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.
Hey Dustin. Disappointed to hear that this is actually a melodrama - should've stuck than in the log-line 'cos it could get missed. Wind-swept oceans, flowing capes, get 'em all in. Somehow. And drugs. They're illegal by the way, so careful.
Back to it.
p.31 - I wouldn't start a new scene straight into dialogue. Maybe go with Honey double, or sprawling, or Tony stepping in.
Minor on this one: Johnny never steps in the house, but storms out of it (he's in on/by Tony's dialogue).
p.36 -
INT. DELBOY'S etc
The men ...
-- think about your breakdown. There's a couple of bits like this that are a bit off - I know it's nothing major but it is a new scene, and better is 'The Cobo's ...' or similar.
p.37 - okay - I'm guessing (or had thought) that we were working with two cases - at this point, I'm still thinking that. If that's true ... do you need an identifier for Johnny's case? It's just that if a case came out - then I'm thinking it could be either Benny's or Johnny's, but as you're specifying in the description, I'm wondering how I know this, and how I know it's not Benny's?
p.38 From the dialogue 'You've done well my friend.' I got the feeling the guys almost had the wrong dialogue? Would the 'If only things were that simple' not belong to the Cobo's?
p.39 DANNY To be honest with you, I don't think they will. -- got give-away written all over it. DANNY To be honest with you... -- or DANNY I don't think they... -- maybe play with it.
p.44 - exposition on the Turks is too heavy: needs a re-work. Angle's fine.
Okay - I'm out for tonight. Only thing I'm wondering at close-ish to half way is the Alexander role ...?
There is only one case. I'll certainly need to make that clearer. No this isn't a melodrama.
On page 38, the implication here is that The Colombians set up Johnny and Tony as they were going to deposit their money into a Colombian bank. I'll need to make that connection clearer, either earlier or around this point in the meeting with Delroy and the Colombians.
I'll sort out the scenes where I go straight to dialogue.
I'm hoping to come back to this script on Monday and spend a few days editing so these notes will be open as I'm going along. Cheers.
Wow, you really stick to your guns on things, don't you?
Have you even done a little digging into the possibility that you are mistaken? Even a dictionary or something?
Anyways, done here. Sail on, good Sir. Where is Jeff when I actually need him?
Have you? I've done a lot more digging than you have, obviously.
Do a little test. First, google: overly dramatic and see what happens. Then google, overly melodramatic and see what happens.
You will note that searching for overly melodramatic will pull up only the word melodramatic on its own. However the search for overly dramatic will show those words going together all the time.
Also if you do a search on synonyms of melodrama you will find overly dramatic meaning the same thing. Likewise backwards too, here: http://thesaurus.com/browse/over-dramatic
So if melodrama is the same as being overly dramatic, which let's face it... it is... then to place over before melodramatic is a blunder.
Nobody uses over melodramtic together, nobody. People say overly dramatic, that's it. If you guys want to take on this mistake and perpetuate it that's fine. That's all I have to say on it.
"So if melodrama is the same as being overly dramatic, which let's face it... it is... then to place over before melodramatic is a blunder."
This is where you're wrong and have been wrong the entire time.
Melodrama is a noun. It's a sub genre of film. Overly dramatic is an adjective with an adverb modifier.
We can say, "I'm going to see that Melodrama tonight." We CAN'T say "I'm going to see that Overly Dramatic tonight."
What you've been so adamant on, it appears to me, is that melodrama has one meaning and one meaning only. Come on, Dustin. You should know better than that.
As Bert, and others, have correctly pointed out to you numerous times, Melodrama is a genre. So the adjective melodramatic used in this context is a "descriptor" of that genre. And that's what we mean. One more time, in this context when we say melodramatic we are referring to the genre of melodrama.
You of course ignore this and keep repeating the same thing, saying it means overly dramatic or over dramatic. True, the word melodramatic does also mean this. But that's not the same word we're talking about. That word is more or less referring to "extravagant in speech, or behavior."
