LOGLINE: A young boy tries to save his mother from terminal cancer by seeking out the town’s bogeyman, The Water Man, who is fabled to have conquered death.
WRITER: Emma Needell
SCRIPT BIO: 18 votes on the 2015 black list.
STORY:
GUNNER is a ten year old boy. He lives in a small town in Montana. His mother, Mary, who is his world, is dying of cancer. She's not far from death. Gunner doesn't get along with his father Amos. In fact the only thing that unites father and son is Mary.
When she dies, who knows what will become of the two males of the family.
Mary has kept her cancer secret from Gunner. He knew she was ill in some way, but he didn't know she was on the verge of death. So when he inadvertently finds out that she is dying, he's justifiably scared, for Mary and himself.
Gunner can't accept that his mother will die. He has to do something to help her. But what can he do more than the doctors?
Enter The Waterman. A folklore fable about a man that drowned in a flash flood, only to rise from the dead.
That sounds just like what Gunner needs. But how to find this Waterman?
Enter Joseph, a fifteen year old kid with a cut on his face, allegedly put there by the infamous Waterman.
Gunner steals his dad's rifle and about 80 dollars, and hires Joseph to take him into the woods to find this Waterman.
Right off the bat we're sure that this Joseph is lying to Gunner in order to swindle him out of his money. But Gunner is too desperate and naive to see through Joseph's deception.
Together they venture out into the wilderness in search of the Waterman, unaware that a huge forrest fire rages out there in the very same woods.
Amos learns that Gunner has run off into the woods, and mounts his own search and rescue mission.
The question becomes, will Gunner find the Waterman, will Amos save Gunner from the fire and the wilderness, and how will this journey change them?
INITIAL REACTION:
I ended up enjoying this far more than I thought I would from the logline. I'm always wary of a story where one of the main characters are dying of cancer.
I don't think I've ever seen a good cancer based story. Maybe I have, it's just that nothing springs to mind. 50/50 was a pretty bad film.
There's something too obvious about forcing cancer on a character in a film. It kind of feels like the writer is cheating. Like they're going straight for your heart strings and pulling hard.
But with that element aside, the rest of this script executes pretty well.
I don't know if I'd want to see this film. I think its story is more execution dependant than other storylines. This is usually the case with dramas. The story is not something that really explodes off the page, so for it to do well it needs good direction and great actors.
For example, take the film SAW. The acting was terrible. The direction was so-so - but it didn't matter. The CONCEPT was incredible and brilliantly executed and the numbers at the box office reflect that.
Some aspects of this script really didn't work for me. The convenience of the raging bush fire right when these two boys are going out into the wilderness. It felt a little bit added for the sake of story.
A fix would be to insert the fire earlier. Start the story with the fire. Perhaps even set the story around a REAL bush fire that really happened. And even set it back a few years - in the eighties.
Also, Joseph is selling his story about the Waterman for $1 a hit in a tent.
Have you ever heard of anything like that happening in present day society? I'm assuming this script is set in present day. It doesn't say otherwise.
Can you imagine ten year old kids parting with $1 in a tent with a guy with a cut in his face to tell them a story?
I just don't see kids of today doing this. I imagine this scene would play out weakly on screen - it'd be one of those film moments that only happen on screen, never in real life.
Another problem here is the predictability of the story. Right from the start we se conflict between Amos and Gunner - but there's no real reason for the conflict.
You can immediately see this is going to be the arc of the story.
Amos's arc will be to learn to accept his son for who he is. Gunner's arc is to accept his mother's death as inevitable, unstoppable, and to get over that.
I don't know - you can just see these arcs as soon as you get the story setup. I was never at any stage unsure where the story was going to go, and I was right, it went exactly where I thought it would.
When the reader is one step ahead of your story it makes for slow reading.
All that said, I did still walk away from this story having enjoyed it somewhat. It didn't blow my hat off, but it's worth the read.
CONCEPT:
A child must come to terms with his mother's inevitable death from cancer. That's a pretty dull concept. Inserting the angle of The Waterman here was a wise move. It added a Stand By Me supernatural angle which freshened things up.
CONCEPT RATING: 6.5/10
CONCEPT TIP: If the basis of your concept has already been told a hundred times, be sure to find that fresh angle that will pump some life blood into your story.
FORM:
This script was well written. The formatting was great. No obvious errors at all.
