SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 28th, 2024, 5:52pm
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
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.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Unproduced Screenplay Discussion    Short Scripts  ›  Filthy Animal Moderators: bert
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 11 Guests

 Pages: 1, 2, 3 » : All
Recommend Print
  Author    Filthy Animal  (currently 6285 views)
Don
Posted: March 6th, 2016, 10:12am Report to Moderator
Administrator
Administrator


So, what are you writing?

Location
Virginia
Posts
16381
Posts Per Day
1.94
Filthy Animal by Michael J. Kospiah - Short, Horror - A mysterious animal control officer shows an abusive dog owner what it's like to be an animal. 17 pages - pdf, format


Visit SimplyScripts.com for what is new on the site.

-------------
You will miss 100% of the shots you don't take.
- Wayne Gretzky
Logged Offline
Site Private Message
SAC
Posted: March 6th, 2016, 2:25pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


… but some dreams do

Location
Upstate NY
Posts
3201
Posts Per Day
0.79
Michael,

This certainly took a couple turns I wasn't expecting. Good job on the first page -- I wanted Dwight dead immediately. However, by the end I was left feeling that true justice had not been served. I mean, yes it had, but the fight that closes this didn't leave me anyone to root for, or to empathize with. Fritzinger started out as that guy, and I was pulling for him and couldn't wait to see what he did next to Dwight -- that angle, had you stayed with it, would have been more satisfying for me.

The methods you used to give Dwight his comeuppance were effective in spots, and I understand what you were going for, yet ultimately you made me feel sorry for him. Getting pelted with rocks, and the fight at the end. Fritzinger gained empathy, then it was taken away. Angela the same. By the time all was said and done there was really no one left to like/root for -- except maybe the jogger!

Written very well, of course, and with your usual flair. Very visual, nice pace, very good set up. The ending left me feeling kinda empty, though.

Steve


Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 1 - 37
Logan McDonald
Posted: March 6th, 2016, 4:20pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
Astoria, NY
Posts
56
Posts Per Day
0.02
Hey Michael,

I really liked this one. I was worried that this was going to go down the path of one of those fantasies people have after hearing about an animal abuse case; with Fitzgerald just torturing him. Fortunately you didn't and that’s great!

This felt very Twilight Zone-y; a classic morality tale about how you treat others but it didn't feel like it was pandering to the audience.

While its nice to see someone get their just due I'm happy you kept the graphic details. Its nice to challenge the audience by showing what they want to see but showing the harsh effects of their fantasy. As much of a jerk Dwight is he's still a person and his treatment still hard to read.

Dialogue was great, descriptions captured everything visually and the twists were unexpected.
Great job!

Logan.


Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 2 - 37
stevemiles
Posted: March 6th, 2016, 5:24pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
745
Posts Per Day
0.16
Michael,

Darkly toned and engaging read.  Felt the ending went against what we saw of Fritzinger’s earlier motives with the final scene taking something away from the idea of making Dwight pay for abusing animals.  I preferred the no-nonsense, yet seemingly selfless Fritzinger from the start -- that he’d be involved in dog-fighting at all seems an odd choice.  Maybe I could get with this more if Dwight had been involved in dog-fighting -- a poetic justice to the ending.  The continued punishment felt like it outweighed the crime and I came away almost sympathetic for Dwight.

That’s a gut response and I appreciate this is in line with your other shorts -- with that twisted, nightmare logic where you don’t dig too deeply and just enjoy the ride.  

Steve.


My short scripts can be found here on my new & improved budget website:


http://stevemiles80.wixsite.com/sjmilesscripts
Logged
Site Private Message Reply: 3 - 37
spesh2k
Posted: March 7th, 2016, 2:17am Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Harlem USA
Posts
1186
Posts Per Day
0.20
Thanks for the reads and comments... nice to hear from Steve, Steven (Miles)... and thank you, Logan.

I thought the same thing about the end (dog fighting)... I just didn't want to make the script TOO long. So I settle for an ending based on an idea I wanted to explore.