Alright Dustin. I'm giving this one a go. I'm being completely honest with my comments here. I'll try to explain myself where necessary. I may be saying things that have been already mentioned before. I didn't read through all of the comments, however.
pg. 2, "Feliks screams and strides towards Delroy in a rage, spittle flying from his mouth."
I don't get this. I think this would look goofy on screen. Now if you mean he screams the dialogue as he strides toward him, that's different. But just him screaming and striding is very, very odd.
It's meant to look odd because when people get really mad that's how they look, and most people when they get really mad, they can't speak. It's just noise. I want a guttural roar. I think I'll change it to guttural roar. I expect pure anger in this scene. The man's wife and son are there and gangsters have just walked in. That's not how it's done. They could hit him anywhere and they walk into a family event. Fear and anger will reign. He doesn't care if he dies himself, he just wants his family to be OK. If you have kids yourself then you should understand what I mean... and genuinely put yourself in that situation, you may well be overly dramatic.
"FELIKS Don't... you... fucking... hurt... my son."
It's at this point where I think you're on the course to channeling melodrama. BUT, having said that, I think in the hands of the right director and the right cast it doesn't necessarily have to be interpreted that way. I'm just saying that most actors, especially method actors, will likely go in that direction. I can perfectly picture an actor cheweing up the scenery with this.
I can't agree. the guy has been shot twice, he has a new baby in the hands of the guy that shot him... ah, ok... perhaps you are right. He would beg at this stage. He would beg for his son's life. He can't move, cannot do anything else, the only thing left is to appeal for mercy (for the baby).
"Delroy raises the machete and slices off the baby's hand. The hand falls onto the floor amidst the baby's terrible, terrified screams. Everyone in the bar screams too -- completely horrified."
Okay, so at this point the red flags are going off. Why go that deep into the violence so early on when it has little to no context? What purpose does this have but to gross out the audience? You're inserting violence just 'cause. If I was watching this movie, I would go, "yeah, this is pointless." There's no build up here. "It's a meaningless gore flick, I'll pass." That would be my reaction more or less. Let me give you an example for reference. Look at a movie like Oldboy or I saw the devil. Excellent films with plenty of violence. There might have been a moment or two where I felt like the violence was stretched out for a beat too long, but generally, it was done very well. I was entertained and I felt that whatever violence I saw was completely warranted. I can't say that about this part here. This is like one of the highest levels of darkness and you stick it right at the beginning of your script?? How do you raise your audience back up after this scene, I have no idea. Anyway, I'm moving forward.
It's only had its hand cut off, there are far worse things that could happen. It is done for effect and the actor I wrote the part for actually really only has one hand. You can tell from the logline what is going to happen. The baby is the son who gets revenge on his father's killer. So obviously the baby plays a part further down the line and it isn't just a senseless gore flick.
"Two cars pull up side by side. Lights go off, engines die. A door opens and somebody gets out -- runs around to the driver side of the other car. CRACK! CRACK! CRACK! Three pistol shots. The GUNMAN opens the car door and pulls a suitcase from inside. The dead body of a middle-aged white man falls out."
Initially, I couldn't understand what's going on here. It was only after I read the next action line that I got it. So reword this so it's clear.
I'm having a minor issue with Alexander being so obliging when he meets Oddball. Okay, he takes the case to the guy, I'll buy that. But Oddball's trustworthiness of him I feel iffy on. Then Alexander's sure-I've-got-nothing-better-to-do-then-follow-you-around-town attitude is where I'm not as satisfied. If he backed off, or at the very least questioned Oddball, simply said, "Look, man, I don't want any part of this shit, whatever the hell it is." I could buy that. I'm assuming he's got some idea as to what his friend Danny is involved in so he might have some idea that if cops are involved, then this shit's hitting the fan from both sides and maybe it might be wise to stay out of it. All I'm saying is that it's a convenient stretch for the screenwriter to make and personally it's not a big buy from me. But I'll go along with as it doesn't bother me that much.
