Prepared by Paul Kinsey - Short, Horror, Action - Sergeant Smyth and Deputy Stephenson will be transporting a bus load of inmates to their final destination for crimes-- Nah. They're screwed. All of them. - pdf, format 8)

I didn't initially see how the flashbacks were anything other than filler, but they hold a purpose later, so good work there.

There's elements that work well here, and bringing in multiple legends is effective, there's a few comedic moments that I don't think sit as well, but that could be just me.

All in all a decent scripts, some strong visuals and good use of the legends.

Anthony

Well written and a decently told story... just not a story for me. Sorry I don't have any more to add.

Decent little story here.

I was at first confused with the VO but then realized you were using several different legends in this piece which is at least original IMO.

I like the fact that this writer has voice and isn't afraid to use it.

I never understood why Smyth did what he did. I never liked him either. But that isn't a problem for me.

Not sure I love the title...And not sure I love the logline because it really does give what's going to happen away.

Enjoyable read. Good job with the OWC.

A well-written story. Especially enjoyed the use of other legends. The only real let-down for me is the lack of explanation for Smyth's actions. I'm left with no choice but to presume he hates criminals. Also, I think the legend with the hangman and the car didn't really fit in all that well. Just seemed out of place to me.

Overall, quite like this one.

Not sure why Smyth credits his girlfriend with almost killing him. Seems whoever hung him from a tree did the heavy lifting, so to speak.

Giving the Inmates names, even fake names, would’ve helped me distinguish them better. Later they end up getting shot and crushed without it being specified which ones were killed. I guess the flashbacks tricked me into thinking they would be important characters.

I like the attempt to use multiple legends and tie them together, but it never really came off for me. Probably the biggest thing that could help that is elaborating on Smyth and why he does this. Why now? Why these people? Stephenson, his coworker, was expendable too? Maybe if there was a specific prisoner he wanted to deal with, or he psychologically snapped and was trying to create a legend of his own, it would feel like there was more of a purpose. As is, I couldn’t grasp it.

Stuff like "Dirty, cracked, oily fingers" reads awkwardly, especially as the beginning of a script.

The writing is really unclear, what does "Young BC glassed fatty punk scrambles from back seat." mean? There's a lot of similar instances in the script. Underwritten in parts so to say. Cap any characters when introduced, line or no lines and flashback or no flashback.

Not entirely sure what this was, hard to follow, again, because of the writing. I could definitely guess, but I don't want to embarrass myself. It's a shame too, since there was a clear voice here but the story was lost on me. Could do with a good rewrite.

Oh this was great. I like the way you write. So fast and flowing. I thought maybe there was too many 'flash' scenes at the beginning and could be trimmed down a bit. But overall I thought this was a fun short.

So, it appears you're experimenting with the Dan Gilroy method of screenwriting - nothing wrong with trying things out, I'm all for it and the OWC is as good a platform as any for you to see if the audience responds to it in a positive light.

Unfortunately, in my case it only served to distance me from the story.  I have a feeling this style doesn't necessarily translate well in the telling of a 'short'.

Combining this style of writing with the multi-strand legends didn't do your story any favours imh. It distanced me further I'm afraid. I want to feel invested with your characters and I re-read the script to get the full meaning of what the story was all about, but still I wasn't feeling it. You need to show me more not get caught up so much in the words you're trying to construct cleverly.

Example:
The grinding action of the bus’ weight spews blood from the
crushed inmates onto all aboard.

What?

That's just so contrary to what I think you're trying to achieve - economy with your words but expressive at the same time. This should be a visually graphic scene but I'm not feeling it or visualizing it. The bus has overturned, the inmates are crushed, and there's lots of blood, right?

Be stylish, be economical, but if it's at the expense of me responding in a visceral way then I think you defeat your purpose.

The bus rolls off the shoulder, and flips onto its side on
top of the inmate and inmate one handcuffed to the side
mirror.

