showreels and knew who I wanted for the lead. The Des role was a surprise, although I'd invited the actress to audition when she first arrived she was really softly spoken... and I think that it was the way she suddenly switched into character that convinced us right away that she was Des.
No doubt, respect, to keep, remember, come back to a kind of harmony is important for any artistic realization and success imo.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
I'd invited the actress to audition when she first arrived she was really softly spoken... and I think that it was the way she suddenly switched into character that convinced us right away that she was Des.
Sounds like a confident person. And as if she's coming from a theater background as well.
Cheers mate. Just got word back from the editor and he's already 80% through the first edit. Still may need a sit down with him yet to figure out what is what, but we may be happy with the first one, who knows. Then it'll be down to colour grading. There will probably be some posted on FB so you should see those, but I'll also put a couple in this thread.
Looking forward to seeing it, mate. Yeah, it normally takes a few edits to get something that you're happy with. I find editing is the processes which requires the most collaboration to produce an end product that everyone is happy with.
Follow that link for a screenshot as I don't want to break the forum... shows Janet in the nightclub... I can't release any more until the final edit and colour-grading have been done.
After seeing the initial sequencing edit though I'm extremely happy with it.
Sound is a bit quiet on "notebook standard" but I don't know how this works and if there's even an opportunity to make it louder from the start... I think I see it again with loudspeakers
I felt that the actors did a good job. The director too.
The club scene was quite modern, didn't expected that from the script. What was it about with the splitscreen? Was it just for bringing in some agility?
Seems to me "you" played safe with some points: I expected Des to act supernatural, wasn't she sitting on a shelf or sth. whispering her demonic shit in the script...
It was a good choice to change the second plot point from car-accident to slip on a plate. It much more relates to the subject.
I expected Janet to have some spasms though.
I wasn't sure about the first "slow fade", apart from that, how you begun the film was very good.
I dislike the door movement. That came across a bit amateur. The door moves and scene begins stuff. Don't know if it was once or twice, but writer, I guess that was your fault
I wouldn't watch short movies if I wasn't on this board; the passion's visible, go on.
Good luck Dustin, great start I guess.
Ps: There were two other points: To me it seems like the picture went darker, greyer at the half. I liked it a lot. The quotation was specific but I couldn't get something out of it while it was different, still, says the one-time-watcher.
I wish I could read the script again but obviously it's not here for the reading anymore. So, bear in mind some of my comments will be off the cuff and may not be as well informed as they could be.
From a purely viewing experience there's a lot to like about this and it has a pro feel, so well done.
I did find some parts of the film a little dark (lighting wise) that could be an artistic choice I'm not sure... or perhaps the fact I viewed it on my tablet. Also for a short film the frequent fade to blacks were a little discombobulating for my liking. Mind you I'm in the middle of watching Birdman and was dying for a breather with all that continuous action.
I would have put the Fellini quote in at the end - again that's personal choice. Btw Dustin it says Fellino with an 'o'?? Is that a typo or some variable spelling?
And why the updated logline mentioning she's an 'office worker'? Seems irrelevant.
I was impressed with the nightclub scene (how many extras did you get for that?) it looked very realistic considering I'm sure you weren't filming with a packed crowd but the illusion was a good one. I was similarly impressed with the actress playing the role of Janet - terrific performance and the husband (though a thankless role) did extremely well with his part too. Des, I found a little one-note in her performance - even the devil has light and shade surely, but I reckon that was a directorial decision.
Overall, good stuff - very pro looking and I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with next.
I'm interested in what you think of the final result too, what you were happy with, what you might have changed, learned for the next one etc.
Dark theme's as I'd expected mate, an interesting take on the plight of the related carer and them losing their lives, really liked the device of her alter ego... felt a little like you had externalised both the good Angel and the bad Angel.
Congrats on getting this made! Not sure whether the short was my cup of tea, but it's easy to notice it's well done.
I remember you mentioning on the Smackhead short thread that you wrote the lead role for the actor who plays the husband here, inspired by his performance on this short. I can see why, that was terrific acting.
Contrary to Prussian, I quite liked the scenes starting with the door moving. It gave the room a strong isolated feeling imo, worked well especially with what the camera was focusing on. It's probably necessary to show that Janet isn't at his bedside too often, too.
I wasn't a fan of the fade to blacks, except the last one that threw the quote in there. I thought that added an interesting layer to the short. I really liked the final shot too.