There are people in this world James that walk into trouble. That is what this film is about. The fact that it may be dangerous is what is attractive.
"ALEXANDER I met your friend tonight.18. ODDBALL His name is Danny... you met him tonight? ALEXANDER Yeah, tonight."
Okay, Dustin, I can't believe this. I thought the two knew each other, in which case I was going to cut you some slack for what I mentioned above about Alexander's readiness to oblige, but at this point I can't believe what just transpired. It's far fetched to have Alexander just conveniently do go through all this for someone he just met!!! I can't believe these plot points. I can't believe Alexander is doing this guy the favor. I can't believe Oddball is so easily trustworthy with Alexander. And I can't believe Alexander would follow Oddball. Having said that, I think you could find a better way to lay down these plot points. As they stand, they're very unbelievable.
No... they're not. You just have no idea about that type of mindset.
"No mate... you're going nowhere till Danny shows up."
I neither understand the logic behind this plot point nor can I believe it. Oddball's very conveniently inviting Alexander into this is not wise I think and not very believable, especially how quickly it happens.
Alexander is homeless, jobless, but he's gotta eat regardless (Dead Prez). Oddball hasn't invited him in, he's already in. Lot of drugs involved. You'd be surprised what can happen in one crazy night.
"Look. This isn't going to get us anywhere. Now Danny, look... there's a lot of fucking money in that case. Everything we've worked for is in that case. Can you think of anywhere that fucking mug could be right now?"
Las Vegas!!! No, I kid But that was my first thought as I was reading this.
"A shot from behind the settee shows that the case is gone."
I don't understand this. Is this like a thought bubble or something? Or a shot back at the safe house?
If you check the slug, they are actually in the safe house.
"ODDBALL Fuck. DANNY Yeah, fuck. Danny looks at Alexander. DANNY You as well."
I don't understand these reactions either. Is it because they're not at the safe house like they're suppose to be and they're just screwing around like little kids?
From what I read so far I would say a good portion of your action lines are very well written. There's no superfluous words. You get right to it. Some could definitely use tweaking, others need more clarity. But overall you get good marks from me on that aspect.
I can't say much about the dialogue for right now. It does come off as wooden at times. Sort of fades in and out for me. And true, it's nothing like your opening scenes which I can't take seriously by the way, and probably would not continue watching the movie because of them. But thank God they were only 3 minutes long. Actually the more I think about it, it's probably the odd combination of sentimentality and violence, and it's right in the beginning too.
In any scene like that we run the risk of over dramatising as it is a highly dramatic event. Several people are killed and a baby has its hand cut off. emotions would be running high.
"So if melodrama is the same as being overly dramatic, which let's face it... it is... then to place over before melodramatic is a blunder."
This is where you're wrong and have been wrong the entire time.
Melodrama is a noun. It's a sub genre of film. Overly dramatic is an adjective with an adverb modifier.
We can say, "I'm going to see that Melodrama tonight." We CAN'T say "I'm going to see that Overly Dramatic tonight."
What you've been so adamant on, it appears to me, is that melodrama has one meaning and one meaning only. Come on, Dustin. You should know better than that.
As Bert, and others, have correctly pointed out to you numerous times, Melodrama is a genre. So the adjective melodramatic used in this context is a "descriptor" of that genre. And that's what we mean. One more time, in this context when we say melodramatic we are referring to the genre of melodrama.
You of course ignore this and keep repeating the same thing, saying it means overly dramatic or over dramatic. True, the word melodramatic does also mean this. But that's not the same word we're talking about. That word is more or less referring to "extravagant in speech, or behavior."
Are you converted now?
Are you having a laugh mate?
You said the dialogue in my first 3 pages was overly melodramatic. You didn't accuse it of being a melodrama.
You said the dialogue in my first 3 pages was overly melodramatic. You didn't accuse it of being a melodrama. That's complete b/s mate.
Dustin, please carefully read what I wrote.
"As Bert, and others, have correctly pointed out to you numerous times, Melodrama is a genre. So the adjective melodramatic used in this context is a "descriptor" of that genre. And that's what we mean."
