The Bad News First - Print Topic

Hi Erik. And the good news is!

Looks like a pretty good script here. (At last!).

I think that some people will have some issues with the liberal use of CAPS - I think it played well with parts of the script, but in other places in gnawed somewhat.

Couple of minors that I spotted:

# a flashy but sheik sport coat
-- did you mean 'chic'?

# A PAIR OF UNIFORM PATROLMEN catch his attention.
-- this is passive - okay now and again.

I don't think that your dialogue setting are correct? I think they should have a ragged right where as yours are justified.

Just did the first ten pages - looked like a solid write.

Good stuff.

Thanks for taking a look. Yeah, I starting doing my dialogue like this after seeing several other scripts with this similar format. I hate how Final Draft makes the dialogue margins look so sloppy, so I started doing it manually on Word.

Thanks for the positive comments! I got beat up pretty bad on Amazon Studios with a three out of five star review. I think it's my best script, but its getting the worst marks of all my stuff. Go figure

Uhhhh? Go figure...

Sorry! Didn't realize it was you - you're called Jack and the writers called Eric...

So I know you from the boards. In all honesty, this is one of the best scripts I've read in a long while - just a lot of distraction that takes away from it.

I totally see what you are saying with the 'several other scripts' - but I'm guessing you mean 'produced' scripts???

While I don't totally agree with the 'once optioned do what you want' theory - I concede there's more freedom, so that produced scripts can be misleading.

Look - I read the 'best script' on Amazon (Matthew Gossett - sure you're seen it), I felt it was pedestrian, but then it didn't make many errors.

I reckon you need to 'spec script' this - make it look like a spec more than a produced one, and see where it gets you. It's worth a test. Matthew's made me yawn. Yeah. Indeed. Go figure.

Best to you.

Simon.

Simon,

Would you like to tackle a rewrite and possibly resubmit to Amazon as co-writers? It seems you "get" the story, but understand where the format needs work. I would be interested in someone else taking a crack at format. I'm too burnt to tackle a rewrite and I could use a fresh set of eyes.

Are you interested? I actually LOVE this story, but was very confused on how to properly convey these ideas on paper so they make sense to whoever reads it. I think I over did the action and descriptions because I thought the reader would get lost with all the multiple stories.

Anyways, let me know if you're interested.

Eric D.

I can honestly say that I've been struggling with "spec style" as of late. I haven't written anything in almost three years and having a tough time getting back into the swing. I'm trying to learn how to write less action and keep my descriptions brief, but not dull.

Hi Jack - sorry, been away from the boards - I kind of would like to take a look, but I haven't got major amounts of time on my hands - I'm working on a couple of features at the moment (not mine) - so if you are in no rush, then yeah - I'll pm my email over to you and we can have a go.

Simon

Hi Jack. Good script. I think you have a good idea but it's very confusing. I'd be willing to help you rewrite this.

Simon tackled a rewrite and trimmed up the format, action and dialogue. Im very happy with it, but haven't re-uploaded the new draft to simplyscripts. You can check it out on Amazon Studios.

Quoted from ericdickson

Simon tackled a rewrite and trimmed up the format, action and dialogue. Im very happy with it, but haven't re-uploaded the new draft to simplyscripts. You can check it out on Amazon Studios.

Hey Eric,

Can you provide a link to the new draft?

Regards,
Brett

http://studios.amazon.com/scripts/14227

The story and dialogue are pretty much the same, but Simon really trimmed the format and made it more spec ready. I might fix up some of the story contrivances a bit later, but letting this one rest for now. It could use a bit more work.

Write To Reel did a full page review of Bad News First this morning. They didn't think much of it. I was really surprised and kind of shocked. I thought it would rate a bit higher than this.

I had never heard of Write to Reel, but it looks like a pretty cool little site.

I was surprised to see Simon's name along with yours here.  I take it you brought him in as a collab?

47 out of 100 is definitely tough to swallow, but haven't you been saying for a long time there were problems here you couldn't do away with?  What surprised me more was that bigfoot script, Sawtooth, received a 46, and it was very, very poorly written.

I think their grading scale is fairly well thought out, but like everything, it has its problems, and getting an 80 or higher looks to be pretty tough at best.

Hey as you know, you can't please everyone.  Good luck with it going forward.

When it comes right down to it, you should judge a script on whether or not it will make a good film.  The script is not without its problems, but 47% is hard to accept given the fact that a sasquatch running through the woods received the same score.

Weak.

Thanks,
Eric

Quoted from Dreamscale

I was surprised to see Simon's name along with yours here.

Thank-you Jeff. You do my ego no end of good.

Yeah - I had mixed feelings about the review - they're a couple of guys who have an idea of what they're about, but they're not industry pro's.

