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.
Joe by Warren Duncan - Two amateur documentary film makers get more than they paid for when they interview Joe, a homeless man who lives in the woods. - Short, Horror, Found Footage - pdf format
Not much to say here for me. It's a great, quick read.
Personally though, I'm not a fan of the Blair Witch type stories of people going out to the woods. But that's just me. I'm sure there a lot of people who disagree with me!
On page five though you have "you're" instead of "your" in Joe's dialogue.
Page 1 - I'd indicate whether Becca's car is moving or not. Had to go back and re-read the "the road rushes by" part to realize that the car was driving.
Page 2 - Should be "grabs the lens" not "gabs the lens".
Page 6 - "Becca SCREAMS, turns, Joe waits." Worded strangely. Rather, punctuated strangely. It's a bit confusing. Maybe
Quoted Text
Becca screams and turns just as --
Joe, out of nowhere, throws his fist into her face.
Or something to dictate what we're seeing more vividly.
Page 7 - Where exactly is the camera? You say it's illuminating the car. But are we inside it? Is it lying on the ground, outside? The way it's written is quite confusing. I'm not sure what I'm looking at, here.
OVERALL:
This didn't really work for me. I know it's a short, but it felt rushed. There wasn't much tension and I didn't really care what would or could happen to Becca or Reggie. There was nothing unique about them. Or even any qualities about them that made me like or hate them. I felt indifferent. Horror films, even bad ones, you're either rooting for the characters or you're hoping they get killed in a cool way. And there was nothing unique about your killer, Joe. I was hoping for something more clever and didn't quite get that.
Also, the writing could use a little tightening up... I was often confused by what I was seeing. Not because it was a found-footage, but because I wasn't given a clear visual via the writing. And that, of course, hurt the pace of the read, thus compromising the tension that I should have felt. More specifically, I'm talking about the last scene with Reggie. The location of the camera was unclear. And the ending was a bit anti-climactic. It just felt ho-hum. I would have liked to see something more clever, especially when dealing with found-footage, which has grown tiresome over the years. But once in a while, there will be a take on the found footage genre that IS clever that brings me back to it. For instance, "Creep" with Mark Duplass.
I'm not quite sure how else you could improve this. Maybe make Joe not the killer? Have whoever is in the trunk play a more clever role in the story's conclusion? The moment we here a thump in the trunk, I though something more clever would come into play later. But the route you chose was the most basic and predictable route you could've gone. Maybe structure it differently? Start off with a good scare or creepy image? Then go into the story a little bit, the mythology?
I read another short of yours, I think "Imaginary Friend". The writing seemed a bit tighter in that one and had a nice premise and was, overall, pretty clever. So, I know you're capable of better. Perhaps you rushed this one a bit? Either or, you're here for feedback. Hopefully this helps in some way with any future drafts. It's nothing a rewrite or two can't fix.
In 2008 Becca Conway and Reggie Fletcher went into Long Valley National Park to film a documentary. The pair did not return home. This footage was found three weeks after their disappearance.
This isn't super helpful because I can't explain why, but this super could be better -- it could have more punch. It's similar to Blair Witch in setup, so to "survive" that it's going to need more character.
Pg. 1 -- So you know, and I know, and most people can figure out from context, that this is a found footage film. But the mini-scene with the journo clearly isn't part of the footage, so is it a video tape of the interview? Is it a "fiction" part of the narrative? And how do we know when the found footage starts? Like, I'm 99% sure when it starts but there's no clear deliniator. I know it's hard because you're not supposed to do camera directions, but I'd think there's an exception in this case? Feel free to correct me.
Pg. 4 -- Joe changes his mind with the offer of money; from what I know about Joe in the last 3 pages, he wouldn't have a lot of use for money.
**
Ok, so, 20 years later, I still like the Blair Witch Project so I had a soft spot for this. It's hard to develop tension in 7 pages so I commend the effort.
It's just...there's nothing suspenseful about Joe. He's a homeless guy who is a cannibal? The interview with the journo at the start actually interrupts the suspense because we KNOW Joe is the villain/monster/bad thing. If that weren't there, we'd have more of a shock.
I liked Reggie dismissing the bones on the fire when coming across them; we know that they're human bones but the characters aren't aware.
Your writing is fine, dialogue is good. Found footage dialogue is naturally a little weird because of the documentery aspect so you did well with that.
I just think if this were a little longer it'd be a stronger script.
Fast and easy read, as usual, even though the genre is not my cup of tea.
What I like most about your scripts is that they are simple and clean. You're not trying to use as many "complex" sentences as possible just to make the script look like something super extraordinary.
Hey, Warren. I thought I read it before then saw it's Taxi Joe.
A found footage slasher.
I am lost as to who is on camera - and maybe because you miss O.S. at times - like in the first scene you haven't introduced Reggie but there's no O.S. for some lines.
And then I'd appreciate if you told us who's holding the camera - the image of them in the car is not very clear to me. I know one of them is constantly holding the camera - I suppose I need to watch all of these off stages, but it's tiring. I prefer you stated the position of the camera and that would be it.
I wish there was more of the scare. Maybe they could tell each other awful taxi stories. Or scary Joe stories. Or nice Joe stories but have some kind of scare on the way there - to divert our attention off Joe.
You gave us the give-away beginning. I'm not sure about it.
Yes Reggie isn’t technically introduced in caps in the first scene because we never see him, I did forget to put the O.S's in, my bad. Will be fixed tonight. Thanks for picking that up. Amazing how many times you can check something and olny see what you want to see.
I think it is pretty clear who is holding the camera, not sure how it isn’t. I definitely won’t be making it clearer by telling the reader who is holding it. If you can see someone on camera, obviously the other person is holding it, there are only two characters that share the camera. Again, not sure what the issue is.
I agree that this probably needs more of a punch.
Not sure I give anything away, as such, in the beginning. A lot of found footage films start this way. You know something goes wrong but it isn’t clear what. How can you tell from the beginning that they get killed and consumed by a cannibal?
You don't give away that they will get eaten alive but you give away that they met a dangerous guy and lost to him (disappeared). It's also implied twice, having a super and a "narrator" (the journalist) who never reappeared.
In the original script, the hook read more as I'm into an adventure script and you gave more "options" with the term TAXI Joe. There we also could possibly expect you tell something about a guy having weird reasons to just live in a car f.i. – and there were possibilities other than him waiting to rock them in a physical conflict. Now it's pretty clear they're going under there. So, I agree with Kham if that's what she means...
I also have to say the title was cooler before. It gave me more the feeling of: what the hell is a Taxi Joe? I wanna know. Just knew Banana Joe before.
However, you know that I liked the script in the OWC. And my opinion hasn't changed because of those little changes. I think it does work- So best of luck.