LOGLINE: A fisherman sails out of Martha’s Vineyard in search of the shark that killed his fellow sailors while they were stranded in the water for four days after their ship was attacked by a Japanese submarine.
WRITER: Will Dunn
SCRIPT BIO: 18 votes on the 2015 black list.
STORY:
This is the genesis story of QUINT from Jaws. How he came to have such an incredible chip on shoulder when it comes to sharks.
The story is told in dual time line, jumping between 1945 and 1946. In 1945 Quint and his comrades deliver the first atomic bomb to an island near Japan, but shortly after delivery their ship is sunk and they spend four days floating in the sea waiting to be rescued.
All the while the sharks are having a feeding frenzy. In 1945 we also meet Laura. Quint's love interest. It's not a natural fit, these two are from different worlds, but there's chemistry enough to make it happen.
In 1946. Quint tries to reintegrate back into society but he's plagued by day light hallucinations of the horrors he witnessed during those four days in the water.
Laura wants to marry Quint, her wealthy and powerful father is even okay with this, but Quint knows he is damaged goods beyond repair.
The only way he's going to be able to beat these hallucination demons is if he goes back out there and kills a shark. The bigger the better.
The question becomes, will Quint survive the ordeal, and will it do anything toward quelling his terror visions.
INITIAL REACTION:
There's a lot of good here, but there's just as much bad. I'll start with the good.
This is a very deep story. We are taken into the depths of a mind suffering from some pretty heinous PTSD. It is almost a horror film in that sense. A good chunk of the film is set in the water, with Quint and his men being picked off one by one by the sharks.
The psychological terror reminds me of Jacob's Ladder, while the real life terror of being eaten alive by sharks echoes Open Water.
There's definitely a market for this story if executed well.
It also doesn't go into any cheesy areas. None of the moments come across as contrived for the sake of story, none of the characters, none of the dialogue - everything feels genuine, which only adds to the sense of terror throughout.
It's not a happy ending either. I could imagine a lesser writer trying to wedge some happiness into the close of the film, but it's not like that, which again, only adds to the authenticity of the piece.
Now the negatives --
It's very slow moving. I mean molasses slow. And that comes back to the nature of the story itself. There's not a huge amount going on.
Quint meets Laura. Small affair. Quint goes out to sea. Deliver bomb. No problem there, then boom, they're hit by torpedoes, they go in the water where they float about for 4 days then get rescued.
Quint then suffers from PTSD, ruins his relationship with Laura, and goes and kills a shark to exact revenge and hopefully clear up his daylight hallucinations.
That's the entire story in a nutshell.
The story really gets into the minutiae. Quint spends a huge swathe of the story in the water trying not to be eaten, and a huge swathe on the boat hunting the shark. It felt like we were in the water and on the boat for about 80% of the film.
Put simply, things got dull. There's only so many daylight hallucinations we can endure before the effect of them start to wear off.
Like wise, watching people float in water while sharks are after them, is scary at first, but soon grows tiresome.
The problem here lies in the lack of goals.
When they're in the water the goal is - avoid getting eaten. But the problem with that goal is it's open ended. If they had a focus, get to that buoy then get to that small shoal, then get to X, then try to do Y, then their time in the water could have been broken up into smaller bites, each bite with its own goal. This would have focused their time in the water and made it far more interesting.
The second goal is 'go out and kill the shark'. The problem with this goal is that it's a self imposed goal. While it could be argued, that unless Quint goes out and kills a shark he'll be tormented by his PTSD the rest of his life, we all know that killing a shark isn't going to put his demons to bed.
Again, this final goal is just one long goal. It's not broken up into increments. He goes out. Lays some chum, waits, reels in the shark.
The original Jaws did an incredible job of breaking up their time on the water. There are very clear stages in their attack on JAWS.
There's also the problem with knowing the outcome of the story. Quint is an iconic character. Pretty much every film goer knows about Quint.
So when we see him go down in the water, we KNOW he survives. We also know, because he's in the film Jaws, that he survives his ordeal when he's hunting the shark.
When we know for sure that a character will survive an ordeal, it makes the ordeal that much less interesting to watch.
CONCEPT:
The concept here is fifty-fifty. It's clever because Hollywood LOVES stories that revolve around existing intellectual properties. It saves them having to market the hell out of the story.
You say 'the genesis story of Quint form Jaws,' and a lot of your marketing is done for you. The problem is, the speech from Quint in the original Jaws is so famous, when people clue into the fact that this entire story is a dramatisation of that one monologue, people already know the story through and through. There's not much intrigue left.
With the pre-existing IP angle aside, this concept becomes, 'a soldier must hunt and kill a shark to try and beat his PTSD, after seeing hundreds of his fellow soldiers eaten alive when his ship went down in WW2.'
That's a messy concept. It doesn't pop. The story line is muddied. There's also two very clear time lines set way apart from each other.