What's the plan with the short now? Going for festivals or? Good luck anyway.
I read the original script. I see you made quite a few changes to the one I read - I don't remember the club scene for one, then Des in the original was there fairly from the beginnig I think. Not sure if I liked the changes but I liked the movie.
Neat job, congrats, Dustin!
I really liked Fellini's words placement and the ending was quite powerful.
British English was a challenge for me. But that's just me I'm sure.
Excellent work, all around. I especially like that Janet looks blank most of the time and sees herself as victim ("look what you made me do") -- and when she's talking with her alter ego, Janet has a sort of empty stare while Des's face seems to be always vibrant, sultry and in deliberate motion. The scene where Des shows no reflection in her compact's mirror is nicely creepy but the scene (around 6:30 - 6:50) where Des, speaking, moves in and out of darkness is a marvel, hypnotic and beautiful. Martin is also a wonderful creation; great soulful eyes and a mess of bodily functions, he eats hungrily, he wants to live. The ending has a good karmic justice sense to it but that is transcended by our final look at Janet's moving eyes, her wildly, helplessly searching into the emptiness -- without inspiration. That speaks an overflowing mouthful for us would-be creative types.
Thanks for the kind comments. All I can see is how amateur it is. I was actually dreading the reviews from here, so was pleasantly surprised to see they are mainly positive.
I feel the direction lacked, the cinematography is lacklustre, make-up poor and the sound is not as good as it could have been. All things that I am rectifying with Smackhead. There were too many scenes where he was injected with the heroin.
Positives were the actors, I believe all three did a great job, with Val and Benji shining. Benji is playing the main part in Smackhead too and is doing an amazing job so far. He's one of those actors that is prepared to go the extra mile for the sake of the performance. I'd like to work with Val again on something too as she can play almost any part.
The music was also good. All original songs and music composed/written from the ground up by a few friends. One of them, Anthony Niner, the other producer.
For the nightclub scene we did have around 20 people. All we had to pay for that place was 40 pounds, and that was for wages to the member of bar staff that was there to supervise the bar. The club came free.
The credits got messed up because we had to switch editors half way through post.
We filmed it within 24 hours. We did the bulk of the shoot on day 1 in 9 hours. The did the nightclub scene the next day and was finished in 4 hours.
I think it takes around four hours for our DP to set up a shot now, let alone shooting a whole scene, lol. Not that that's a bad thing, it's a good thing, a very good thing. Story, cinematography and sound... three essentials you don't want to get wrong.
All I can see is how amateur it is. I was actually dreading the reviews from here, so was pleasantly surprised to see they are mainly positive.
I think that's common with perfectionists. I'm the same way. I cried (not really, but almost) when I first saw the footage for the pirate short. Same thing with writing. Some people think their stuff is gold and refuse to see any flaws with their work. Others are highly critical about their work and go on to shoot/write another just to prove that they can do better. You belong in the second group, so I only predict your films getting better and better. You have the drive to make sure it will happen.
I haven't read the script for this, so I watched without prejudice, as George Michael might say.
Firstly, that credit logo at the front is a bit big. I'm not a fan of credits at the start of shorts. The title card alone would have done the trick.
A lot of the acting was pretty good. Some bits not quite as.
POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD I think there was a trick missed towards the end with the plate bit. Just after this a good sound effect, or the image of her just about to hit her head or neck would have made the end far more meaty.
You've got to get that Fellini quote typo fixed as well. Such things cannot stand. As it is you'd be better off without the quote at all.
My final quibble is the fades to black. There's a few too many and they're a little too long. These days viewers will go with a passage of time with the next scene starting, often the fade is redundant now. See Birdman for some examples of how far you can push this.
Overall though, you're well on the way. Bit more time prepping and filming and a few more quid about will make the difference.
First let me say that writing something like this, then turning around and actually making it is an incredible feat. I tip my hat to you, sir.
However...
Quoted from DustinBowcot
I feel the direction lacked, the cinematography is lacklustre, make-up poor and the sound is not as good as it could have been.
Exactly.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Positives were the actors...
Agreed.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
The music was also good.
Also agree.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
We filmed it within 24 hours.
Amazing.
The pacing was the problem I noticed the most. It was too slow the whole way through and some of the shots lingered much longer than they should have.
The Foley work was a little off, but that goes with the poor sound. Some sound baffles would have helped reduce the echo in the room and I'm not sure if a Lav would have worked any better.