It's meant to look odd because when people get really mad that's how they look, and most people when they get really mad, they can't speak. It's just noise. I want a guttural roar. I think I'll change it to guttural roar. I expect pure anger in this scene. The man's wife and son are there and gangsters have just walked in. That's not how it's done. They could hit him anywhere and they walk into a family event. Fear and anger will reign. He doesn't care if he dies himself, he just wants his family to be OK. If you have kids yourself then you should understand what I mean... and genuinely put yourself in that situation, you may well be overly dramatic.
Dude, I just said it looks goofy to me. No need to force me to sympathize with it.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
I can't agree. the guy has been shot twice, he has a new baby in the hands of the guy that shot him... ah, ok... perhaps you are right. He would beg at this stage. He would beg for his son's life. He can't move, cannot do anything else, the only thing left is to appeal for mercy (for the baby).
Both would be melodramatic, no doubt. That wasn't my point.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
It's only had its hand cut off, there are far worse things that could happen. It is done for effect and the actor I wrote the part for actually really only has one hand. You can tell from the logline what is going to happen. The baby is the son who gets revenge on his father's killer. So obviously the baby plays a part further down the line and it isn't just a senseless gore flick.
My impression, if I knew nothing about a movie version of this, would be that this is a senseless gore flick because in my mind anyway, you must build to it like suspense. This is just my taste.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Don't agree.
Don't agree. Do you have a wife? Do you love her?
A woman would scream that if she felt powerless after seeing her husband killed and several other men in the bar. The guy now has her baby.
My feelings are that when this kind of sentimentality is portrayed on film I can't take it seriously. I am incapable of it. I know it's fake. Just like I know the blood in a bad or great movie is fake. But the difference is when I'm immersed in the story in a great movie, the violence, blood, gore, and occasionally sentimentality, when properly executed, only intensifies what I'm already immersed in. It doesn't add to it. It's not something that just dangles out there on its own. And to me, both your sentimentality and your violence dangle in the opening. That's my feeling. Don't get offended. I'm just giving you my opinion because I'm sure you'll get plenty similar opinions as mine especially if this gets produce. In no way shape or form should you take this to be personally against you. Just my opinion, dude.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
He's already done his worst, now she is beyond caring.
I still don't get it. I'm being honest. I don't understand that instant switch you make her do.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
There are people in this world James that walk into trouble. That is what this film is about. The fact that it may be dangerous is what is attractive.
It seems extremely unlikely that the events you plotted would transpire. Perhaps I'm wrong and this is a cultural thing and it does in fact work. I don't know. I'm just saying that if I saw this movie, that's how I would feel about it.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
No... they're not. You just have no idea about that type of mindset.
Well they are to me. I can't get my head around the idea that these two people that just met became so quickly trusting of one another. Again, just my gut reaction.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
Alexander is homeless, jobless, but he's gotta eat regardless (Dead Prez). Oddball hasn't invited him in, he's already in. Lot of drugs involved. You'd be surprised what can happen in one crazy night.
Yeah, I certainly don't get the logic behind this. Sorry, dude.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
If you check the slug, they are actually in the safe house.
pg. 24, "Danny puts his thinking cap on. A shot from behind the settee shows that the case is gone."
There isn't a slug there. Check the page. Sorry for not putting page numbers next to my comments.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
They're only hard to believe for you because you don't understand what it's like to be homeless, jobless but you gotta eat regardless.
Again, could be. I think a great writer should be able to make me understand. I've never lived in Russia nor do I understand the Russian life but I still enjoyed and could sympathize with the characters in "The Brothers Karamazov". But as you said, this is geared to a specific audience. So obviously I won't criticize you for doing something you didn't set out to do.
"As Bert, and others, have correctly pointed out to you numerous times, Melodrama is a genre. So the adjective melodramatic used in this context is a "descriptor" of that genre. And that's what we mean."
Here is where I accused you of calling my film a melodrama.