Film concepts work better when they're set within one linear time line.
The concept is also straight character driven drama. There's no unique hook here.
It's basically, 'Soldier deals with PTSD after horrific incident in war.' That's not a high concept.
CONCEPT RATING: 6/10
CONCEPT TIP: Break down your concept. If you have a hard time coming up with a short sentence that encapsulates your idea and SELLS it in an easy way, odds are your story will be messy and convoluted. The easy to understand ideas make the best films.
FORM:
Not so great here. Bold sluglines. Over use of parenthesis. Directing the actor in the dialogue. Use of italic in dialogue.
All of these are no-no's.
Also, waaaaaaay over written. This script is 110 pages long. Seems short huh? Nope. It's very densely written.
There's a lot of prose writing here. What do I mean by prose? The kind of writing you'd find in a novel.
FORM RATING 5/10
FORM TIP: Keep your writing lean and clear. Don't get into flowery descriptions. It slows the read down.
STRUCTURE:
There was no real flaw here, well at least not for the first half of the film. His flaw developed after the event in the ocean.
The structure would have been stronger if Quint had a flaw earlier on. Perhaps something that leads into his PTSD flaw later on.
because of that lack of flaw, and the story jumping between two time lines - the structure was unorthodox here.
Does it work? Yes, to a degree. But it could be a lot better.
STRUCTURE RATING 5.5/10
STRUCTURE TIP: If your hero doesn't have a clear flaw then your story will be meandering. Also, if your story doesn't have clear goals that keep it focused, your structure will come across as disjointed, as it does here.
CHARACTERS:
When you have a pre-drawn character such as the iconic Quint from Jaws, you have a lot to live up to when writing their genesis story. Alas, the character composition fell short here.
It only felt like Quint was really half of who he could have been. There is a lot of room to move with his character, but there were no real chances taken. Consequently he comes off as vanilla.
The same goes with the ancillary players here. They all sort of blended into one. There was very little distinction between them.
Laura, also came across as vanilla. She was a YES character. She said yes to anything the hero wanted. That means the hero doesn't really have to fight for what he wants. Imagine in Star Wars if Princess Leia had been a one scene push over? How that would have resonated throughout the story?
CHARACTER RATING: 6/10
CHARACTER TIP: Don't make it too easy for your hero. If they want something, put as many obstacles in their way and hold off letting them get that something until the final minute.
DIALOGUE:
Swing and a miss. Especially given the pedigree of writing that setup this character in the original Jaws. Quint in the first Jaws spoke in a very unique way. I would have hoped that they studied how he spoke, then brought that particular style to this story, alas his voice didn't shine through here.
DIALOGUE RATING 5/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Understand how it is your character is going to speak before you start to write. If you feel your character out as you write, odds are your character will have one voice at the start of the film and a different voice toward the end as you have developed their style.
VOICE:
This script was too over written and too slow moving for the voice to really stand out.
That said, there is a consistent tone of terror here which elevated the writing somewhat.
VOICE RATING: 6/10
VOICE TIP: If your script is overwritten with dense description, unless the writing is incredible, odds are the reader will start to skim read. Don't give them that opportunity. Trim back your script and let your voice shine through.
PRODUCTION:
This is a war drama. Only when done on the Saving Private Ryan scale of things do war dramas make money.
This would be a HUGE production.
Shooting on water - massive negative. Pushes the budget through the roof.
Huge ancillary cast. In the hundreds - negative.
VFX - negative.
Period - negative.
Low concept character driven drama - negative.
I sincerely doubt this film would make money.
I wouldn't invest, that's for sure.
SUMMARY:
There is a dark sense of dread and terror throughout this script. To that end I applaud the writer. But the story is too slow and over written for it to really get going.
Factor in the open ended and arguably unnecessary goals and this script fails to find its focus.
It's a character driven drama that could work if the characters and the dialogue were given some more focus.
OVERALL RATING 6/10
Monday, 25 January 2016
Sunday, 24 January 2016
DREAMLAND - DRAMA
LOGLINE: With his family farm on the precipice of foreclosure, fifteen year old Eugene Evans is determined to capture a fugitive bank robber and collect the bounty on her head. Against all odds, he beats out the FBI and the local police to capture her, only to discover that all may not be what it seems.
WRITER: Nicolas Zwart
SCRIPT BIO: 18 votes on the 2015 black list.
INITIAL REACTION:
Five things that were done wrong sprang to mind as I read this. Two or three things sprang to mind that were executed exceptionally well.
A lot can be understood about a screenplay from it's logline. A lot can be understood about the writer from the logline.
The logline here is over written, this script is waaaay over written.
I enjoyed this script a lot more than I thought I would going in. Before I read this script I opened two more black list scripts and stopped reading after the first page. One thing that I'm noticing is the page count for black list scripts is almost always 120 pages or more.
As soon as I see that page count I KNOW that the writer has over written the story.