There were moments where the shots looked well composed, but most of them lacked any substance.
Some of the cuts seemed out of place too. The jump from the bedroom to in front of the club didn't work for me. A few shots of Janet getting ready while her husband groaned in the other room would have worked well.
And finally, there were too many shots that were out of focus. Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert AC that can pull focus out of my ass, but it was there and I noticed. My only bit of advice there is to practice the blocking as much as possible. Have your actors nail their marks and hope your cameraman nails his.
Thanks Ren and Nomad. I've taken over the directing myself now and have found, surprise, surprise, things are finally going how I want them to go. Directing is actually fairly easy and I believe that is because I'm a writer. Directors usually come from writers or actors. Just by writing a script we are directing actors and the way the story should go. What's the point in getting somebody else in who will only mess it up?
I have a new guy for sound, where sound is actually his area and not just some guy that's a line producer who has done sound before.
I also have an amazing cinematographer who has two degrees in the subject and when I said he takes 4 hours to set up a shot, I was joking, but only just. If the sun's light drops by just one degree, he's there with the light meter, reorganising the shot.
Our last cinematographer was a student that had done some music videos, and was a photographer. Actual film wasn't his area and it showed. Every shot was over exposed and the copy you see now has had some intensive corrections made to get it to that standard.
The credits are handled by the editor, and I didn't consider size of credits. Not sure I was even asked... or maybe I was and decided to leave it up to the editor's discretion. Which I did a lot of in this film, I will admit. I was new, so I tended to trust other artist's instincts. That was my biggest mistake and that's why I'm taking full charge of the next production.
In regard to the Fellini quote that was down to one of the editors. I didn't even notice as it was put in last minute after the director missed a plot point at the end that showed Des wasn't actually real. That's also why I updated the logline.
Either that, or we get everyone together to reshoot it... and, with a short film, nobody being paid (expenses only), it's hard. Plus reorganising the location.
When I say expenses, all we pay for is the catering and travel expenses. Usually, that means me giving them a lift to and from the set as they don't drive. But it saves me money. Can still end up costing a couple hundred (English pounds) per shoot, before rentals.
I did some furniture removals for a big film being made in my city for a couple of days (back is killing me today) and the money they spend is ridiculous. They've got Location Managers, art department with around 6 people that do everything from aside from make-up. Line producers, first and second ADs... it goes on and on.
I was there totting up the budget and it was blowing my mind that it takes all of that to make a feature. It won't take me that much and I bet I make a better feature... might be hard though as the film in question is Lenny Henry's biopic. I like Lenny Henry, I think his film will do well.
i liked the reversal twist at the end, a sense of karma.
I'm always amazed with the short films how little is on the walls of the rooms used to film
Impressive to film in one day.
One point i would make about Des, assuming that is the black woman, is that seeing them leave the nightclub together did perhaps make it harder to accept she doesn't exist, something i only got from the longline.
The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards. Third - Honolulu Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
I saw the short film, obviously, wasn't able to read the screenplay. It was pretty hard to watch. Very unsympathetic protagonist. that's okay, but, I almost shut it off b/c she was such a bitch...
A few things:
I didn't know that was Janet's alter ego. You make no mention of that in the script at all. You also make no mention how her husband got like that. Did he suffer a stroke? Did she marry him for money?
Where is his family? Why was the nurse so lousy?
Also, we ASSUME that she's paralyzed at the end Perhaps you could have the nurse lecture her or something. I know you can't do a lot now, since it's filmed, but, you could always add scenes to it and reedit it. I added more to my college thesis full length video movie.
There were a lot of little questions that I had no answers for. Another minute added to the movie could make a huge difference.
Congrats again, it left a mark, which is what you want a movie to do.
I'm interested in reading animation, horror, sci fy, suspense, fantasy, and anything that is good. I enjoy writing the same. Looking to team with anyone!
Glad you got this made. I didn't see the original script and I've no other comments to offer that hasn't already been said, just wanted to congratulate you on getting this done. From your comments it sounds like you have learned loads going through this and that's an important point to make to any aspiring writer; you won't learn unless you don't put it all on the line and try.
Even if you shoot something yourself with a phone you'll learn, so don't just write - produce!
All the best with the Lenny Henry project, Katanga my friend!