Eric knows my take on what they said - whilst I don't think they've got it right, I think they've helped highlight some of the issues that can improve things, so I still think the script's on an upward trajectory.

BTW - it's still 90% Eric's work - I just tightened it up some.

Quoted from Forgive

Thank-you Jeff. You do my ego no end of good.

Simon, I didn't mean it that way. I just didn't know you were involved with this. That's all.

Quoted from Dreamscale

Simon, I meant it that way. I really did. Jack should have asked me. Not you. Me.

Sorry Jeff - I should have put a ;D by my first post.

The more emoticon usage, the better, in my book.

Hey Eric and Simon,

I was asked to give this one a looksee about a month ago.
So, I'm getting a little better about getting through my personal queue.
I've got the latest Amazon draft, so let's dig in...

P. 3
Wonky parenthetical.
The wryly goes below the character name, not beside it.

P. 6
I'm a tad frustrated with the narrative so far...
We're focusing on people talking about exciting things.
I want to see the exciting thing that will pull me into the story.
Show the van on the move, helicopters and a text going to the news man.
But he's more into scoring on a Saturday night than his job.
Those sample visuals tell me more in a fraction of the time.
Even if you want to conceal the identity of the crook...
I can't see any reason why you wouldn't slambang us right into the tale.

P. 11
Same aforementioned problem again...
We're hearing second hand about cops pressuring the newsroom.
That's exciting stuff, why aren't we seeing that on the screen?
The characters in conflict with each other are not onscreen acting out that conflict.
Why not?
All the scenes so far have depicted no immediate in your face conflict.

P. 13
I don't think Darby would be pacing furiously at zero years of age. ;)

P. 20
Marty's speech about Friendly didn;'t make much sense to me.
I don't see how a prank video with 1,500 hits has the police up in arms.
Again, the conflict of the story is being delivered through exposition.
I want to see the conflict and not be told how to feel about it.

I'm stopping at page 20 for today.
Felt pretty at arm's length throughout the read.
I keep hearing about catalyst type events, but don't get to experience any.
Some of the early Miami color was decent.
I was a transplant there for three years. You could spice that up some more.

Overall, it read okay, not much tripped up my pace.
But I did have a hard time distinguishing characters.
Friendly is the only one I can even recall the name of.
So far, I wouldn't say this is a 46/100 rating though.

This feels pretty close to "The Paper". That's the easy connection.
You can boil that film down to the "ensemble workplace" sub genre.
And the best of those IMHO is, "M*A*S*H".

You may want to spend some time with that film and soak up that genre vibe.
I think it's narrative choices could help you streamline your script.

Regards,
E.D.

Thanks for the read ED - I'm sure Jack will be popping up on the boards. I'd be interested to heard what else you have to say about this - I had my angle on it, and I'll post that up once I've digested the remainder of your feedback.

Cheers

Simon

Quoted from Forgive

Sounds like a plan.
I'll read on as my work schedule allows.

Regards,
E.D.

Hey Guys,

I'll pick this up again this morning.
The more I think about it, the more I believe the Altman film can help out.
I love how the conflict of the Korean War polarizes the character conflicts.
And how they have to find a way to cooperate despite their differences.
There's something in there that I feel will help you crack this story.

P. 24
Friendly's comments come off as really snide.
All the wise guy commentary right before a woman gets terrorized?
Who would want to hear that guy?
Am I so out of touch that people actually enjoy things like that?
Saying the cops suck cuz they don't have leads an hour after a crime...
How does that make the cops stupid? It's just been a hour.

P. 25
Oh, it was a trick. Just a blow up doll and drunk cops.

P. 29
Three pages of new exposition about a ghost/potential murder deal.
I'm suffering from exposition overload.
The script's about a quarter gone and we're still bringing in new stories.
I'd like to see some development on the fistful you already established.
I'm wondering how some, if not all, of these interconnect.

P. 30
This beat here best exemplifies my issues with this script...

SARAH
The cops were just in here asking
about Friendly. You just missed
them.

KURT
Dodged that bullet.

I want to stop dodging bullets and generate live conflict on the page.
Consider this alternative...
Kurt's interview gets crashed by some pissy cops.
They put the squeeze on him to produce Friendly.
A cop with an axe to grind leaning on a reporter. That's conflict!
Those kind of scenes drive stories and usually engage readers.
Conflict gets the reader involved, they may even take sides.

Stopping at page 42 this morning...
I'm unclear as to what Friendly does for the paper.
He makes these editorialized videos with little to no fact.
Is he a reporter? Why does he get such latitude from his boss?
Has he done stuff in the past that was great, but now he's a bit of a mess?
Something like that might legitimize his antics to the reader.

We've got Friendly and the Lawson thing...
The armored truck robbery...
The disgraced football player...
And the ghost dad thing that could be a murder.