While there is a beautiful story here, there's far too much padding to wade through. I wish writers would learn to edit. Learn to trim back their scripts. That's one of the beauties of screenwriting - an entire story told in less than 20 000 words.
Aim for 200 words a page and a 100 page count. So many writers cram 250+ words into 120 pages.
My first tip for the day - take a sentence, any sentence in your script - count the words. Then rewrite that sentence to have 10-15% less words. You can do it. And odds are the sentence will get EXACTLY the same idea across, and it will be far less clunky than the previous, fatter, sentence.
STORY:
This is the coming of age story of one EUGENE. He narrates his story from the get go, giving us a detailed account of his early childhood up until he is 15 years old.
His father was once a loving, caring man, but he found 'alcohol' as many find 'God', and was soon beating his wife and running out on her.
A local policeman, GEORGE came to the rescue, married Eugene's mother and together they had a daughter called PHEOBE.
Everything was going gangbusters, until the great depression hit. George's wages were cut in half and Eugene's mother took shifts waitressing, but even that wasn't enough to feed the family and make mortgage payments.
They were on the verge of losing the family home to the bank when a notorious killer called ALLISON, who is wanted by the FBI turns up in their barn with a bullet would to the leg.
Eugene discovers her and Allison quickly turns on the charm, sweet talking Eugene into helping her.
While dubious at first, Eugene quickly comes around, and agrees to help nurse her back to health, then get her to Mexico.
Eugene steals his best friend's family truck and they high tail it out of dodge, next destination Mexico.
But George gets wind and sets out with a posse of policeman hell bent on collecting the $10,000 reward on Alison's head.
The question becomes, will Eugene come to his senses and realise he's being used by Allison before it's too late.
CONCEPT:
The concept here is pretty simple. It's a coming of age story. An innocent youth falls in love with and helps a fugitive to evade the law.
There's nothing terribly high concept about that idea. There's no unique hook. It's fine to have a plain, run of the mill idea as your concept, so long as you deliver it in a fresh and new way. Alas the delivery of his story is as straight forward and predictable as they come.
There's not one moment in the execution of the story where I was surprised by a turn of events. Every beat was telegraphed, everything that happened I saw coming a mile off.
The concept here is purely execution dependant, without stellar cast and director/producers attached, this film would fail.
CONCEPT RATING: 5/10
CONCEPT TIP: If you're hell bent on writing a character driven, coming of age story, try to find a unique way to tell it. If your delivery is as standard as the idea then odds are it's not going to get many reads.
The reason this script did so well on the black list is the writing itself.
FORM:
While this piece was over written, the writing here is exceptionally good. This read clean and fast. There is a confidence to the prose. I believe this is why it's garnered such a great response from those who voted for it.
It has the Stand By Me pedigree.
There is no use of BOLD. No underlining in dialogue. CAPS are used correctly and the underlining in the descriptions are kept to a minimum.
If this script were 20 pages shorter - and it could have been - it would have had almost perfect form.
One major mistake here was the writing of things that we can't see on the screen. Many times the writer wrote something that the character was feeling, or thinking.
Unless you can see it on the screen, don't write it on the page.
FORM RATING 8/10
FORM TIP: If your character is feeling an emotion, don't write, 'Jake feels sad.' SHOW us how Jake feels sad. Manifest the characters emotions in actions.
CHARACTER:
Characters were well formed here. They felt real. They didn't feel plastic or manufactured. What is it that makes a character feel real or not? The choices they make. Also the reactions of other characters to those choices.
When a choice/action a character makes is something you could imagine that character doing in REAL LIFE, then they will feel real. When the characters that are affected by that choice/action react in a REALISTIC way, then the characters feel real.
It's when you, as the writer manufacture or force a decision/action upon the character for the sake of hitting a story beat that the character will come across as phoney. Likewise, when the character/s that are directly affected by that choice/action react in an unrealistic manner the characters feel fake.
Example: I read a script recently that had an ugly fat billionaire flying in first class on a plane. After being about as obnoxious as you can imagine, he stated to an air hostess that he was going to fuck her in the toilet. To which she replied with a smile and a wink.
Think about that scenario in real life. What do you think would really happen? I sincerely doubt the stewardess would be flattered. She's be pissed and possibly claim sexual harassment.
Because the reaction to the action wasn't real, the characters started to feel drawn, rather than real.
CHARACTER RATING 8/10
CHARACTER TIP: There's movie logic, then there's real world logic. Try not to write with movie logic in mind. Audiences aren't as easily fooled as they were even just 5 years ago. Apply real life standards to your character's decision making process and your characters will feel far more real.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue here was fine. It didn't pop in any great way, but it was good. Okay, better than good. But not one character here really stood out from the rest.
They all spoke as one. If you removed the character name from each piece of dialogue, you could maybe tell who was talking from what they were saying, but you couldn't tell who was talking by HOW they were talking.