-Mark
For more of my scripts, stories, produced movies and the ocassional blog, check out my new website. CLICK
Congratulations on this short film. Producing my own work I know first hand how a micro budget project can end up being expensive, so the resources and budget you had, the end product is really quite good. The performance by Benji is stand alone, what an actor!
I'm a little embarrassed to say that I didn't read the script before watching this short but have no doubt the script is as good as the short.
Shooting this in one day with the problems with lights, sound and other issues that sometime occur you and the team should be proud, yes there are a few minor things that could be improved but on the whole a solid effort.
Anyway, I'm currently filming my short 'the brightest star' so I will share with you once it is complete.
I'm not going to do any more with this film. It was a learning curve and I'm going to use what I've learned in the next production.
I think assuming she is paralysed is enough. It's a cliche ending and probably the ending we all know is coming. Even with the screenplay I struggled over the ending as no matter which way I turned it demanded that I tread old ground. I think a load of exposition at the end just to confirm something the viewer should already expect would be way too much.
Mark -- I keep meaning to watch No More Tomorrows. I'll get to it later today as I have my speakers plugged in again now. I watched a little on silent and thought it looked very well shot.
Lee -- Thanks mate. Yep, those costs can certainly mount up pretty quickly. I want everything for nothing. I'm putting my time and energy in, so should everyone else involved. However, some things cost money and I don't expect anyone I'm working with to have to put their hands in their pockets. Good luck with your own shoot.
Good on you for being an integral part of getting this made. I would rather be a writer who barely knows how to work a camera than a director without a story.
I skimmed the other comments and agree with most. My biggest gripe, and it applies here as well, is the sound. You can really hear the reverb in the entire room and the dialogue levels fluctuate. Had to rewind a couple of times to get the lines.
In my humble opinion, it is usually sound, not image, that sets apart pro stuff from amateurs.
I enjoyed it. I wished there was another way to capture Janet's downfall on camera. That is the moment of comeuppance that we're supposed to enjoy. At least, I think.
Good on you for being an integral part of getting this made. I would rather be a writer who barely knows how to work a camera than a director without a story.
I skimmed the other comments and agree with most. My biggest gripe, and it applies here as well, is the sound. You can really hear the reverb in the entire room and the dialogue levels fluctuate. Had to rewind a couple of times to get the lines.
In my humble opinion, it is usually sound, not image, that sets apart pro stuff from amateurs.
I enjoyed it. I wished there was another way to capture Janet's downfall on camera. That is the moment of comeuppance that we're supposed to enjoy. At least, I think.
Solid work, keep at it.
James
The big guys can afford complete ADR if they need to. We do have access to a sound recording studio but my colleagues don't want all the hassle of that. Personally, I'd be happy to go complete ADR. Once I get budgets to play with, it will be something I think I may insist upon. Particularly when shooting outdoors. It just makes loads more sense.
In regards to Directing... I'm taking over that role. I think that all screenplay writers are also directors just waiting to be given the chance.
Regarding the plate.. I know what you mean. It was classed as a stunt and there's only so much we can ask of free talent. Although, typical Val, she was prepared to do quite a bit to make it look realistic. We just felt that we needed to act with caution. We also only had so long in the location.
Thanks mate. Good luck with your own stuff. If you ever need any help spreading the word for a new film or whatever, let me know and I'll help in so far as I can.
The big guys can afford complete ADR if they need to. We do have access to a sound recording studio but my colleagues don't want all the hassle of that. Personally, I'd be happy to go complete ADR. Once I get budgets to play with, it will be something I think I may insist upon. Particularly when shooting outdoors. It just makes loads more sense.
Be cautious of ADR. I can always tell when it's cut in. I think the big guys mostly use on site sound. There's a reason why that person with the digital recorder around their waist and fuzz covered mic on the end of a boom make their money.
A good directional mic (aimed at it's subjects) and some cleaning up in post is all you should need.
I should have my first crack at film making on the boards by the end of the month. I'll let you know when it's up. I feel like I'm talking shit and have nothing to show for it, but I'm learning.
I'm with James about the audio. First off, I would be afraid to re-record all the dialogue and make it fit the actors emotions and intent when it was filmed. Also, sometimes it sounds too clean, IMHO.