FORM RATING: 9/10
FORM TIP: Take a read of this script if you want to see good form. It's very cleanly written.
STRUCTURE:
Structure was pretty good here. It nailed beats well. The second act didn't drag, as can happen when you have an unstructured screenplay, like yesterday's piece the PALE BLUE DOT.
One thing I would note here is that Gunner doesn't seem to have a flaw. He has a problem, in that he can't accept his mother's death, but I wouldn't say that's necessarily a flaw. Given the circumstances, I think Gunner's reaction to learning his mother is dying of cancer is very real and natural.
Everyone goes through denial as the first stage of grief. To that end, I don't think it's really a flaw. It's great to give Gunner this problem, but it would be better if he had a deeper inner flaw as well.
One of the major problems with the structure here is the predicability of the story. I was always one step ahead of the storyline.
STRUCTURE RATING: 7/10
STRUCTURE TIP: Be careful of following the Hero's Journey structure beat for beat. When you do this the story can become to easily predictable. Throw yourself and the reader a curveball every now and then. It will remove that predictability factor and spice up your script.
CHARACTERS:
Characters were well drawn here. One negative is that they were a little too well drawn. They all felt like they were verging on stereotypes.
Loving mother dying of cancer. Father that just can't connect with his kid.
Kid that's artistic and sensitive has trouble fitting in.
All verging on cliche.
CHARACTER RATING: 6.5/10
CHARACTER TIP: Cliched and stereotyped characters are a great place to start. But use these tropes as starting blocks of clay and rework them into unique personalities. Add elements to your characters that you wouldn't expect and it will add flavor to their personalities.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue worked fine here, but at no point did it pop off the page. Sometimes that's a good thing, sometimes it's bad. I feel the dialogue is one area of this screenplay that could use some amping up.
Too often we finish watching a film and think, well that was okay, nothing special, but at least it wasn't bad.
That's not what you want to be aiming for as a writer. You want to aim for sensational. One way to get people to sit up and pay attention to your work is when your character's dialogue really zings.
DIALOGUE RATING: 6/10
DIALOGUE TIP: When you've nailed your structure, do a dialogue pass. Focus on the way your characters speak. Identify blocks of dialogue that you feel are only so-so, and re write them until they pop.
VOICE:
The voice was nice here, but again, not something that sprang off the page. The story is well told, but it's something that I'm sure I will forget about in the next few weeks.
VOICE RATING 6/10
VOICE TIP: Just like the dialogue pass, do a voice pass. When you have your screenplay as close to finished as you want. Do a pass focusing on the sprite in your writing. See if you can tell the same story but in a more vibrant way.
PRODUCTION:
This would be quite expensive for a drama.
Multiple locations.
Require good actors and director.
I'd say this would come in at around the 20 mill mark.
Which would make it difficult to turn a profit on.
I wouldn't put money down on this.
It'd be a hard sell.
Just thinking about how to market this. Is is horror? Not really. Is it a drama, yes, but with a slight horror angle.
I feel this script would actually do better if it was a straight horror. It's got all the right elements. If the writer and the producers were to lean closer to the horror end of the spectrum, this script could be really powerful.
SUMMARY:
Well written, good story. It does well across the board, but it doesn't excel anywhere that counts. To that end, it's a good script, but just not exceptional. And that's what you need to be if you want to make a dent in the world of film.
OVERALL RATING 7/10
Wednesday, 3 February 2016
Tuesday, 2 February 2016
PALE BLUE DOT - BIOPIC
LOGLINE: Twelve months after returning from a space mission, decorated astronaut Laura Pepper is arrested for the attempted murder of a fellow astronaut.
WRITERS: Brian C Brown & Elliot DiGuisseppi
SCRIPT BIO: 26 votes on the 2015 black list.
STORY:
This is a fictionalised recount of the LISA NOVAK story.
In this screenplay, Lisa is LAURA PEPPER.
Laura has just returned from a successful mission in space fixing satellites and what not.
She returns to her loving family, two young boys, a 12 year old daughter and her loving husband, OWEN.
We spend some time with her and her family and everything is fine. Except maybe it's not. Maybe there was something about being in space that changed the way Laura looks at life.
Laura really wants to go back into space, but Owen and her children don't want her to. Apparently going into space isn't such a safe thing. Apparently there's a chance you could die, and her family - surprise surprise, aren't cool with this.
There's a mild argument of sorts, where nothing is decided.
