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.
Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me by Brendan L. Morrisey - Drama - A Post-apocalyptic drama. After the world has been torn apart by natural disasters, The McShane family travels the wastelands until they come across an entire community of survivors in a town called Kingsport. Lead by a self-proclaimed prophet named Harold Seymour Thomas, the town prepares for the coming of the rapture, but quickly become uneasy by their newest occupants who they assume to be non-believers. 110 pages - pdf, format
I wanted to give you some thoughts on what I’ve read thus far. I’ve read the first 14 pages and decided to give it a rest. All in all you have some good work here. There are however some things I would like to discuss with you regarding some of the finer points of the script that you might want to address if your so inclined.
The structure is fine. You have obviously read a few scripts and have a decent enough grasp of what the reader needs in the way of formatting and grammer.
FADE IN: is generally to the left in the opening of the script. I’m not sure if that’s industry standard or not but that’s how I’ve seen it in most scripts. You spend the first three sentences discussing the day. This can be really condensed IMO. In fact, this was a bit of a common theme in your descriptions up until I quit reading. That whole thing could be summed up very quickly and in fact should be.
A clear blue sky suddenly becomes overcast as shadows fall on the California landscape.
See what I mean. It’s quick and explains everything you need.
Then you hit me with a slight contradiction from one sentence to the next and it throws me off a bit.
A highway, empty as far as the eye can see.
Further down, a pile of cars.
Which is it? See what I mean, it can’t be empty as far as the eye can see if we see a pile of cars.
You also explain the characters role, the wife, the son, the daughter. No need for that, explain them though the dialog.
Okay, now we get into the story and the dialog. This is where I feel the story can use some work.
Right out of the gates, I feel the dialog is very on the nose. What that means is, it sounds as though they are reading from a script rather than with emotion.
Here is an example-
They emerge from a tornado shelter, their lives in complete ruin, there worlds are gone, it’s complete chaos.
Right? MICHAEL I can't make anything out on this damn thing.
JANICE Before it happened they said on the TV that it was going to be global.
MICHAEL By the looks if it, it probably was.
Really???
I would have expected them to come out with…
Holy Shit.. They went and did it. They finally went too far and destroyed everything. Those sonsa bitches.
And this runs throughout the script. I just didn’t get any emotion from any of them that was why I suspended my reading.
Now lets look at your positioning-
Michael turns his back on Janice and walks back to the shelter.
He stops by the rubble that used to be the house of his neighbors.
Their corpses lay strewn out between the wreckage. Their faces distorted.
A child's corpse has a piece of wood sticking out of his face. His arms wrapped around a dead dog.
This would be a great place for another location. You have him leaving one location to another. It is also a GREAT time for some of the graphic nature of the destruction to really impactful.
But again, it feels like you are explaining the directions on how to assemble a bike here. Very ordinary.
First off, we don’t need to know that the house that used to be his neighbors was destroyed.
It’s as easy as saying, Among a pile of wreckage and debris, the contorted horrific remains of people strewn across the lawn. Their bodies ripped apart. Ect…
KRISTY Where is everyone?
MICHAEL They're all gone sweetie. They weren't in shelters like we were.
KRISTY Everyone died?
MICHAEL Maybe. We don't know yet. That's why we're out here.
That’s not why there out there, is it? I thought their lives were completely in shambles and they were in a complete state of confusion from the destruction of the world as they knew.
Then when Janice decides she should just kill herself and the family here-
JANICE If we go back into town there's a chance we could still come across some pesticide or rat poison and-
I realized this was going to be tough to continue.
They have been out of the shelter for just a brief time and she wants to off the whole family at the drop of a hat?
I didn’t get that at all. I know you are trying to build suspense but it’s simply not working up to this point for me.
I’ll stop there. I jus want to you know that the issues you are having with the script are all very easily redeemable. The trickiest part of writing is having characters that you can relate to and get a feel for. If for some reason, you cannot make that connection, you are going to lose the reader very quickly.
I hope some of this helps. I hope to hear your feedback and keep writing. You have a knack for it. You just need to do what all of us need to do. Just keep at it and enjoy what you do. Take care.
Thanks. This is the first feature that I've written in a long time and is a first draft. So far, all of this helps IMMENSLEY! So thank you.
I'm looking through some scripts that I have saved on my computer. Most of them have the FADE IN: and CUT TO: on the far right. A couple of them have it on the far left. I'm not sure how much of a difference it makes in the industry. The program that I use has it set up so that transitions show up on the far right.