Quoted from DustinBowcot
You appear to have gone from saying the dialogue is melodramatic to accusing the whole film of being so after reading just three pages.
Well first of all, there is no film. It's a script. Second of all, I did no such thing. I was speaking generally about such films.
A melodrama can be any genre... romance, thriller, comedy (pantomime). All you have to do is go too far to the point that it is unrealistic. You have to overdo it. Then it becomes melodrama. It is already over done.
I would like to get further into the script when I have time but I will just comment on the first three pages that I read.
...
Also my fear is that the over-melodramatic nature of the script makes me feel like this is going to be a film that is taking itself too seriously.
So it should be obvious from the context that when I accused your script of having an "over-melodramatic nature" I am "comment[ing] on the first three pages that I read."
My impression, if I knew nothing about a movie version of this, would be that this is a senseless gore flick because in my mind anyway, you must build to it like suspense. This is just my taste.
You already said that and I don't agree with it. Senseless violence, yes... but gore. Long, long way away. You have real difficulty defining genres it seems.
My feelings are that when this kind of sentimentality is portrayed on film I can't take it seriously. I am incapable of it. I know it's fake. Just like I know the blood in a bad or great movie is fake.
You are incapable of it for different reasons than it being fake. You have no idea what real is. You've never been there while people have been shot around you, your wife shot in front of you. Your child about to be harmed. You have no idea what is real and what isn't. You cannot say what people would or wouldn't say in that situation. When people really panic they can say crazy things that make no sense at all... but doing that in a script would be hard. Kind of thing you need to do on set with the actor. As that is where a lot of dialogue is changed anyway. As writers we only need to convey the sentiment and an approximation of dialogue.
It seems extremely unlikely that the events you plotted would transpire. Perhaps I'm wrong and this is a cultural thing and it does in fact work. I don't know. I'm just saying that if I saw this movie, that's how I would feel about it.
You already said that and I gave you my response. That's how it works. You repeating yourself over and over again isn't helping much.
Well they are to me. I can't get my head around the idea that these two people that just met became so quickly trusting of one another. Again, just my gut reaction.
Again... you've said this once already. The fact that you still don't get it after an explanation doesn't matter one iota.
Again, could be. I think a great writer should be able to make me understand. I've never lived in Russia nor do I understand the Russian life but I still enjoyed and could sympathize with the characters in "The Brothers Karamazov". But as you said, this is geared for a specific audience. So obviously I won't criticize you for doing something you didn't set out to do.
You don't want to understand, you've already demonstrated that.
So it should be obvious from the context that when I accused your script of having an "over-melodramatic nature" I am "comment[ing] on the first three pages that I read."
That's pure and simple context for you.
A thriller script... which this is... a crime thriller... with a logline to boot. Nowhere does it say melodrama. So... in that vein, a thriller script can only be melodramatic as in overly dramatic. You can't use overly melodramatic... it's poor grammar. But, if you wish to continue being ignorant then that is up to you.
"Nobody uses over melodramatic together, nobody. People say overly dramatic, that's it. If you guys want to take on this mistake and perpetuate it that's fine."
I have no stake in the argument, I actually just appreciated the logic of Dustin's original argument, and as a diversion, wanted to look into it myself.
Which I did. And the only online dictionary I went to did not have over dramatic as the definition for melodramatic. I posted what it did have above.
And my logic was decisive, Dustin. It is acceptable to use overly melodramatic. Just like it might be fair to describe something as excessively over the top. Over the top could be a chosen style, but its possible to go too far. Thus the excessive, even though a certain amount of excess is implied in over the top itself.
Sorry, Dustin. You're wrong this time. But let's look at your own words, quoted above. You place double emphasis on "nobody uses" overly dramatic. And then a few words later you refer to perpetuating a mistake, which indicates that you are aware that people do in fact use the combination of words. Which you know from googling it.
"Nobody uses over melodramatic together, nobody. People say overly dramatic, that's it. If you guys want to take on this mistake and perpetuate it that's fine."
