Only God Forgives by Alex Garcia - Short, Thriller - When a teenagers lover commits suicide, he finds revenge that will chase he forever. 17 pages - pdf, format

Sorry to point out the obvious, but this script is in serious need of an original title.

If you actually read the script, you would realize that it's relevant.

Quoted from Cosmo If you actually read the script, you would realize that it's relevant.

Not trying to be a jerk, but you might wanna read a few scripts yourself and get a better grip on how to write one.  For example:  Always start out with FADE IN:  (left hand side) Get rid of the CONTINUEDS (waste of space) Title card should be SUPER:  or at least TITLE CARD:  Get rid of camera directions such as "dolly backwards", lose the "we see's" break up those big blocks of prose and dialogue to 2-4 iines per paragraph, and write in present tense only.  

Until you work out the kinks you'll probably have a hard time getting anyone to read it.   There are some instances of good writing here, but they're far and few between.   Needs a rewrite.  And as I said before -- an original title.  I'll provide a few examples on how to fix this if you like.

Hey Zander, Caleb's right about the title.  A day or two ago, when I was on the portal, I clicked on this thread at first thinking it was a movie review for Only God Forgives, starring Ryan Gosling.  You're really better off coming up with a different title.  Right now, it's way too close to, uh, Only God Forgives.  Yeah, maybe the title is relevant to your story, but it's already been taken and it's pretty well known.  As for your script, Caleb is on the money about a lot of things, but it looks like all of that stuff really runs rampant mainly on your first page.  I read past the first page and your action lines do slim down a lot, but your main problem here is dialogue.  It's OTN to the point of cringing.  You have a semi opening grabber, but I feel the camera directions, the dialogue, and the rest that follows, does not hold up.

It is true that the title is taken but I didn't think it would be that big of a deal. I've seen multiple movies with the same title as others. Caleb, I actually would like if you could give me some thoughts on the title.

Other than that, I do say: Title card in the script just not on all caps. If that's why you think it's wrong it's not that big of a deal.

Also the FADE IN is missing, but that's an easy fix. CONTENTIOUS, I've seen in scripts with it, it's actually not a waste of space, it's needed to tell the reader that whatever action is happening is following to the next location.

Also, dolly, I get why you'd want that camera shot out because of how scripts aren't really supposed to have that but this was written to shoot. I was hoping I could get some feedback on the story it self or how the characters act/talk.

I'm actually surprised you guys haven't pointed out the spelling errors that I've noticed... like doges...

ANYWAYS present tense in writing, yes, I always fuck that up. Also breaking up dialogue would be nice. I'll do that when I rewrite it.

deadite, what do you mean by it runs rampant? Like gets confusing?

I have never started a script with FADE IN and no one (agents, producers, managers, etc) has ever mentioned it.  It's not important and no one has ever been able to make the case for why it is.

Edit: I'll read your script tomorrow. Off to bed.

Hahaha sounds good xD

Quoted from Cosmo It is true that the title is taken but I didn't think it would be that big of a deal. I've seen multiple movies with the same title as others.

It's only a big deal because certain folks make it one.  Titles cannot be copyrighted ... period.  Now if you want to try and come up with other options that's on you, but -- in the end, if you feel like your current title is best for your script, then keep it.

Okay, back to ghosting...

Ghostie

Quoted from Ghostie Okay, back to ghosting...

Is that a euphemism?

I think the problem with this title is it's too soon after quite a well known film. In a few years it won't matter. But right now it does.

As for the Fade In business - it's just customary. Or at least it used to be. Few pro scripts bother these days.

R

Alex, for these guys to encourage you not to use FADE IN: and keep the used title (which by the way was one of the crappiest movies of all-time) is just fltaout bad advice, IMO.

You're an unsigned writer.  It's best to play by the rules (industry standard) as well as be 100% original.  

But hey, everyone's entitled to their opinion.  Good or bad.

If nothing else drop the "only" and call it "God Forgives".  Problem solved.

Btw, here's a "quick example" of how I'd handle the the first scene.


FADE IN:

EXT.  WOODS - DUSK

A YOUNG MAN (17) face mostly hidden by a hoodie, finishes digging a grave, then rolls a CORPSE wrapped in a white sheet, into the hole.

He draws a cross over his heart in silent prayer, then heaves dirt into the hole.

The sound of a GROAN.   The Young Man sees movement under the sheet.

He panics and repeatedly hacks at the body until the white sheet is completely bloodsoaked.  

He finally ceases his assault, then waits and watches for any further signs of life.   Whatever it is under the sheet is now dead as a doornail.