My original idea was:

After Dwight gets tagged by Fritzinger, he wakes up being operated on (due to his gunshot wound to the face). Then he wakes up in a Plexiglas cage in some shelter. Moments before he's about to be put down, he's saved by his ex-wife Angela. But in this version, Angela still treats him like a dog. Just like a PIT BULL. She brings him home (sure enough, he's transported in a doggy crate). And Dwight finds out that he is taken in by his ex and... the human version of Dwight. And I end the film w/ the dialogue "He's just a dog".

I did want to show him being fed scraps from the jogger, being stoned by children, etc. Which I still may be able to do w/ changes. But, in the doggy crate, from his POV, he's sees his owner... HIMSELF (Dwight).

But I thought that was too predictable and fit too perfectly. Which is why I went this route. But I'm seriously thinking about changing it. I know changing it would add a more HUMAN element to this story, more empathy for the characters, sometimes, adding emotion and empathy makes it very predictable (E.G. The Suicide Theory -- if you haven't seen it, see it). Because these "turns" that occur are something that WE want to happen. Though it may happen and satisfy us, last thing I want to be is predictable.


THE SUICIDE THEORY (Amazon Prime, 79% Rotten Tomatoes) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2517300/?ref_=nm_knf_i1
RAGE (Coming Feb. 2021) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8874764/?ref_=nm_knf_i2

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 4 - 37
LC
Posted: March 7th, 2016, 7:22am Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Great Southern Land
Posts
7581
Posts Per Day
1.34
Michael, seventeen pages just flew by. Effortless, terrific writing, powerful subject matter, and I love that Dwight gets his comeuppance - up to a point...

SPOILERS


There's a real Twilight Zone vibe to this when Dwight transforms from man into dog and I enjoyed it overall.

Few points:

Is is really necessary for Fritzinger to shoot Dwight? I would have thought knocking him out and then him waking to his new fate might be enough torture. Particularly enjoyed the kids with the rocks (interesting observation, though) and the jogger throwing him the bagel. I thought for sure he was dead from that shot btw, so it was good to see the story evolve in an unexpected direction.

In the animal rescue scene FATHER saying: 'he's just a dog' echoes nicely with Fritzinger's original line: 'we're all something' - very nice, and nifty pickup later with: 'I'm not a fucking animal'.

Nitpicking: I'd select a word other than lackadaisical - though Dwight is resigned to a degree to his fate it seems a little too casual and indifferent a word to use. Jmh, of course. And I suppose at that point his fate hasn't yet been revealed to him... Hmm.

Bit curious what exactly Angela is looking at, man or dog, when she calls the dog 'Dwight' and gets in on the final act. But, nice commentary on domestic violence and all types of violence for that matter.

I'd perhaps rethink Fritzinger appearing in the final scene - I understand the full-circle what goes around comes around denouement however Fritzinger has a saviour good guy quality to me, and for him to be a part of the final showdown and responsible for dishing out the justice with the original dog - I dunno, it's clever but also a bit convenient that he and Angela all end up in the same place. I think he already played his part and Angela is more than enough to dish out the final retribution on her own - perhaps she now owns the original dog? You could of course argue that this is part of the Twilight Zone, entering another dimension etc.

I also felt (like some other comments I've read now) that I (almost )wanted to save Dwight in the end, and I felt sorry for him, and consequently disliked Angela, and I'm not sure that should be the case. I'm of two minds really, perhaps that's the whole point - Dwight apologizes for his previous sins, yet we don't believe he's reformed - it's too fast - he'd need to be enlightened to a far larger degree for that to actually happen. He is what he is. We don't believe he'll ever be anything other than an animal.

My view is that this is a cautionary tale, that we can all so easily succumb to violence and revenge. On paper and on screen there's easily a case for Dwight getting exactly what he deserves. But what of the now rather dubious moral qualities of everyone else involved? They're now surely no better than him, including the dog who is now a vicious animal.

Is the point then that in the end we are all animals and that violence meted out to someone who deserves it, is justified? I'm thinking capital punishment?

It's certainly thought provoking on a lot of levels.  

