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.
To Buy A Nose by Alexander Brauck (PrussianMosby) - Short, Socio-Political Drama - A racist home shopping mogul, an old uranium lobbyist, and a musician who sold his talent to the commercial industry watch NFL in a South African golf club. 8 pages - pdf, format
Hey. Gotta say I liked this a lot. A couple minor language issues here an there but nothing that detracted from the read for me.
I keep thinking about this piece. It had an impact on me. Corporate moguls, desensitization in the name of greed and money and who gives a shit what you force down our/their throats as long as you make a buck.
For me, the fact that Byron wrote a lemonade jingle stood out. Personally, I would equate lemonade with backyard barbecues and picnics, an old timey thing that hearkens back to simpler times when it was the quality of the thing, not the quantity. It seems to me Byron thought this too. I don't know if that's what you were going for but that's what it felt like for me.
The jingle being played on the TV twice seemed a bit much. And I'm not sure if Byron's line about women was meant to mean that men think differently than women, but that seems to be the case. Personally, I've found women to always be right. But lets not get into that right now.
And a kick ass ending with the shoe hovering over Philips head, then black. Nicely executed. Overall, very good. Good luck with this one.
Based on Steven's praise I read this one. Didn't get it ...at all. Too much chit-chat. Sorry. You might wanna throw in a few more visuals/flashbacks/whatever to break up the talking heads. Cigar should be plural and VO should be V.O.
Yea I didn’t get this one either. Basically all dialogue and by the end I felt lost.
Your log line reads like a setup for a joke. Such wildly different occupations thrown together in two lines. I was waiting to read…and a priest.
The dialogue didn’t read well for me. I’m not sure on the point of the whole story. Their watching Football their talking a lot -- About their jobs and world politics, which none of it seems to pertain to anything going on in the script. In fact, nothing is going on in the script. They’re just talking. Guy wins a bet -- then punches the other guy in the face? Why? I feel like I missed something. And I don’t get the whole buying the nose thing. Is that when he punched him? I’m confused.
I liked the Iranians could win Uranium line.
It almost felt like you tried to use this script as a way to have a dialogue in geopolitics. Which isn’t a bad thing, however it needs to serve to strengthen your story. Not for your entire story to be saturated by it -- at the expense of your plot.
I'm interested in what women think about this script and how they see those men politics. Actually I'm very interested.
@Steven, glad you liked it. It seems you were open to this whole pathetic mood here. That's what I hoped for. It was a bit risky to write it that way. I tried to be direct, and let Philip and Byron represent some of our political problems today. Their characters are highly over pictured. It seems to me a lot of shit begun in the 70's when those old men, who never stopped to rule us, were extremely expanding the markets of weapons, uranium and all those dangerous things. Their attitude is still alive. Today it's the same: who cares about tomorrow... Let's sell tanks to Egypt.
@Caleb, sorry you don't like it. The style is very stable to me. It's a one location script. I hoped those bad men, how they see things and the inside of what they offer us in case of Iran/ the recent poison gas attacks, selling worthless scrap... grab your attention anyhow. I think they interact fine, how arrogant they earn Byron's attention. They see his jingle as if they wrote it themselves.... There's a lot of prey talk, but man, this is the style here. And I know that. It was an experience to take this chance that way.
@Marcello, thanks for your thoughts. I can't follow your interpretation. Seems I should have marked it as satiric. It's not about a bet and all that. It's meant to be pathetic in its style. I understand it doesn't work that way for you. Indeed there are endless references to geopolitical problems. The worthless scrap the home shopping mogul sells must be the attitude responsible for the famous plastic island in the ocean. Syria's gas attacks. Iran's uranium. Now we cry but we were the ones who sold it to them in another time... SPOILER: He spends his fresh money for the following court session. I guess Montgomery and Philip, those fuckers, will proceed against Byron in case of physical injury. That's all in the context. That way he buys a nose. It should be plural- noses- but I liked it more that way...
Here's the main source for the script. It's very up to date that they uncovered the Iran uranium sales, Interesting stuff:
I enjoyed this one, I'm a fan of the one location scripts and long dialogue, good use of the football game to break up the dialogue. I like the message you where trying to deliver here. My only suggestion is if Byron prays for the day women rule the world a.k.a world peace then maybe have him sell something more organic, life changing or something that can contribute to the world.
I like how they casually talk about selling uranium as if it's normal, as we all now if anyone did find some it was be a national security matter, almost like finding a ufo, but hay ho.
The first time I read this, I didn't get it. The next morning, I gave it another shot. Turns out I hadn't paid close enough attention.
I see this as a quick commentary about values told via oddball characters in a colorful setting -- with a nice punchline (so to speak) at the end.
Mongomery's stilted phrasing sounds both authentic and comical.