So, the bus rolls, flips, and pins inmates one and two - to the 'side mirror'? I don't get the last part - do you mean it skewers them? Oh no, I get it now - they're handcuffed to the side-mirror prior to the bus crashing - see, in the telling of that line it was ambiguous imo.

Then, this:

Rain pours.
Water rushes.
Smyth waits.
Nothing.

It takes up four lines.

But then this expansive description:

'Like trained magician Capuchin thieves they snatch
Stephenson’s keys, ... '

You could do without the 'trained magician' imh, cause the Capuchin does the job in one word - as long as you're confident most people know what Capuchin monkeys are.

I really don't mean to be harsh. I'm giving you my candid opinion after reading the story twice. I think your storytelling is getting bogged down in style over substance and your narrative suffers for it. I have no idea from reading this if it would translate well to screen. Maybe it would... maybe I'm short-sighted.  :-/

You're obviously a talented writer otherwise I don't think you'd even be able to attempt this. I'm just not sold it worked to tell your story well.

Wow.  I rather like this one.  Based on the descriptions, it's clear that a skilled writer submitted it - which doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

LOVE the premise and the urban legend mish-mosh.  Unlike several other OWC scripts I've read that tried to combine more than one UL so far, this one actually succeeds - at least for the most part.  

IMHO: the snazzy descriptions do get a little too terse at times; going from snappy and fun to unclear.  Same with the action.  A bit more focus is called for, to make sure that there's no questioning what's happening at all times. (Yes, I get what happened on the bus - but it could still be made clearer.)

But...a very, very solid foundation for a gem of a script.  In my estimation, it's already 4/5s of the way there....

I'm on the fence as to whether I like this or not.  On one hand, it's pretty original, it's visual, it's compelling. Things necessary to a great script.

But I'm also torn as to whether all the flashbacks serve the purpose they're intended to. In a sense, they're all shoehorned in, because there's no connection between one legend and the other.  Now what WOULD make sense would be if each of the criminals in the previous urban legends were in the bus at the end. THAT would tie it all together and make sense of all of this.

The writing's great. Unfortunately, there needs to be a little more cohesion brought to the story to make it pay off.  
Gary

It seems to me the other legends DO fit in because (1) the incidents involve Smyth or family, and (2) they show he has a thing for legends.

It's clear at the end that he knows of the Boy Scout legend, plus the finale takes place on Baden-Powell Lane -- Baden-Powell being the founder of the Boy Scouts.

So killing the inmates is done in a kind of "legendary" way.

Why does he kill them? I'm not sure.  Maybe he's so sick of being a grease monkey in the prison garage that he takes it out on them.

The title is not bad ( a play on the scout motto).

Some things could spiffed up some, as others have said, so I'll leave it at that.

I enjoyed the use of multiple urban legends within this one.  Has something juicy in its core.

The descriptions of characters are also refreshing.  Pump monkey being a personal favorite.  It's evidently clear the writer is quite decent at weaving a tale.  I'd add more on the concept overall, but I think most of what I want to say has been said by others.

Decent overall concept that delivers on multiple urban legends.

I loved the style of the first half of this. The action line descriptions and 'asides' were funny!

It lulled a bit when the shit began to go down. The humour became fair dinkum stuff. Maybe the writer hurried at the end? I dunno, it seemed to change course too much.

But it was cool and would be even better with a re-do.

I found this incredibly difficult to read. I had to read lines a few times to fully comprehend them. Maybe it's just too American for my English eyes.

There wasn't enough narrative drive for me, with the constant flashbacks and VO. I had no motivation, nor desire to read on.

Judging by the other comments it's found a home, so that's good. Didn't work for me on any level, I'm afraid.

I found the prose to be kind of irritating. It read to me like a writer trying to convince me that they were clever instead of doing it with a clever story. I thought it was an interesting idea to have the alternate past urban legends, but it didn't serve the story, I don't think and I felt that the voice over was unnecessary. Once again, it read as being faux-clever instead of something that really needed to be there. A disappointment from somebody who does have talent.

C-.