I think what I was going for with the opening was a post-apocalyptic enviroment in which it is never fully explained how it happened. So there really is no one to blame. So the "Holy s***.. They went and did it. They finally went too far and destroyed everything." reaction never occured to me. Its more like "Okay, the world is gone. Somehow we survived it. Now we need to figure out what we do next."
Quoted Text
That’s not why there out there, is it? I thought their lives were completely in shambles and they were in a complete state of confusion from the destruction of the world as they knew.
Sure. There is a state of confusion. But when Michael says "Maybe. We don't know yet. That's why we're out here." - its in a way saying he doesn't know yet if they're the only ones left alive, and the reason that they're traveling now is so they can see if anyone else out there has survived. I picture if I had just survived an apocalyptic catashtrophe, I'd set out to see if there was anyone else still out there.
As far as Janice's suicidal tendencies go, maybe I am moving things along too fast. I think I was more concerned with making Michael the sympathetic father who has total control over his wife and kids, even during the worst situation imaginable. I don't think I had suspense in mind during that scene because of how early on it takes place. I would assume that some people out there would have that reaction. The easy way being the first option.
As far as the rest of the script goes, if I remove that moment when Janice says that, I don't think it would fit anywhere else later on in the script. Personally, I might find it hard to sacrifice that bit so hopefully others are okay with it. If not, I guess I'll have to give in and get rid of it.
I think if you take Janice's thoughts and words and put then into action, that might be more effective. In other words, maybe have her husband catch her as she is about to give one of the kids or herself a dose of poison. That way we see the tendency and not have it explained.
Most of the best moments like this in writing are often shown which allows us to see them in our minds eye.
When you mentioned the "there is no blame" scenario to me, I just didn’t see it. I have to imagine that if i am exiting from a shelter and my whole world was gone, I would be dumbfounded, confused, amazed, pissed. The whole nine yards. This moment defines the entire story.
In Stephen King's THE STAND, do you remember how it felt when the "super flu" wiped everyone out and how stunned and panicked people were?
This is the jumping off point for the entire story. You need to build the story around the tragedy of this moment. It should be defined and sad.
I hope that makes sense. Te first 7 pages or so should have me pulled in and that scene left me asking, why in the hell are these people not shocked and stunned but a page later want to kill themselves. I realize it was just Janice, but do you see what i mean?
I think if you take Janice's thoughts and words and put then into action, that might be more effective. In other words, maybe have her husband catch her as she is about to give one of the kids or herself a dose of poison. That way we see the tendency and not have it explained.
It didn't sound like you have plans on reading the rest of it because of your reaction to the first 14 pages. Which is fine by me. But something similar to what you're saying does happen later on.
Quoted Text
When you mentioned the "there is no blame" scenario to me, I just didn�t see it. I have to imagine that if i am exiting from a shelter and my whole world was gone, I would be dumbfounded, confused, amazed, pissed. The whole nine yards. This moment defines the entire story.
I think I might need to come up with something different for them to say then if I want the dialogue to display their shock and confusion. I was really hoping to avoid the cliche "oh my god, can you belive it?" And leave the sad look of confusion to the actors when they look out at everything. I guess if you didn't see that, then I need to specifically specify it "They look out at their surroundings with a look of utter sadness and confusion." Or just come up with new dialogue. Whichever.
Back to the Janice scene though. You said the problem with it in your previous post was that you don't relate to the character and get a feel for her because of how soon a suicide solution crosses her mind. Some characters in movies start out more flawed than others and we come to like them later on. From what I observe from my own parents, I have a mom who worries when it comes to certain things and assumes the worst. Then my dad is the one to try and pull her away from that negative zone and put her back on a more postive path of thinking. I'm pretty sure that was what I was going for. If its not suicide that's brought up, then I will have to come up with something lighter I guess.
I hope I don't come off as questioning your criticism. I'm just trying to get the most out of having my script read so I have a better idea of where to take it next.
Just gave this a short read - I was taken by the title.
I was caught out by the #Empty as far as the eye can see. Maybe change for stretched a long as the eye can see or similar?
I've looked at some of Ledbetter's posts, and he's made some points. I will try and come at a different angle to avoid repitition.