It's important to have a clear distinction in the way your characters talk.
DIALOGUE RATING: 6.5/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Think about your friends and family. Everyone has their own way of speaking. Some are quiet and only say the really important things that come to mind. Others are verbose and say everything that comes to mind. Some have unique words that only they use. Decide on at least two unique speaking traits for everyone of your characters before you write their dialogue.
VOICE:
There is a distinct voice here. While it is over written to hell, this script creates a 'feeling'. That's a rare thing for a script to do. Many screenplays you forget the minute you finish reading.
The Stand By Me voice shines through here.
VOICE RATING 9/10
VOICE TIP: Voice is the hardest thing to learn. Some think voice is a synonym for x-factor. Voice is part of x-factor, but not all of it.
To learn how to develop a voice that is memorable, you have to be willing to take chances. The best way to do that is to surprise yourself. If you don't see a twist or turn coming in a screenplay, odds are neither will your reader.
Remember, readers read hundreds of screenplays a year. They see all story types, all character types, all scenarios. If you can give them something they've read before, but then twist it in a way they haven't read - odds are they'll sit up and pay attention.
PRODUCTION:
Straight forward drama - positive.
Period piece - negative.
Core cast isn't too big - positive - ish.
Not too many ancillary players - positive.
Loads of locations - negative.
No VFX - positive.
Will need major talent to get it off the ground. Negative - in some ways.
Concept is low. A character driven story - negative.
I wouldn't put money down on this.
It'll be a 20-30 mill film mainly due to the need for an A list cast and director.
SUMMARY:
I want to touch on a couple of no-no's that this script does.
1) Don't have a character narrate what we're seeing on screen. You don't need for your narrator to say, 'Then johnny kissed her on the cheek' then we see Johnny kiss 'her' on the cheek. Use your narrator in a clever way.
2) Don't have one character tell another character something that the audience already knows. Start the scene right after the first character has brought the second character up to speed on recent events. Start the scene on the second character's reaction to the news.
3) Don't write what's not on screen. I know I mentioned this earlier, but I want to re-iterate. If it's not on the screen, don't put it on the page.
4) Don't let your scenes run on too long. There were several scenes that could have been cut in half. Know WHY you're writing that scene. Once you've hit that beat - end the scene.
While this piece is over written and breaks quite a few rules, the prose is incredibly well written and elicits a powerful emotion.
While I wouldn't recommend writing a character driven coming of age tale - Dreamland works in its own unique way.
OVERALL RATING 7/10
WRITER: Nicolas Zwart
SCRIPT BIO: 18 votes on the 2015 black list.
INITIAL REACTION:
Five things that were done wrong sprang to mind as I read this. Two or three things sprang to mind that were executed exceptionally well.
A lot can be understood about a screenplay from it's logline. A lot can be understood about the writer from the logline.
The logline here is over written, this script is waaaay over written.
I enjoyed this script a lot more than I thought I would going in. Before I read this script I opened two more black list scripts and stopped reading after the first page. One thing that I'm noticing is the page count for black list scripts is almost always 120 pages or more.
As soon as I see that page count I KNOW that the writer has over written the story.
While there is a beautiful story here, there's far too much padding to wade through. I wish writers would learn to edit. Learn to trim back their scripts. That's one of the beauties of screenwriting - an entire story told in less than 20 000 words.
Aim for 200 words a page and a 100 page count. So many writers cram 250+ words into 120 pages.
My first tip for the day - take a sentence, any sentence in your script - count the words. Then rewrite that sentence to have 10-15% less words. You can do it. And odds are the sentence will get EXACTLY the same idea across, and it will be far less clunky than the previous, fatter, sentence.
STORY:
This is the coming of age story of one EUGENE. He narrates his story from the get go, giving us a detailed account of his early childhood up until he is 15 years old.
His father was once a loving, caring man, but he found 'alcohol' as many find 'God', and was soon beating his wife and running out on her.
A local policeman, GEORGE came to the rescue, married Eugene's mother and together they had a daughter called PHEOBE.
Everything was going gangbusters, until the great depression hit. George's wages were cut in half and Eugene's mother took shifts waitressing, but even that wasn't enough to feed the family and make mortgage payments.
They were on the verge of losing the family home to the bank when a notorious killer called ALLISON, who is wanted by the FBI turns up in their barn with a bullet would to the leg.
Eugene discovers her and Allison quickly turns on the charm, sweet talking Eugene into helping her.
While dubious at first, Eugene quickly comes around, and agrees to help nurse her back to health, then get her to Mexico.
Eugene steals his best friend's family truck and they high tail it out of dodge, next destination Mexico.
But George gets wind and sets out with a posse of policeman hell bent on collecting the $10,000 reward on Alison's head.
The question becomes, will Eugene come to his senses and realise he's being used by Allison before it's too late.
CONCEPT:
The concept here is pretty simple. It's a coming of age story. An innocent youth falls in love with and helps a fugitive to evade the law.
