RodThompson
Veteran
stranger = son
...on Friday.
- Thread starter RodThompson
- Start date
Hi there again! Well, I didn't know the riddle - but for those that do, I'm sure it wouldn't detract from the script. Thing is, when you're 'lost' in a story (well when I'm lost in a story), I like to be carried in the flow and not try to work things out. I like this script more each time I read it - 3 times now!
arroway
Well-known member
nice sparse writing style.
good breezy dialogue.
fast paced read.
could easily be produced.
didn't really understand this bit:
my one criticism is the 20 year old revenge plot is a little far-fetched. how did he track them all down? he didn't know their names, they didn't have any readily identifiable features that an 8 year old boy would never forget. "once upon a time in the west" is built upon the exact same premise but it had explanations for all of these questions.
good breezy dialogue.
fast paced read.
could easily be produced.
didn't really understand this bit:
my one criticism is the 20 year old revenge plot is a little far-fetched. how did he track them all down? he didn't know their names, they didn't have any readily identifiable features that an 8 year old boy would never forget. "once upon a time in the west" is built upon the exact same premise but it had explanations for all of these questions.
RodThompson
Veteran
That's the beauty of short fiction...:huh:
Sarah Daly
Well-known member
Solid, simple, great hook with the riddle and it ties the whole thing together. Yes, he waited a while to get revenge...but this is explainable - I wasn't too worried about that. Overall, a really well written, clever story. I particularly liked the relationship between the father and son that you painted so expertly in the first page. I was genuinely affected when they were shot. This is quite a feat after such a short time spent with them.
So great job - one of my favourites!
So great job - one of my favourites!
REHov520
Well-known member
I liked this one. Even though I pretty much knew exactly what was going to happen from P. 5 and on, the riddle added an extra level to this that lifts it up above your run of the mill revenge story.
Two main problems I had: Stranger's dialogue is way too self-analytical at the end for me. It's like he's trying to describe his own character, in that he's been one man before and now he's going to be another man altogether. I think this is a really cool idea in the way that it works with the riddle (they're two different men?), but the Stranger's explanation of it is just way too overt and hitting us over the head. Try and get this idea across more subtly if possible.
Secondly, I very much think you should lose the last line of the script. The fact that he knew the correct answer to the riddle irritated me. I really liked the idea that he had this wrong answer in his head, that it was two different men, and he was relating this to him taking revenge on the bandidos. So he thinks he's got it all figured out, he'll march into town and kill them and leave as a different man and everything will be better. But then the bartender gives him the real explanation, pulls the rug out from under him, and he realizes he's the same guy as he was before and the real answer was something much more trivial. It would give the whole act of revenege a more ambivalent feel. By making him know the answer all along you lose that, and the whole riddle thing becomes more gimmicky to me.
Good job!
Two main problems I had: Stranger's dialogue is way too self-analytical at the end for me. It's like he's trying to describe his own character, in that he's been one man before and now he's going to be another man altogether. I think this is a really cool idea in the way that it works with the riddle (they're two different men?), but the Stranger's explanation of it is just way too overt and hitting us over the head. Try and get this idea across more subtly if possible.
Secondly, I very much think you should lose the last line of the script. The fact that he knew the correct answer to the riddle irritated me. I really liked the idea that he had this wrong answer in his head, that it was two different men, and he was relating this to him taking revenge on the bandidos. So he thinks he's got it all figured out, he'll march into town and kill them and leave as a different man and everything will be better. But then the bartender gives him the real explanation, pulls the rug out from under him, and he realizes he's the same guy as he was before and the real answer was something much more trivial. It would give the whole act of revenege a more ambivalent feel. By making him know the answer all along you lose that, and the whole riddle thing becomes more gimmicky to me.
Good job!
leepback
Well-known member
I'd have to agree it didn't make sense to me at all. Perhaps it's me?
I think the trouble I had was that by this time I had already figured out the riddle. Not saying I'm some sort of genius, possibly have heard it before in one of those lateral thinking games so the explanation he gave threw me a lot.
Being a bit self indulgent here but I reckon you could have the SPANIARD ask the riddle of the FATHER as a sort of password to get by unscathed thus giving the SON a real need to know the answer. Just my humble suggestion. (maybe a bit cliched)