#A wasteland that consists of what used to be a small town, wiped off the face of the planet. Catastrophe or warzone. --- I really wasn't too sure about this - it's overly wordy, and doesn't really locate me where you need me to be.
If this makes sense, I really need to be on the ground, somewhere in the village.
As such, it's probably better to start with something along the lines of your additional lines:
#Houses are now large piles of burnt wood and ash. -- but maybe I'd be looking for the immediate visual impact - >>large piles of burnt wood and ash, used to be a house. Or something along those lines - it physically locates you somewhere in the village, next to the rubble.
#A church tower stabs the ground. Motor vehicles rest on their sides and are torn in half. -- I'd rub out the 'and are' (maybe have a 'some'), but I think this is the kind of details that you need - something that will stick in the mind.
#The door to a metallic tornado shelter slowly opens. -- Again, I don't feel located, here. We've checked the church tower, and seen the cars, and then this shelter just come out of nowhere. If you just use a line or two to locate it, then you can go straight to the door opening.
DANIEL (20) the son,/ out of the jar -- Ledbetter referred to this. You need to drop 'the son', but also you need to drop 'the' and go with 'a' jar.
#KRISTY (8) the daughter lays on the floor scribbling in a coloring book. -- KRISTY, (8), on the floor, scribbles in a coloring book.
#Janice opens her eyes, slowly awakes. -- This seems like nit-picking, but there are a lot of minors, which in combination build up to majors, 'cos they keep tripping the reader up. I had her resting, but awake. If she is sleeing, say 'sleeps' or similar.
Okay - I'm on page two, and I'm going to dip out, but I'm going to sum up with this last piece:
Michael and Janice take a walk through the wreckage. Janice stops and stands before the ruins of what used to be the town church. -- Michael is still walking... Michael holds a portable radio. With every station he turns to there is nothing but static, buzzes, bleeps, and echoes. No signal. -- I think just buzz and static. He stands by Janice's side and stares at the wreckage with her. -- Boing! He's back with Janice. And even if he did stop with Janice, then there is no need to say he is standing by her side.
Sorry Brendan. Didn't work for me. I liked the image that I think you were trying to create, and I think the script can work, but too many minors are creeping in. I think you are using too many words, instead of focusing the words that matter in the right place.
With regards to Janice, how about some foreshadowing by one of the kids to the dad? Maybe you can get an early feel for in that way without her saying anything just yet.
Something like,
Dad, is mom going to be okay? I'm not sure son but you’ll help me keep an eye on her, Okay?
Set it up a little bit up front that she has a problem and then expand on it as she grows in her suicidal tendencies.
While we are talking, there is another scene you might want to revisit and see what might can be done about realism. Lets talk about the gas station starting on page 10 I believe.
The family gets a car started and drives it into a gas station for fuel, the station is in complete ruins as is everything everywhere they have gone to. They reach into a dead mans pocket, steals a credit card and gets gas.
Here is my problem. What about power? The electrical most assuredly would be down everywhere. Power lines down, everyone’s dead, infrastructure decimated yet they drive up and the pump works? Not only does the pump work, but the credit card goes through and processes it which means the phone lines are working, the banks have power to authorize the transaction ect…
In a world of complete destruction, you need for them to come up with a way to get the gas. Siphon it out of the underground tank, or have the gas truck be there about to fuel it and they have to get the gas out somehow.
But just walking up and everything working completely throws this scene off.
See what I mean?
We discussed the positioning as well in an earlier scene and this is another example of you not setting the scene correctly.
By the way, just leave the little boy with me scene didn’t work.. It rang too on the nose with the dialog. But anyway back to the scene settings.
You have a split scene going on here that needs to be separated some. Everything is happening outside, you then have the dad get in the car and drive off without transitioning it to an INT. Scene in the car.
All in all, it’s a decent enough scene but by the time you add up what needs to be done here, you might want to consider rewriting this part.
He is 20 years old, an old fart wants him for his play toy and words are used like, boy and son when refering to him. When the whithered old trucker hat wearing man throws him to the ground, "he whimpers"
The old man unzips his fly and Danial "turns his head away"
Then as they get away, you have mom holding him in the back seat. that doesnt sound like a 20 young man to me.
I have two son's in their 20's and I couldn't picture either of them whimpering.
In fact, you should give Danial some balls and have him get into a fight with the old man and wrestle for the shotgun just as dad slamms through the front of the building.
