Perfect Justice by Kenneth Eduakwa - Action, Thriller, Drama - A disabled woman takes matters into her own hands to prove that her supposedly dead ex husband is the current most wanted serial killer. 121  - pdf, format 8)

I don't like such violence, but your writing is very engaging. So I'll keep going.

The only thing I have right now is everyone is talking gangsta. That creates a graphic novel feel.  I like this so far.

This alimony thing is kind of weird. Total shift in the story. I thought I knew what Tim was doing. Hope it comes back some how.

I liked the writing very much but not sure there was a story here but of a loose vengeance. I started out with Tim seeming to love Janis and avenge her but then goes off course and divorces her then tries the rest of the way to kill her. And during the divorce it's all about not wanting to pay alimony and all that happened with that. Then he dies and shows up again and there is another story shift, Tim becomes a killing machine. All culminating in that finale.

You do a great job with the mood. While your action paragraphs are lengthy they don't bog down because of how you write.

I said above that this has a graphic novel feel and that is maintained. Having that supports the superhuman aspects of the characters especially Tim and Janis. Tim gets big superman nods in the army hodown and chasing Janis' car.

There is a very metal feel to this. Dark even when it's day. All of that adds to the graphic novel feel.

The suspense was very good. When Janis was being stalked everywhere she went to find answers.

The dialogue is what I might call poetic gangsta. Everyone speaks that way because of how you structure your sentences. Takes getting used to but I like it. I like it all yet I probably would not see this for all the violence. It's the writing I find engaging.

The elements all fit but I think there needs to be more on why Tim is the way he is. He is introed playing the sax, which he doesn't do ever again, and then it's the gunfight, and we jump right into the cops and feds wanting him, and we know why the cops do because of Luth. And Janis getting shot up and surviving only to be cast aside, maybe that is part of that culture. But I still want a reason that Tim does it what with him checking in on Janis while she is in a coma. Then she comes to and he bails? Tim is ruthless, I am told, then shown. So yes, he is ruthless. But why? Maybe keep some of the oney elements all the way through? Maybe have something where he and Janis have a fight? She seems like a nice girl protecting him and taking all that shot for him, so what would make him divorce her? He really is cold and heartless. Is that the point? It goes against him avenging her, watching her. The supers of time lapse all indicate he is holding out for her, at least to me.

Anyway, pretty cool stuff.

I browsed the first few pages.  Honestly, I think you're over-writing it.  For one, you're including direction, which is a no-no.  You don't tell the camera how to move, how to spiral, how to zoom in, etc.  Also, your action/description paragraphs are overlong (they should be no more than four lines, max).  Also, ease up on the "we."  No need to tell us that "we" are looking at something; we already know we're looking at it, because it's in the script.  

For the most part, though I want to address the over-writing thing.  For instance, you write:

EXT/INT. TIM COCKEREL’S MANSION – WINDOWS - STAGE
Through the windows of the mansion block...we find him here...
TIM COCKEREL (40’s), burly...tough...ruthless...aggressive...
blowing and boogying hard on a tenor saxophone, like there’s no
tomorrow, warming it up. The stage is all his own...under a
spotlight like there’s an audience to watch his act. Just him
alone...

You're telling us a lot -- too much, in fact, when less would be fine.  Burly and aggressive.  Good enough.  We now know he's a well-built manly man, and a real go-getter.  "Tough" and "ruthless" are overkill; they're pretty much the main traits of aggressiveness, so no need to include them.  Also, and this is just me, but describing him as aggressive and ruthless and then having him boogie...kind of contradictory.  When I think burly and aggressive I think of a bear on the prowl; when I think of someone boogying, I think of feathered bangs and disco music. :lol:
The point is, you don't want to confuse your reader.

The rest of it...from "blowing and boogying" all the way to "Just him alone" is all also overkill.  You can tidy that up.  Make it less clunky, make it clear, make it flow.

TIM COCKEREL (40s), burly, aggressive, runs scales on his TENOR SAX, playing it up to a crowd which isn't there.

Everything you just said, but clearer and more concise.  This gets the point across.  If there are other character traits you want him to have, let the reader discover them as the story progresses.

Over-writing is both a tell-tale sign of, and a bane to, a newbie screenwriter.  Nip it, tuck it, tighten it up.  Be deliberate in your choice of words.  Avoid over-explaining; rather, give us just enough to give us the general idea.  Don't let your words get in the way of telling your story clearly.