At NASA, Lauren meets Mark. A gung-ho astronaught with an arrogance level akin to Kim Jong il. - Okay, maybe not that arrogant, but he's up there.
This guy loves himself. He couldn't be more of a player if he wore a t-shirt that had PLAYA written on it.
It doesn't take much for Mark to seduce Lauren.
Lauren falls in love with him, and decides to abandon her loving husband and children for the sake of Mark's cock. Oh, and Mark. I'm sure there's more to him than just his man-member.
Mark has a family of his own. To him, this was nothing but another affair. He's kinda freaked out that Lauren is so serious about them being together.
Soon a new young astronaut shows up, ERIN - she's a hottie and (surprise, surprise, again) Mark starts banging her.
Lauren (surprise, surprise, again, again,) is not cool with this.
So she loses her shit.
She plans to abduct and possibly murder Erin so she can have her man.
Which is, like, you know, totally rational. I get it. Cool.
She waits in Orlando airport for an hour, then stalks Erin to her car where she fails miserably at kidnapping her. Erin flees. Lauren is arrested and tried for attempted murder and kidnapping.
She ultimately pleas out and gets 1 year probation, plus the 2 days jail time she already served.
Boom that's it.
Entire story right there folks. What a winner.
Sigh.
INITIAL REACTION:
Seriously?
A love triangle. That's the back bone of your story. It's 2016 and we have a love triangle being the basis of a story that's done really well on the black list.
But wait, the love triangle involves astronauts.
Well that surely elevates the concept doesn't it! Wow what a great idea! Love triangle astronauts! Woo...
But wait, there's more... Lauren wore an adult diaper when she was driving to kidnap Erin, apparently she didn't want to waste time on the drive stopping to go to the toilet like any normal person.
Well, hot damn! Why didn't you say so in the first place. Let me throw 50 mill at this sucker, someone get me Angelia on the phone.
Double sigh.
Needless to say, I'm not wowed by this idea. Nor the execution. There's this little thing called conflict that drives most stories.
The conflict doesn't show up here until very late in the piece. Until then you have Owen being really lovely to Lauren.
Lauren completing a mission in space - with nothing going wrong.
Sure Lauren now sees life a little differently after being in space - but wouldn't we all have a slightly different perspective after seeing earth from 200 miles up?
There's just nothing interesting here. There's not enough to warrant this story being told.
HAD lauren actually kidnapped Erin, that'd be kinda interesting, maybe. But she didn't. She was just plain old jealous, and she botched the kidnapping.
She didn't even get any jail time. She got one year probation. How many stories are there out there that are waiting to be told and this, a love triangle between astronauts is getting the spotlight.
Speaking of spotlight - the movie - that's a story worthy of being made into film. It has HUGE amounts to say about things that are very very very important. Namely the systematic abuse of children in the Catholic church.
That's a TRUE story worth telling.
This is a fictionalised story based on a very dull idea.
CONCEPT:
Do I even need to say?
CONCEPT RATING 0/10
CONCEPT TIP:
Try writing something that has some sort of gravity to it. A story about a love triangle in 2016 is dull, dull, dull.
FORM:
Form here was off as well. The writers used loads of bold. The story was waaaaay over written 122 pages - could've been 90 pages easy beans.
There were a lot of asides where the writers talked to reader - saying stuff that would never end up on screen.
FORM RATING 2/10
FORM TIP: Learn the formatting rules. They're pretty damn easy to learn. Don't use bold. Don't write asides to the reader. Keep scenes lean. Here we had scenes that went on and on for no reason. I recall one scene that had NOTHING to do with anything.
Here's an age-old test. If you can take a scene out of your screenplay and the story still makes perfect sense - delete the scene. You don't need it.
STRUCTURE:
I don't believe there is any kind of structure here what so ever. There is no goal at any stage in the film. Okay, maybe when Lauren wants to get rid of Erin there's a goal? Maybe? But that hits on page 100 or something. Until then we're just hanging out. Awesome.
No discernible first act. The entire script read like a very long second act.
STRUCTURE RATING 1/10
STRUCTURE TIP: I've said it before, I'll say it again. Learn what a three act structure is before you start writing. Here there is zero structure and consequently the story is boring as hell. Though I actually imagine hell would be quite an interesting place.
CHARACTERS:
The one thing that didn't completely suck about this script. Characters were well drawn. There was a little bit of disparity between them and that made the read less painful.