The way he sounds now, he is a pussy willing to get banged by any man with a shotgun.
I took a look at this as promised. I made it to page 55 and have an abundance of feedback for you. I'm going to split my review into multiple posts as I've got six pages worth of notes.
pg. 1 – Capitalize the McShane in Michael, please.
- I’m noticing a lot of passive voice use. I’m not sure how long you’ve been writing but this is a common problem amongst beginners. Try to avoid the words “is” and “are” in your descriptions as well as “ing” verbs. As much as is practical anyway. For example: “A child’s corpse has a piece of wood sticking out of his face” can be rephrased to “A piece of wood sticks out of a child’s face.”
Keep your writing as active as possible. It’ll come off a lot stronger and fluid this way. As of now, it reads very choppy.
pg. 2 – “Their corpses lay strewn...” – I think you mean “lie strewn.” Also: “His arms wrapped around a dead dog.” Watch your tenses. Keep it present.
pg. 3 – I don’t much care for Michael’s exchange with Kristy. I think he’d want to be a little more reassuring. “Maybe” wasn’t the right response to “Everyone died” for example.
- Janice’s defeatist dialogue doesn’t come off as realistic at all. It’s too casually fatalistic and very awkward, especially her mention of “pesticide and rat poison.” I understand that you’re trying to bring out the leadership and optimism in Michael but I think you could afford to use a little more subtlety.
And come on. Even if Michael does think suicide (I assume that’s what you were implying by the poison) is an option, he definitely shouldn’t say it. It’s contrary to his cause, for sure.
pg. 7 – “....” – This isn’t dialogue. Either insert some real dialogue or write a nonverbal response (e.g. “Daniel shrugs.”).
- At eight years old, Kristy seems unfamiliar with the concept of a crucifix. I find this strange.
pg. 8 – Lose the “We see” at the start of the montage. It’s a worthless device. I’d avoid it at all times.
pg. 10 – Lose the brand names. They’re not necessary and will generally catch you a lot of flack from readers.
pg. 11 – “You’ve got to be kidding me.” – Not a great response, considering the circumstances.
- Watch out for windows/orphans (same thing, just different names). These are words that come at the end of sentences and take up their own lines, like the “it” at the top of page 12. Sometimes they’re unavoidable but they tend to look sloppy and if they pile up, they add unnecessary page count. Avoid them if you can. They’re generally easy to take care of with a little reworking of sentences. This one on page 12 can be removed, easy.
- Michael leaving Daniel feels extremely unrealistic to me. Honestly, I feel like this whole situation should pan out differently.
But if you’re dead set on using the car crashing through the window, I’d rework Michael’s exit. I think the gunman would wait to make sure he’s left too. As messed up as he is, I think even he’d find it strange how easy Michael gives up.
- I don’t understand why Janice is screaming. Did she even see/hear what happened in the store? Seems otherwise.
pg. 13 – “Daniel turns his head way.” – This is awkwardly phrased. Try to fix it.
- Why would Michael beat up a man he just hit with his car, especially when he actually didn’t get the chance to hurt his son? You set him up to be this model family man (at least that’s what it seems you’re after); I don’t buy him turning to violence so quickly, especially when it seems so unnecessary.
I see this kind of thing a lot, especially with new writers. Avoid injecting violence/gore that’s not merited by the plot. This coming from someone who counts Hellraiser and Martyrs amongst his all time favorite films.
- That said, Michael would most definitely take the gun from this guy. Good call.
- “Honey, no...” – Not a fan of this line. I understand she’s shaken by the encounter with the gunman but that’s the only violence she’s seen today. The line just reads awkward.
- Michael seems very bad at reasoning with people. You need to come up with a better strategy for him to deal with Niles and Arthur.
pg. 23 – A very douchy, not to mention unrealistic response from Arthur upon discovering Michael is Janice’s wife. He should apologize, first and foremost. I also don’t buy how jolly he suddenly becomes once Janice shows up. I mean of course, he’d be relieved but not ecstatic. The brief chitchat is especially tedious and unnecessary.
- Also, if these guys are guards looking out for the community, wouldn’t they want to question newcomers instead of just turning them away without a discussion. Not saying they should be welcoming but they should consider situations like Michael’s coming up.
- Why call him The Prophet? He’s introduced to Michael and the family as Harold and assuming that everyone in the town knows him, why would they call him anything other than the name they’ve always known him by. Seems cheesy and unnecessary.