When I shot TTD, I was horrified when I heard the audio. On the beach, the waves were soooo loud! Not only loud, but not nice wave sounds either. It was a constant crashing sound that was overwhelming. Inside the fort, we had terrible echoing. I was convinced we would have to redo all audio in post. Well, turned out we didn't have too. Main reason was because I have a really great shotgun mic. It's freaking amazing. Pricey, yes, but it's beyond fantastic. Well worth the investment. Because of this mic, the dialogue was still crisp and clear from all actors so all I had to do was trying to figure out how to mask the waves and the echo. I put down a nice soundtrack of waves over the other real waves and it masked the bad waves enough. The echo was a different issue, but was handled by adding other ambient sound like rain and thunder. Also, in regards to this mic. I once filmed a fisherman on his airboat. His airboat used an eight cylinder big block Chevy engine... Talk about loud! Anyway, my trusty mic could still pick up the fisherman's audio. A great shotgun mic is worth its weight in gold.
oo this aint bad, a bit rough round the edges but a really good effort. I liked the grittiness and the actors were really good. There was a slight hissing sound but that may just be my computer...but it wasn't anything too distracting. Good stuff, looking forward to seeing more.
I'm with James about the audio. First off, I would be afraid to re-record all the dialogue and make it fit the actors emotions and intent when it was filmed. Also, sometimes it sounds too clean, IMHO.
When I shot TTD, I was horrified when I heard the audio. On the beach, the waves were soooo loud! Not only loud, but not nice wave sounds either. It was a constant crashing sound that was overwhelming. Inside the fort, we had terrible echoing. I was convinced we would have to redo all audio in post. Well, turned out we didn't have too. Main reason was because I have a really great shotgun mic. It's freaking amazing. Pricey, yes, but it's beyond fantastic. Well worth the investment. Because of this mic, the dialogue was still crisp and clear from all actors so all I had to do was trying to figure out how to mask the waves and the echo. I put down a nice soundtrack of waves over the other real waves and it masked the bad waves enough. The echo was a different issue, but was handled by adding other ambient sound like rain and thunder. Also, in regards to this mic. I once filmed a fisherman on his airboat. His airboat used an eight cylinder big block Chevy engine... Talk about loud! Anyway, my trusty mic could still pick up the fisherman's audio. A great shotgun mic is worth its weight in gold.
I bought an NTG2 shotgun mic. It cost me a couple hundred.
I'm with James about the audio. First off, I would be afraid to re-record all the dialogue and make it fit the actors emotions and intent when it was filmed. Also, sometimes it sounds too clean, IMHO.)
I believe they call it looping, or ADR. I suppose you call it Miriam, but that would be silly. There's a time and and a place for that type of thing. Maybe later, if you ask me nicely. Don't forget the fudge.
I've been rewatching The Sopranos recently. Good for you, you may think. Never mind that, what are we having for dinner? Yes is it.
Anyways, one of the few flaws of this otherwise masterpiece is the bloody audio dubbing. Every few episodes you can tell when they've added the odd line in post.
The lesson here is be very careful about audio dubbing. Try and get all the actor dialogue at the time of filming. And never forget the fudge.
Finally got to watch this one. Good stuff, Dustin. I'm more or less agreed with you on the strengths and weaknesses. Sounds like you've got a good attitude with it though, and it's good to hear that you're already working on the next, so anyway, thanks for the film, and looking forward to more!
I also wanted to throw my vote in with James and Pia and R -- definitely best to avoid ADR at all costs, in my view.
Nice one. Aside from the relatively minor audio issues already addressed, I think you are being a bit too critical of yourself. This was nicely done. Besides, when you get down to it, isn't this all preparation for the big ones we are working on? It is all a learning experience and you take those lessons onto the next project.
I look forward to seeing what else you have coming up.
Thanks, Ian. Yes this is all preparation for the big one, which hopefully will come next year. I can't help but be hard on myself as there were a lot of mistakes made. I aimed to make a professional product and failed. That doesn't make me feel bad, it makes me want to do it right next time. I do think it was a good effort, considering what I've learned since, I'm actually surprised we did even that well. A wannabe writer and a wannabe actor teaming up and making a short film with no experience whatsoever in actual filmmaking, on paper, doesn't look good... but I think we did well enough where we should continue with it.
We had to use some ADR on No More Tomorrows as the sound was a big problem. I think its turned out quite well in the end but it's a big lesson for next time!
