I need feedback on my Short 4 page Horror script.
- Thread starter radames_e
- Start date
Egg Born Son
Veteran
WARNING: CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISMS FOLLOW
Very wordy, a great deal of unnecessary and messy description is choking this script.
Alt:
INT. KITCHEN - DAY
Granite counter top. Fruitbowl, stack of letters. A set of
knives laid out in perfect alignment. Water runs from the
faucet.
A PETER(32), clean cut, close-trimmed beard, wears yellow
rubber gloves. He wipes down the counter top.
The kitchen spotless, he rinses the cloth a few times. He
wrings the water out, folds it into a neat square and
places it by the sink. Lines it up precisely.
He removes the gloves, puts them under the sink.
Fruitbowl and letters don't add anything but I'll leave them there. Why all the 'Suddenly's? Am I supposed to jump? INT. KITCHEN, INT. FRIDGE...not needed. He's in the kitchen, the fridge is in the kitchen. If he's called Peter, call him Peter. Why mention he's 32 half a page after he's been introduced? Age and description on first mention. Maybe he should wear an apron? Could have fun with that (grandma's gingham, butcher's clear vinyl or 'world's best chef' etc).
The clock reads midday. Does it have hands or is it digital? A digital clock showing 12:00 would suggest that it hasn't been set rather than it is midday. Unless you show the time clicking over: 'The clock ticks over to 12:00.' You could have him sitting there at 11:59, waiting.
INT. DINING ROOM - DAY
11:59. Peter sits before a meticulously prepared table set
for one. Meat, some fruit. He stares ahead, motionless.
12:00. He begins to eat.
You have:
INT. DINNING ROOM -DAY
Man continues to eat - Suddenly there's a KNOCK on the door.
Man continus to CHEW his food setting his utensils down on
the table organized, he reaches for the napkin while
swallowing his food, wipes his standing up folding the
napkin, setting it aside next to his fork as he heads to the
front door. Man opens the front door.
Better grammar:
INT. DINING ROOM - DAY
Peter eats. There's a knock on the door. He continues to
chew his food, neatly sets his utensils down on the table,
reaches for his napkin as he swallows. Wipes his mouth,
stands up while folding the napkin. Sets it aside next to
his fork. He heads to the front door. He opens the door.
More efficient:
A knock at the door. Peter finishes his mouthful, sets
down his utensils, aligns them. He wipes his mouth, neatly
folds his napkin and sets it down. He stands, pushes in his
chair and heads for the door.
He doesn't need to 'continue eating' because he hasn't changed location or action, also no need for the slug. The preceding close up is directing in the script anyway and unnecessary. No need to describe the act of eating in minutae, most of us instinctively know what it entails. It is a directing decision to focus on it. His character is anal retentive, describe it but in not so many words. By now I understand he is uptight from the previous scene, no need to pedantically describe every action. I've reinforced this behavior using only four words to modify his action descriptions: 'aligns them.' and 'neatly folds'. Further on this, because the character is uptight and methodical, he will perform ALL actions SEQUENTIALLY, COMPLETELY and IN ORDER. He will NEVER perform two actions at once ('reaches for a napkin as he swallows'). His efficiency is from precision, order, control. One thing at a time, not sloppy multi-tasking. Finally, he doesn't open the front door from the Dining Room.
I'd suggest not using words like 'perplexed' if you don't understand them properly. I'd further suggest (as has been correctly pointed out to me recently) that you don't use them even if you do understand them. Use simple words that your reader doesn't need to figure out. I'll leave it there for the grammar and formatting. You need to do a lot of work in those areas. Spelling is not too bad but needs a little work too. A few words like 'Dinning' (that act of making a lot of noise?) and surprised (correct in english but the rest of the script uses american words/spellings, so incorrect).
Now to address the story, up to this point it's okay. From here it goes downhill. There's not a great deal to engage with. The fairly cliche set up could work well but after grinding on every minute detail you just rush from here. I can see what you envision and your first minute could look good but it doesn't continue to work once the young man shows up. The twist isn't a twist, it's a turn and should be the halfway point of your story.
Since you haven't made Peter a sympathetic character, what follows should be the cathartic 'torture' of Peter as the young man deconstructs him (see Hard Candy, starring Ellen Page). Dexter is a good reference for your Young Man, to personalise the audience's avenging angel. If we are siding with him we must want to side with him. You can do this by demonising Peter or by helping us relate to the Young Man (giving him a name would be a start). Secondly the young man should be more interesting or horror-cool in some way, the simplist way is a gimmick. In horror films most people on some level are rooting for the bad guy. I don't remember their victims but I know Freddie Krueger, Pinhead etc.