- FYI, many Christians regularly go to church on Wednesday (during the evening). If you’re talking hardcore churchgoers, they’re likely to be going to church of Wednesday and twice on Sunday as part of a standard routine. It’s really not all that out of the ordinary.
pg. 23 – “And you failed to mention this before how?” – Absolutely the wrong response/tone for a woman who’s just been told her parents are dead, after being lied to that they weren’t. She’s barely reacting at all to this news. No good.
Honestly, I’m having a really hard time with your dialogue, man. You really need to step it up in the realism department.
pg. 25 – “A bunch of loonies...” – Not very endearing. Not to your audience anyway. Not that characters have to be sympathetic all the time but Michael definitely feels like a character that’s supposed to be.
- The Prophet seems very uppity for a man in his 80s. Have you considered dropping his age down? 60s, perhaps?
- Not a fan of his dialogue either. First off, you have got to cut it down. Blocks this big tend to have a lot of filler in them. Skim through them and see if you can’t find some stuff to remove. Let the dialogue breathe.
Secondly, I imagine a priest this old would have this preacher thing down pat. Yet not only does his sermon meander a lot, it leaves much to be desired in the eloquence department. Honestly, it all just comes off as the ravings of a one-dimensional, stereotypically evil uber-villain, especially with the overwhelming amount of homophobic rhetoric siphoned in there.
- This scene with Michael and Niles seems very forced and speedy. These guys have barely had a conversation and already Niles is telling some very personal information. I think you need to ease into this backstory a little bit.
- Niles sounds like a complete presumptuous idiot in this scene with the Prophet. I mean, maybe he spilled his guts earlier but Michael’s dialogue was far from revealing. Niles has no basis to think any of these things about him.
- “You wanna stand up and say that to my face?” - ...Didn’t Arthur indeed just say this to his face? Awkward line. I’d lose it.
- The Prophet takes Niles a little too seriously IMO. I’d scale his dialogue back some.
pg. 40 – “So where you from?” – What an awkward transition. These two just drop the previous string of conversation entirely. It’s like you spliced two separate scenes together. It doesn’t work. You need to do something.
pg. 42 – “Pass the guns is an alter.” – “Pass” should be “past.” “Alter” should be “altar.” I’m not sure how often you’re using the word “altar” from here on out but make sure the spelling’s correct. It seems like an easy thing to lose track of in this case.
- Asking for Michael’s gun is highly suspicious. I’m talking a huge red flag. I think Michael should just outright ask Arthur to have a drink with him rather than outright offer to surrender his weapon. Otherwise, he looks like a complete moron.
I should tell you at this point, I’m through with the guy. You’ve lost me on him completely. I think developing Michael’s character should be one of your key focal points in revising the script.
- Sorry to say I don’t buy this lake scene with Daniel and Vail. At all. Their relationship leading up to it is pretty devoid of chemistry. If you have any intentions of carrying this relationship further into the story – and given all the redhead references, I suspect you do – I think this’ll have to be another focal point once you get to revisions.
pg. 46 – Even more obliviousness from Michael. I think he’d want to keep his gun close. Not leave it on the couch for Arthur to pick up.
- This conversation between Michael and Arthur really isn’t going anywhere. It just feels like very dull, forced exposition. Once Michael gets into his evolution tirade, he just sounds like a preachy douche. Not a great way to get on Arthur’s good side. I’m assuming something was supposed to be gained from this since Michael is giving up his gun but apparently, he’s botched any chances of that.
- Also, I’m seeing a lot of these big blocks of dialogue popping up a lot. Again, it’s usually overkill and a pain to read for that matter. So unless you’ve got an epic Dennis Hopper/True Romance speech, keep it down.
- Okay. Now Arthur is revealing a big secret... Exactly what has Michael done to convince Arthur to take such a big risk?
pg. 52 – I don’t much care for your use of ellipses. It’s excessive to say the least and just looks plain sloppy. I think you can come up with a better way to go about inserting beats into your dialogue. Try not to use parentheticals if you can help it. I think the best method is inserting actions for your characters, even something as simple as bringing a hand to their chin. This kind of stuff gives your characters something to do as well as breaks up your dialogue.
- “The serial killer being Arthur.” – Duh. Lose this line.
pg. 54 – “...your parents-in-law.” – Why don’t you just say Janice’s parents? Or how about their actual names? “Parents-in-law” doesn’t exactly slip off the tongue.