There's nothing terribly high concept about that idea. There's no unique hook. It's fine to have a plain, run of the mill idea as your concept, so long as you deliver it in a fresh and new way. Alas the delivery of his story is as straight forward and predictable as they come.
There's not one moment in the execution of the story where I was surprised by a turn of events. Every beat was telegraphed, everything that happened I saw coming a mile off.
The concept here is purely execution dependant, without stellar cast and director/producers attached, this film would fail.
CONCEPT RATING: 5/10
CONCEPT TIP: If you're hell bent on writing a character driven, coming of age story, try to find a unique way to tell it. If your delivery is as standard as the idea then odds are it's not going to get many reads.
The reason this script did so well on the black list is the writing itself.
FORM:
While this piece was over written, the writing here is exceptionally good. This read clean and fast. There is a confidence to the prose. I believe this is why it's garnered such a great response from those who voted for it.
It has the Stand By Me pedigree.
There is no use of BOLD. No underlining in dialogue. CAPS are used correctly and the underlining in the descriptions are kept to a minimum.
If this script were 20 pages shorter - and it could have been - it would have had almost perfect form.
One major mistake here was the writing of things that we can't see on the screen. Many times the writer wrote something that the character was feeling, or thinking.
Unless you can see it on the screen, don't write it on the page.
FORM RATING 8/10
FORM TIP: If your character is feeling an emotion, don't write, 'Jake feels sad.' SHOW us how Jake feels sad. Manifest the characters emotions in actions.
CHARACTER:
Characters were well formed here. They felt real. They didn't feel plastic or manufactured. What is it that makes a character feel real or not? The choices they make. Also the reactions of other characters to those choices.
When a choice/action a character makes is something you could imagine that character doing in REAL LIFE, then they will feel real. When the characters that are affected by that choice/action react in a REALISTIC way, then the characters feel real.
It's when you, as the writer manufacture or force a decision/action upon the character for the sake of hitting a story beat that the character will come across as phoney. Likewise, when the character/s that are directly affected by that choice/action react in an unrealistic manner the characters feel fake.
Example: I read a script recently that had an ugly fat billionaire flying in first class on a plane. After being about as obnoxious as you can imagine, he stated to an air hostess that he was going to fuck her in the toilet. To which she replied with a smile and a wink.
Think about that scenario in real life. What do you think would really happen? I sincerely doubt the stewardess would be flattered. She's be pissed and possibly claim sexual harassment.
Because the reaction to the action wasn't real, the characters started to feel drawn, rather than real.
CHARACTER RATING 8/10
CHARACTER TIP: There's movie logic, then there's real world logic. Try not to write with movie logic in mind. Audiences aren't as easily fooled as they were even just 5 years ago. Apply real life standards to your character's decision making process and your characters will feel far more real.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue here was fine. It didn't pop in any great way, but it was good. Okay, better than good. But not one character here really stood out from the rest.
They all spoke as one. If you removed the character name from each piece of dialogue, you could maybe tell who was talking from what they were saying, but you couldn't tell who was talking by HOW they were talking.
It's important to have a clear distinction in the way your characters talk.
DIALOGUE RATING: 6.5/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Think about your friends and family. Everyone has their own way of speaking. Some are quiet and only say the really important things that come to mind. Others are verbose and say everything that comes to mind. Some have unique words that only they use. Decide on at least two unique speaking traits for everyone of your characters before you write their dialogue.
VOICE:
There is a distinct voice here. While it is over written to hell, this script creates a 'feeling'. That's a rare thing for a script to do. Many screenplays you forget the minute you finish reading.
The Stand By Me voice shines through here.
VOICE RATING 9/10
VOICE TIP: Voice is the hardest thing to learn. Some think voice is a synonym for x-factor. Voice is part of x-factor, but not all of it.
To learn how to develop a voice that is memorable, you have to be willing to take chances. The best way to do that is to surprise yourself. If you don't see a twist or turn coming in a screenplay, odds are neither will your reader.
Remember, readers read hundreds of screenplays a year. They see all story types, all character types, all scenarios. If you can give them something they've read before, but then twist it in a way they haven't read - odds are they'll sit up and pay attention.
PRODUCTION:
Straight forward drama - positive.
Period piece - negative.
Core cast isn't too big - positive - ish.
Not too many ancillary players - positive.
Loads of locations - negative.
No VFX - positive.
Will need major talent to get it off the ground. Negative - in some ways.
Concept is low. A character driven story - negative.
I wouldn't put money down on this.
It'll be a 20-30 mill film mainly due to the need for an A list cast and director.
SUMMARY:
I want to touch on a couple of no-no's that this script does.
1) Don't have a character narrate what we're seeing on screen. You don't need for your narrator to say, 'Then johnny kissed her on the cheek' then we see Johnny kiss 'her' on the cheek. Use your narrator in a clever way.