Judging by your own comments I just read, I suppose it comes down to what you're trying to say. If you return to your original theme and the message you're trying to convey (if indeed you are going for that) that might decide the ultimate denouement for you.

As is, I came away from it thinking that none of these characters learn anything or act to a higher moral code as a result of being pushed to the point of violence/seeing violence etc., and that this cycle of violence is the natural by product. The organized dog fights at the end puts quite a different slant on things.

Minor typo: p.8 'Hands the it back to Dwight...'
delete the 'the'.

I'm on the fence re your title - I agree 'Animal' has to be a part of it, definitely.

Anyway, despite all my rambling, this is an impressive script. You definitely got me thinking and I'll be interested to read any further drafts if there are to be any.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 5 - 37
spesh2k
Posted: March 7th, 2016, 7:31pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Harlem USA
Posts
1186
Posts Per Day
0.20
Hey Libby, thanks for reading!


Quoted Text
Is is really necessary for Fritzinger to shoot Dwight? I would have thought knocking him out and then him waking to his new fate might be enough torture. Particularly enjoyed the kids with the rocks (interesting observation, though) and the jogger throwing him the bagel. I thought for sure he was dead from that shot btw, so it was good to see the story evolve in an unexpected direction.


I guess I was trying to be metaphorical here in a way... his dog was wounded both mentally and physically. A gunshot to the face takes care of the physical part. And, of course, if someone gets shot in the face, you'll assume they're gonna die. But, I kept him alive. I was actually watching Fargo not too long ago and maybe I was subconsciously thinking of the image of Steve Buscemi's character running around with a gunshot wound to his face.


Quoted Text
Bit curious what exactly Angela is looking at, man or dog, when she calls the dog 'Dwight' and gets in on the final act. But, nice commentary on domestic violence and all types of violence for that matter.


She's looking at both man AND animal. By her calling him "Dwight", there's just enough human left of him... after he's saved, he apologizes profusely. He's happy to be out of there, happy to see the wife he abused (which I should probably have made more clear -- at the beginning I have him say "I never laid a finger on her" -- he was lying). There's just a little piece of that human being he once was, perhaps at the beginning of their relationship. But then, in the car on the way to the dog fight, he's kind of an asshole again. He transformed into an "animal" long before Fritzinger came to his home. He was an animal to his wife and took a lot of it out on her dog.


Quoted Text
I'd perhaps rethink Fritzinger appearing in the final scene - I understand the full-circle what goes around comes around denouement however Fritzinger has a saviour good guy quality to me, and for him to be a part of the final showdown and responsible for dishing out the justice with the original dog - I dunno, it's clever but also a bit convenient that he and Angela all end up in the same place. I think he already played his part and Angela is more than enough to dish out the final retribution on her own - perhaps she now owns the original dog? You could of course argue that this is part of the Twilight Zone, entering another dimension etc.


I was thinking the same thing, too. I wanted to explore the brutality of animal abuse. And dog fighting is a perfect example. But having Fritzinger show up at the end kind of defies that nobility he exuded earlier. But, as Fritzinger says, "We're all something, aren't we?"

Where I was trying to go with Fritzinger is that fantasy any animal lover shares about giving an animal abuser his comeuppance. Perhaps even giving the animal abuser a fate far worse than his abused dog's. But what does that make us? It shows the brutal nature and instincts that we as humans have and we try to pass it off as "justice".


Quoted Text
My view is that this is a cautionary tale, that we can all so easily succumb to violence and revenge. On paper and on screen there's easily a case for Dwight getting exactly what he deserves. But what of the now rather dubious moral qualities of everyone else involved? They're now surely no better than him, including the dog who is now a vicious animal.

Is the point then that in the end we are all animals and that violence meted out to someone who deserves it, is justified? I'm thinking capital punishment?

As is, I came away from it thinking that none of these characters learn anything or act to a higher moral code as a result of being pushed to the point of violence/seeing violence etc., and that this cycle of violence is the natural by product. The organized dog fights at the end puts quite a different slant on things.