- “Thanks for that. I feel very welcomed here now.” – An attempt at awkward charm? That’s fine. As much as people shit on Judd Apatow/Seth Rogan films for characters’ lack of social graces, I enjoy it. Only this line doesn’t have charm. It’s just awkward and given how cold Daniel and Vail’s relationship has been up until now, it actually seems kind of rude.
I think I might be done with this guy as well.
- “He might as well have asked her...” – That’s kind of implied by Vail’s next line. Lose this, please.
pg. 55 – “Its like you said. The world’s gone to hell...” – Okay, I’ll admit this puts a different spin on the whole thing. But didn’t Vail suggest the exact opposite earlier on? Hello, inconsistency! If this is the route you wanted to take from the beginning, you should’ve made it clear and followed through with it accordingly. Honestly, it would’ve been interesting. But the way things are now, it just feels like lazy, sloppy and mishandled character development.
So I've noticed it's become somewhat more common for members to stop reading scripts and give partial reviews. I think that's fine but it's not my style. If I put a script down, I won't review it at all. Obviously, you asked me to check this out so I was committed to reading it in its entirety. I wanted to put this script down much earlier but I slogged it out.
Now, at the halfway point, I'm definitely going to have to put this down. It's a very problematic and tedious read on many levels.
I don't think it's all bad. There is somewhat of a sense of dread present throughout or at least something very off. I anticipated some kind of big plot reveal and indeed, Janice's parents was a strange turn. I also think this is a rather unusual take on the post-apocalyptic genre. I was expecting something much more action-oriented.
And while you do meander from time to time, I do recognize an attempt to build a plot with some mystery and tension.
So I think you've got a story in mind that's worth striving for.
Unfortunately, I think it needs a lot of work. Namely, your characters. Your protagonist, Michael, is an idiot with seemingly no skills of any kind to help get him through the story. Yet he does, somehow. Mostly as a result of other characters being stupid or just plain plot convenience. I saw some attempts to bring out some humor in him which were flimsy but I think you had the right idea. Still, that's not enough. He's an incredibly weak lead for your story.
Janice probably needs about as much work as Michael. She's all over the place and really doesn't have any genuine development except for when she's talking about her town and why she left. Otherwise, she just seems to react to situations in the absolute most incorrect, unrealistic ways and is just a flat out inconsistent character.
Daniel is awkward and feels much younger than he is. I can't imagine him having gotten out of high school at this point. Kristy seems a nonentity. I have to wonder where she is some of the time.
The Prophet needs depth as a villain. His bigoted and overzealous dialogue feels cheap and stereotypical, especially with all the gay bashing. He reads like a left-wing caricature of a televangelist. The script as a whole gives me the sense that you're a writer who's mindful of religion and its effects on society. So with that in mind, I'd say don't try to demonize the character. Draw from real life. Even guys like the Westboro Baptist Church think they're doing good. Try to think about how that gets translated into the more sinister things they do. I think your script with have a lot more integrity that way and the Prophet's character will come off as more disturbing and less cartoonish.
Arthur and Niles are serviceable but don't have that much stake in the story at this point so I don't know.
Overall, a lot of the characters come as unrealistic both in their actions and their personalities. I think you'd benefit from reading other scripts and doing some people-watching in your personal life. Writing realistic characters isn't something you learn overnight.
I'd also read other scripts for the sake of language and formatting. Your writing comes off as very choppy with a very limited and redundant vocabulary. There's some odd word choices scattered throughout and many an instance where you pile too much on. It's going to take some time to fix this.
WARNING: This is a pretty long set of nitpicks/critiques/feedback. I’m an indie film director/producer that writes his own scripts, so I’m coming at this from a screenwriting AND a production angle. Hopefully, it helps make your script stronger. But take the feedback for what it’s worth....
A few nitpicks on presentation (formatting):
1. Your imagery could probably be trimmed down in the action lines. For example, on page 1: "A perfect summer day. The sun shines. The California Mountain Peaks in the distance. Perfect blue skies." You probably don't need the first fragment, as the other lines cover it.
2. Your verbs could sometimes be more active. For example, again on page 1: “A church tower stabs the ground” is infinitely better than “ Houses are now large piles of burnt wood and ash.” Why can’t “Piles of burnt wood and ashes that used to be houses cover the landscape”?
