Feedback...

The script doesn't call for any visuals of the WTC's destruction, or use any audio from the event. It's implied strictly through dialog and some background SFX in the phone message. What we collectively witnessed, is not described as part of the imagery. Although the fact that we collectively witnessed it, gives the reference much of its power.

I don't want to trivialize 9-11, but it says something about many Americans' inability to see the scale of catastrophes - natural and man-made - that befall other nations, every year. There are people in Gujarat, for example, who would probably be grateful to have lost 'only' 3,000 some people, in their last earthquake...and people on southern Sudan, who probably wish that they'd 'only' lost 3,000 people, in the slaughter going on, there...
 
SeanEmer said:
I don't think its fair to compare taboo and blatantly illegal and distasteful sexuality with an uncontrollable event when considering 'where to stop'. Tapping the emotional resorvoir of 9/11 is very different from showing something illegal and commonly distasteful. 9/11 brings up feelings of patriotism, mourning, love, bravery. .
Click to expand...

On the subject of where to stop, I don't have a clue. I do think the analogy holds regarding showing the rape of a child, if anything 9/11 for me was capo di capo of obscenities-- maybe only rivaled by the events that followed in its wake. I'd use a different set of adjective to describe 9/11. I'd probably start with "Nightmarish".

Right now, I'm changing my vote to "don't invoke 9/11" because it's the elephant in the classroom. We SHOULD be talking about the scripts main character, but we're not, we're discussing 9/11.
 
Brian,

Damnit. Good point. :)

All,

Oh well. I'm semi-elated to see the debate though. After my night at work, it's fun to read through posts that are, at the very least, passionate. So, thanks to all for that.

And thanks for reading it. Next script, I'm gonna write about puppy dogs and butterflies...and stay away from 9/11. Ha...
 
brianluce said:
Right now, I'm changing my vote to "don't invoke 9/11" because it's the elephant in the classroom. We SHOULD be talking about the scripts main character, but we're not, we're discussing 9/11.
Click to expand...


Well...it's hardly the fault of the script, when the audience chooses to fixate on something other than the actual story presented...
 
It's not bad. Definitely a lot better than a lot of the drivel getting pettled throughout the underground scene as 'art.'

Some general points, good and bad:

- The descriptions at the beginning are overly fruity and can be irratating to read. Lines like "sprawled across her half of the bed and not a penny more," "A sleeping goddess" and especially "The burnt orange of
morning fades into a piercing yellow" are too poetic for a screenplay, and too cliche for a poem. Just keep it to the basics. You may also want to keep down a few of the overly-analytical set-piece descriptions, since that might distract the reader from the pieces which are more important.

- The 9.11 perspective did not work for me. It's been done to death as of late, and has become ingrained in culture far too much for it to work properly in this script.

- I'm having genuine trouble actually seeing this script transposed to film. The subtleties are so extreme at this point, it makes me wonder whether or not this should be kept to short-story format. Unless shot with absolute tact, I feel as if the overall production would be boring.

- I applaud you for not using one of those "omgz a twist" ending. This is far more effective and mature.

- The dialog is solid and effective. It never for a moment feels forced.

- What is the message of the piece? I'm not seeing it, other than a distressed woman becoming more distressed.

- The picture falling down does not seem to fit. It's far too random for a piece like this.

More to come, I'm off to bed now.

But, nice work, I do look forward to reading other things you've written.
 
Sad Max said:
Well...it's hardly the fault of the script, when the audience chooses to fixate on something other than the actual story presented...
Click to expand...

Disagree. It's the writer's obligation to guide his audience imhop. He's the pilot, we're the passengers. We go wherever he takes us.
 
I think most writers would agree with the comments about the descriptions, though they'd probably use the word (overly) "Novelistic" instead of "Poetic". Personally I like SP's that read like a novel.

What does "OMGZ" mean?



StefanHaynes said:
It's not bad. Definitely a lot better than a lot of the drivel getting pettled throughout the underground scene as 'art.'

Some general points, good and bad:

- The descriptions at the beginning are overly fruity and can be irratating to read. Lines like "sprawled across her half of the bed and not a penny more," "A sleeping goddess" and especially "The burnt orange of
morning fades into a piercing yellow" are too poetic for a screenplay, and too cliche for a poem. Just keep it to the basics. You may also want to keep down a few of the overly-analytical set-piece descriptions, since that might distract the reader from the pieces which are more important.



- I applaud you for not using one of those "omgz a twist" ending. This is far more effective and mature.
.
Click to expand...
 
brianluce said:
What does "OMGZ" mean?
Click to expand...

omg = oh my god. The z represents the simplistic, immature style. For example, 16 yrs olds writing a script with a twist ending might brag to their friends online saying 'dude omgz this twizt ending is awesumz!'
 
SeanEmer said:
omg = oh my god. The z represents the simplistic, immature style. For example, 16 yrs olds writing a script with a twist ending might brag to their friends online saying 'dude omgz this twizt ending is awesumz!'
Click to expand...

God I'm out of touch...
 
brianluce said:
Disagree. It's the writer's obligation to guide his audience imhop. He's the pilot, we're the passengers. We go wherever he takes us.
Click to expand...


He took me somewhere different, I think, than where he took you.

Jeez, stick with the tour group, huh?
 
Whoa, I just realized my comments sounded very mean. That is not my intention at all: this script is good; very good, with some fantastic dialog and a great use of subtext.

In my opinion, it still seems to come off as rather trite, when all is said and done. She (rightfully) dislikes her husband, states as such, then (we assume) he dies, and she feels remorse.

Maybe I'm missing something, as I only read it once, but I feel it needs more.

But it's a simply fantastic start, at the very least.
 
Stefan,

Yeah. I don't think we're on the same page. But, that's cool. I respect your thoughts.

The theme (albeit, loose) is captured in the title and voicemails (that she and he left). Say it now, there may not be a later.

As far as the story, I don't think it played with you as I intended it. She doesn't dislike the departed. But, that is where they left it. That's the point where she lost him. That's where they were. As she can't let go, she wants to hold on to things (keep them as they were), even if it means reenacting and recreating her life as she knew it the morning before she lost him (which is essentially what is going on in the opening.) And, to me, there's nothing to indicate that she hates him. She's clearly not happy. But, to me, all of the events at the beginning of the story are annoying, pet-peevish type occurrences that happen in every relationship (or most). She feels like life has become this annoying routine. But, she doesn't dislike him. Just needs change. Needs him to recognize that she needs change.

When she leaves the voicemail, that's all subtext. (I have to let you go. I'm not happy like this. I have to move on.) It's her breaking point. But, then, she realizes that she can't let go...once again. And, again...remember, if she isn't insane (which...she wasn't when I wrote it), she is in some ways aware that this is a ritual and not a reality. She knows that he isn't really there. She knows it when she calls him. So, she's not so much telling him off (as I'm thinking you read it) as she is trying to tell herself that she has to move on.

It's okay to sound harsh. My ex read your comments and said that you were the me for me....meaning, I have a tendency to sound a bit harsh (unintentionally) when I criticize other people's writing. So, understood.:thumbup:
 
Last edited:
I didn't get the idea she disliked her husband. I even reread the script after stefan said that. On the second read however I felt more in agreement with stefan's other comment about excessive language. I do like a novelistic approach but I think you can tighten up the language a tad--be a little more economical, esp in the stage directions.
 
Holy crap, I totally misread that script. I'm going to claim being very tired as being the major reason to my problematic responses.

I'll re-read it again, the re-evaluate it. I'm terribly sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top