It is a cautionary tale, as were most Twilight Zone episodes. And of course, Twilight Zone was a huge influence on me as a writer (e.g. The Suicide Theory). And it is a circle. It's not quite suggested clearly, but Dwight was most likely a damaged person already. And he's damaged others (human and canine). He goes through something that, unfortunately, too many dogs, (especially PIT BULLS) and too many PEOPLE, go through. And like so many of these "vicious" PIT BULLS, their viciousness came from being damaged. His ex-wife Angela is vicious b/c of their unhealthy relationship. Fritzinger is vicious in his own way. And, at the end, the final showdown with the PIT BULL he abused... that dog is vicious b/c of Dwight's abuse. It's just an endless circle. And it's unfortunate.


Quoted Text
Anyway, despite all my rambling, this is an impressive script. You definitely got me thinking and I'll be interested to read any further drafts if there are to be any.


Thanks, Libby!

-- Michael


THE SUICIDE THEORY (Amazon Prime, 79% Rotten Tomatoes) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2517300/?ref_=nm_knf_i1
RAGE (Coming Feb. 2021) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8874764/?ref_=nm_knf_i2

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 6 - 37
LC
Posted: March 7th, 2016, 11:48pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Great Southern Land
Posts
7581
Posts Per Day
1.34

Quoted from spesh2k
... I was actually watching Fargo not too long ago and maybe I was subconsciously thinking of the image of Steve Buscemi's character running around with a gunshot wound to his face.

Ah, I should have got that! Love that scene, it's so horrifically funny.


Quoted from spesh2k
... He's happy to be out of there, happy to see the wife he abused (which I should probably have made more clear -- at the beginning I have him say "I never laid a finger on her" -- he was lying). There's just a little piece of that human being he once was, perhaps at the beginning of their relationship. But then, in the car on the way to the dog fight, he's kind of an asshole again. He transformed into an "animal" long before Fritzinger came to his home. He was an animal to his wife and took a lot of it out on her dog.

I don't think you need worry about this. All this was perfectly clear to me, i.e., that he was lying, a thug all round etc. So I think you did your job fine there.

Quoted from spesh2k

I was thinking the same thing, too. I wanted to explore the brutality of animal abuse. And dog fighting is a perfect example. But having Fritzinger show up at the end kind of defies that nobility he exuded earlier. But, as Fritzinger says, "We're all something, aren't we?"

Funny, I took the 'we're all something' to mean, no matter what we are, animal, human being - we're all worthy, that being an animal doesn't make it of lesser value. Was my interpretation wrong there?


Quoted from spesh2k
Where I was trying to go with Fritzinger is that fantasy any animal lover shares about giving an animal abuser his comeuppance. Perhaps even giving the animal abuser a fate far worse than his abused dog's. But what does that make us? It shows the brutal nature and instincts that we as humans have and we try to pass it off as "justice".

Succinctly put. I got pretty much all of what you were trying to get across.

Big Twilight Zone fan myself btw.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 7 - 37
spesh2k
Posted: March 8th, 2016, 12:53am Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Harlem USA
Posts
1186
Posts Per Day
0.20
@ Steven Miles


Quoted Text
Felt the ending went against what we saw of Fritzinger’s earlier motives with the final scene taking something away from the idea of making Dwight pay for abusing animals.  I preferred the no-nonsense, yet seemingly selfless Fritzinger from the start -- that he’d be involved in dog-fighting at all seems an odd choice.  Maybe I could get with this more if Dwight had been involved in dog-fighting -- a poetic justice to the ending.  The continued punishment felt like it outweighed the crime and I came away almost sympathetic for Dwight.


Yeah, I kinda felt that way, too. But the Fritzinger character himself isn't a moral character. He pretty much is that mysterious, ominous "Angel of Death" kind of character. More than anything, he represents and expresses that fantasy that a lot of animal lovers (such as myself) would have when running into an animal abuser. Yes, the way Dwight is punished maybe goes too far. But that fantasy animal lovers would have usually exceeds the punishment that perhaps is deserved. Which is animalistic on our part. Fritzinger represents US. Dogfighting is animal abuse, yes, but would we not want to see Dwight, after hurting that dog the way he did and most likely his ex-wife, get torn to shreds by that PIT BULL he abused? An animal lover, ideally, would. But at the same time, it's barbaric and we'd probably cringe at the sight of that.