3. For the awkward silence, you don’t want to have an ellipse as the only dialogue. For example, on page 7, Daniel’s first line. Instead, give Daniel something visual to do. Maybe he kicks a rock? Same thing with “beats”.
4. You could save space (and shorten your script and its read-time) by describing your locations in the slugs instead of using action lines. For example, on page 19: “Old fashioned, southern evangelical church” could become “INT/EXT. OLD-FASHIONED CHURCH”. Unless you have more than one old-fashioned church. But this is probably just my own taste.
5. Spread out the description in your action lines. For example, on page 20: “There is a toy motorcycle on the corner of the desk. There is a little sign on the wall that reads "Practice the ‘Presence of Christ.’” Those are two separate images, and therefore two separate “shots”. I would instead have the motorcycle as one paragraph all its own, and then the sign with its own paragraph. It’ll read faster, and contribute to a certain pace. Again, perhaps this is just my own taste, so take it for what it’s worth.
6. Either call him Harold or The Prophet from the start in your action lines. The characters can refer to him however.
7. Typos. Page 22, Arthur’s line should start: “Wednesday. It’s… We do things a…” Same page, Michael’s line should be: “Whose return? Jesus’?” Same page, Book of Revelation should be capitalized. And if you want to get technical, you may consider capitalizing Him and His when referring to Jesus, since these folks are believers…
8. “END FLASHBACK” is redundant, as your flashback indicator is in the slugs.
9. Page 41, Vail’s first line should be “Cause I want to be more than…” You don’t want the word “don’t” in there.
10. Page 51, Arthur should say “affected” not “effected”.
11. Page 60: who is cold and calculating in his looks? I can read between the lines, but you should be more clear.
12. Page 90: The Denizens should not be numbered, they should be given visual traits. FAT DENIZEN, SHORT DENIZEN, SHAKY DENIZEN, etc. it’s better for the read.
13. Page 91: Vail should say “Stop!” instead of “No!” The former implies a motivated action (saving her love interest) instead of an impulse reaction (being passive and weak).
14. Page 92: “Arthur can’t chase after her no more” is grammatically incorrect. “Any more” is correct.
15. In general, as the story progresses, you provide the reader with information that is not visual. As a loose rule, if it involves the word “is/are” or “can/can’t” or “will/won’t” or “has/had”, it’s passive and/or non-visual. For example, on page 92: “Arthur can’t chase after her no more. He’s exhausted his body past its threshold tonight.” You can’t show me that his body is past a threshold. So, instead, try: “Arthur stops, panting heavily.” One is telling, one is showing. Show.
16. Point-of-view stuff should be done like a MONTAGE or INSERT.... Put POV as a header, then give us the action lines. Then, with POV or INSERT, type BACK TO [whatever].
17. Your speeches are too long. Break them up with action lines describing the visuals during the speeches. I’d even cut the speeches down. These will seem a lot longer on screen than you think they will as you write them. (I’m a director, so I speak with some small amount of authority).
18. Page 101: Don’t give the future director of your script shooting instructions. Just describe images. Your reader is not a camera.
Now, for some story nitpicks:
1. Do you need to start with the family in the shelter? Couldn’t we meet them all as they look for shelter? Your dialogue between Michael and Janice on the first night covers the fact that they had a shelter, and you could show the same visuals as your characters walk through the debris. I think your reader would then be more interested as you’d be throwing them right into the story.
2. You could take the Underpass Tunnel scene on page 3 as your opportunity to say more than what you say in the scenes between Daniel and Michael on pages 5 and 6. Wordless tension works a lot better than on the nose dialogue. Show, not tell.
3. Janice seems a little inconsistent in how she protects Kristy from the ruin of the world. Covers her eyes at a dead body, but has no problem explaining that everyone is, in fact, dead? And rather matter-of-factly, at that. I’d like to see more hesitation when she speaks with her daughter.
4. Once they make it into the town, Michael should want to get the hell out, while Janice wants to stay and locate her parents. That is, until Michael discovers the in-laws, at which point, he should not want to go for fear of repercussions. As it is, Michael and Janice kinda flip-flop on who wants to stay and who wants to go, or at least that’s the impression I get. I think it would flow better if their views were consistent until their respective turning points.