Cool that you see it the way I intended this script to be. Those bad guys; I wanted to show their attitude kind of nude, direct and over pictured, which shows their rough ugliness, while in real life they wind covered and hidden through law, politics and lobbies. Thank you sir.
I enjoyed this one, I'm a fan of the one location scripts and long dialogue, good use of the football game to break up the dialogue. I like the message you where trying to deliver here. My only suggestion is if Byron prays for the day women rule the world a.k.a world peace then maybe have him sell something more organic, life changing or something that can contribute to the world.
I like how they casually talk about selling uranium as if it's normal, as we all now if anyone did find some it was be a national security matter, almost like finding a ufo, but hay ho.
Either way it was a nice read.
Lee
I'm glad you enjoyed it. You are right with Byron. Second one who made that call. I feel his change, and especially in case of the thing you pointed out - his final comment about women to rule - is too sudden that way here.
It should be a well chosen subject, the theme of his commercial deal or maybe something completely different to show him more consistent. Thanks for looking at my script.
“BYRON, 38, wears an oversized turquoise shirt, sits with legs crossed at the knees in a wicker chair.”
- I’m sure others will have pointed this out but you really don’t need to specify “at the knees” when describing someone crossing their legs. We’ll get it without that.
As I read I’m getting the impression English isn’t your first language. You’ve got a good grasp of vocabulary, very good in fact, it just when it comes to tenses they are noticeable mistakes a native speaker would never make.
MONTGOMERY Interesting. What are you doing?
- This would be my cue to tell Montgomery to mind his own fu?king business but that wouldn’t make for much of a story. Reading on…
Unfortunately as I did, I got more and more confused, in part due to the sometimes jumbled dialogue and also because of the nature of the conversation. I didn’t really get why Montgomery was spilling all this sensitive information to Byron, a stranger to him. He first tells about Phillip’s amoral job before describing his own ignoble profession of basically raping South Africa’s gold resources during the apartheid, then selling Uranium to Iraq.
I presume him and Phillip are Americans for political (and perhaps factual) reasons and because of their love of the football on screen yet they don’t sound American because of your grasp of English which to be fair isn’t really your fault it just meant reading their dialogue was a little disorientating, and unnatural.
So after Montgomery almost boasts about his past involvement with nefarious enterprises (he’s certainly not sorry anyway) he then goes on to criticise a nearby German for similar exploitative transgressions. I get he is meant to be hypocritical, espousing that double standard we see in people all the time, politicians, business men, etc but I just kept asking myself why is this conversation taking place and why should I be invested in it as a reader.
The ending perplexed me in that Bryon seemingly gets delivered his song’s royalties in a briefcase, presumably in cash. I dunno, is this how these transactions are done? Before he “rightfully” knocks out Montgomery (I think anyone reading this wanted to see that ) before requesting he buy his nose. I know we should have been expecting this given the script’s title but still, wtf? It almost made me think you mistook it for some other word. I guess I’m missing the significance of him requesting that particular appendage. Is it a South African phrase maybe?
Also, the last shot is of Byron stamping on Phillip’s face, sh?t, this is getting serious then, we’ve resorted to kicking people in the face now! I appreciate you are doing it for the CUT TO BLACK: effect, it just seemed a bit much to me.
Anyway, I was confused by this, not so much the language but what the script was about, what is was trying to say…if anything. At the moment it reads like a comment on imperial machinations that's about as subtle as...well, a kick in the face
At the moment it reads like a comment on imperial machinations that's about as subtle as...well, a kick in the face
I try to explain some things you already pointed out and furthermore explain for whom this script is made, because that's another aspect of intention. I think there are a lot of people which criticize the partly heavy kind of rogue capitalism our western companies accomplish - expanding to poor countries where people are almost enslaved and work under horrible conditions, which makes it possible for us to even wear 10 dollar jeans; pushing a load of high tech medicine into animals that they are able to survive anyhow and provide the best profitability of the "product" and so on and so on...
Same happens with trading dangerous "products" such as uranium, armament. If there's a chance to sell that stuff to a partly stabile country, they did it and will do so, no matter about the potential risks in the future. It's not their problem anymore at that moment.
That's not a new knowledge about financial imperialism, right? WITH SHOWING THEM nude, those old men politics, with showing their usually hidden attitude clearly and trying to be as direct as possible, I don't give them the chance to cover behind their lawyers, lobbies - OR STORIES. As you pointed out right, there's no story, it's a construction for message. (I like to see short films of that kind-expressive, different – and not in a way of a shorter kind of feature play entertainment)
In its pure and pathetic way it could give hope, which lets people, who almost give up and accepted these system's conditions, understand: We still see them! We still blame them! They've not defeated us and made us accept THEIR understandings of the world TOTALLY.
By the way I don't criticize the US or our system of capitalism at all. I would prefer this system to any other one in which the state and the people are divided from each other more radical. Still, in our way of capitalism, I feel it is necessary that art, journalism, people's opinions, should always keep an eye on those who cancelled prudence and potentially consequences and most important responsibility off their vocabulary.
Michael Moore and others, they did some good research, but the problem people have with this kind of message is, that he uses those stylistic angles of polemic in a real world situation, and that's a catastrophe for the impact.
I did it with fictive characters. So, I can be biased, and I am, and I want to be for those people I described above. Some things should be drawn out black and white, maybe that would even give more style and another metaphor to film it in black and white actually.
I hope this long text covers a lot of your points why I let the story be so direct and obviously constructed and let Montgomery and Philip act that way. They reach for Byron's privacy as if they think they own him, same time they kind of want to collaborate with him friendly, which could be seen as another metaphor of building groups of interests. They make pressure on him and force the situation, because they think they are the hardest d*** in ANY ROOM imaginable.
Byron is new to productivity. He's a musician and what he gets is money for commercial which shouldn't be his true deepest claim. That gives (I aim for) him a kind of cold view on life, because that was the way the industry accepts his music- in a commercial. He maybe starts to see the world as a market of ignorance; everybody just makes a dime that's it. He doesn't care or stand up against those racial comments from the start anymore. But there's something growing and I did not a good job with making him understandable throughout.
The ending perplexed me in that Bryon seemingly gets delivered his song’s royalties in a briefcase, presumably in cash. I dunno, is this how these transactions are done? Before he “rightfully” knocks out Montgomery (I think anyone reading this wanted to see that ) before requesting he buy his nose. I know we should have been expecting this given the script’s title but still, wtf? It almost made me think you mistook it for some other word. I guess I’m missing the significance of him requesting that particular appendage. Is it a South African phrase maybe?
Montgomery and Philip - both took some heavy hits. So, Byron probably will have to use his fresh money from the briefcase to pay the bill these both will bring to account by law. Byron is clear about that himself:
PHILIP What you gonna do with the cash?
BYRON I'll spend half of it right in a few seconds.
MONTGOMERY No shit?
BYRON No shit. I'll buy your nose.
---
It's a way "To buy a nose".
Thanks very much for your thoughts, Col. Very useful feedback. It makes me think of a better transmission to our heavily difficult craft especially when it comes to nuances of differences in case of style and tone. The passion made me answer a bit ... extensive here... once again
There's some amazing things to be said for this script, but you've gotta fix those opening passages.
BYRON, 38, wears an oversized turquoise shirt, sits with legs crossed at the knees in a wicker chair. From the seating area he gazes into the lobby.
You've given this entire passage a passive role, putting Byron's outfit before his action. Even though you've given verb to his attire, it's still way too many words before he gazes. Also, "wicker chair" is a much better note to end on tha "lobby" IMO. Consider rearranging.
In the armchairs next to him sit MONTGOMERY, a dressy warhorse, and his gelled younger fellow PHILIP. They smoke cigar and follow the game.
I was just talking to another writer about how I love passive character intros. If done correctly, you can be a sneaky screenwriter, giving a sense of who the character is while still remaining visual. Kudos for adding some variety at the start of this passage too. But it doesn't work for me because you're introducing 2 characters in one sentence. Start the passage with this:
Seated in the armchairs next to him --
And your sentence appears active.
This story caught my interest because it was different. It's plays out like everyday people meet, and some of the dialogue was top notch. But without subtext, I lost my way and potential theme was overwhelming the moment. This isn't for a casual audience, but I respect the effort - it's one of the better scripts of yours I've read.
I was waiting for a turn in the story, some sort of reaction from Byron toward the dialogue. I enjoyed how their banter wasn't a secret, spoken without redress.
I try to explain some things you already pointed out and furthermore explain for whom this script is made, because that's another aspect of intention. I think there are a lot of people which criticize the partly heavy kind of rogue capitalism our western companies accomplish - expanding to poor countries where people are almost enslaved and work under horrible conditions, which makes it possible for us to even wear 10 dollar jeans; pushing a load of high tech medicine into animals that they are able to survive anyhow and provide the best profitability of the "product" and so on and so on...
Same happens with trading dangerous "products" such as uranium, armament. If there's a chance to sell that stuff to a partly stabile country, they did it and will do so, no matter about the potential risks in the future. It's not their problem anymore at that moment.
That's not a new knowledge about financial imperialism, right? WITH SHOWING THEM nude, those old men politics, with showing their usually hidden attitude clearly and trying to be as direct as possible, I don't give them the chance to cover behind their lawyers, lobbies - OR STORIES. As you pointed out right, there's no story, it's a construction for message. (I like to see short films of that kind-expressive, different – and not in a way of a shorter kind of feature play entertainment)
In its pure and pathetic way it could give hope, which lets people, who almost give up and accepted these system's conditions, understand: We still see them! We still blame them! They've not defeated us and made us accept THEIR understandings of the world TOTALLY.