CHARACTER RATING 6/10
CHARACTER TIP: Make us LIKE the hero. There was nothing to endear us to Lauren. She's the driving force behind this story and she is a self serving bitch.
She couldn't have any more white girl problems if she tried. She's a rich successful astronaut with a caring loving husband. She throws it all away for an affair with an asshole.
How am I supposed to like this person?
If you don't like the hero, you won't want to watch the film.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue was actually pretty good here.
Again, it made the read less painful. Nothing hugely amazing though, nothing that popped off the page. But it worked. Pulled you along through the nothing that was happening in the storyline.
DIALOGUE RATING: 6/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Know WHY you are writing a scene. Aim to hit that WHY beat as soon as you can. When you've nailed it - end the scene.
VOICE:
Sorry what?
VOICE RATING: 1/10
VOICE TIP: Actually understanding the very very very basics of screen writing will help your voice to shine through. While the writing is not bad here, you know what else is not bad?
Boiled cabbage.
But it's a long way from good.
PRODUCTION:
This will probably get made with an A lister like Reese Witherspoon. Then it will make no money. And people will blame everything OTHER than the fact that there is no interesting story here.
A screenplay is the foundation of the film to be. If you start with a foundation as strong as marshmallow... you get the idea....
Don't build houses on marshmallows.
Simple.
Space scenes: Negative.
Large cast: Negative.
Requires A lister to get off the ground: Negative.
No story. Negative.
Hero is a unlikable. Negative.
No consequences to anything in the story what so ever. Negative.
This would cost upwards of 20 million.
This will not make money.
SUMMARY.
A no idea concept that goes nowhere.
OVERALL RATING 1/10
WRITERS: Brian C Brown & Elliot DiGuisseppi
SCRIPT BIO: 26 votes on the 2015 black list.
STORY:
This is a fictionalised recount of the LISA NOVAK story.
In this screenplay, Lisa is LAURA PEPPER.
Laura has just returned from a successful mission in space fixing satellites and what not.
She returns to her loving family, two young boys, a 12 year old daughter and her loving husband, OWEN.
We spend some time with her and her family and everything is fine. Except maybe it's not. Maybe there was something about being in space that changed the way Laura looks at life.
Laura really wants to go back into space, but Owen and her children don't want her to. Apparently going into space isn't such a safe thing. Apparently there's a chance you could die, and her family - surprise surprise, aren't cool with this.
There's a mild argument of sorts, where nothing is decided.
At NASA, Lauren meets Mark. A gung-ho astronaught with an arrogance level akin to Kim Jong il. - Okay, maybe not that arrogant, but he's up there.
This guy loves himself. He couldn't be more of a player if he wore a t-shirt that had PLAYA written on it.
It doesn't take much for Mark to seduce Lauren.
Lauren falls in love with him, and decides to abandon her loving husband and children for the sake of Mark's cock. Oh, and Mark. I'm sure there's more to him than just his man-member.
Mark has a family of his own. To him, this was nothing but another affair. He's kinda freaked out that Lauren is so serious about them being together.
Soon a new young astronaut shows up, ERIN - she's a hottie and (surprise, surprise, again) Mark starts banging her.
Lauren (surprise, surprise, again, again,) is not cool with this.
So she loses her shit.
She plans to abduct and possibly murder Erin so she can have her man.
Which is, like, you know, totally rational. I get it. Cool.
She waits in Orlando airport for an hour, then stalks Erin to her car where she fails miserably at kidnapping her. Erin flees. Lauren is arrested and tried for attempted murder and kidnapping.
She ultimately pleas out and gets 1 year probation, plus the 2 days jail time she already served.
Boom that's it.
Entire story right there folks. What a winner.
Sigh.
INITIAL REACTION:
Seriously?
A love triangle. That's the back bone of your story. It's 2016 and we have a love triangle being the basis of a story that's done really well on the black list.
But wait, the love triangle involves astronauts.
Well that surely elevates the concept doesn't it! Wow what a great idea! Love triangle astronauts! Woo...
But wait, there's more... Lauren wore an adult diaper when she was driving to kidnap Erin, apparently she didn't want to waste time on the drive stopping to go to the toilet like any normal person.
Well, hot damn! Why didn't you say so in the first place. Let me throw 50 mill at this sucker, someone get me Angelia on the phone.
Double sigh.