If the point was you wanting to flip the expectations of who is the bad guy, Peter needs to be sympathetic. No one would be sympathetic to Peter, even if he wasn't a serial killer. Have him rescue a kitten.
The dialogue is unconvincing, doesn't sell the character and doesn't even work when spoken out loud. People speak in short sentences. About half the length of what they'd write (to say the same thing). Maybe because communication is partly body language but mostly because we have to breathe. Always vocalise and act out your dialogue when you write it. It will automatically help you in this area. The second problem with the dialogue is characterisation. Peter doesn't speak like he acts, his dialogue is uncontrolled, his emotions are uncontrolled. He speaks too much, he gives too much away for very little prompting.
The full list of names is problematic. The fact it reaches Z suggests that Peter is done. If he is done maybe it is time for judgement. On the other hand, if it's over it's in the past and therefore he is not beyond redemption. If he's not done, why end on Z? More importantly the list goes on too long and so loses it's impact in delivery. 'Alice, Bobby, Catherine, David, Esmeralda, Frank, Gina....need I go on?'. Catherine is not a good choice for C as it sounds the same with a K.
So in summary, need to work on grammar and formatting a lot, on spelling a little. Need to consider your character when writing dialogue, not a word out of Peter's mouth rings true. Don't direct in the script, almost all your issues come from trying to describe the shots...imagine the action from an overhead perspective, not in terms of what the camera sees. That's a directorial decision. If you are the one making this, go ahead. It's probably better in your head than on the page. Workshop the dialogue with your actors and let stuff come spontaneously into the script through that process.
It is not a good script on almost any level but that said, it is not the worst first script. You could actually make this. It won't be good because of the story flaws but could have some visually interesting bits. You tried to do an interesting idea, something different (although believe me this is cliche). I think given time and effort, you might have the spark so I'd encourage you to keep at it. But this is a draft. Not even a final draft. The key is rewrites. The key is to write a lot. It takes a lot of writing to get to the point of being a novice. A lot more writing before you can be an amateur. There's no shortcuts. You need to write. Hopefully some things I've suggested here will be useful to you.
If you're just starting out it has enough in it to practice using the camera and editing. It might even be a good thing because you can focus on the technical stuff without being too concerned about the story. There's some shots and sequences that would be cool to do, the kitchen/dining section could work out real good.
Very wordy, a great deal of unnecessary and messy description is choking this script.
Alt:
INT. KITCHEN - DAY
Granite counter top. Fruitbowl, stack of letters. A set of
knives laid out in perfect alignment. Water runs from the
faucet.
A PETER(32), clean cut, close-trimmed beard, wears yellow
rubber gloves. He wipes down the counter top.
The kitchen spotless, he rinses the cloth a few times. He
wrings the water out, folds it into a neat square and
places it by the sink. Lines it up precisely.
He removes the gloves, puts them under the sink.
Fruitbowl and letters don't add anything but I'll leave them there. Why all the 'Suddenly's? Am I supposed to jump? INT. KITCHEN, INT. FRIDGE...not needed. He's in the kitchen, the fridge is in the kitchen. If he's called Peter, call him Peter. Why mention he's 32 half a page after he's been introduced? Age and description on first mention. Maybe he should wear an apron? Could have fun with that (grandma's gingham, butcher's clear vinyl or 'world's best chef' etc).
The clock reads midday. Does it have hands or is it digital? A digital clock showing 12:00 would suggest that it hasn't been set rather than it is midday. Unless you show the time clicking over: 'The clock ticks over to 12:00.' You could have him sitting there at 11:59, waiting.
INT. DINING ROOM - DAY
11:59. Peter sits before a meticulously prepared table set
for one. Meat, some fruit. He stares ahead, motionless.
12:00. He begins to eat.
You have:
INT. DINNING ROOM -DAY
Man continues to eat - Suddenly there's a KNOCK on the door.
Man continus to CHEW his food setting his utensils down on
the table organized, he reaches for the napkin while
swallowing his food, wipes his standing up folding the
napkin, setting it aside next to his fork as he heads to the
front door. Man opens the front door.
Better grammar:
INT. DINING ROOM - DAY
Peter eats. There's a knock on the door. He continues to
chew his food, neatly sets his utensils down on the table,
reaches for his napkin as he swallows. Wipes his mouth,
stands up while folding the napkin. Sets it aside next to
his fork. He heads to the front door. He opens the door.
More efficient:
A knock at the door. Peter finishes his mouthful, sets
down his utensils, aligns them. He wipes his mouth, neatly
folds his napkin and sets it down. He stands, pushes in his
chair and heads for the door.
