The Mansour Circle Incident by Ray - Short, War, Crime, Documentary - Bombs, directives, money, training, contracts, protocol, friends, deals, guns, trades, grenades, subterfuge, shots fired, plans three layers deep, maps, late night phone calls, blood, memorandums, deaths, judges, clean, prosecutors, dirty, investigators, patriots and justice for all. There's so much error and deception in so few pages there isn't room for any sex. Well, there is the "finger" remark. 13 pages - pdf, format

From Ray's Reluctant January Format Exercise  http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?m-1294011744/

Ray,

Your script stopped hurting my head when I took it for a black comedy.
The turn of phrase, "nice interrogation room", cracked me up.
In my head, I heard like waltz music and stuff as they "danced" around the incident.
I'm a story hound, not the best bloke for these exercises you embark upon.
However, I read these because you are the resident Jack Russell terrier around here.
Once you bite something, you shake the bejesus out of it until it submits. =p

Your format is so thick, I feel your script triple dog daring me to read it.
At any moment, the pages will flutter to life and paper cut me for flinching.
I would say your molasses like formatting works about 65% of the time.
It took a lot to wade through it and parts (release form) I just mini skimmed.
Quick flashes through rifle sights section worked very well for me.
The (VISION) thing...is that a POV type deal? That's how it read to me.
The aftermath on the roof with the pair of insurgents, I don't get it.
I like the tie in to Automated there in the last act, I dig geek stuff like that.
Creating a Rayverse of miscreant meat managers and sardonic media soldiers. =p

I eagerly await the day that you don't suppress story to learn format.
Tailoring format to enhance your story is where some serious trickery is at.
I hope you embark on that challenge soon.

Thanks as always for posting, writing and rewriting!

Regards,
E.D.

Brett -

Your script stopped hurting my head when I took it for a black comedy.
You gotta be joking?
This sad story is pretty much just what actually happened.

Goto the link at the end of the PDF and read the first ten, twelve pages of the report. It's pretty messed up.

The turn of phrase, "nice interrogation room", cracked me up.
Yeah, I figured there are the nice ones and the scary ones depending upon how you wanted the interrogation to go.

In my head, I heard like waltz music and stuff as they "danced" around the incident.
You're a funny man, Brett.

Your format is so thick,...
I don't know what that means.  Sorry.

I would say your molasses like formatting works about 65% of the time.
D@m Ham!
What do I need to do?
I'm following the assorted SLUG rules.
I'm chopping my descriptions to sentence fragments with comma splices.
What else?

It took a lot to wade through it and parts (release form) I just mini skimmed.
Oh, h3ll, yeah. That's a chunk.
It's just there so that anyone interested in knowing how the government and private industry have created a loophole for themseslves to jump out of.

Quick flashes through rifle sights section worked very well for me.
Cool.

The (VISION) thing...is that a POV type deal?
No. POV is... POV, which is not what I wanted.
Think of it as visually "different" than the rest of the (one sided) battle sequence: Blurred/slurred/slow shutter speed on the camera/whatever the director wants to do it.
Although it would be from their POV, it would "look" not like the rest of the camera work.
Just like dream sequences could be done.
I want to develop the "suggestion" of a perception rather a documentation of actual events. Often, in these situations, they are not the same.
I think the CSI franchise uses a lot of these.

The aftermath on the roof with the pair of insurgents, I don't get it.
Okay, here's the fun part.
WITHOUT that inclusion CLEARLY there were some unjustified manslaughter charges coming towards the STOKES, SKINNER and HOGUE.
There was no evidence of any enemy insurgent activity collected at the scene.
No gunshots on the Xiphos guards or their vehicles.
Yeah, well...
What if...
What if STOKES really did see flashes of gunfire coming from the vicinity of those three vehicles? It wasn't FROM the vehicles, just from that vicinity.
Then he would have been justified - sort of.
But without any evidence - STOKES is screwed - except that the entire investigation was bungled on purpose.
So...

Are they bad guys according to the evidence?
Are they bad guys according to what was about to happen?
Are they bad guys according to what did happen?
Real life gets messy.

I like the tie in to Automated there in the last act, I dig geek stuff like that.
Creating a Rayverse of miscreant meat managers and sardonic media soldiers.
Thank you.
I look forward to expanding the Rayverse. Muah-ha-ha!

I eagerly await the day that you don't suppress story to learn format.
Getting there.
Breaks my heart to see so many 120+ page features AFU stem to stern.
I wish to avoid that fate.

Thank you as well for your review!
I'll be onto LIE DETECTOR shortly!

Quoted from RayW Brett - Your script stopped hurting my head when I took it for a black comedy. You gotta be joking? This sad story is pretty much just what actually happened

Rayness!

I think I meant to say, political satire.
The way the soldiers went about things, I felt it played out like a dance.
They dance with their superiors, their superiors dance with the media, etc.
Once I saw your characters through that filter, the read got easy for me.
I guess I have to find a tone to latch onto a story.
Once I bottled that vibe, I ran with it and the script came to life for me.

Quoted from RayW In my head, I heard like waltz music and stuff as they "danced" around the incident. You're a funny man, Brett.

It's true! I swear! It had Kubrickian moments at times.
But it's all played straight, policy, procedure, protocols came out like a waltz.
I rode that wave through the rest of the script, satire is hard to pull off.
I don't know how one plans satire, it's such a tricky delicate thing.
It must be somewhat organic, tell the truth and let it speak for itself.

Quoted from RayW Your format is so thick,... I don't know what that means.  Sorry.