Script's one third gone and I don't have much to go on with these stories.
Do you really need all of them to tell this story?

And here's a biggie...
How do these news stories help the reader learn about the characters?
Perhaps looking at these segments through that filter may help.

Regards,
E.D.

Cheers ED - makes me think I need to re-read it - but you're touching on some of my thoughts here, something I raised with Jack - let me know what you think -- but I felt there was some of lack of clarity on what was the 'A' story - I agree it could (you'll say should) be cut down -- and personally I really liked the ghost story (it's not really a ghost story ... ), but IMO there was some really nice imagery there, and I began to feel for that story-line.

Your point about conflict is an interesting one, and would change the tone of the script, which at present is not an 'in-your-face' job, but more evasive puzzle -- indecision aside, I feel that intrigue is as good as conflict, but maybe not to everyone's taste.

Hope to see Jack soon (?). Cheers for the feedback.

Hello fellas.

I just stopped by and ready all your comments.  I can see the news van at the beginning in a chase with the helicopter to amp things up a bit, more action, more tension right away.  Agreed.

I'm thinking that what the script needs the most is to provide a definite link between Lawson and all three stories, including the ghost story.  And the staff can use this to trap Lawson.  I think the Alex Ray story distracts from the Lawson investigation and pulls away from the A story.

I also think Darby figures out the link between the Rock Star bank robberies and Alex's father too quickly.  This should be a drawn out investigation that could ALSO bring Dennis Lawson to the forefront of a police investigation.  Maybe he had something to do with covering it up.  Something, anything to keep him in the story.

There should be a direct connection back to Dennis Lawson in each scene, keeping the A story going full speed ahead.

I also feel I should drop the Steve character altogether and trim the page length by ridding of him and the scene at the restaurant.

Structurally, I could spec this thing down and cut and cut format to keep a smoother pace.  I also think intercutting the three stories more will help keep the Lawson case more prevalent, fresh and at the forefront of this story.

With that being said, I'd like to offer you the chance at a re-write.  Simon's done his version.  You seem to have some good ideas.  I'm done with this script for now and have moved on to a more straight-forward mystery.

Help yourself.

Eric D.

Write to reel... Same site that tee's off on writers for page counts and over writting,120 being far too long, then openly admits in the same review that he never goes over 110 pages -- except for the time when he wrote a 111 page script and that it was only 2 lines and his fade out.

That, to me, sounds like over writing.

Write to Reel also has a rather crazy formula in which each and every scene in which 2 or more characters are talking (without any action taking place) is a subtraction of points. I honestly can't think of a single movie that doesn't have a few talking scenes and IMO, depending on how they're handled, they are not necessarily a problem, automatically.

Quoted from Dreamscale

Dialogue heavy scenes are fine...however, if they are just idle chatter that don't reveal character or move the story forward, they are a waste of everyone's time and the audience will get bored.

Look at Inglorious Basterds' beginning scene for example. It is brilliant. It looks like idle chatter, but is tense and layered. Of course, few can write dialogue like him. :)

Quoted from Grandma Bear

Look at Inglorious Basterds' beginning scene for example. It is brilliant. It looks like idle chatter, but is tense and layered. Of course, few can write dialogue like him. :)

Well, I can't completely agree with you here, Bear Pia, as I wrote in my initial review of Bastards, I found the opening scene a bit ludicrous in the fact that it went on for like 20 minutes of dialogue between 2 people in, I think, 4 different languages?

Now, don't get me wrong, I did enjoy it on 1 hand, but on the other, no one, and I mean no one other than QT could get awy with such a thing, especially opening up the movie.

My point relates to Write to Reel's "scoring system", in which they automatically deduct points every time 2 characters have a conversation in which they can call it talking heads, no matter what's being said, or how long it plays out.

Is that right? I am going off memory here, but I think I'm right in what I'm saying.

If the conversation is extremely well done, layered and intelligent like IB, then it will work. I do however agree with you that if it's automatically knocked down for two people talking then that's stupid. I'm not familiar with write to reel btw...nor do I care to be.

If two charcters are saying things like:

Dan-Hi

stan-hi

Dan- how are you doing today?

Stan- i'm fine, dan.  How are you doing?

Dan- i'm doing fantastic, stan.  Thank you for asking.

Then, yeah, that's a problem.  But if you are weaving personality, character trait and believability in there... Nothing wrong with that.  Life isn't all beef and no sides.  It's a mixture of both... A good movie should also be.

Quoted from ericdickson

There should be a direct connection back to Dennis Lawson in each scene, keeping the A story going full speed ahead.

