Thread: Point of No Return
Results 11 to 19 of 19
01-15-2010 10:29 AM
kfer, Anthony here.
Also a nube here, good luck.
Good work. I think the monologues would work as is with the proper actors. It's all in the delivery. A fast-talking car salesman comes to mind... Less would work better as a read possibly.
Very funny, and points out some absurdites that are long over due. Offensive to ones faith or not, I loved your angle. You stayed true to the world you created and the simple act of anthropomorphizing the all knowing, all seeing, but never seen dieties was a master chess move.
My only gripe, is it excludes non beleivers. So, if one is a buddhest, they may not relate to the betrayal. Although, as a story, it is there. So it will work as more powerfull metephor to Christian then non-Christians.
What if, Buddah was playing Galaga in the corner...? lol. Something like that could really expand the idea. I think it works, as is, and would love to see this "Come to life" ha ha ha!
01-15-2010 11:37 AM
I have it on good authority that Budda is a Pac-Man guy. At least, that's what the Dalai Lama told me that time I caddied for him...The Plinkett Equation:
TOS16 + TNG5 + DS94 + VOY11 + ENT 8
__________________________________________________ = History is changing every 23 millionths of a second
F649 + Alp987 + Bet934 + Gam764 + Del837 * 100,000,000,000
01-15-2010 10:01 PM
First off this was thick. Narrative and dialog heavy so for me it didn't really flow and was a bit of a struggle to read. But it was entertaining. Some parts had me laughing.
I bet you there were some more laughs burind in there...lean out your writing. You'll get much better results out of your great ideas.Marnie . . .
01-16-2010 09:05 AM
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
hey guys, thanks for the reads and all of the feedback! i haven't gotten a chance to read everyone's work yet...hopefully this weekend.
i really appreciate your comments, and i agree, the dialogue should be thinned out a bit. glad it made you guys laugh
01-16-2010 09:18 AM
I think you used your idea effectively, the humour worked for the most part and it read decent al though a bit clunky sometimes.
The meeting with Rachel hehe. chuckled a bit at the "hey sugartits" line hehe, came by surprise to me.
Regarding the dialogue, I think there was perhaps one or two many "christ, jesus" in it.
My only problem is that im a bit worn out on the god and jesus characters, but it still worked ok, and it was quite entertaining.I'm also on Moviepoet under name William Flink,
Why must I insist on writing my name backwards?
Scripts on MP:
01-17-2010 03:18 PM
Funny, snappy writing, clever dialogue. My issue is that there isnt much of a story arc - we start off with god and jesus disilussioned and end that way - I feel like something should change. It's funny and I think you want to talk about something big here but I think the story as well as the dialogue has to convey a message. This feels like the middle act of something, a snippet of a story - it needs more of a resolution I think. Again though, great dialogue - and a brave and interesting concept - take it further!
01-19-2010 09:59 PM
I liked a lot of the dialog a lot but I also thought there was a bit of ramblin' on...I think it could be whittled down, excised of its "fat" and be that much more potent.
I didn't like the running gag of God using "Jesus" as as curse word. One instance of this would be enough. Two is overdoing it.
Love the fact that Santa was included.
I really think Buddha would have leveled out the cast, maybe ponder that a bit for the rewrite?
01-21-2010 11:45 AM
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
You've got a good concept here and I found it to be quite funny at times. It made me think of Dogma a lot, even though they're very different. I think you've got some good dialogue that can be really funny with the right actors. However, I felt that the characters were all too much alike. I think it was an interesting choice to make God foul-mouthed, but I think that Jesus should be different. Same goes for Santa. That said, it was a fun read.