2) Don't have one character tell another character something that the audience already knows. Start the scene right after the first character has brought the second character up to speed on recent events. Start the scene on the second character's reaction to the news.
3) Don't write what's not on screen. I know I mentioned this earlier, but I want to re-iterate. If it's not on the screen, don't put it on the page.
4) Don't let your scenes run on too long. There were several scenes that could have been cut in half. Know WHY you're writing that scene. Once you've hit that beat - end the scene.
While this piece is over written and breaks quite a few rules, the prose is incredibly well written and elicits a powerful emotion.
While I wouldn't recommend writing a character driven coming of age tale - Dreamland works in its own unique way.
OVERALL RATING 7/10
Thursday, 21 January 2016
REAGAN - FICTIONAL BIOPIC
LOGLINE: When Ronald Reagan falls into dementia at the start of his second term, an ambitious intern is tasked with convincing the commander in chief that he is an actor playing the president in a movie.
WRITER: MIKE ROSOLIO
SCRIPT BIO: 25 votes on the 2015 black list.
INITIAL REACTION:
This script felt like it's almost there, but not quite. The writing is good, but not exceptional. The idea is fun, but not great. The characters interesting but not poping off the page. Everything about it felt like it just fell short of what it wanted to be.
I think one of the major problems with the script lies in the concept side of things. This is a fictional biopic. It's loosely based on some real world events. Reagan did have dementia, there were nefarious dealings going on in the white house under Reagan's nose.
The problem with fictional biopics lies in the word 'fictional'. People tend to enjoy biopics because the events really happened. Or at least the majority of the important events did. We, as an audience will allow a writer a certain amount of creative license, but when that artistic freedom veers the story too far off track we start to check out.
There are circumstances where you can take artistic license to an extreme and the audience will allow you, but that only works when it's obvious that what you're doing is fiction, and that fictional element had better be entertaining.
Audiences don't like to be lied to. There is a big difference between not telling an audience something for the sake of suspense or mystery, and presenting something as true when really it's not.
There's different levels of lying. When a story is set in the real world with real characters, audiences expect a level of authenticity.
You might say Inglorious Basterds lied to the audience in that sense, but it was still successful. That's correct, but IB never claimed to be a factual retelling of events. In fact it's a dark comedy in a lot of ways, and it set out to be a revisionist retelling of events.
Reagan never quite goes far enough with the idea. It stays too safe, and consequently the reader is constantly asking, 'Is this real? Should I take this seriously? Or is this just a fun revisionist piece?'
THE STORY:
Reagan has just won his second term in office but his brain checked out long ago. He is no longer aware of reality on any level. He thinks he is an actor, not the president of the U.S.
We join FRANK CORDEN (20s). An underling on capitol hill using his Princeton degree to make coffee for low rung political folk.
He comes from a relatively wealthy family. His father is suffering from early stage dementia, and his brother is a TV commercial director.
Dismayed with his political career Frank spends a day on set with his brother and gets a crash course in directing petulant actors.
This comes in handy the very next day when President Reagan has to give an acceptance speech but refuses as no one has told him where his 'mark' is.
The 'mark' being the place the actor is supposed to stand to deliver their lines.
Seeing that Reagan is suffering from dementia, Frank takes a chance and yells at Reagan as though he were his director commanding him to get out there for another take.
Everyone thinks that Frank has gone too far. The secret service men are ready to shoot him, but lo-and-behold, Reagan reacts to the voice of an authoritative director and does as he's told, delivering a great speech.
Franks is then quickly enlisted as Reagan's handler. His job is to coax Reagan through the rest of his term in office, convincing him that he is an actor playing the role of president.
All the while Reagan's chiefs of staff are using his dementia to their own ends, importing cocaine by the tonne and selling weapons to insurgents around the world for profit.
The question becomes, will Frank be able to keep the charade going, and what will he do when he learns of the corruption going on at the highest levels.
CONCEPT:
The idea here is a mixed bag. Ask yourself, would you pay money to see a fictional biopic about Reagan's dementia? Sure, there is a demograph for this concept, I just don't feel that it's large enough to justify this getting made.
If the Cohen brothers were behind this and some serious A talent, then it could fly well. But this idea feels very execution dependant.
CONCEPT RATING: 5/10
CONCEPT TIP: Be sure your idea is so strong it will fill seats on the premise alone. The idea here is niche at best. If your idea isn't a seat filler then you've stacked the deck against yourself from the start.
FORM:
Form here was fine. It wasn't too over written. It could have been trimmed 10% but then most scripts could and often are in the production process. The writing is clean and clear, and there is a good adherence to all the screenwriting formatting rules.
FORM RATING: 8/10
FORM TIP: Keep it clean and clear. This script an easy read (for one reason) because there
was no bold. No unnecessary use of CAPS or underlining, and the paragraphs were kept to three lines or less the majority of the time.