On the flip side, we feel sorry for Dwight. But he was an "animal" long before Fritzinger shows up at his house. And though we feel sorry for him, he gets what WE humans (albeit barbaric and perhaps wrong) thinks he deserves. Just like we feel sorry for an abused PIT BULL. But when that PIT BULL brutally tears someone to shreds, do we think about his damaged past? No. But that PIT BULL is damaged. Angela (his ex-wife) has been damaged. And now Dwight is damaged. Now, is there still hope for a damaged PIT BULL? Yes, I've seen it a million times in those Animal Planet shows/videos. A new family takes them in and treats them right. But too many times, sort of like "re-formed" criminals leaving jail, they attack. Sometimes, the damage never really goes away. And it's kinda sad. And that's the angle I went for in this story -- I know, a bit of a bummer, but that's the direction I went.

I'm still re-considering the ending, though, as well as some other parts I may (or may not) rewrite.


Quoted Text
That’s a gut response and I appreciate this is in line with your other shorts -- with that twisted, nightmare logic where you don’t dig too deeply and just enjoy the ride.
  

Thanks, Steven, though I feel I dig a little deeper into this story than it may appear, especially in contrast to other schlocky horror stuff I've written. I try not to hammer you over the head with obvious themes (I try to be subtle in the "message" and explore several different ways of looking it). I guess I was trying to leave the audience with questions whilst concluding the story w/out an open ending. Sure, there's the violence (yeah, I wasn't very subtle with that -- I rarely ever am), but there's a root to that violence that comes from depths I try not to force on everybody. Maybe I need to execute a clearer message, but the clarity, I feel, takes away from the complexity of the message, gives you less to the think about. Meh, I could be wrong. But that's just my opinion.

@ Libby


Quoted Text
Funny, I took the 'we're all something' to mean, no matter what we are, animal, human being - we're all worthy, that being an animal doesn't make it of lesser value. Was my interpretation wrong there?


No, it wasn't wrong, it was just only one part of the meaning.

-- Michael


THE SUICIDE THEORY (Amazon Prime, 79% Rotten Tomatoes) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2517300/?ref_=nm_knf_i1
RAGE (Coming Feb. 2021) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8874764/?ref_=nm_knf_i2

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 8 - 37
rendevous
Posted: March 8th, 2016, 1:39am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Away

Location
Over there.
Posts
2354
Posts Per Day
0.43
Spesh2K,

What happened to Spesh1K? Is there something we should know?

Interesting choice for an opening image. I'd have gone with something else, as it could be a gift for reviewers who disliked your story.

Still, considering the subject matter I suppose it's more suitable than usual.

I read though it easily enough. Always a good sign. I was pulled up at the end of page seven as the last line appears to be exaclty the same as a Tim Roth line as Mr. Orange line from Resevoir Dogs.

He said it when telling a story in the club scene about cops hanging about in a bathroom. You can have similar lines, but when they seem word perfect it's going to cause problems. That line is rather too memorable to use.

Story kept me interested. Weird and surprising. Sometimes perhaps too surprising. Though I'd be in the camp of going with it if I saw it.

If the guy playing Dwight was good enough to be a convincing thug at the start and also good enough to elicit (some) sympathy from the audience then it'd work on screen. It would also be nice if he exhibited some subtle but definite dog habits.

I think there'll also be a camp of folks for who this wouldn't work at all. Still, that's alright. It would be somewhat weird if everyone liked something as out there as this.

I liked it. There's some choices in there I wouldn't have gone with. Then again, me not you.

Now, me off to walk my dog lest he turns on me and becomes my master.

R


Out Of Character - updated


New Used Car

Green

Right Back

The Deuce - OWC - now on STS

Other scripts here
Logged
Site Private Message Reply: 9 - 37
spesh2k
Posted: March 8th, 2016, 2:00am Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Harlem USA
Posts
1186
Posts Per Day
0.20
Hey R,


Quoted Text
What happened to Spesh1K? Is there something we should know?