Best of luck.  Keep writing.  :)

- Lon

Quoted from Lon TIM COCKEREL (40s), burly, aggressive, runs scales on his TENOR SAX, playing it up to a crowd which isn't there. Everything you just said, but clearer and more concise.  This gets the point across.   Over-writing is both a tell-tale sign of, and a bane to, a newbie screenwriter.- Lon

Where is the mood in what you cut it to? Granted, I thought the same thing when I first started reading but I kept going and what I found was an incredible painted mood of this story. Nipping and tucking would not come close to the conveyance the writer intended, that I assure you. Nipping and tucking does not always make the intended story clearer and more concise nor is the presumed lack of it the sign of a newbie. This writer has a voice and it's out there like it or not and he did an incredible job of it. I think it rare that a story, as faulty as this one is for me, is painted in such a manner. It hooked me in all the way to the end. One man's opinion.

It was just an example.  I'm not telling him to use my exact words.  The point I was making was that so much description, while it may paint a portrait, also clogs up the pipes and makes reading it a drag.  You don't want to bore the reader, and using so much description does exactly that.  The writer established a certain mood, yes, but he used a lot of space in doing so.  Were he to tighten it up, the visuals would come more quickly, hence allowing the story to progress, hence keeping the reader involved.  It's not like I'm encouraging him to write an instruction manual, here.

"5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5" may equal 30, but so does "5 x 6."  Know what I mean?

Some things you can teach, some you can't.

Janis stops at the house, overgrown hedges, all over. Suddenly,
a GUY briskly walks her way, hands into windbreakers, she
braces up for some attack. Guy comes close enough, near
touching her, but he just walks past her, steps into the street
and walks off. Janis sighs, in the process looks behind, at the
fast pacing Guy, he disappears in the fog.


How would you redo this?

What is this, a test?  LOL

Break it down to the purpose of the scene.  Since I have no idea what the set up is, I'm going to assume she's there to snoop around the house, when she notices someone walking toward her and there's a moment where we're supposed to think she's busted.  Then I'd get rid of the unnecesarries; the guy's hands in his pockets serves no purpose, nor do the overgrown hedges.  These things are mentioned, but at no point do they come into play.  They're unnecessary details, and therefor don't bear any mentioning.  They're just taking up space.

Also, if she's standing by this house in the dark and a sees a man quickly approaching her, why does she just stand there?  Wouldn't she, say, duck behind those hedges that were mentioned?  I think if I were a woman, all alone on a dark and foggy street and I suddenly saw an intimidating presence hurrying toward me, I wouldn't just stand there and hope for the best.  I'd run, or hide, or maybe dip my hand into my purse and wrap it around the can of mace I keep stashed in there, just in case.  So -- again, going by my own assumption on what the scene may be about despite having no idea what the set up is, I'd write it something like this:

Janis creeps up to a house lined with towering hedges when she
sees a MAN emerge from the fog, his pace brisk, his head low.
Suspicious.

(at this point I'd start a new paragraph to separate the beats in the action and set up a pace for the scene)

She quickly ducks behind a hedge.  Her hand snakes into her purse
and wraps around a CAN OF MACE stashed within.  She peers around the
hedge.

The Man, closer now.

Janis quiets her breathing.  Fearing the worst.

The Man.  Closer.  So close she can hear him breathing.  

Mere steps away now.  This is it...

The Man passes by, oblivious to her, and continues off into the fog.  
Janis relaxes and lets out a breath.  False alarm.

But, that's just me.  Again, not knowing what she's even doing at the house in the first place.

Ha, no. Just curious. I like less for the most part and generally will say so and how to edit down. There is a script up right now that I would cut description in. Those scripts generally expound on what is in the scene, not who is in the scene or how they are behaving. Describing a western saloon should be a two word affair in the slug, not 4 lines in action paragraphs. However this time, I didn't find a lot wrong with the length or content of his writing because he goes for character in them for the most part.

The purpose of the original action was for suspense and the way it is written works in the context of the story and actually stood out for me as an example of how he created suspense when there was actually no threat. But it's only done in the whole context of how he writes. It fits this story of his.

My point is that this writer broke "rules" yet he conveyed something I think is bit unique and in not worrying about too many rules, he achieved his goal by telling his story.

I think there could be some reductions to the writing, but this script is not harmed by not cutting it all down. His story is stilted, in my opinion, but that is another matter.

When a script takes me away from something else I'm doing I have to wonder why and usually it impresses me in some way. This one did.