Quoted Text There is anyway no sense that Chris is in imminent danger, he doesn't have to do anything and has nothing at stake; if he just stays quiet he'll be fine. He makes token efforts to get Mel out of it but she doesn't have anything to do with the drug raid either.

The Bar Chris works at is where it all started so the Collector will have to see Chris to talk to him at some point.  Chris does stay quiet, that’s what he always does.  But as he starts to ask questions he’s drawn in and the further he goes the more he wants Mel out.  With Mel being the go between Max and the suppliers she’s also involved, so eventually the Collector will see her.  Chris even says the Collector could see anyone he wants because Max has let him do what he wants.

Chris isn’t in danger but his struggle is internal.  He’s in a cocoon, he breaks out, thing’s get bad because of the characters around him and their actions.  Chris wants to stay out but is drawn in and tries to put things right.

Quoted Text The Collector bumps off everyone, when he could just have started with Doug and recovered the drugs like he was supposed to.

He’s trying to find Doug and cant so he does what he can through leads he gets, mainly from Skinny and the Smackhead.

Quoted Text For some reason Doug skips away scot free towards the end - is a sequel in mind?

It’s logical.  All you’re mates are killed and the one friend you thought could help you cant you pack your stuff and leave.  End of.  Nothing is simple and people don’t get their comeuppance, if that were true everyone but Mel and Chris would die or learnt a valuable lesson.  I’m trying to say away from cliché.  Doug leaving makes everything worst for everyone.  The Collector must be killed but even then Max or the suppliers will be after Doug – its never simple or has a satisfying conclusion for him.      

Quoted Text To keep it the way you have it, Chris should put his own head on the block trying to help Doug (the repaying element) and when things go wrong deflect the heat from Mel to earn her love and respect. Max should be pulling the strings, with the possibility that Tall Man is trying to take over his operation. Everything should be leading to the final, inevitable confrontation. Chris tells Doug he can't help him because Max didnt send the Collector. He says Doug has "killed us both". That sounds dramatic but how is it so? The scene ends with tears and embraces, but now should come the germ of a last all-or-nothing plan to fight back.

That was meant as Doug has killed their friendship.  Doug will die for what he’s done.  If he said “Killed both of us” it would of mean both of them would die.  “Killed us both” adds that they’re friendship is over.  Chris has always helped Doug because of what he did to him and also because Doug has nobody but Chris.  Their friendship is based on loyalty and trust but even that is by a thread.  Doug snaps it and Chris wants to cut the ties.  The two getting together a final time to fight back would feel false being that Doug has done nothing but cause the conflict for everything by stealing the drugs and getting Chris involved by asking him to sell them on.  I wanted things more complicated than people owing favours.  The characters are selfish and being so adds complications to their relationships.  

The whole dynamic between the two is based on Mean Streets.   Harvey Keitel puts up with De Niro’s character due to his sister but he’d easily cut the ties with him because of how much of a liability he is. But they two are close friends and would do anything for each other until it gets pushed over the edge and they are shot at the end.      

Quoted Text Just at this moment Mel has successfully concluded her latest business deal. This could be revealed at the end as a double-cross that messes Max good and sets her and Chris up for their new life. As it was, I didn't know what was the significance.

Was thinking about this or the deal falling through.

Quoted Text Not only is the violence nearly all gratuitous (adding nothing to the plot) but the story sometimes stops to accommodate it, such as Chris breaking off a desperate drive to jump out and assault two blameless pedestrians. He implausibly runs out of petrol moments later, so you might as well have him crash because of the chavs and abandon the car there.

I disagree with that.   None of the violence is done for excitement or glorification, it all has repercussions and is brutal.  I’ll agree when Chris beats the Clubbers up is glorified to make him a cool tough guy but everything else is not.  Bad guys get killed.   People you don’t like get killed.  

How can it not progress the plot? The drug heist gets everything going, causes unbalance in the story bringing the characters together.  Skinny tells the Collector about Doug’s gang after being beaten.  The beaten Smackhead grasses to where Terry is.  Doug’s gang being picked off drives Doug to try and rectify their plight.  What happens to Mel needs more behind it but what he does to isn’t particularly nasty or OTT, its just written like it does.  
  
Well there are a few reasons why its there. Nobody likes Chavs and they kick his car so he beats them up.  Gratuitous as it is I wanted obstacles getting in his way to save Mel.  He shouldn’t beat them up, we want him to get in the car and go to Mel’s.  But Chris is angry, true its up in the air whether he’ll jump out and beat them in but I’ve been around people when its happened for real – adrenaline takes over and you don’t know what you’re doing – see “A Bittersweet Life” and Takeshi Kitano films mainly Hanabi.  Though the car crash is an option, I was thinking about budget when I wrote it.  But it’s noted.    

Quoted Text The climax is Mel's torture and Chris's running to save her. If the film was shown the way you write, cutting back and forth, it might look exciting but there would be no tension. We just know Chris is going to bust in at the critical moment and Boom! it's all over. (It would be wholly unexpected if Mel had just been killed and the Collector offed Chris too, for that downbeat '70s ending.) Really, you should have her completely at the mercy of the sadistic killer, with just the threat of violence and no cutting off fingers. She has just had the row with Chris, and has no expectation that he is on the way. He needs to come to some realisation between then and now that triggers the rescue. Mel has brushed with danger in her job when she thought she could handle it, but she never bargained for this - no-one messes with the Collector. Even better if Mel had taken on Max, made him pay for something he'd done, perhaps years before, and she patiently inveigled her way into his trust before turning and twisting the knife. Here is his revenge. Similarly, Chris will have done something that puts him in danger and Mel realises her action led to it. Something in Chris's past too has Max at its heart (the Lucy incident?) and then they are bound together by their need to make Max pay. She is now prepared to sacrifice herself to protect Chris. In this case when he rescues her Chris is saving himself and their relationship as well. Mel needs to lay her own demons; Max can have had some hold on her, broken by Chris's intervention. I never got what happened to his sister, but Chris can have his own reason for killing the Collector that is only understood at the end. These are just ideas that might not be your intention, but your script needs some depth to be anything more than a litany of violence.

My opinion is that having her die would also be something you’d see coming.  It just happens that way, the opposite of something good is the bad.  I saw it as the Collector is doing what he has to, to get what he wants.  I understand that I need to change and put Mel in more danger before hand for the ending to have more purpose.  

Quoted Text That's more than a few impressions, of things that might be better, because not much is right as it is. I don't want to be discouraging, a few words shouldn't damage your confidence, since enthusiasm for writing is plain to see (I'd trim out all the exclamations). Others might like it just as it is, where in my view HELLO, MR COOL is misdirected as a rehash of modern gangster movies, concerned with surface gloss and camera setups. Would it work as a short story without any swearing or violence? If not, then it's just titillation and that wouldn't make much of a movie. Find a story worth telling and completely overhaul this, beginning by getting a lock on the story and the relationships of the characters. That will mean changing just about all dialogue; I couldn't remember one single line that anybody spoke. At least cut down on the swearing, so the reader can concentrate on what is said, not how. Limit the script to three scenes of violence (each integral to the story) and only two spoken "f--ks". That's hard, but when you do you'll have a better script. Good luck.

Thanks for the in depth critique, truly appreciate it gratefully.  Hopefully my response will change some of your views.  Personally I was going for more characterisation and making the plot secondary, more like Mean Streets and Japanese Yakuza films by Takeshi Kitano such as Hanabi, Boiling Point etc.  But I fully appreciate the time taken and I understand if you thought it was truly terrible you wouldn’t write such a long critique – I know I wouldn’t lol.  

Thanks.