The Young Man drops to his knees exhausted and sobs.

                                                  YOUNG MAN
                                                (whimpers)
                                        God forgive me.

(Something like that)  Best of luck with it.

I haven't read the script but I'll chime in on the title thing.

I DO think you need to change it. It might make sense, It might be very fitting but it's got to go. It's just not productive to create associations in people's head before they have even read the script. Plus it's a very obvious thing, that people will cling on to and constantly nag you about. You don't want to come off as unoriginal right of the bat and with a title like that you do.

Quoted from CalebHart Alex, for these guys to encourage you not to use FADE IN: and keep the used title (which by the way was one of the crappiest movies of all-time) is just fltaout bad advice, IMO. You're an unsigned writer.  It's best to play by the rules (industry standard) as well as be 100% original.   But hey, everyone's entitled to their opinion.  Good or bad. If nothing else drop the "only" and call it "God Forgives".  Problem solved.

Sigh.

He should change his title; no doubt.  Yes, there are movies that use the same title, but this is far too specific of a title to use (and much too recent).

As for FADE IN, it's not worth arguing.  Put it or don't put it.  But don't act like anyone has ever closed a script because they didn't see FADE IN at the top.  It's never happened and it never will.

Quoted from Dressel As for FADE IN, it's not worth arguing.  Put it or don't put it.  But don't act like anyone has ever closed a script because they didn't see FADE IN at the top.  It's never happened and it never will.

I agree. It's a trivial thing. Preference. I think it's gonna get dropped eventually. If "continued" is a waste of space, why waste a line on "Fade in", when it's understood? If someone leaves it out, I don't think it comes off unprofessional or is a deal breaker.

To Fade In or not to Fade In?

It's a red flag when you don't have it, properly left aligned.  You get enough red flags waving at you, the script gets closed.

Funny here, because there is a fade in, it's just not done correctly, so I'm confused why anyone would even argue about using it correctly.

But obviously, the lack of a correct Fade In is the least of this script's problems.  2 big mistakes in the logline alone, a title already associated with a fairly recent movie, an incorrectly formatted SUPER with a typo (lack of space after the dash), "We then hear", followed by "We then fade in to..."

All problems and all easy enough to stop right there, but we're then treated to a 9 line passage beginning with "A dolly backwards..." that doesn't even attempt to be an actual sentence.  WAY TOO MANY MISTAKES out of the gate.

Oh, BTW, the "(CONTINUED)" and "CONTINUED:" on the tops and bottoms of every page are indeed a big mistake, as they serve only 2 purposes - to waste lines and to irritate readers.

Zander, I don't mean this to be harsh or mean spirited, but I am very serious in everything I just said.  It's great that you chimed in, as many don't.  Now, read some scripts by the peeps that have chimed in to help you. See if you can take anything you see in their scripts that will help you as a writer.  Read closely and take it all in.

Then, jump back to your script and see if you don't understand a little bit more about what's wrong here...and how to make it right.

Hope this helps.

Alex,

While your script is littered with errors of every variety, you have a creepy tale here.  I especially liked the images of Derek's corpse popping up here and there.

Unfortunately you're not going to get many full reads due to the myriad problems.

What country are you from, Alex?  Your sentence structure seems foreign.

::SPOILERS::
As I go:

• Pg. 1  "Title card:" should be "SUPERIMPOSE:"
  
• Pg. 1  Try to avoid, "We hear" "We see"  "We fade".  Just describe what's shown or heard.
  
• Pg. 1  Instead of "we fade in to...", just use "FADE IN:"
  
• Pg. 1  I see that you wrote this as a shooting script, so the camera directions are acceptable, but just know that in a spec script, they're not wanted.
  
• Pg. 1  You already said we're in the woods in the slugline.  There's no need to repeat that the 17-year-old boy is "digging into the rocky soil of the woods."  Just say he's digging into the rocky soil.
  
• Pg. 1  Hyphenate 17-year-old.
  
• Pg. 1  "CUT TO:" should be on its own line as a transition.
  
• Pg. 1  Your dialogue is horrible.  It's more than on-the-nose.  It's up the nose and festering, oozing bloody puss from the nostrils then drying and crusting on herpetic lips.  Read your dialogue aloud to see if it sounds natural.  Don't be so direct with what the characters are saying.  Be subtle.
  
• Pg. 2  "Words out that their both talking."  Learn the difference between, "their", "they're" and "there".
  
• Pg. 2  "He turn to Paul...", should read, "He turns to Paul..."
  