These format exercises are so dense, to the point of being jungle like.
I have to wade through them to get to the story.
In this case, I think that helps sell the "media dance" aspect of the story.
I don't think you planned it, but that's how it reads to me.

Quoted from RayW I would say your molasses like formatting works about 65% of the time. D@m Ham! What do I need to do? I'm following the assorted SLUG rules. I'm chopping my descriptions to sentence fragments with comma splices. What else?

I''d say its time to consider moving towards the opposite end of the spectrum.
Economize.
"Lie Detector" was an exercise in description economy for me.
No more than two lines of action description. Ever.
I was looking for a fluid read combined with suggestive visual flashes.
Tickle the imagination of the reader just enough.
But keep the read moving like a rollercoaster.
You've tried bombardment and complexity, now whittle it down to its basics.
You're ready, pal. Let her rip,

Quoted from RayW The aftermath on the roof with the pair of insurgents, I don't get it. Okay, here's the fun part. WITHOUT that inclusion CLEARLY there were some unjustified manslaughter charges coming towards the STOKES, SKINNER and HOGUE. There was no evidence of any enemy insurgent activity collected at the scene. No gunshots on the Xiphos guards or their vehicles. Yeah, well... What if... What if STOKES really did see flashes of gunfire coming from the vicinity of those three vehicles? It wasn't FROM the vehicles, just from that vicinity. Then he would have been justified - sort of. But without any evidence - STOKES is screwed - except that the entire investigation was bungled on purpose. So... Are they bad guys according to the evidence? Are they bad guys according to what was about to happen? Are they bad guys according to what did happen? Real life gets messy.

I like your explanation, now shoehorn it into your story somehow.
As it stands, I don't get that from the pages, but I'd like to.
A VO or something perhaps to wrap up the story might work
As it stands, once I found my footing, I really enjoyed this one.
I really hope you get more reads on this one, you deserve it!

Quoted from RayW Thank you as well for your review! I'll be onto LIE DETECTOR shortly!

I always appreciate your time and effort spent on my work.
You were one of the early champions of Widow's Walk.
We "bonded" over our novel like descriptions, gosh, doesn't seem that long.
But I guess internet months are like dog decades. =p

Keep writing and rewriting and rewriting and rewriting...

Regards,
E.D.

Hey Ray

Was referred to your story, so figured I'd give it a shot. Man, this is by far the hardest short I've ever read. And that's not saying that it's poorly written either. Not at all. It's just so jam packed with information and acronyms and technical stuff. This is almost the equivalent of reading a feature. If I was taking a test on it right now I think I'd fail!

I'm going to have to read this again tomorrow. So far I can say that it seems well written and formatted, extremely well researched, and is grappling courageously with a very difficult subject. This must have really taken you a long time to research and write. The care you have taken means this certainly warrants another read on my part. Maybe some others on the board will join me since this looks like it had only one review.

Ok, more tomorrow, if this is the only thing I read!
Kevin

To be honest Ray, I lost interest halfway through the logline.  Tell us what the story is.  Don't give us a laundry list.


Phil

Holey moley!
It's easier to find Obama bin Laden than me on these threads.

Kevin -
Was referred to your story,...
Who's mad at you? Ha!

Man, this is by far the hardest short I've ever read. And that's not saying that it's poorly written either. Not at all. It's just so jam packed with information and acronyms and technical stuff. This is almost the equivalent of reading a feature. If I was taking a test on it right now I think I'd fail!
Welcome to Ray-style!

There's a prevailing perspective unique to SS, not found in "some" feature films, that everything must be dummied down to accommodate the education level "achieved" by most readers.
Yeah, well...

I move fast. I think fast. I know a lot of sh!t. I research a lot of sh!t. I appreciate a lot of layering of detail.
I loathe spoon feeding the audience. I expect a Ray-audience to bring a lot to the table so that they can fill in the gaps with their own liddle iddy biddy bwains.
Honestly, it's a mutual respect thing.

If I'm writing a urban assault film and I use the term "HRT" I expect the audience to know that means Hostage Rescue Team.
If I'm writing a middle-age medical thriller about the horrors of the pharmaceutical industry I expect my Ray-audience to know that "HRT" means Hormone Replacement Therapy.
"SEC": In a sports movie means one thing. In a financial poli/dram means something different.

Everyone knows what a M-16 is, but do they know what a AR-15 is?
Tough t!tties. Gotta learn your Glocks from your Berettas and then all will be kosher.

I write for directors, not readers.
Perhaps to my own detriment, even.

So far I can say that it seems well written and formatted, extremely well researched, and is grappling courageously with a very difficult subject. This must have really taken you a long time to research and write. The care you have taken means this certainly warrants another read on my part. Maybe some others on the board will join me since this looks like it had only one review.
Thank you and thank you.
Oh, yeah, baby! I researched the cr@p outta this work.
I now know who makes which MRAPs and how their funding is going.
I now know how the Justice Department and contract services have an "understanding" of utilizing grey ares of international law.
I now know how our government sanctions all sorts of ugly sh!t that keeps our ignorant a$$es safe to b!tch about the government.

I love a good education.


Phil -
To be honest Ray, I lost interest halfway through the logline.
Creampuff.


"There's so much error and deception in so few pages there isn't room for any sex. Well, there is the "finger" remark."
After reading it you won't be able to say I deceived you.

I read this ..had to read some lines two times. I guess I'm not as familiar with guns and war stuff but it was ok for me. Only found a few typos:
pg 1 vehicls
pg 3 through  through
pg 9 ditrying
Anyway, it was ok. I will go back and reread it tonight.