Spesh was a nickname back in the day, way back during that Y2K craze in '99 heading towards the new millennium. So I combined it because I'm a douche


Quoted Text
Interesting choice for an opening image. I'd have gone with something else, as it could be a gift for reviewers who disliked your story.


Yeah, I think about that a lot with titles, too, thinking about how they'll use it as a pun in a negative review. And I did think about that when I initially decided to open on a dog turd. Then I thought about it and said, fuck it.


Quoted Text
I was pulled up at the end of page seven as the last line appears to be exaclty the same as a Tim Roth line as Mr. Orange line from Resevoir Dogs.

He said it when telling a story in the club scene about cops hanging about in a bathroom. You can have similar lines, but when they seem word perfect it's going to cause problems. That line is rather too memorable to use.


Oh, yeah, the "panic/bucket of water" bit at the end of page 7 (used in Tim Roth's story when he sees the cops in the bathroom). I don't think it's a big deal, I used it in description, not dialogue. Not sure how the viewer will know I used that in the description unless they filmed it with a camera pointed at some dude in a chair, reading the script aloud.


Quoted Text
Story kept me interested. Weird and surprising. Sometimes perhaps too surprising. Though I'd be in the camp of going with it if I saw it.


Noice.


Quoted Text
If the guy playing Dwight was good enough to be a convincing thug at the start and also good enough to elicit (some) sympathy from the audience then it'd work on screen. It would also be nice if he exhibited some subtle but definite dog habits.


When he is in the animal shelter, he is twitching in his sleep, whimpering, having a bad dream... I should have added "like a dog". But that's the only dog habit I really gave him.


Quoted Text
I think there'll also be a camp of folks for who this wouldn't work at all. Still, that's alright. It would be somewhat weird if everyone liked something as out there as this.


I agree. That's why I like short films, they can "afford" to take chances (if the budget isn't insane) that features can't really afford to take with box office numbers and money on the line.


Quoted Text
I liked it. There's some choices in there I wouldn't have gone with. Then again, me not you.

Now, me off to walk my dog lest he turns on me and becomes my master.


Thanks, R, appreciate it, thanks for the feedback!

-- Michael


THE SUICIDE THEORY (Amazon Prime, 79% Rotten Tomatoes) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2517300/?ref_=nm_knf_i1
RAGE (Coming Feb. 2021) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8874764/?ref_=nm_knf_i2

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 10 - 37
Athenian
Posted: March 9th, 2016, 10:30am Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
203
Posts Per Day
0.06
Hi Michael,

I liked a lot your script, but also your replies in this thread - especially your comment about Angela and the pit bull having become vicious themselves. It shows that this is more than a comeuppance story.

Not much to add to the detailed reviews you've got, but here's one thing I found strange: Why didn't Angela take the dog with her after the divorce? And why did Dwight keep it even though he hated it? You should probably explain that in the script (unless I missed something).

Finally, at some point I thought Dwight hadn't actually survived the gunshot and everything that followed was actually his descent into Hell. In that case, Angela might have been dead too (because of him?), which could give the story a new dimension. Not sure, though, whether that would align with your intentions.

Great writing and a powerful and fascinating script. Good luck with it.

Manolis
Logged
Private Message Reply: 11 - 37
Dreamscale
Posted: March 9th, 2016, 11:48am Report to Moderator
Guest User



Hey Michael, what's up?  I haven't read or reviewed anything in some time, and had some free time this morning, and the first script I came across was yours, so I thought "why not".

I have to be honest and tell you I really don't get it, and that's mainly because I don't know what I'm supposed to be seeing, in terms of Dwight "the dog".  I also don't understand why no one helps him...unless he has somehow actually changed into a dog, but you never make that remotely clear.  Also, since he seems to be talking still, it's impossible to really "know" what anyone sees or hears in the story.

A few things you may want to look into and change, technically...

You use several POV shots, but never return to scene.