• Pg. 2  You use "CONTINUED" from page to page yet you don't use it when the same character speaks in two adjacent blocks of dialogue.  Why?
  
• Pg. 3  "YEAH! of course not."  You need to capitalize the next word after an exclamation point.
  
• Pg. 3  Your dialogue is still horrible.
  
• Pg. 4  Does everyone have everyone else's phone number in this town?  I never had the phone numbers of people outside of my circle of friends.  Roderick having Derek's phone number seems strange.
  
• Pg. 5  Change Derek's name or Roderick's name.  They're too similar.
  
• Pg. 5  Why DID Derek come to meet Roderick under a bridge?  I would never go meet someone under a bridge unless there was a very good reason to do so.
  
• Pg. 6  "Fuck you for coming her..." spell check.
  
• Pg. 6  "Derek looks at him, know that this bugs him."  What?
  
• Pg. 6  You already caught "doges" but this is just one of the spelling errors.
  
• Pg. 6  "bunches" should be "punches".  Proofread.
  
• Pg. 6  "chocking" should be "choking", unless you really do mean he's "furnishing with or securing by a chock or chocks."
  
• Pg. 7  Try to avoid 8 line action blocks.
  
• Pg. 7  What is newly pounded floor?
  
• Pg. 7  "CUT TO-" is a transition and should be on its own line.
  

I was going to do this for the entire script but it's just more of the same.  You do a good job of making Roderick relive the same day and you have some very nice creepy moments, but like I said, your script is riddled with errors that make it difficult, thus unenjoyable, to read.
::END SPOILERS::

It's great that you're on here commenting, but be sure to do so with an open mind, taking everyone's advice with a grain of salt.  There's no one way to write, but some ways are better than others.

Jordan

Quoted from Cosmo deadite, what do you mean by it runs rampant?

It is throughout the script.

Quoted from CalebHart Alex, for these guys to encourage you not to use FADE IN: and keep the used title (which by the way was one of the crappiest movies of all-time) is just fltaout bad advice, IMO.

I agree on the encouragement of keeping the title as bad advice and would flat out ignore anyone who suggests it.  By that frame of thinking, it would be OK for me to write a gangster script and call it "American Gangster".  Uh, no.  The title's been taken, it's a very popular (and recent) film.  Try to come up with something else....but the content of the script is a bigger issue.  Many rewrites are in order.  I won't even get into the whole "to Fade in or not to Fade in" business because if we start talking about that, we will be here all day and the next couple of weeks talking about it, making diagrams with straws.

Alex,

Sorry to do this to you, but I was only able to get through about 7 pages.  I'm not going to go into the formatting issues, as they've already been addressed.

My main problem is the dialogue.  It's really on-the-nose.  Everyone speaks in exposition and says things no normal person would say.  You need to inject some subtly into your characters.  Make it so that they don't just come right out and say everything.  Because as it stands right now, they're just vehicles for delivering information, not characters.  (Example:  No one would ever say "They cyber-bullied her last night."  That reads more like a news article, not a couple teens talking about their friend being harrassed.)

I stopped at Page 7 because of the giant blocks of description.  That's asking a lot of your reader.  Make your descriptions more succinct.  Only include what absolutely needs to be there.

Sorry I couldn't be a bigger help.  Good luck with the script.

-Matt

This is a short and he can call it whatever he likes. I think the title is fine. It's a well-known phrase and cannot be owned by a film. I don't see why it is bad advice. Same as FADE IN. Just leave it out... who cares? Only a handful of screenplay writers that aren't looking to buy a script.

Quoted from DustinBowcot This is a short and he can call it whatever he likes. I think the title is fine. It's a well-known phrase and cannot be owned by a film. I don't see why it is bad advice.

You'd know why if you saw the film.  It was absolutely horrible.  I woudn't want "my script" associated with it.  But you're right...to each their own.

Dressel thank you for actually giving me an example of how the dialogue seems weird. I see now what you guys are talking about. It's very spoon fed.

Normad, I'm little bit Puerto Rican but I'm more American. I think your pointing out my dyslexia, which is really bad. It's common haha lots of people point it out. Oh and I appreciate you listing the errors by page. I would have never put that much time into correcting a strangers script that didn't ask me too. So thank you.

Caleb I'm going to use your description as a reference. I do like parts of it and the words you used.

Other than that, I'm totally going to take Dreamscale 's advice and read some of you guys' scripts. I'm going to be searching around this website but if you want to send it to me directly, my email is: alexg.zander@gmail.com

Good to see you taking it in stride.

Welcome aboard.