By the way I don't criticize the US or our system of capitalism at all. I would prefer this system to any other one in which the state and the people are divided from each other more radical. Still, in our way of capitalism, I feel it is necessary that art, journalism, people's opinions, should always keep an eye on those who cancelled prudence and potentially consequences and most important responsibility off their vocabulary.
Michael Moore and others, they did some good research, but the problem people have with this kind of message is, that he uses those stylistic angles of polemic in a real world situation, and that's a catastrophe for the impact.
I did it with fictive characters. So, I can be biased, and I am, and I want to be for those people I described above. Some things should be drawn out black and white, maybe that would even give more style and another metaphor to film it in black and white actually.
I hope this long text covers a lot of your points why I let the story be so direct and obviously constructed and let Montgomery and Philip act that way. They reach for Byron's privacy as if they think they own him, same time they kind of want to collaborate with him friendly, which could be seen as another metaphor of building groups of interests. They make pressure on him and force the situation, because they think they are the hardest d*** in ANY ROOM imaginable.
Byron is new to productivity. He's a musician and what he gets is money for commercial which shouldn't be his true deepest claim. That gives (I aim for) him a kind of cold view on life, because that was the way the industry accepts his music- in a commercial. He maybe starts to see the world as a market of ignorance; everybody just makes a dime that's it. He doesn't care or stand up against those racial comments from the start anymore. But there's something growing and I did not a good job with making him understandable throughout.
- Thanks for your detailed response, I basically concur with a lot of what you say in term of the the exploitative greed which infects our world. I guess, in art, we always look for more subtle ways to say it, I dunno, it seems to carry more value in that manner, appears more nuanced, cleverer...but like you say, sometimes its better to just say it outright, drop the subterfuge and ambiguity, paint it in black and white since that is what the situation is essentially made of up, the transgressions are that blatant.
Also, it you are looking to get you point across about important matters you want to reach as many people as possible and not veil it in metaphor.
I guess the risk of presenting it in such a straightforward way is that some people will just construe it a didactic moralizing, like they are being given a lesson. And therein lies a reason why we try to dress up our "messages" (if we have one) in drama, tension, entertaining situations, etc.
Montgomery and Philip - both took some heavy hits. So, Byron probably will have to use his fresh money from the briefcase to pay the bill these both will bring to account by law.
- Ha, yeah I get it now, its for the legal/medical bills he'll have pay for assaulting these people. You can definitely imagine Montgomery and Philip "lawyering up" to squeeze every possible cent out of him. Byron is basically paying for the satisfaction of attacking these two crooks.
hey Johnny,you say there are amazing things about this play, so you should name those things, you don't. The sentences are all right in my eyes, though I understand what you're talking about.
I've been out of the game for a few months, so it was refreshing to read a good short. Your sentences were good at start, got a clear sense of the visual. After the initial description/setting was down - it broke off into tons of dialogue. I was suggesting you shuffle the sentences around to own the moment.
I wasn't expecting Byron and his jingle. I thought it was a clever icebreaker to quickly get into the story. Another thing that I loved that could be considered filler is the pacing of the dialogue. When Byron says, "Not really", it was believable and empowering for his character.
Without shame, Montgomery and Phillip leach on to Byron through his own work, and pretty much unravels from there. Consumers, everyday folks, everything they need is just a five minute drive away. It doesn't matter as long as the food's in the fridge and the big screen is on the wall.
The last line is what made me think. What interested me about it was the finality of the statement. It doesn't present too many options for solution. Almost like we've met our irreversible end through greed and power.
Hope that helps, that's what I took from it. I really did enjoy the piece. Good work!
Your logline is more like character descriptions for the main characters. Your script should tell us everything we need about the characters if written right, you don't need ot tell us about them in the logline.
Read the script, it's different I'll give you that. A lot of the dialogue is 'on the nose' if you pardon the pun. You have some strong opinions and want to get that across desperately; unfortunately that means the characters blurt out their lines unnaturally. I think you could take your time with this, build it up more and include some visuals and this could be a good character driven short.
Nice statement at the end but in the UK we had a woman in charge for quite a few years and she proved she could mess things up and start wars just as good as a man
Mark
For more of my scripts, stories, produced movies and the ocassional blog, check out my new website. CLICK
Pages: 1, 
Author
To Buy A Nose
Logged
) before requesting he buy his nose. I know we should have been expecting this given the script’s title but still, wtf? It almost made me think you mistook it for some other word. I guess I’m missing the significance of him requesting that particular appendage. Is it a South African phrase maybe?
Locked Board