Needless to say, I'm not wowed by this idea. Nor the execution. There's this little thing called conflict that drives most stories.
The conflict doesn't show up here until very late in the piece. Until then you have Owen being really lovely to Lauren.
Lauren completing a mission in space - with nothing going wrong.
Sure Lauren now sees life a little differently after being in space - but wouldn't we all have a slightly different perspective after seeing earth from 200 miles up?
There's just nothing interesting here. There's not enough to warrant this story being told.
HAD lauren actually kidnapped Erin, that'd be kinda interesting, maybe. But she didn't. She was just plain old jealous, and she botched the kidnapping.
She didn't even get any jail time. She got one year probation. How many stories are there out there that are waiting to be told and this, a love triangle between astronauts is getting the spotlight.
Speaking of spotlight - the movie - that's a story worthy of being made into film. It has HUGE amounts to say about things that are very very very important. Namely the systematic abuse of children in the Catholic church.
That's a TRUE story worth telling.
This is a fictionalised story based on a very dull idea.
CONCEPT:
Do I even need to say?
CONCEPT RATING 0/10
CONCEPT TIP:
Try writing something that has some sort of gravity to it. A story about a love triangle in 2016 is dull, dull, dull.
FORM:
Form here was off as well. The writers used loads of bold. The story was waaaaay over written 122 pages - could've been 90 pages easy beans.
There were a lot of asides where the writers talked to reader - saying stuff that would never end up on screen.
FORM RATING 2/10
FORM TIP: Learn the formatting rules. They're pretty damn easy to learn. Don't use bold. Don't write asides to the reader. Keep scenes lean. Here we had scenes that went on and on for no reason. I recall one scene that had NOTHING to do with anything.
Here's an age-old test. If you can take a scene out of your screenplay and the story still makes perfect sense - delete the scene. You don't need it.
STRUCTURE:
I don't believe there is any kind of structure here what so ever. There is no goal at any stage in the film. Okay, maybe when Lauren wants to get rid of Erin there's a goal? Maybe? But that hits on page 100 or something. Until then we're just hanging out. Awesome.
No discernible first act. The entire script read like a very long second act.
STRUCTURE RATING 1/10
STRUCTURE TIP: I've said it before, I'll say it again. Learn what a three act structure is before you start writing. Here there is zero structure and consequently the story is boring as hell. Though I actually imagine hell would be quite an interesting place.
CHARACTERS:
The one thing that didn't completely suck about this script. Characters were well drawn. There was a little bit of disparity between them and that made the read less painful.
CHARACTER RATING 6/10
CHARACTER TIP: Make us LIKE the hero. There was nothing to endear us to Lauren. She's the driving force behind this story and she is a self serving bitch.
She couldn't have any more white girl problems if she tried. She's a rich successful astronaut with a caring loving husband. She throws it all away for an affair with an asshole.
How am I supposed to like this person?
If you don't like the hero, you won't want to watch the film.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue was actually pretty good here.
Again, it made the read less painful. Nothing hugely amazing though, nothing that popped off the page. But it worked. Pulled you along through the nothing that was happening in the storyline.
DIALOGUE RATING: 6/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Know WHY you are writing a scene. Aim to hit that WHY beat as soon as you can. When you've nailed it - end the scene.
VOICE:
Sorry what?
VOICE RATING: 1/10
VOICE TIP: Actually understanding the very very very basics of screen writing will help your voice to shine through. While the writing is not bad here, you know what else is not bad?
Boiled cabbage.
But it's a long way from good.
PRODUCTION:
This will probably get made with an A lister like Reese Witherspoon. Then it will make no money. And people will blame everything OTHER than the fact that there is no interesting story here.
A screenplay is the foundation of the film to be. If you start with a foundation as strong as marshmallow... you get the idea....
Don't build houses on marshmallows.
Simple.
Space scenes: Negative.
Large cast: Negative.
Requires A lister to get off the ground: Negative.
No story. Negative.
Hero is a unlikable. Negative.
No consequences to anything in the story what so ever. Negative.
This would cost upwards of 20 million.
This will not make money.
SUMMARY.
A no idea concept that goes nowhere.
OVERALL RATING 1/10
Monday, 1 February 2016
TRUE FAN - SPORTS DRAMA/BIOPIC
LOGLINE: After interfering with a foul ball during a Chicago Cubs playoff game, Steve Bartman was tortured and stalked by die hard Cub fans for potentially costing them their first National League pennant since 1945. Years later, in a new town with a new identity—but depressed, overweight and working a dead end job—Steve meets a woman who gives him a new lease on life and reason to live.
WRITER: John Whittington
SCRIPT BIO: 28 votes the 2015 black list
STORY:
This is an odd one. It's half true story, half fiction. The event that sets up the story really happened. In 2003, Steven Bartman was unfortunate enough to be the one fan out of a dozen trying to catch a foul ball at a Cubs' baseball game, who managed to get his hand to the ball.
Simultaneously a Cubs fielder was trying to catch the ball. Had Steve not touched the ball, the fielder would have caught it, which could have potentially led to the Cubs winning the World Series.
What happened instead was that Steve fumbled the catch, the fielder missed the ball, and the Cubs went on to LOSE the World Series.
After the incident, Steve was singled out as the SOLE reason that the Cubs lost, and literally thousands of fans found out where he lived gathered in a mob and threatened to kill him until he was forced to leave Chicago.
All that is true, and takes up to page 50 in a 105 page script.
The second half of the story is a fictionalised account of what happened to the enigma of Steve.
In this imagined world, Steve has changed his name to that of his father, Ron, to avoid being recognised. He's let himself go, works a dead end job and has no friends.
He meets Annie in a supermarket and they hit it off.
A relationship develops, that blossoms at first, but when Annie learns Steve's past, things bottom out. Not because she thinks that what Steve did was wrong, but because Steve refuses to let go of his past. He's let that one incident ruin his entire life.
The question becomes, will Steve be able to let go of his past and move on, or will he let it destroy his entire life.
INITIAL REACTION:
This is an interesting one. The writing here is sleek. Very easy to read. With some writers it's the reading equivalent of a 2000 mile hurdle race. Every sentence is clunky. Even the point of what the writer is saying is lost in the murk.
But here, it's crystal clear.
I see-sawed between liking and disliking this script. There's much to recommend it, but it doesn't nail everything.
Firstly, the setup take 50 pages. That's far too long. To me, the interesting thing about this story is not the incident, but the emotional journey of Steve after the incident. I was really hoping that journey would start at page 25-30, then take up the rest of the story.
But unfortunately, we don't get to the second half of the story until page 50.
And when we do get there, there's no goal to drive the story. When you don't have a goal, the story gets unfocused, and it becomes boring quickly.
A great way to drive a story when you don't have a goal is with conflict. But in the second half of the film, Steve and Annie get along really well for the first half of their time together.
That means for 15 pages of their relationship we have no conflict and no goal.
That gets dull really quickly.
On the plus side, this script highlights a disgusting event in the world of baseball that is just plain sickening.
A man's entire life was ruined because he almost caught a foul ball in the stands at a game of baseball.
Wow.
Just wow.
That says volumes about the mentality of the masses. It also says huge amounts about the newscasters that hyped the pandemonium. There were literally sports newscasters calling for Steve to be beaten to death.
Take at look at Rwanda, the priests preached murder from the pulpits and on the radios and half a million people were slaughtered for no reason.
You might think that a stretch of an comparison, but look at what's happening - in both situations, those with the power, those with the voice used it for ill, used it to incite the masses to murder.
While Steve wasn't killed, it took dozens of police working 24 hour watch around Steve's home to protect him.
If there were no police there, this would be a story about Steve's murder for sure.
Another great thing about this script is that it is a story about the universal theme of accepting your past, letting go and moving on.
To that end, this is a story that will resonate with many people.
CONCEPT:
The concept is okay. It's based on a very well known event. The story is so macabre and unbelievable that it's engaging. But the later half of the story is not developed enough.
CONCEPT RATING 6.5/10
CONCEPT TIP: If you find yourself creating an imagined world around a real world event, be sure to execute that imagined world as best you can. It really feels like the imagined world here is only half-thought through.
FORM:
Beautiful form here. Worth the read to see how to format a screenplay.
FORM RATING: 8/10
FORM TIP: Don't use bold. Don't direct the actor. Don't direct the camera. Keep your writing lean. Don't write anything that can't be seen on the screen. Don't write what a character is thinking, show how they feel through action.
STRUCTURE:
Structure was off here. Despite it being a biopic, which normally allows for more structure rule bending than a normal screenplay.
The event should have happened within the first 7 pages. Then the aftermath of the event over the next 12 pages. By page 25, he should have gone off to Baltimore to start his new life in hiding.
Then the story should have unfolded from there as a normal story would.
STRUCTURE RATING 5/10
STRUCTURE TIP: Understanding even the basics of the 3 act structure will go a long way toward focusing your story. There are countless books that teach it. Buy them, read them - THEN start writing.
CHARACTERS:
Characters were okay here. None of them popped off the page. But in the same breath, none of them were unbelievable.
CHARACTER RATING 6.5/10
CHARACTER TIP: It feels like Steve's character wasn't really thought through properly here. This is a great setup for a deep investigative drama into someone's life and psyche. If you find yourself writing something similar, be sure to delve deep. Really know and understand your characters before you write up their fictionalised life.
DIALOGUE:
Again, dialogue was in the same boat as character creation here. It was suffice, it wasn't bad, there was never a moment when I read a piece of dialogue and thought... hmm that's off, that doesn't work. But in that same breath, there weren't any take-away lines. Any moments that made me laugh out loud or think, 'hey that's some damn good writing'.
DIALOGUE RATING 6.5/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Once you have a safe execution of your dialogue that 'works' on a functional level. Do a dialogue pass and see if you can add some spice to the spoken words, without making it sound out of place.
VOICE:
The clean and lean writing here made for an easy read. To that end, I was focused on the story, and it being so macabre it's something I will remember for a long time. But that's the story. The actual voice that told the story is in the same vein as the character creation and the dialogue execution... just enough to get by, but nothing memorable about it.
VOICE RATING 6.5/10
VOICE TIP: Again, once you have functional version of your script. Do a pass to see if you can add some flair to your writing, without going to far and creating an odd tone.
PRODUCTION:
I wouldn't put money down on this.
It's a sports drama biopic. While these can work when done about a BIG player that once was - these don't fair so well when it's about a fan, and only half the story is real.
You've got stadium scenes. That means huge VFX expenses.
Pretty damn large cast - negative.
You'd need A level talent to get this off the ground - big expense.
I'd say this would be a 30 mill plus venture.
Very hard to see a return on that investment with this story.
SUMMARY:
Great clean, lean writing. Interesting, strange and true story. But it's just not executed right. The structure needs to be re-worked, and the character study needs a lot of work.
OVERALL RATING: 6/10
WRITER: John Whittington
SCRIPT BIO: 28 votes the 2015 black list
STORY:
This is an odd one. It's half true story, half fiction. The event that sets up the story really happened. In 2003, Steven Bartman was unfortunate enough to be the one fan out of a dozen trying to catch a foul ball at a Cubs' baseball game, who managed to get his hand to the ball.
Simultaneously a Cubs fielder was trying to catch the ball. Had Steve not touched the ball, the fielder would have caught it, which could have potentially led to the Cubs winning the World Series.
What happened instead was that Steve fumbled the catch, the fielder missed the ball, and the Cubs went on to LOSE the World Series.
After the incident, Steve was singled out as the SOLE reason that the Cubs lost, and literally thousands of fans found out where he lived gathered in a mob and threatened to kill him until he was forced to leave Chicago.
All that is true, and takes up to page 50 in a 105 page script.
The second half of the story is a fictionalised account of what happened to the enigma of Steve.
In this imagined world, Steve has changed his name to that of his father, Ron, to avoid being recognised. He's let himself go, works a dead end job and has no friends.
He meets Annie in a supermarket and they hit it off.
A relationship develops, that blossoms at first, but when Annie learns Steve's past, things bottom out. Not because she thinks that what Steve did was wrong, but because Steve refuses to let go of his past. He's let that one incident ruin his entire life.
The question becomes, will Steve be able to let go of his past and move on, or will he let it destroy his entire life.
INITIAL REACTION:
This is an interesting one. The writing here is sleek. Very easy to read. With some writers it's the reading equivalent of a 2000 mile hurdle race. Every sentence is clunky. Even the point of what the writer is saying is lost in the murk.
But here, it's crystal clear.
I see-sawed between liking and disliking this script. There's much to recommend it, but it doesn't nail everything.
Firstly, the setup take 50 pages. That's far too long. To me, the interesting thing about this story is not the incident, but the emotional journey of Steve after the incident. I was really hoping that journey would start at page 25-30, then take up the rest of the story.
But unfortunately, we don't get to the second half of the story until page 50.