STRUCTURE:
Structure here was well executed. There was a clear journey for Frank. His flaw could have been amped a little. His flaw is that he's too meek and mild for the world of politics. He needs to grow a pair (politically speaking) if he's to survive in this world. His journey is well crafted.
One element that was a problem here was that Frank's flaw didn't endear us to him. He was too meek and mild. It was hard to like a character that had so little spine.
STRUCTURE RATING: 8/10
STRUCTURE TIP: Make us like your hero before you show us their flaw. If you show us their flaw and that trait makes the hero unlikeable, then it's a hard slog to win the audience over to feeling empathy for your hero.
CHARACTERS:
Characters here felt like they could use another pass. While there was nothing terribly wrong with any of them, there wasn't one character that really jumped off the stage. There wasn't one that made you sit up and pay attention.
Frank was interesting, but he had no edge to him. There were no chances taken with any of the characters here. When you play it safe, odds are your characters will come off as vanilla.
CHARACTER RATING: 6.5/10
CHARACTER TIP: Do a 'Character Pop Pass' of your script. Once you have your structure down and you're happy with where the script is sitting, go through and see if you can re-work each scene to add more spice.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue leads on from character. There better you understand your characters, the better their dialogue will flow.
Again, here, the dialogue was sufficient. But there were few lines that were pause for reflection. There were one or two humorous moments but not as many as a script like this could have.
This could have been a dark comedy, which in some ways it is, but the comedy elements were left wanting. There is a lot of room for comedic moments that were missed.
DIALOGUE RATING 6/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Think about the tone of your film. What genre are you writing. A lot of writers don't ask this question until after they've written their script. Knowing what your genre is from the get go will dictate how you write the tone of the script.
This script felt like it started out as a political drama, then slowly edged it's way into comedy as it was written. If it was written with a dark comedic edge from the get go it could have been more than it is in this current draft.
VOICE:
The voice here didn't stand out at all. The writing, while proficient, is not memorable in any way.
VOICE RATING: 5/10
VOICE TIP: Voice stems from the chances you take. If you take no chances in any way shape or form in your script, odds are your voice will blend into the din.
PROUDUCTION:
No VFX is good.
It's a straight forward drama, which is easy to shoot.
Will need A list to get it up - negative in some ways.
This would be a 15 mill piece. A good producer could get it done on less than 10, but being that it's a character piece dependant on talent, it couldn't go much below the 10 mill mark.
Political dramas don't fair too well at the box office. Fictional political dramas even worse.
To that end I wouldn't put money down on this.
SUMMARY:
A fun idea that could use a stronger execution. The structure is fine here. No real need to change anything on that level. It's the scene level execution that could use some electricity.
Also the characters and dialogue could use another pass.
But these elements are easier to rework than structure. To that end I applaud the writer. Structure is the hardest element to nail. Once you have that in place, all the rest is cosmetic.
OVERALL RATING 6.5/10
WRITER: MIKE ROSOLIO
SCRIPT BIO: 25 votes on the 2015 black list.
INITIAL REACTION:
This script felt like it's almost there, but not quite. The writing is good, but not exceptional. The idea is fun, but not great. The characters interesting but not poping off the page. Everything about it felt like it just fell short of what it wanted to be.
I think one of the major problems with the script lies in the concept side of things. This is a fictional biopic. It's loosely based on some real world events. Reagan did have dementia, there were nefarious dealings going on in the white house under Reagan's nose.
The problem with fictional biopics lies in the word 'fictional'. People tend to enjoy biopics because the events really happened. Or at least the majority of the important events did. We, as an audience will allow a writer a certain amount of creative license, but when that artistic freedom veers the story too far off track we start to check out.
There are circumstances where you can take artistic license to an extreme and the audience will allow you, but that only works when it's obvious that what you're doing is fiction, and that fictional element had better be entertaining.
Audiences don't like to be lied to. There is a big difference between not telling an audience something for the sake of suspense or mystery, and presenting something as true when really it's not.
There's different levels of lying. When a story is set in the real world with real characters, audiences expect a level of authenticity.
You might say Inglorious Basterds lied to the audience in that sense, but it was still successful. That's correct, but IB never claimed to be a factual retelling of events. In fact it's a dark comedy in a lot of ways, and it set out to be a revisionist retelling of events.
Reagan never quite goes far enough with the idea. It stays too safe, and consequently the reader is constantly asking, 'Is this real? Should I take this seriously? Or is this just a fun revisionist piece?'
THE STORY:
Reagan has just won his second term in office but his brain checked out long ago. He is no longer aware of reality on any level. He thinks he is an actor, not the president of the U.S.
We join FRANK CORDEN (20s). An underling on capitol hill using his Princeton degree to make coffee for low rung political folk.
He comes from a relatively wealthy family. His father is suffering from early stage dementia, and his brother is a TV commercial director.
Dismayed with his political career Frank spends a day on set with his brother and gets a crash course in directing petulant actors.