5. The scene between Michael and Arthur on pages 45-54 is far too long without enough conflict. It feels very preachy (on both sides of the argument, mind you) and not like a scene that moves the script toward a turning point. I might even suggest cutting most of the believer/non-believer debate and starting instead with the discussion on miracles, since that’s all that’s pertinent. And if you want to highlight a conflict to ramp up the tension, maybe have Arthur talk more about his past “relationship” with Janice… I think it would help the turns he makes later on.
6. The snip-it of The Prophet on page 58 is unnecessary. If the purpose of the scene is to setup his ill health, you can move it into any of his other scenes to ramp up the conflicts therein without losing anything.
7. Page 89: When John reveals the fate of Janice’s parents, it should be more delicate. I doubt this man would be so callous and matter-of-fact. It’s a bigger deal… we know, but she does not. And they’re HER parents.
8. Pages 93-94: Why does Daniel have to die? Page 97: Why does Vail have to die? Neither death really pushes the story forward. You lose your reader at this point. You can successfully write protagonist deaths, but these are unsatisfying. There is no sacrifice, the perpetrator does not really get a comeuppance, and the deaths don’t motivate our hero.
Here are some overall thoughts:
1. ACT ONE was decent. Not amazing, but I was rewarded as I kept reading. If we started a little further into the story, I think it would fix a lot of the problems.
2. ACT TWO was solid, outside of a few suggestions above. You kept me generally captivated. Avoid being preachy, make your dialogue and action paragraphs leaner, and give the characters some consistent motiviation. Then, you’ll be in great shape. But this is the important thing: most scripts fall apart in Act Two. Yours got better!
3. ACT THREE was abysmal. I have such a strong reaction to this act only because I was actually into your story until then! Here’s why it absolutely fell apart:
a. The problem is that Act Three made me realize our hero had no internal conflict whatsoever. In fact, he barely had an external conflict. Everyone in this story reacts. Everyone except Arthur, who changes, changes, and changes again. So we need a solid hero who grows as well. What happened to the conflict with the Daniel? There was a great tension early on, and it just went away. And then his son dies, and he takes no action. He is not motivated to take on the antagonist head on. He does nothing.
b. Janice finds out Arthur killed her parents, and she does nothing! She doesn’t even tell Michael. She doesn’t know that he knows. So she barely cries about it, and doesn’t mention it again. Not a good enough motivator to take on those who wronged her and her family?
c. Daniel tries to save his sister and dies. And no one does anything. People yell. No one cares.
d. What about Daniel and his love interest? Are we supposed to dislike Vail for her cold treatment towards Daniel? There’s no sense of redemption or purpose to the deaths of these two characters. Either eliminate the subplot or provide payoff. If they die, let that be the motivator for Michael to take action! Let that resolve some kind of heroic flaw within him!
e. And then there’s John. I like the idea. I like the character. But c’mon, he's the hero? He’s the guy that saves the day. As a reader, I don’t have any kind of emotional connection with the character. He’s a concept. He’s the Holy Grail, if you will. A battle crest. An emblem of power. He should invigorate the heroes, give them power to battle the antagonists. But instead, he’s your Deus ex Machina because Michael doesn’t matter to the agenda of the script.
f. Wait, I’m wrong. The real Deus ex Machina is the literal Apocalypse. Really? You did such a beautiful job setting up this gritty world of ambiguous morality with protagonists that look at the world in a realistic way. You paint the picture so wonderfully, and I hate these kooks our protagonists are forced to share a bed with. And then, you slap your reader in the face… because the kooks were right. Just on the wrong side of the fence. Out of absolutely NOWHERE. Disbelief was not suspended. If you’re going to try and pull this one over my eyes, you’d better plant plenty of seeds way earlier in the story. My suggestion? Try another ending; one more grounded in reality (like the beginnings of your story), but with a hint of heavenly “intervention”. See Shamalyan’s “Signs” for the right way to approach it.
g. Finally, I get the theme of your script. And I like it. But since the payoffs were non-existent, I was left to remember three-to-four page speeches where evil people use scripture the wrong way and ten-page debates of theological re-hashing. And I feel, as a reader, cheated.
Please don’t let this feedback discourage you! ACT TWO works! I didn’t even realize most of these problems until Daniel and Vail died. So, if you go down a different path from there, I think you can salvage this story and make it compelling and powerful.... and still get your same point across.
If you have any questions about this feedback or want to discuss further, please let me know, and I’d be glad to help!
Pages: 1
Author
Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me
Logged
Locked Board