PREPARED

The script got a bit of everything which some may like. Not for me. Flashbacks, stunts, then a massacre, don't know, just didn't arrive at me this bus.

Good luck.

I'm not sure what to make of this really.

The outline of the story is right up my street, but I found it quite difficult to read smoothly and a bit confusing. There were a lot of lines and descriptions I had to re-read because I just didn't get the terminology used (my fault, not yours).

There were several UL's used too, which for me made it all seem a little too busy.

4 more to go, so usually I try and give more detailed feedback, but the last time I gave detailed feedback, it didn't go over too well, so looks like I should try and play nice and keep things short and sweet.

Well, I can tell from the logline what kind of writing I'm in for and sure enough, it is what I expected it to be...and it's not for me in any way, shape, or form.

Very strange style on display here with so many missing words, bizarre "look at me" descriptions, and just hard to follow writing that thinks its alot smarter than it really is.

Based on reviews, looks like alot of peeps like it, so good for you.

I'm out on the top of Page 2, and like Rick, I have absolutely no desire to go any further.

The opening voice overs were too long for my taste and in part unnecessary since the action that followed did a nice enough job of explaining the plot point. If you are going to keep the action blocks, then I don’t think the detailed dialogue is required and is really redundant. For example:

Quoted Text SMYTH (V.O.) Legend has it I fucking hate cars because my dear father, working as a gas station attendant, was murdered trying to protect a lady customer from a maniac hiding in the backseat of her car.

Could simply be:

SMYTH (V.O.)
Legend has it I fucking hate cars because my dear father was chopped to death at a gas station.

Quoted Text SMYTH (V.O.) Yet another legend has it I fucking hate cars because my sweet mother, helping an old lady find her own car in a parking lot, was almost murdered, or worse, by a hairy armed nutcase in an old lady’s dress.

Could simply be:

SMYTH (V.O.)
Or maybe because my sweet mother was almost murdered in a parking lot.

Basically, since the action that follows details what happens to Mom and Pop - I don't think you also need to include it in the dialogue. There were other instances where I just felt the dialogue could have been crisper.

There were several parts of the script that were very well written – a nice clear flow.

Maybe I’m thick headed, but I didn’t get the link from the opening and the ending of the story – i.e., the link between his hatred for cars vs. killing the inmates and the scout ghosts.

The logline has me thinking this is a proper pisser – let’s see…

As Jeff would say, there are problems right out of the gate, or big red flags waving around giving me signals but I’m not sure if this is on purpose or not yet?

Yep, that’s it! This feels like it was written in spite of good old Jeff – everything he picks up on is on display. I’m not even gonna bother and just enjoy the spectacle.

Hope you don’t mind – I skipped the quick flashes.

Truth! I can’t get past page 3 – I’m tired and can’t read any further. My apologies if this is a serious effort but this needs work. If this is a pisser then there is nothing remotely funny here IMO.

Edit: Read through the reviews so decided to give this another chance – maybe I was thrown by the logline.

“Deputy Stephenson riding shotgun with his shotgun”

“The literally chained inmates are figuratively off the chain with alarm.”

I’m stumped and out for a duck at page 5.

Whoa. This really pushed my A.D.D. to the limits. Too much going on for me and I got lost pretty quick.

I think it's missing something - and it's Smyth's motivation. I know from the logline that he did it for their crimes. But I don't see why Smyth would decide to play judge all of the sudden. I also don't know why now. I think these are two important things you have to build up to.
Instead - entertaining though- the first part didn't seem to render any support to the second part. The first part was about why Smyth hates cars. So it's like two different shorts in one for me.

But it was incredibly entertaining. And I still wanted to see what Smyth's plan was. That's good.

It wasn't easy to read for me.

Some of the wordings completely lost me. Like "radiates heat distorted air" or "coke-bottle tub-o-lar". And there are many instances like this. "rides shotgun with his shotgun" - is this intentional?

Lastly, there's a blend of comedy and horror here which works for me. But I'd work on that first part - it should go together with the second part in my opinion.