And when we do get there, there's no goal to drive the story. When you don't have a goal, the story gets unfocused, and it becomes boring quickly.
A great way to drive a story when you don't have a goal is with conflict. But in the second half of the film, Steve and Annie get along really well for the first half of their time together.
That means for 15 pages of their relationship we have no conflict and no goal.
That gets dull really quickly.
On the plus side, this script highlights a disgusting event in the world of baseball that is just plain sickening.
A man's entire life was ruined because he almost caught a foul ball in the stands at a game of baseball.
Wow.
Just wow.
That says volumes about the mentality of the masses. It also says huge amounts about the newscasters that hyped the pandemonium. There were literally sports newscasters calling for Steve to be beaten to death.
Take at look at Rwanda, the priests preached murder from the pulpits and on the radios and half a million people were slaughtered for no reason.
You might think that a stretch of an comparison, but look at what's happening - in both situations, those with the power, those with the voice used it for ill, used it to incite the masses to murder.
While Steve wasn't killed, it took dozens of police working 24 hour watch around Steve's home to protect him.
If there were no police there, this would be a story about Steve's murder for sure.
Another great thing about this script is that it is a story about the universal theme of accepting your past, letting go and moving on.
To that end, this is a story that will resonate with many people.
CONCEPT:
The concept is okay. It's based on a very well known event. The story is so macabre and unbelievable that it's engaging. But the later half of the story is not developed enough.
CONCEPT RATING 6.5/10
CONCEPT TIP: If you find yourself creating an imagined world around a real world event, be sure to execute that imagined world as best you can. It really feels like the imagined world here is only half-thought through.
FORM:
Beautiful form here. Worth the read to see how to format a screenplay.
FORM RATING: 8/10
FORM TIP: Don't use bold. Don't direct the actor. Don't direct the camera. Keep your writing lean. Don't write anything that can't be seen on the screen. Don't write what a character is thinking, show how they feel through action.
STRUCTURE:
Structure was off here. Despite it being a biopic, which normally allows for more structure rule bending than a normal screenplay.
The event should have happened within the first 7 pages. Then the aftermath of the event over the next 12 pages. By page 25, he should have gone off to Baltimore to start his new life in hiding.
Then the story should have unfolded from there as a normal story would.
STRUCTURE RATING 5/10
STRUCTURE TIP: Understanding even the basics of the 3 act structure will go a long way toward focusing your story. There are countless books that teach it. Buy them, read them - THEN start writing.
CHARACTERS:
Characters were okay here. None of them popped off the page. But in the same breath, none of them were unbelievable.
CHARACTER RATING 6.5/10
CHARACTER TIP: It feels like Steve's character wasn't really thought through properly here. This is a great setup for a deep investigative drama into someone's life and psyche. If you find yourself writing something similar, be sure to delve deep. Really know and understand your characters before you write up their fictionalised life.
DIALOGUE:
Again, dialogue was in the same boat as character creation here. It was suffice, it wasn't bad, there was never a moment when I read a piece of dialogue and thought... hmm that's off, that doesn't work. But in that same breath, there weren't any take-away lines. Any moments that made me laugh out loud or think, 'hey that's some damn good writing'.
DIALOGUE RATING 6.5/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Once you have a safe execution of your dialogue that 'works' on a functional level. Do a dialogue pass and see if you can add some spice to the spoken words, without making it sound out of place.
VOICE:
The clean and lean writing here made for an easy read. To that end, I was focused on the story, and it being so macabre it's something I will remember for a long time. But that's the story. The actual voice that told the story is in the same vein as the character creation and the dialogue execution... just enough to get by, but nothing memorable about it.
VOICE RATING 6.5/10
VOICE TIP: Again, once you have functional version of your script. Do a pass to see if you can add some flair to your writing, without going to far and creating an odd tone.
PRODUCTION:
I wouldn't put money down on this.
It's a sports drama biopic. While these can work when done about a BIG player that once was - these don't fair so well when it's about a fan, and only half the story is real.
You've got stadium scenes. That means huge VFX expenses.
Pretty damn large cast - negative.
You'd need A level talent to get this off the ground - big expense.
I'd say this would be a 30 mill plus venture.
Very hard to see a return on that investment with this story.
SUMMARY:
Great clean, lean writing. Interesting, strange and true story. But it's just not executed right. The structure needs to be re-worked, and the character study needs a lot of work.
OVERALL RATING: 6/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)