Your Slugs are problematic throughout.  You have basically the same scene back to back, but use different headers - "DWIGHT'S YARD", then "DWIGHT'S HOUSE".  Your time elements are all over the board, some of which should be SUPERs, other times missing completely.  One early scene is a classic mistake, IMO, in which you have an EXT scene/shot of the white van (moving).  You label it, "EXT. - WHITE VAN (MOVING) - STREET - DAY.  So, basically, you have 2 subjects here - the white van and a street.  What would I recommend?  EXT. - XZY STREET - DAY. I'd then open with something like, "A windowless, unmarked white van cruises through a suburban neighborhood...blah, blah, blah.

You opening doesn't let us know whether it's night or day, and even inside a house, it would be either light or dark, which is important.

For some reason, you don't name many of your characters and continue to CAP them every time they're in the script (PIT BULL many, many times).

I'm not sure why so many writers do this, as it makes no sense to me and makes the read unclear, but many of your action/description lines have no subject, meaning we have to assume who is doing the action.  To me it's a big mistake.

It seems like everyone loves the story and your writing, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Interesting idea and angle you took here.  It doesn't work for me though, sorry to say.

best of luck with it, bro.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 12 - 37
spesh2k
Posted: March 9th, 2016, 5:15pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Harlem USA
Posts
1186
Posts Per Day
0.20
Hey Jeff, good to see you on the boards again. I've always valued your opinion.

My use of POV --

Yes, technically I should use BACK TO SCENE (although its use has been pretty loose in a lot of scripts) when leaving a POV shot. I do feel that its kind of a waste of space, though, especially if it's obvious that we're no longer in a POV shot, e.g. changing the direction of action without BACK TO SCENE taking up a whole line. I used it "correctly" on page 1,  mainly because the scene ends on a POV shot. I used it "wrong" on page 13... I could have inserted a BACK TO SCENE before "Employee shakes his head, walks away." But again, I felt it was a waste of a line. And once I jump to a mew action paragraph, I feel it's implied that we're no longer in a POV shot. And BACK TO SCENE isn't there to impede the momentum of the read. BACK TO SCENE is more often used when INSERTING an image, e.g. a photo, the time, a text message, TV image, etc. I really don't feel my omission of BACK TO SCENE confuses the read, though it seemed to throw you off. The BACK TO SCENE rule isn't nearly as set in stone as the basics.

In regards to my slugs --

Thanks for catching DWIGHT'S HOUSE when it should have been DWIGHT'S YARD. As for my time elements, the only one I can pinpoint is SEVERAL DAYS LATER, which comes after a scene ends with DAY and NIGHT flashes by several times. I should have/could have written DUSK or EVENING.

Another one is THE NEXT DAY a few pages later. I think using SUPERS every time to indicate how much time has passed (when we don't see the change from day to night) would be a tad excessive. I use THE NEXT DAY to inform the reader that it is the next day... the character is in the same room, away from EXT light. On screen, it would be clearer to the viewer that a day has passed via time cuts. If I mentioned only DAY again in the slug, how else would the reader distinguish whether or not it's the same day or the next day?

"EXT. WHITE VAN (MOVING) - STREET - DAY"

I wanted focus on the white van... we are following the white van via an EXT shot. If I did:

EXT. STREET - DAY

Then mention the white van, what do we see? We see a white van driving down a street -- I picture this from afar for some reason rather than us moving with the car. I probably should've left out STREET in the slug and describe where the van was moving (I think I do anyway).

In regards to not using a subject in an action line --

I realize it isn't grammatically correct to NOT use a subject... BUT... screenwriting in particular tends to (and allows us to -- to a point) to bend and break Grammar 101 rules. When I don't use a subject in a sentence, it's because the sentence comes after dialogue spoken by the character/subject in question. Once an action is made by a different subject/character, then I'll use a subject in the sentence. Otherwise, wouldn't it be redundant to have --

DWIGHT
The fuck is this?

Dwight looks up at WOMAN JOGGER, incredulous.

