It is a formidable entry... I can see why it made the list, but I can also see why it didn't make any higher on the list.
Let's take a look to see what it does right, what it could improve and what we can learn from this screenplay.
It is written by Michele Atkins based on the novel by Craig Shrive.
THE STORY
We start in Mississippi 1964. We meet Graden Williams. He's only 17 years old but he knows that this backwater is not where he wants to spend his life. He's walking down a dirt road in the middle of nowhere. A car pulls over, filled with white men. One of whom is Earl Daniels. Only a young man at this stage of the story.
The men quiz Graden for a time then force him into their car. The next scene is Graden's father signing for his son's mutilated body. Graden was horrifically killed by the men.
We now meet Graden's brother, Warren. This is Warren's story. He is our hero. The story is told in two timelines, jumping between 1964 and 2008.
In 2008 we find that Warren has dedicated his life to getting justice for the death of his brother. He has doggedly tracked down every one of the men that were present that night and seen that all of them except for Earl have been put behind bars. He gave up on Earl as he believes that Earl had died.
In this 2008 timeline we learn that Warren is succumbing to dementia, just like his mother did. Warren survives by writing everything of importance to him on post-it notes.
Warren lives a very unassuming life. He works part time at a small grocery store. He has no career ambition above work that puts fuel in his car and food in his belly.
The inciting incident comes by way of a phone call from an unidentified woman claiming to know the whereabouts of Earl Daniels - the only person left from the night of his brother's murder that Warren hasn't hunted down and put behind bars.
This is a shock to Warren as he was of the understanding that Earl was dead.
Thus begins Warren's final hunt - his final journey to track down the last killer of his brother and see that justice is served.
I'll leave the story there as I don't want to reveal too much.
FIRST THOUGHTS
I am a massive fan of this script. There is so much that it does right, yet there is also so much that it could improve upon.
Let's start by looking at what it does right.
STAR POWER.
This script has the potential to be an Oscar winner. It is an emotional story that touches on the darker side of American history. When I talk about Star Power what I mean is the ability of A list actors to green-light pretty much any film that they want to make.
If the producers of this script could get Morgan Freeman to play the 2008 version of Warren, then this script would be greenlit almost instantly.
When you're writing a screenplay you need to think of what will entice serious actors to your work. Ask yourself, does your script have the kind of character that an A lister would want to bring to life?
If not, you need to rethink and rewrite your story. Sometimes this means re-thinking your entire premise/concept.
CONCEPT
This story has a powerful concept at its core. It is essentially a revenge story - but rather than it being an angry-man-kills-people-who-did-him-wrong revenge story - it is an intelligent revenge story. Warren spent his life tracking down his brother's killers and seeing that they get justice through the correct means - the courts.
When you're working on your own screenplay you need to think about your target audience. Are you looking to focus on people who will watch anything so long as there is a lot of gore? Or are you trying to target people who prefer a film that challenges them, that makes them think?
There's no right and wrong to it, but it is good to know who your target audience is.
EXECUTION
The execution of this concept is well done in some regards but could definitely use some improvement in other areas. I really liked the use of a dual-time line. Some people don't like jumping back and forth between past and present, but when it's done well it is a great story telling technique.
The best way to use a dual time line is to make sure what we learn in the past somehow furthers the story of the present. That happens here. In fact, the reveal of the story - the twist - happens in the past time line. I won't say what it is out of respect to the writers and producers of this story - but it is a great example of using a past time line to change our understanding of the present time line.
That covers what this script has done well.
Now lets look at what it could improve upon,
SLOWNESS
This screenplay moves very slowly. It has a great opening hook. It has a very powerful following scene, but when it comes to the present-day storyline the pace suddenly slows down. We start to dwell in scenes that aren't really moving the story forward in anyway. There is a lot of development of ancillary characters who aren't central to the story.
TRAVELLING SCENES
These are scenes where we see the main character travelling somewhere. These scenes are scenes of death. Unless you use these scenes as a respite from an intense part of story telling - there is nothing to be learned from seeing a character travel anywhere.
START LATE FINISH EARLY
This is a maxim I talk about a lot. It means starting your scene as LATE as possible and ending it as soon as you have excepted the main beat of that scene.
This script has a lot of scenes that drag on, seemingly for no reason. Knowing that this is an adaptation of a novel made a lot of sense. In a novel you have as much time as you want to linger in scenes, for what ever reason this style of writing works in a novel. In a film this kind of writing slows your story down immensely. It is a kiss-of-death as your audience will grow bored very quickly.
INCITING INCIDENT THEN NOTHING?
In the story - Warren believes he has hunted down all the killers of his brother. He then receives a phone call telling him otherwise.
This is the inciting incident as it shakes up his world and sends him on a new journey. Normally an inciting incident tests the hero's flaw - this one doesn't - but it doesn't seem too matter. This is enough of a catalyst to start Warren on a new journey.
Only - that's the thing - instead of Warren setting off immediately to track down this last killer - we have a series off scenes where Warren goes about his every day life.
It really slows the story down.
After the inciting incident typically your hero refuses the call to adventure as it test their flaw, only for there to be a second inciting incident (that I refer to as The Catalyst) - this forces the hero to accept the call to adventure and go on this new journey.
While Warren does eventually set out to track down Earl - he does it in a very untimely manner.
GOAL
Now, there is a great goal established here for Warren - track down the last killer of his brother - but until Warren finally begins pursuing that goal - there is no goal and what we're left with is a very slow opening to this story that has no real focus.
Without a definite focus - your audience will grow bored, very quickly.
ANCILLARY INFORMATION
When writing a novel it is fine to go off on tangents and give us loads of details about things that aren't directly related to the central story line - but in a film it doesn't work. Everything needs to be tied to that main storyline.
In this script we have a few instances where we get information about Obama's run for president. This would be fine if it had something to do directly with the main story - but it doesn't.
SMALLER CHARACTERS ...
Another area that this script could improve upon is that it develops smaller characters in too much detail. The person that Warren meets to tell him of the whereabouts of Earl is far too developed.
This is a story about Warren hunting down Earl. It's fine to develop other characters if they're integral to the plot. But this character is not.
Had this character want to come along for the ride with Earl, had they become a supporting character then it would be fine to develop them in great detail. But really, this character serves one purpose and one purpose only - to give Warren information.
The take away - only develop your characters as much as they are important to the overall story.
You wouldn't go into a full background detail of a waitress in a cafe if the only purpose they serve is to bring your hero a coffee, would you?
IN SUMMARY
This story has the potential to be an Oscar winner and an A list magnet. In its current form it is not there yet. It needs to remove unnecessary story development, it needs to maintain a clear goal from the moment of the inciting incident, and it needs to trim the fat and improve the pace.
There are plenty of opportunities to add excitement in this story that are overlooked in its current form.
If the producers and the screenwriter/s could re-work this story it would have a great chance of being an Oscar contender and more importantly - it could make a lot of money.
PRODUCTION
I don't see this story being difficult to shoot. While it does have a 1964 timeline - all of it is set in rural areas. It's very easy to dress up a shack or a dirt road to make it look period. It's when you try to set a story in 1964 central Manhattan that your budget goes through the roof.
The 2008 part of the story would be fairly straight forward to shoot.
There is definitely an audience for this film, I just hope the producers can shape it into a more viable form than its current iteration.
No comments:
Post a Comment