The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar

Quoted Text

And it is such a wonderful story.

And that it was.

I don't think that the addiction to gambling really shines in the beginning stages of the story. Sure he loses some money but I don't feel he was addicted anymore than rich guys who play on Friday nights.

What happened in that year he took to perfect his "seeing" ability? Did all his friends abandon him? Did he just go about everyday life normal and work on it at night? Did he lock himself inside for a year and give it a run? I did not see an answer.

And the moral of the story is... Money cannot buy happiness.

The script is well written. The story is told good although I have not read the source material so I cannot compare. I would wager a guess that you probably went all out in an effort to use all of the source material.

Usually when I write reviews I can find stuff in the script that I did not like but really the only thing was when you transitioned from room - room and instead of using new scene headings just wrote the WINDOW or HALLWAY and so on and that may be the correct way to write but I have not seen that very often.

Good job and I hope you get more reads.

Cheers Wesley, yeah I thought that final line might bite me in the bum if people didn't like the story haha. Pleased you did.

I haven't read the short story for around 12-15 years, so I don't know how close this is to it. It was one of my faves growing up and I found a general synopsis of it on the web somewhere, so I figure it is pretty close.

Henry is a guy that doesn't really have any friends. Sure he has aquaintances (sp?) but noone really that close. The year he takes out, he dedicated to learning this new skill.

With my scene headings I kind of just do that if it's in the same main location, but they're changing rooms or I'm trying to sneak a sly camera angle in. Hasn't been pointed out as incorrect before but hope it's clear enough during the read.

I know nothing can come of this without owning the rights to the story but anything that puts a spotlight on Roald Dahl is a worthwhile cause.

Thanks for the review fella.

Ste

The moment I saw this title, I thought, Stephen, that you had stolen the title of Roald Dahl's story. That is, until I found out that this, in a form and fashion, is Roald Dahl's story. And as a fan of Mr. Dahl's work through-and-through, I was very intrigued by the idea of this adaptation.

Having not read this short story for quite some time, I'm not entirely sure how faithful this adaptation from book-to-script is. Nevertheless, I thought the set up was very nice.

I would like to know why Henry and Charles say one another's name every time they address each other. It was one of those miniscule details that edged on odd occasionally, but not enough to cause a fuss.

I've noticed that on many occasions you decided to go Coen-style and leave the INT. and EXT. out of the script completely. Personally, I've never had a problem with it. But the format Nazis around here may.

Honestly, I thought you did a great job. After reading this, it's a wonder that no one has attempted adapting Henry Sugar before. In fact, I believe it's one of the few Dahl stories that has been attempted. Until now, that is.

The main issue I have is that, for the longest, I was wondering what Mr Brown and John Winston's V.O.s had to do with the rest of the story. I believe that setting just a bit more up for those two in the beginning would not make their first V.O. so odd and out-of-place.

I did like your ending line, even if that is (again, I can't remember) or isn't the line Roald Dahl ended the story on as well.

Good effort, and I'm looking forward to your other work.

Thanks doc, pleased you enjoyed it and you are like me a Dahl fan. It's part of a collection of short stories, I think called 'Henry Sugar and five others'....something like that anyway. It's more adult short stories than most of his more well known books.

For some reason I went all Oscar Wylde with the dialogue (not in quality, but in style) and I think that's why they refer to each other by name constantly. I think I just went for a group of people (cough cough Toffs) that believe they're very witty but are actually just (insert expletive). None of the dialogue was taken from the book - I haven't read it for ages and couldn't find a copy. This is the first one where I've actually done a treatment for and had all the scenes sketched out before starting to write it.

In the story, Dahl ends it by saying that Henry Sugar's accountant contacted him and asked him to tell the story. To try to fit that part in I had it so the accountant contacted me to write the screenplay - hence the John Winston/Mr Brown V.O's. I can see where you're coming from with it being a bit 'huh?' to begin with.

I still don't know about the INT./EXT. thing. The way I see it is if no time has passed and the main location hasn't changed then it's OK to do it. Might have to ask Sir Phil of Dogglebe to check it out.

Thanks again for your comments, it's appreciated.

Ste

Quoted from stebrown

Yes, I have the Roald Dahl anthology. I'm not sure if Sugar is in it or not, but I will definitely look.

Quoted Text

For some reason I went all Oscar Wylde with the dialogue (not in quality, but in style) and I think that's why they refer to each other by name constantly. I think I just went for a group of people (cough cough Toffs) that believe they're very witty but are actually just (insert expletive). None of the dialogue was taken from the book - I haven't read it for ages and couldn't find a copy. This is the first one where I've actually done a treatment for and had all the scenes sketched out before starting to write it.

Wilde, huh? I didn't pick up on that necessarily. But I'm impressed that you worked this straight from a synopsis. Also, I'm glad to hear the treatment process worked well for you. I never use it (I prefer the write it straight, then rewrite heavy), but it seems to have worked; this is your best work I've read thus far.

Quoted Text

In the story, Dahl ends it by saying that Henry Sugar's accountant contacted him and asked him to tell the story. To try to fit that part in I had it so the accountant contacted me to write the screenplay - hence the John Winston/Mr Brown V.O's. I can see where you're coming from with it being a bit 'huh?' to begin with.

Clever idea replacing Dahl's narrator with yourself. However, I still believe that the two narrators need a bit more of a set-up, even if it is a very small one.

Quoted Text

I still don't know about the INT./EXT. thing. The way I see it is if no time has passed and the main location hasn't changed then it's OK to do it. Might have to ask Sir Phil of Dogglebe to check it out.

Again, I'm not a stifler for those formatting rules. If it works, it works. In this case, it definitely fits just fine, without the INT., EXT., NIGHT, and DAYs sprinkled throughout.

And just so you'll know, there are a select few scripts that I actually save to my hardware, calling it my S.S. Archive. I only download my favorite scripts featured here into it, and this, Mr. Brown, is definitely among the group. Just thought you should know that; I really did enjoy it.

Thanks Doc, that's good to know.

Hey Ste,

Just finished the script and what a joy it was. Also, it was such a fast read - breezed right through it. I haven't read the story which the script is based on, so I can't comment on how well you did adaptation-wise. But as I read, like a stand-alone story, I thought it worked really well.

Your writing style seems to improve from script to script and this was very well written. The script was very rich on visuals, while not dwelling on details and I also liked how you managed to pull of the flashbacks along with the use of V.O.s.

The story in itself is sweet. Maybe a little too sweet. The main "crisis" lacked some "oomph" in my book. I agree with Wes that I did not see Henry as a gamling addict. To me he came off more as a guy he liked to lose actually (or at least was rather indifferent about it). I think it would benefit the script if you explore that area a bit more cos' it'll help set up the rest of the story better imo. The same thing goes for when Henry turns into the good samaritan, that also needs a bit more depth to work properly.

Quoted from Dr. McPhearson

In this case, it definitely fits just fine, without the INT., EXT., NIGHT, and DAYs sprinkled throughout.

The Doc is absolutely right. When it's painstakingly obvious that the new scene picks up from where the previous left of, there's really no need to overdo the format. Use it for clarity. Here it's very clear where we are and when. I'm sure someone would insist on using those term, even though it actually disrupts the flow of the script. I, like yourselves. wouldn't.

All in all a good read. but it could use a little tweaking.

Cheers
Rob

Hey Rob, thanks for the read. Pleased you liked it.

I got some advice from Shelton about how to best do the part where he's reading from the book, so got to give some props for that. Ha, did I say just say props?

I struggled alot with showing visually, how the money didn't matter anymore. Couldn't really think of anything apart from what I already did. I also didn't like the part with the beggar - it just seemed a bit too quick to me (again, couldn't think of a better way for it.)

A lot of gamblers, deep down don't want to win. They enjoy the feeling of losing everything they have - or at least I've come across a few people like that. I tried to get Henry to be one of those guys. I'm with you on feeling it needs to be expanded in certain places though.

Since reading The Screenwriters Bible I'm a bit more confident in writing, and changing little things. I actually enjoyed coming up with descriptions for this one, rather than being worried if it's unfilmable or should be more clear. I think it was you who pointed in me in the direction of that book, so cheers. (The montage on here, I based entirely off that book.)

Thanks again

Ste

Hey Ste.

Like most I've not read the Dahl story so I don't know how close this is to the original short story.  I have to say though this was a great short.  It read quick and easy and the dialogue was spot on.  The feel was great, helpped by the descriptions, I could sense the grandure of Charles' house and the joy Henry felt as he shared his wealth.

I too wasn't sure about the V.O.'s from Brown and Winston as I wasn't sure who they were and what their role was, until the end of course but even then it seemed a bit strange to have the story told from the point of view of someone who we don't know until the end.  I thought perhaps Charles would have been better but then if that's how it is in the original then so be it.

The story is a wonderful story of a man who thinks he needs money but of course doesn't.  Of course you know that as you wrote it lol.

Overall Ste this was excellent and well worth the read.

Hey Stephen,

I have read this story, not all that recently but recently enough that I remember it. I thought you stuck pretty close to the original material but I did have a few issues with it.

First, I thought you did not explore his gambling problem well enough. When he makes the decision to try and see through cards it should be the last ditch crazy decision of a man with a problem, a peniless. Also, doesn't he go to india to try and find the swami?

Secondly, I thought the process of seeing through cards was much too easy. In the book it was at least a third of the story. I thought making it so simple for Henry to see through cards sacrificed a lot of the dramatic impact of the conclusion.

Otherwise, well done.

Thanks Alffy and thanks Michael

Allfy, I was trying for a twist at the end that the whole story was being told to someone else. I probably didn't do that well, but there we go.

Michael, I haven't read it for ages, so I haven't stuck to the intricate parts of it simply because I can't remember them. I tried to get a hold of the book but couldn't so that's why I might have missed some parts. This is pretty much my perspective of the core of Dahl's story.

Can you remember the part where he sees the blood clot by the way, because that wasn't in the synopsis i read but i can remember it from the book.

I really enjoyed this. I don't know if I would consider Henry someone with a gambling problem. That's really the only negative thing I have to say about this. I really liked everything about this script. This is probably the best things that I've read from you so far. Good Job!!!

Thanks Pants

Yeah, general view I've picked up is it should be longer and certain areas should be explored more.

I'll try and sort out the couple of problems and post a longer version.

Any other views, more than appreciated.

Ste

I thought this script was rushed. Way too rushed. A story like this should be written as a feature length script.

You spend a few pages showing Henry as a bad gambler.
You spend a few pages showing Henry learning how to see through cards.
You spend a few pages showing Henry winning at cards.
You spend a few pages showing Henry becoming a generous guy.

You don't show any of these 'story parts' in any detail and, as a result, the story doesn't take off. I don't feel anything for Henry. While I know this is an adaptation of someone's story, I wonder what (if anything) you left out. If there isn't anything else to the story, then I would suggest taking some liberties with it.

Phil

Cheers for your thoughts Phil

I'm going to have to rework this and show more about his gambling and how his addiction is leaving him broke.

I seem to have a problem building upto scenes and expanding on them. Whereas I don't know if this quite has the legs for a feature. Maybe 50-60 pages would be a better page length for it.

Fair points

Ste

After doing a bit of research I've found that the rights for the short story are owned by Random House - a pretty big publishers I think.

On their website it says;
For dramatic performance, film/television, translation, and reprint rights, please call the Random House general information number at 212/782-9000 and request to be connected to the subsidiary rights department of the specific imprint.

I have no idea how to call America, anyone know how to? I figure it's worth calling to ask...see how much the rights would be to buy.