This comes in handy the very next day when President Reagan has to give an acceptance speech but refuses as no one has told him where his 'mark' is.
The 'mark' being the place the actor is supposed to stand to deliver their lines.
Seeing that Reagan is suffering from dementia, Frank takes a chance and yells at Reagan as though he were his director commanding him to get out there for another take.
Everyone thinks that Frank has gone too far. The secret service men are ready to shoot him, but lo-and-behold, Reagan reacts to the voice of an authoritative director and does as he's told, delivering a great speech.
Franks is then quickly enlisted as Reagan's handler. His job is to coax Reagan through the rest of his term in office, convincing him that he is an actor playing the role of president.
All the while Reagan's chiefs of staff are using his dementia to their own ends, importing cocaine by the tonne and selling weapons to insurgents around the world for profit.
The question becomes, will Frank be able to keep the charade going, and what will he do when he learns of the corruption going on at the highest levels.
CONCEPT:
The idea here is a mixed bag. Ask yourself, would you pay money to see a fictional biopic about Reagan's dementia? Sure, there is a demograph for this concept, I just don't feel that it's large enough to justify this getting made.
If the Cohen brothers were behind this and some serious A talent, then it could fly well. But this idea feels very execution dependant.
CONCEPT RATING: 5/10
CONCEPT TIP: Be sure your idea is so strong it will fill seats on the premise alone. The idea here is niche at best. If your idea isn't a seat filler then you've stacked the deck against yourself from the start.
FORM:
Form here was fine. It wasn't too over written. It could have been trimmed 10% but then most scripts could and often are in the production process. The writing is clean and clear, and there is a good adherence to all the screenwriting formatting rules.
FORM RATING: 8/10
FORM TIP: Keep it clean and clear. This script an easy read (for one reason) because there
was no bold. No unnecessary use of CAPS or underlining, and the paragraphs were kept to three lines or less the majority of the time.
STRUCTURE:
Structure here was well executed. There was a clear journey for Frank. His flaw could have been amped a little. His flaw is that he's too meek and mild for the world of politics. He needs to grow a pair (politically speaking) if he's to survive in this world. His journey is well crafted.
One element that was a problem here was that Frank's flaw didn't endear us to him. He was too meek and mild. It was hard to like a character that had so little spine.
STRUCTURE RATING: 8/10
STRUCTURE TIP: Make us like your hero before you show us their flaw. If you show us their flaw and that trait makes the hero unlikeable, then it's a hard slog to win the audience over to feeling empathy for your hero.
CHARACTERS:
Characters here felt like they could use another pass. While there was nothing terribly wrong with any of them, there wasn't one character that really jumped off the stage. There wasn't one that made you sit up and pay attention.
Frank was interesting, but he had no edge to him. There were no chances taken with any of the characters here. When you play it safe, odds are your characters will come off as vanilla.
CHARACTER RATING: 6.5/10
CHARACTER TIP: Do a 'Character Pop Pass' of your script. Once you have your structure down and you're happy with where the script is sitting, go through and see if you can re-work each scene to add more spice.
DIALOGUE:
Dialogue leads on from character. There better you understand your characters, the better their dialogue will flow.
Again, here, the dialogue was sufficient. But there were few lines that were pause for reflection. There were one or two humorous moments but not as many as a script like this could have.
This could have been a dark comedy, which in some ways it is, but the comedy elements were left wanting. There is a lot of room for comedic moments that were missed.
DIALOGUE RATING 6/10
DIALOGUE TIP: Think about the tone of your film. What genre are you writing. A lot of writers don't ask this question until after they've written their script. Knowing what your genre is from the get go will dictate how you write the tone of the script.
This script felt like it started out as a political drama, then slowly edged it's way into comedy as it was written. If it was written with a dark comedic edge from the get go it could have been more than it is in this current draft.
VOICE:
The voice here didn't stand out at all. The writing, while proficient, is not memorable in any way.
VOICE RATING: 5/10
VOICE TIP: Voice stems from the chances you take. If you take no chances in any way shape or form in your script, odds are your voice will blend into the din.
PROUDUCTION:
No VFX is good.
It's a straight forward drama, which is easy to shoot.
Will need A list to get it up - negative in some ways.
This would be a 15 mill piece. A good producer could get it done on less than 10, but being that it's a character piece dependant on talent, it couldn't go much below the 10 mill mark.
Political dramas don't fair too well at the box office. Fictional political dramas even worse.
To that end I wouldn't put money down on this.
SUMMARY:
A fun idea that could use a stronger execution. The structure is fine here. No real need to change anything on that level. It's the scene level execution that could use some electricity.
Also the characters and dialogue could use another pass.
But these elements are easier to rework than structure. To that end I applaud the writer. Structure is the hardest element to nail. Once you have that in place, all the rest is cosmetic.
OVERALL RATING 6.5/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)