For more of my scripts, stories, produced movies and the ocassional blog, check out my new website. CLICK
I liked the sparse, un-fussy direction here. The use of colour was employed effectively to dictate mood and atmosphere though am I wrong to say the exterior nightclub scenes were filmed during the day? I did like the split screen technique used in the club's interior shots though. The close ups and handheld camera technique helped bring immediacy and claustrophobia which worked well with the tone of the story. The lack of score was appreciated too.
The actors playing Janet and Martin both done a great job but I felt Desmedona was severely lacking and dragged the whole thing down. I hate to point fingers and name names but it really stuck out for me. I don’t know if it was down to the actress who portrayed her or the character she was given, perhaps it’s a bit of both but she took me totally out of the film. Looking back at my comments on the script I see I had the same issue on the page with her scenes with Janet and unfortunately it translated directly to screen.
Being honest I had forgotten the script as it’s been almost two years since I read it so I went into this blindsided yet immediately when she began to speak after the night out I knew she was a projection of Janet’s, her evil alter ego pushing her to do what she deep down wants to do: end Bill’s life thus her responsibility to look after him. Their exchanges are so stilted and pointed that any discerning viewer will draw only one conclusion. It’s a pity this narrative device is so signposted as otherwise you have a potentially interesting scenario here that is unflinching in its depiction. I mean, it doesn’t hold back. If anything it has conviction of purpose, which is a credit to your writing and the performances of Janet and Bill.
I don’t think citing Fellini helps matters though. It reminded me of the uproar at Cannes back in 09 when Von Trier dedicated “Antichrist” to Tarkovsky in the closing credits. One has to tread carefully when invoking the masters
The ironic twist of fate at the end too feels way too on the nose and contrived but we’re all guilty of that from time to time and I guess you needed some drama to cap things off and of course give Janet her comeuppance.
I liked the sparse, un-fussy direction here. The use of colour was employed effectively to dictate mood and atmosphere though am I wrong to say the exterior nightclub scenes were filmed during the day?
Thanks mate. Yes the nightclub scene was filmed during the day.
Quoted Text
I did like the split screen technique used in the club's interior shots though. The close ups and handheld camera technique helped bring immediacy and claustrophobia which worked well with the tone of the story. The lack of score was appreciated too.
Originally the split screen was security camera footage from a camcorder but the fps were messed up and therefore out of synch. The editor did a decent rescue job.
Quoted Text
The actors playing Janet and Martin both done a great job but I felt Desmedona was severely lacking and dragged the whole thing down. I hate to point fingers and name names but it really stuck out for me. I don’t know if it was down to the actress who portrayed her or the character she was given, perhaps it’s a bit of both but she took me totally out of the film. Looking back at my comments on the script I see I had the same issue on the page with her scenes with Janet and unfortunately it translated directly to screen.
I can't blame the actress... we asked her to use an accent. Originally we were going to do it both ways, but didn't get time... so we were left with the accent. Plus the director should really have stepped in and coached her performance better. There's unfussy directing and not directing at all.
Quoted Text
Being honest I had forgotten the script as it’s been almost two years since I read it so I went into this blindsided yet immediately when she began to speak after the night out I knew she was a projection of Janet’s, her evil alter ego pushing her to do what she deep down wants to do: end Bill’s life thus her responsibility to look after him. Their exchanges are so stilted and pointed that any discerning viewer will draw only one conclusion. It’s a pity this narrative device is so signposted as otherwise you have a potentially interesting scenario here that is unflinching in its depiction. I mean, it doesn’t hold back. If anything it has conviction of purpose, which is a credit to your writing and the performances of Janet and Bill.
You're right. If I wrote this again today I would get rid of the Des character and simply have Janet arrive at the end of her tether with having to care for him all the time.
Quoted Text
I don’t think citing Fellini helps matters though. It reminded me of the uproar at Cannes back in 09 when Von Trier dedicated “Antichrist” to Tarkovsky in the closing credits. One has to tread carefully when invoking the masters
It was a last minute quote without much thought put in.
Quoted Text
The ironic twist of fate at the end too feels way too on the nose and contrived but we’re all guilty of that from time to time and I guess you needed some drama to cap things off and of course give Janet her comeuppance.
The ending was something I struggled with and am still not happy with.
Quoted Text
Well done again on getting this to screen.
Thanks mate. I should have a few more done this year and not all written by me.
Pages: 
Author
All About Janet - Filmed
Logged
I’ve done it a couple of times too in the past but with me it’s because I’m crap at coming up with them myself!
Locked Board