I have no stake in the argument, I actually just appreciated the logic of Dustin's original argument, and as a diversion, wanted to look into it myself.
Which I did. And the only online dictionary I went to did not have over dramatic as the definition for melodramatic. I posted what it did have above.
Overly dramatic is a synonym of melodramatic. So melodramatic can be defined as being overly dramatic.
And my logic was decisive, Dustin. It is acceptable to use overly melodramatic. Just like it might be fair to describe something as excessively over the top. Over the top could be a chosen style, but its possible to go too far. Thus the excessive, even though a certain amount of excess is implied in over the top itself.
Give me an example of going too far with melodrama. Melodrama is OTT drama, so I'd love to know what could top that.
Sorry, Dustin. You're wrong this time. But let's look at your own words, quoted above. You place double emphasis on "nobody uses" overly dramatic. And then a few words later you refer to perpetuating a mistake, which indicates that you are aware that people do in fact use the combination of words. Which you know from googling it.
I did not say that at all, I said nobody uses "Overly Melodramatic"... I also said that everybody knows and uses "overly dramatic". It's well known. Overly dramatic, same as saying melodramatic... because they are synonyms. Anyway, I'm not here to give fellow writers English lessons. Continue using overly melodramatic together for all I care... it's not me looking stupid.
1. Having the excitement and emotional appeal of melodrama: "a melodramatic account of two perilous days spent among the planters" (Frank O. Gatell). 2. Exaggeratedly emotional or sentimental; histrionic: "Accuse me, if you will, of melodramatic embroidery" (Erskine Childers). 3. Characterized by false pathos and sentiment.
Again, this could be a style choice. And it's possible to use too much of it, to go too far.
From this link, you can see a listing of melodramatic films and a description of what the genre entails. In fact, they used to be the predominant style of film for decades. Films consisted of exaggerated and heightened emotional plots.
Going too far with such a plot might be deliberate, and a form of comedy. But more often it's an unintentional mistake by the creators of the film. They exaggerate...too much. I don't have to define too much, do I? A film can be overly exaggerated, and it can be overly melodramatic.
This is not even a judgment call, Dustin. You are just plain old fashioned wrong. It happens. I can tell you honestly that when I looked at your original argument, I really didn't know. Your point seemed possible. But 2 minutes of research combined with basic logic shows that there is simply no doubt...overly melodramatic is a fair criticism and probably a very common one.
And yes...you said nobody uses overly melodramatic...and then you said it was a mistake that has been perpetuated, a contradiction. You believe the use of overly melodramatic is a mistake, but it's obviously one you've seen enough to consider a problem you don't want to perpetuate.
You're a reasonably intelligent guy, so I enjoy the occasional joust. Like all people, you are capable of being wrong, and this is one of those times. It just is. Accept it and move on.
Going too far with such a plot might be deliberate, and a form of comedy. But more often it's an unintentional mistake by the creators of the film. They exaggerate...too much. I don't have to define too much, do I? A film can be overly exaggerated, and it can be overly melodramatic.
Show me an example of an overly melodramatic film. Just one. I bet you they are simply termed as melodramtic, as they are already overly dramatised.
And yes...you said nobody uses overly melodramatic...and then you said it was a mistake that has been perpetuated, a contradiction. You believe the use of overly melodramatic is a mistake, but it's obviously one you've seen enough to consider a problem you don't want to perpetuate.
Because there has been more than one taker for the case of overly melodramatic on this board, you are yet another member to join... so as I fear this ignorance is spreading. Much like in our country when people mispronounce wow. It's catching. Admittedly this helps form new definitions. Lots of words change meanings over time and most of them are down to people misunderstanding the true definition of the word. It is so powerful that it changes the meanings of words. Anyway... I digress.
This is the first time I've ever, ever heard anyone mix up overly dramatic and melodramatic before. He even, at one point, hyphenated them like this: over-melodramatic
Pages: 
Author
Out with the Old
Logged
But that was my first thought as I was reading this.
Locked Board