He doesn't need to 'continue eating' because he hasn't changed location or action, also no need for the slug. The preceding close up is directing in the script anyway and unnecessary. No need to describe the act of eating in minutae, most of us instinctively know what it entails. It is a directing decision to focus on it. His character is anal retentive, describe it but in not so many words. By now I understand he is uptight from the previous scene, no need to pedantically describe every action. I've reinforced this behavior using only four words to modify his action descriptions: 'aligns them.' and 'neatly folds'. Further on this, because the character is uptight and methodical, he will perform ALL actions SEQUENTIALLY, COMPLETELY and IN ORDER. He will NEVER perform two actions at once ('reaches for a napkin as he swallows'). His efficiency is from precision, order, control. One thing at a time, not sloppy multi-tasking. Finally, he doesn't open the front door from the Dining Room.
I'd suggest not using words like 'perplexed' if you don't understand them properly. I'd further suggest (as has been correctly pointed out to me recently) that you don't use them even if you do understand them. Use simple words that your reader doesn't need to figure out. I'll leave it there for the grammar and formatting. You need to do a lot of work in those areas. Spelling is not too bad but needs a little work too. A few words like 'Dinning' (that act of making a lot of noise?) and surprised (correct in english but the rest of the script uses american words/spellings, so incorrect).
Now to address the story, up to this point it's okay. From here it goes downhill. There's not a great deal to engage with. The fairly cliche set up could work well but after grinding on every minute detail you just rush from here. I can see what you envision and your first minute could look good but it doesn't continue to work once the young man shows up. The twist isn't a twist, it's a turn and should be the halfway point of your story.
Since you haven't made Peter a sympathetic character, what follows should be the cathartic 'torture' of Peter as the young man deconstructs him (see Hard Candy, starring Ellen Page). Dexter is a good reference for your Young Man, to personalise the audience's avenging angel. If we are siding with him we must want to side with him. You can do this by demonising Peter or by helping us relate to the Young Man (giving him a name would be a start). Secondly the young man should be more interesting or horror-cool in some way, the simplist way is a gimmick. In horror films most people on some level are rooting for the bad guy. I don't remember their victims but I know Freddie Krueger, Pinhead etc.
If the point was you wanting to flip the expectations of who is the bad guy, Peter needs to be sympathetic. No one would be sympathetic to Peter, even if he wasn't a serial killer. Have him rescue a kitten.
The dialogue is unconvincing, doesn't sell the character and doesn't even work when spoken out loud. People speak in short sentences. About half the length of what they'd write (to say the same thing). Maybe because communication is partly body language but mostly because we have to breathe. Always vocalise and act out your dialogue when you write it. It will automatically help you in this area. The second problem with the dialogue is characterisation. Peter doesn't speak like he acts, his dialogue is uncontrolled, his emotions are uncontrolled. He speaks too much, he gives too much away for very little prompting.
The full list of names is problematic. The fact it reaches Z suggests that Peter is done. If he is done maybe it is time for judgement. On the other hand, if it's over it's in the past and therefore he is not beyond redemption. If he's not done, why end on Z? More importantly the list goes on too long and so loses it's impact in delivery. 'Alice, Bobby, Catherine, David, Esmeralda, Frank, Gina....need I go on?'. Catherine is not a good choice for C as it sounds the same with a K.
So in summary, need to work on grammar and formatting a lot, on spelling a little. Need to consider your character when writing dialogue, not a word out of Peter's mouth rings true. Don't direct in the script, almost all your issues come from trying to describe the shots...imagine the action from an overhead perspective, not in terms of what the camera sees. That's a directorial decision. If you are the one making this, go ahead. It's probably better in your head than on the page. Workshop the dialogue with your actors and let stuff come spontaneously into the script through that process.
It is not a good script on almost any level but that said, it is not the worst first script. You could actually make this. It won't be good because of the story flaws but could have some visually interesting bits. You tried to do an interesting idea, something different (although believe me this is cliche). I think given time and effort, you might have the spark so I'd encourage you to keep at it. But this is a draft. Not even a final draft. The key is rewrites. The key is to write a lot. It takes a lot of writing to get to the point of being a novice. A lot more writing before you can be an amateur. There's no shortcuts. You need to write. Hopefully some things I've suggested here will be useful to you.
If you're just starting out it has enough in it to practice using the camera and editing. It might even be a good thing because you can focus on the technical stuff without being too concerned about the story. There's some shots and sequences that would be cool to do, the kitchen/dining section could work out real good.
Last edited: