Print Topic

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board  /  Comedy Scripts  /  B.A. MoFo(s)
Posted by: Don, April 7th, 2010, 7:59pm
B.A. MoFo(s) by David Ford Lewis III (czartim) - Comedy - In the not-so-distant future, President Jena Bush declares war on France after discovering a hair at the bottom of her Olive Garden take-out. A squad of B.A. MoFo(s) is tasked with defending the President's last remaining private spa behind enemy lines. 72 pages - pdf, format 8)
Posted by: ajr, April 7th, 2010, 10:10pm; Reply: 1
Okay, the logline was so bizarre that I had to take a look at this...

I wish I hadn't. This is absolutely appalling. Character's with names of "dude", and editorializing and laughing ("haha") in your own narratives?

If you've got an inkling of a story here we'll never find it. Please read some scripts and stop addressing the audience in the narrative, and maybe then there'll be a shot for someone to uncover what you're driving at.
Posted by: czartim, April 11th, 2010, 6:43pm; Reply: 2
Hey AJR,

Thanks for at least attempting to read. I'd like to clarify that this was not meant to be a real screenplay, but more of a parody of the art of screen writing. So all breaking of the third-wall was intended as part of the experience.

I've written several other screen plays which I'm currently editing to post here. They abide by all proper standards. ;)

So in short, this was written for its own audience, and shouldn't be taken too seriously.

-Tim
Posted by: ajr, April 11th, 2010, 8:11pm; Reply: 3
Tim,

A screenplay can be a satire, yes, but I don't think there's any way to satirize the art of screenplay WRITING? Or a purpose to doing so?

What is the intent in writing an intentionally bad script? And how do we tell it apart from an unintentional one? You have me curious now.

AJR
Posted by: czartim, April 12th, 2010, 2:20pm; Reply: 4
AJR,

As I mentioned, I believe it was written for its own audience. It was written purely for the enjoyment of people who have read far to many horrid screenplays. In that sense it is a very "wink, wink" style of writing. Lame character names, exposition-filled dialogue, plot holes. It's all part of the fiction.

So, yes, it's for fun. You have to go into it without any expectations of a true screenplay. And because comedy is subjective (and even more so on page), I don't expect a lot of praise. But it wan''t written for glory.

Unlike Kaufman's Adaptation, which attempted to fit many of the clich�s of movie writing into a movie, I attempted to write a screenplay with everything you aren't suppose to do. And I did it blatantly out in the open.

- Tim
Posted by: mcornetto (Guest), April 12th, 2010, 5:07pm; Reply: 5
If you're going to lead with a screenplay on a site then you should lead with a screenplay that isn't quite so "innovative".  

I cracked this open and I have to say I agree with AJ.  You need better character names to keep our interest and the asides in the narrative are very distracting.

I would, honestly allow you to get away with the (haha) thing once.  But I counted it at least three times in the first five pages and for the same joke.  We already get it, you don't need to keep reminding us.

Same with the BLACK DUDE strike-through.  You don't need to keep reminding us.  Give him a real name and just do the strike-through once.

Hope this helps,

Michael  
Print page generated: March 28th, 2024, 4:58am