Quoted from stebrown

I think if you buy a calling card it has directions on how to make international calls. That way it also doesn't show up on your phone bill.

Thanks Pants, I've found their email address now so I've tried that. My question of how to dial America probably sounded really thick haha but I get confused by telephone numbers from foreign countries.

Got no idea how much it'd be to buy the rights - hundreds? thousands? who knows...also don't know if they would want to see what I have planned or if they don't sell rights to just anyone. Guess the only way to find out is to ask them.

Ste

Keep in mind also that Random House is becoming very involved with Focus Features from time to time (I want to say that Random House has their own production company, but that might be a stretch of the imagination.)

Keep in mind, work up your own script. I bring to the forefront the story of Peter Jackson. I don't believe he owned the rights to the Lord of the Rings trilogy; when he went from studio to studio, all of whom rejected his offer, he said that he would go to one more studio (New Line), and if they rejected it too, he would hand off his scripts for absolutely no charge whatsoever, and never look back. Well, we all know how that turned out. New Line liked his idea, and now they have tons of Oscars for it.

Many people actually have used adaptations (of which they didn't have the rights to at the time) as calling cards. If anything else, they might see this Stephen, and give you a whole new project altogether.

Of course this is all speculation, of all which can be summed up like this: Go for it.

I wasn't aware of that Doc, about Peter Jackson. I always thought that he was approached - I preferred his earlier stuff anyway. It's a good story to give me a bit of confidence though.

I'll take your advice on board and expand this anyway. I enjoyed writing what I have so far, so once I've re-read the book and maybe add things myself I'm sure I'll enjoy it even more.

Just finished reading this one, Stephen. I�m not familiar with the original material, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

The premise is interesting and so is the main character. Overall, I liked this. But I think there�s room for improvement.

The execution felt a bit rushed. The protagonist goes through a lot of changes in very few pages. I think you need to spend some more time in the most dramatic beats and emphasize (visually) Henry�s inner demons.

An example: After becoming rich, in the caf� scene, suddenly Henry says he feels empty, sees a beggar outside, hands him money. An in the next scene he�s giving away money and feeling great. It�s an interesting journey going from happy-rich to empty-rich to generous-rich, but you need to take your time with these changes.

Instead of having Henry telling Charles that he feels empty, you could write a bunch of scenes to dramatize and show he feels like that despite being filthy rich.

Same with his gambling problem. You could write a couple of scenes to dramatize how his gambling addiction is ruining his life.

The scope of this story is quite big. Lots of things happen and a lot of time goes by. I think that only a feature length could do justice to this premise.

The major dramatic question (and protagonist�s goal) shifts quite a lot here. Will Henry overcome his gambling problem? Will Henry learn how to see through cards? Will Henry find fulfillment in charity? The premise, IMO, is too complex to spawn a �commercial� plot-driven feature that would sell on spec.

But I think that it could work as the type of character driven drama that you usually see going through the Indie circuit. Of course, you should acquire the rights to the story before investing a serious amount of time in it. Unless you just wanna get some practice.

I wish you good luck with this.

Thanks Z, appreciate your comments.

I've re-read it a few times now and have to agree with the 'rushed' comments. I spent time planning it out and actually in the writing, but yeah the shift in character is too quick. I think it had a lot to do with not reading the book for a long time and thinking that people might just pass it off as fan-fiction and not read it.

I'm getting a feeling that this might work best as a play to be honest, but as I have no idea how to write a play I'll forget about that.

I should be getting the book in the next couple of days, and I plan to start over with this after reading it. I have no idea how much the rights to a short story would cost but I'm making enquiries. If it's in the hundreds I might give it a shot but any more and I'll just have to use it as practise and maybe look around for competitions -- depending if the finished product is any good.

Ste

I've heard back from Random House. The rights are owned by an agent in London. He's just replied to my email saying that the rights are unavailable, so doesn't look like I'll do a feature of this. Don't really understand how they can be unavailable as I'm sure if I offered him �1,000,000 he'd sell them to me, but there we go.