Even the use of "he" is unnecessary due to the fact that WOMAN JOGGER (a she) is mentioned in the same sentence. They are the only characters interacting with each other in the scene. Taking out the subject (after the subject/character speaks), at least IMO, makes the read more continuous and fluid in terms of the momentum of the written action.

My opening --

We open on an image.We don't know we're in a house. We don't know whether its night or day -- so why write it in a slug if the audience doesn't see it? The way it is written is very easy to follow and, most importantly, visual. It's easy to see that we're inside just by mention of "the carpet"... we don't know where, our view is floor level. And it IS technically correct... opening on an image without an INT/EXT slug is a technique often used, especially to open a film -- though I wouldn't suggest it to a novice writer).

RE: Not naming all my characters --

IMO it isn't necessary to name a character if a name isn't used (which is why I often CAP bit characters). How do we know their name is "Joe" if nobody refers to him using that name? You don't see a CONSTRUCTION WORKER in a film and see him listed in the credits as "Joe"... who the fuck is Joe?

As for CAPPING --

In features, which I'm more accustomed to writing, I CAP bit characters and keep them CAPPED if they only appear once or twice. I realize that it stands out more in a 15 minute film where appearing once or twice is a fair amount of screen time. Plus, in this one, thise CAPPED characters have dialogue, so I totally get what you're saying. The reason I CAP PIT BULL throughout is because the dog is not human, yet interacts. Maybe it's just me but when I read action, I tend to get lost easy in a sea of words -- that's probably why I do it.

A lot of these "classic mistakes" you speak of aren't really mistakes at all... you've subscribed to one particular way of writing a script when methods and techniques are CONSTANTLY evolving. I'm not dismissing your technical observations completely, but the way I write has worked pretty well for me. Though I can always improve... and I'm sure a lot of what you said will sink in after further thought and I'll probably be like, "Damn, Jeff was right." Which has been the case before

As for the story, I had a gut feeling you wouldn't like it lol, pretty sure you haven't liked anything I've ever written. But I do need, as all writers do, a "different" opinion. You want to look at your story from as many different angles as possible, and I really appreciate it, dude.

Thanks for taking out the time to read and comment!

-- Michael


THE SUICIDE THEORY (Amazon Prime, 79% Rotten Tomatoes) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2517300/?ref_=nm_knf_i1
RAGE (Coming Feb. 2021) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8874764/?ref_=nm_knf_i2


Revision History (1 edits)
spesh2k  -  March 9th, 2016, 6:40pm
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 13 - 37
James McClung
Posted: March 9th, 2016, 6:18pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients



Location
Washington, D.C.
Posts
3293
Posts Per Day
0.49
Hey Michael,

I dug this one a lot. I agree with some of Jeff's comments about the format, but while some changes would be nice, the way the script's written now didn't bother me as much as I think it would've if the story didn't hold my interest. The story doesn't quite fit in a box either, but I kinda liked that.

Again, as Jeff said, it isn't explained exactly what's going on, but I think that lent itself to the confusion and frustration of being an abused dog. It also adds a sinister clandestine aspect to whatever supernatural powers are at play, as if confusion is part of the perpetrator's means of disarming the victim. There's a few horror movies doing this nowadays, e.g. The Witch. I appreciate the approach if handled properly, and even so, we can deduce that Fritzinger is a supernatural entity and that something happens when he shoots Dwight in the face.

The ending was pretty brutal but satisfying. I knew what you were going to do as soon as I saw the slug, and thought, "Damn." Definitely ice cold. In any case, unlike others, I didn't have an issue with there being no one to empathize with in the end, except for Dwight, I suppose, nor do I think that even has to be the case generally speaking. The unfairness of it all also lends itself to the concept of Dwight as an abused dog.

All that said, not sure how much of this was intentional. In fact, a lot of the things I enjoyed could've easily been the result of shortcomings. But sometimes I like works to be a little rough around the edges, and increasingly in horror/supernatural-themed stories, I like for there to be an element that remains in the dark and can't be fully unpacked by the audience.

So yeah. Not perfect, but an engaging read, for sure.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 14 - 37
 Pages: 1, 2, 3 » : All
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Short Scripts  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006