For one of the shorter scripts in the challenge this seemed to take a while to get through.

There's a lot going on here and not much of it worked for me. I usually don't mind flashbacks but here they just seemed to be used to cram in as many different legends as possible. The second half of the script confused me.

A glib, mirthless “That just happened” kinduva story.
I don’t think there’s much of an audience for essentially just a scene or sequence.
Smyth’s motivation for killing the prisoners is there, but you need to tie in the girlfriend’s significance more otherwise his rant about hating her is meaningless.

Writing style:
The montage in the flashbacks in the beginning were a bit confusing. I had to read them a couple of times to understand what's going on. Some misspelling too.

Dialogue:
It sounded alright. I didn't find the inmates lines funny. I didn't mind the voice overs.

Character:
Even though all the events were centered on Smyth, he still seemed flat to me. I didn't care nor root for him.

Story:
The setup which consisted of his previous flashbacks had no connection to the ending. Everything felt detached. If I didn't know better, I'd say this is what the members call "a pisser."

Good luck.

SS alumni know I do my homework.
You name it, I read it. Multiple times, in 31 flavors.

Urban legends tend to be stupid, and are frequently dumb situations a normal person wouldn't find themselves involved in.

So, I started looking for something in common between a few of them I could string together, maybe let some dominoes fall as one character escapes predicament after predicament or madman aggressor becomes the next madman's victim.

Screwit.
I wanted a reaping.

And then I saw a car & vehicle theme emerging.

Smyth lost his father to 'The Killer in the Backseat.'
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/backseat.asp



"BC glasses" are "birth control glasses."

In his old age Inmate One wears thick coke-bottle glasses, in his youth he wore birth control glasses. Also as he aged he grew from fatty to obese.

Smyth's mother was nearly a victim of the 'Hairy Armed Shopping Mauler.'
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/hairyarm.asp



He was young and hairy, now he's old, grey-haired and still hairy.

Young Smyth himself was nearly done in by his stupid, panicky girlfriend from 'The Boyfriend's Death.'
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/boyfriend.asp



Fortunately for the vengeful Smyth these three madmen were not only at some point captured and incarcerated but also all being transported in the same vehicle at the same time that he happened to be driving, in which they would all become victims of 'Boyscout Lane.' 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scout_Lane

Smyth was "Prepared", as in the Boy Scout motto "Be prepared."

The road he murdered them on was named after Scouting founder Robert Stephenson Smyth Baden-Powell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baden-Powell,_1st_Baron_Baden-Powell

The deputy gets his name from Robert Stephenson Smyth Baden-Powell

Smyth's motivation was Inmate One murdered his father, Inmate Two would have killed his mother, and Inmate Three almost killed young Smyth - with a great deal of hapless assistance from young Smyth's panicky girlfriend.

IDK WTH some of you were reading. All the clues are there, some points are not even clues, they're spelled out.

Now, what I do see plain as murder is that I didn't kill Stephenson in any meaningful manner - should let the escaping inmates kill him with his own pistol immediately after they got out of their cage.
And I wholesale failed to have Smyth plot to go hunt down his old girlfriend to wrap up with a bow this sordid affair.
Major fail.
(But that's what happens when you finish writing at four in the morning! Ha! Dumb@ss me.)

For the life in me I don't know why what trips you guys up on the reading of the writing of the screenplay doesn't seem to be a problem that will transfer to screen.
Anything "confusing" in a screenplay will be solved by people paying to direct or produce the film.
But if you wanna win pretty pages contests then I'll concede.

"She" looks good, right?


::)


To those of you who could "see" the actual story (good or bad) for the trees: Thank you.
You guys make legit points.

Thanks for breaking it down this way. All the cues/clues were there. Fascinating to see how you put  things together.

Just goes to show how the chore of reading so many scripts and making  a comment can cause some to get short-changed and/or treated in a flippant manner.

Next time around, i'll take the entire two weeks to read. Somehow I missed the fact that we had two weeks and got it all done in one.

Hwnry