Hopefully someone has already decided to turn this into a movie.

Ah, that's a shame. Sorry to hear that. I too have been told before that the rights to so-and-so book are "unavailable," and I have no idea what that means. I can only assume that someone is optioning it already.

Either way, I think you have a really interesting start with this script. If you plan on a second draft after this, I can't wait to read it.

Thanks Doc, yeah it's a bit gutting but I've asked him to let me know if the situation changes in the future.

After reading the story I'm surprised at how close this was to it. I made up the beggar part (he only throws the money away from his balcony) and there was a lot more to the book that he reads than what I put in here.

I got a lot of ideas about good scenes for the start now, but I'm in two minds about writing the feature. Will probably decide over the next week.

Stephen,

I have never read the original... so, this is an original review. haha

I thought this was impeccably (sp) written. Very nice.

Story wise....

I thought it was slow moving in the beginning. In a short piece like this you need to get to the first point of interest on the first page....

I liked the main part of the story except for a few things.

I could tell right away that Henry was going to be making oodles of cash eventually.

My biggest problem however was Henry giving away all the money! Why? There's no honor (IMHO) giving away money unless it is anonymously. Otherwise it comes off all wrong. Arrogant, buying friends, buying fame...what ever.

I'm curious how close this is to the original story and why you didn't write your own?

Regardless, the writing and format was GREAT!

Quoted from Grandma Bear

I could tell right away that Henry was going to be making oodles of cash eventually.

That's a good point, Me. It would be more engaging if we actually wondered whether our "hero" could really pull it off. That's why I hate the character of Superman so much... unless it's a bucket of kryptonite, there's NO doubt that he'll come out on top.

Thanks Pia, pleased you liked the writing.

It's a story I wanted to adapt since starting to write screenplays (not saying much, only been writing since Christmas). Just because it's a story I really liked growing up. It's pretty close to the actual story - I hadn't read it for a fair few years before doing this, but have bought the book since. The only thing that happens in the book that I missed really was the show of his gambling habit and the difficulty he has in aquiring the skill. In order for this to work in a casino, he has to be able to see through a card in 4 seconds or less. It takes him years to bring it down from 10 seconds.

I've been talking to the person who owns the rights and he says that even if they were available - which they aren't - he would only consider 'a very generous offer from an experienced director/writer or large production company'. So this just stays as a writing exercise - which I did enjoy.

Quoted from stebrown

I've been talking to the person who owns the rights and he says that even if they were available - which they aren't - he would only consider 'a very generous offer from an experienced director/writer or large production company'. So this just stays as a writing exercise - which I did enjoy.

To say he wants someone with more experience is understandable. To say he wants a "generous offer" is a bit extremely; after all, doesn't generosity only apply if you get something more than you were ASKING for. It just pains me when I've spoken with certain agents and authors about this sort of thing, adapting a piece of their work. And while you ARE asking to buy their child, and an author might hesitate at that, some of the people I speak with demand accomodations that are almost unrealistic outside of a major prod. company. Honestly, even in cases where I was the ONLY PERSON to speak with them about it, the demands and stubbornness kicked up a notch. And unfortunately, seeing as how many times they are NEVER encountered with this type of request again, the film rights of the material go untouched and unutilized. :rolleyes:

Sorry to hear about your dead end, Stebrown. But if anything, like you said, this can work as a great writing exercise.

Hey Stephen,

This was well written and had good descriptions and dialogue.  Not read the original but still enjoyed this.

I agree with what some previous people have said regarding the gambling addiction part of the story.  I too feel this could be made stronger and hard-hitting, to give a better feel of how he was prior to be a samaritan.  Show how the addiction ruled him, and maybe emphasise the lonliness of his existance.

Other than that though, a great read.

One thing I will mention is with regards to your descriptions.  You used stuff like - it's, that's and what's, from what I understand these should not really be shortened in descriptions, and should be written fully - it is, that is etc

Print Topic