This sounds like a plan to me.
So far, I've had a hard time latching onto a character...
Someone who can navigate me through the story.
Lawson's talked about a lot in the first 40, but not seen.
I think the direct conflict approach would be served well by using him early on.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from Dreamscale

My point relates to Write to Reel's "scoring system", in which they automatically deduct points every time 2 characters have a conversation in which they can call it talking heads, no matter what's being said, or how long it plays out.

Is that right? I am going off memory here, but I think I'm right in what I'm saying.

Hey Jeff,

I've read several of their reviews and not seen that automatic deduction.
They even accept exposition so long it's an expert talking to a layman.
I think they call it "incluing". So, if they're that understanding there...
It doesn't seem to me they'd ding every talking head instance.

Regards,
E.D.

Hey Guys,

I'm glad there's some discussion heating up on the thread.
I'll pick this up from page 42...

P. 45
Lawson's livening things up.
It's refreshing to see a character inciting conflict within a scene.

P. 47
Rings false that Lawson hands over the folder of info...
Then tells it all to Darby anyway. Feels like clumsy exposition to me.

P. 49
I like that we're getting some forward progress on the stories.
But it's super late to be just getting rolling on that.
The script's almost half gone.

P. 51
Kurt goes into this page long speech and tells a story...
And this is where I'm going to part ways with the script.

But, I will do the authors the courtesy of explaining myself...
I've grown weary of listening to characters always talk about other people.
There's no personal content injected into the journalism exposition.
If there were, I'd keep reading.

Until you find a way to inject personal beats into these stories, it will read flat to me.
Couple that with an ensemble cast and I can't keep everything straight in my head.
Too much information, not enough character for me. I'm out.

I do hope these notes help you develop the script.
Best of luck and keep writing and rewriting.

Regards,
E.D.

Here's "Question 4" of the 9 in their scoring system.

4.) Does the writer understand the challenges and rewards posed by the medium in which they�ve chosen to tell his/her story? Shorthand version of this is: Is it a movie and not a play? Possible 10 out of 10 points.

Here we will be looking for scenes which feature endless pages of just talking. And, if the talking happens in a vacuum unrelated to the plot of the story. Either of these implies the script is not making use of the medium.

In this case, though, the sum of instances will be dramatically less. 1 scene of talking heads or exposition laden dialogue will be forgiven. 2=loss of 2 points. 3-4=loss of 3-5 points. 5-6= loss of 6-9 points. Plus seven scenes= no points.

Quoted from Dreamscale

Ahh, I see. You got that from their explanation of the system.
I just read the reviews and haven't seen that used.
Suppose it depends on how liberal their definition of talking heads are.
I suppose if a couple's in a cab going somewhere, that doesn't count?

E.D.

Quoted from Electric Dreamer

Yeah, it's in "About Us" in the bottom left of the home page.

I haven't read all the reviews, nor have I read any of the scripts (how do you get to the actual scripts, BTW?  I don't see them anywhere).

I do seem to recall reading an earlier review on the sight where they literally did subtract points based on scenes they referred to as "talking heads", but as you correctly point out, Brett, a talking heads scene is highly debatable.

I know this isn't the place to start such a debate, but hopefully Jack and Simon don't mind the attention to their thread.  Obviously, if you put 2 characters in chairs, sitting at a bland or empty table, in a bland room, with nothing happening around them, you've got a case of talking heads.

But, like you said, Bret, does that translate to an INT traveling car scene?  Or on top of a beautiful mountain?  In a liftline at a ski resort?  At a bowling alley?  In a rowdy bar?  Or how about on the very front of a luxury ocean going vessel...like say...oh what's the name of that old ship?   ;D ;D

Quoted from Dreamscale

I haven't read all the reviews, nor have I read any of the scripts (how do you get to the actual scripts, BTW? I don't see them anywhere).

Hey Jeff,

The Amazon Studios scripts are available to anyone with a registered account.
A retail account on Amazon.com works fine, nothing special for the studio division.

Quoted from Dreamscale

I know this isn't the place to start such a debate, but hopefully Jack and Simon don't mind the attention to their thread. Obviously, if you put 2 characters in chairs, sitting at a bland or empty table, in a bland room, with nothing happening around them, you've got a case of talking heads.

I don't see why the authors would mind...
This script has many discussion/interview scenes.

Sprucing up exposition delivery is a very relevant topic here IMHO.
I take exposition during a job interview way better than exposition over coffee. ;D

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from Dreamscale

Jeff, in those WritetoReel reviews, the title of the script is highlighted somewhere in the first paragraph. Just click on the title and it'll take you either to AmazonStudios to read the script, or WritetoReel also has their own hosting page.

As for the dialogue question, I don't really see the problem with two people talking unless their dialogue is blatantly expositional and the scene has a stagnant feel to it. We've all read scenes like that. I think there's a way to weave the exposition in there without it sounding too "convenient."