Good job, Zander.  It's nice to see a writer accepting less than positive feedback and taking it in stride, in an effort to become a better writer.

I too welcome you aboard the ship!

Quoted from CalebHart You'd know why if you saw the film.  It was absolutely horrible.  I woudn't want "my script" associated with it.  But you're right...to each their own.

Whether Nicolas Winding Refn's film Only God Forgives was horrible or not, wouldn't you want your own material to be original?  With this title, you're making someone instantly think of somebody else's movie.  Why would you want to do that?  It's not like the title comes from some obscure flick no one has ever heard of before, then maybe I would understand...but Refn's Only God Forgives is a pretty well known movie, with a well known cast.  IMO, Make your script stand out on its own in every way possible.  Characters, story, title, everything.  Be different.

Well yeah make everything different. I think everything is different except the title. But I like it, I think it really goes well with the story, the devil not forgiving him and all that. I understand the warnings you guys are giving me.



The movie is pretty bad.

Quoted from CalebHart You'd know why if you saw the film.  It was absolutely horrible.  I woudn't want "my script" associated with it.  But you're right...to each their own.

Your script wouldn't be associated with it just because you chose the same popular phrase as your title.

Was Gladiator associated with any of the films called Gladiator previously? Or what about The Avengers?

Only God Forgives does not belong to any film. It is a famous phrase that has been said for (probably) hundreds of years. A film stealing that phrase does not take ownership of it. It is still just a phrase that can be used by anyone at any time for anything.

It's not even as though the film you are talking about is iconic, or noteworthy in any way. I just checked and I remember watching around 5 minutes of it and switching it off.

Telling somebody they should use a different title because it has already been 'taken' is wrong. It is perfectly fine to use any title you want, so long as it isn't trademarked.

Quoted from DustinBowcot Telling somebody they should use a different title because it has already been 'taken' is wrong. It is perfectly fine to use any title you want, so long as it isn't trademarked.

You're completely missing the point and seem to lack common sense regarding this particular subject.    Not to mention OGF was so bad, Refn pretty much ruined the title for all others to follow.  Go watch the rest of the film and then spout off about what's right and wrong.

Quoted from CalebHart Not to mention OGF was so bad, Refn pretty much ruined the title for all others to follow.  Go watch the rest of the film and then spout off about what's right and wrong.

I liked it It was more of the same from Refn, similar in style to his Valhalla Rising (which I loved) and while I can certainly understand people hating the movie, I did like it. It was atmospheric.

Quoted from Demento I liked it It was more of the same from Refn, similar in style to his Valhalla Rising (which I loved) and while I can certainly understand people hating the movie, I did like it. It was atmospheric.

I'd love to continue this discussion on another thread, but not this one.  Doesn't seem fair to Zander.

I'm out.

Quoted from CalebHart You're completely missing the point and seem to lack common sense regarding this particular subject.    Not to mention OGF was so bad, Refn pretty much ruined the title for all others to follow.  Go watch the rest of the film and then spout off about what's right and wrong.

I don't agree that the popular phrase 'Only God forgives' has been owned by that film. I don't need to watch the rest of the film to have an opinion on whether or not the popular phrase should be reused as the title of another feature. I haven't missed your point, I've simply argued against it.

Quoted from DustinBowcot I don't agree that the popular phrase 'Only God forgives' has been owned by that film. I don't need to watch the rest of the film to have an opinion on whether or not the popular phrase should be reused as the title of another feature. I haven't missed your point, I've simply argued against it.

I never said OGF was owned, but fair enough.  I think we're splitting hairs.    Zander,  I read the entire script.   It's a bold undertaking, but for the most part the story got lost in translation.   You might wanna focus more on writing 3 to 5 page scripts.   It's less of a commitment to readers, hence you'll receive more feedback.   Just a thought.

I know what your saying, shorter scripts get more feedback because it's faster and easier to read. Less of a commitment. Time investment. whatever. But I don't know how I could shorten the story. The dialogue alone in the park scene is 4 pages.

I'm thinking in splitting it into 3 parts or something. I don't know what that would be? a mini web series?

Part one would end with Rodrick going to sleep and receiving text messages from Jasmine,

Part two would end with (spoilers if anyone cares) Rodrick killing Derek and realizing that Grummet has something to do with what's going on.

Part three would be Grummet explaining everything and obviously the end.

I think that might work. People could leave after the first part if their not interested and give feedback on that alone. And if people want to keep on reading then, you know... that's cool.

I appreciate you reading the whole thing btw. Thank you.

Use this script to practise on. It's going to take you a couple of years to perfect this craft.