Red Light

One year after a woman is killed by a red light runner, three teens run the same red light in hopes of seeing her ghost, who they believe is responsible for the recent string of bizarre murders.

Okay, horror fans: think quickly. On your grubby, bloody feet! Here’s a question about our much beloved genre… one you can answer instantly:

What sub-genres of horror are so iconic and classic they warrant separate categories in Netflix? Hmmmm, let’s see…. Zombies? That’s an obvious “no-brainer”… once the ghouls have had their feast. Then there are Possession/Exorcism tales. Alien Abductions. Creature Features. Ghost stories of every scary shape and size.

Then there’s the biggest creep show of them all – a category of horror that deserves it’s own star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

Folks, I’m a Preaching’ to Y’All about Slashers. Ruminate a moment, and you’ll see.

When you think of memorable horror films, what Big Bads come to mind? Come on kiddies – it’s easy! Michael Meyers. Jason Voorhees. And Freddy Krueger (oh dearest Wes, R.I.P.)

Those are the names of true Boogey Men. Sinister celebrities that stand out from the crowd.

And that’s what makes any horror film a box office blast: the creation of monstrous archetypes with mind-blowing visuals. Ones that burn their details into your mind.

And let’s be honest here. That’s a pool of talent which occasionally must be refreshed. Sure, classic creepy crawlies will always sell *some* tickets. But once the sequels reach #8-10, then it’s time for new faces to emerge. The rush of YOUNG BLOOD… as it were.

Ladies and Gents, STS is proud to present to you just such a thing. It’s a horror Slasher that has “Franchise” written all over it. And won’t leave you yawning “cliché!”

We bring to your attention: Red Light. It’s a creepy blood drenched entry to the horror cannon. With a memorable villain that’ll sear itself into your mind.

Here’s the grim scenario: a lonely, miserable dark night. The location: rural “Old Haven Road” – smack dab in the middle of bum-f*ck nowhere. An old woman – Tabitha Hudson – approaches the intersection, clad in a bright yellow raincoat. The light’s safely red – so she crosses.

Just as a car shoots through the light, ignoring the ruby warning sign. Smack! A hit and run – instantly. Tabitha lies in the gutter. Suffers and dies. Yet the driver of the car keeps going: both a crime…and a tragedy. Even more complex than one can understand.

Fast forward. One year.

Another car blows through the light. Again.

Yet another lonely night. But this time, there’s no victim – just a group of careless teens. Some drunk. Others texting. The irresponsible jerks stop at a diner for a bathroom break, only to meet a horrific fate. An avenging shadowy figure kills all but one of them (Matt) in gruesome ways. Who is it? We don’t know. But the killer wears a battered yellow raincoat. And carries a gore-dripping steel pipe.

Within a day, rumors abound. Especially at nearby Augustus State University… attended by the lamented victims. Stories circulate about the yellow-coated specter of death – and the grisly end that awaits anyone who runs that fearsome light.

Among the concerned students are several bosom buddies: roommates Hannah and Nikki. Their fabulous – and muscular – pal Xander and Hannah’s estranged brother, Jimmy. Taunted by snobby sorority queen Rebecca (Jimmy’s catty ex), the crew run through the Old Haven light on a dare. Sure, they’re a bit nervous. But who cares? The curse can’t be really true. After all, Matt survived the massacre.

That night, Matt meets a nasty end…

Which leaves the teens fearing for their lives. Taking the initiative, Hannah and Nikki begin to investigate the true death of Tabitha Hudson. Who drove the car that killed her? And are supernatural forces in play? Or is the rumor just petty gossip – generated by Rebecca and her bitchy entourage?

The mystery quickly deepens. As does the bloody trail. The clock ticks loudly for Nikki and her friends. Each of them – marked for death.

Needless to say, spoilers need not apply. But rest assured – the characters in this Slasher are in Technicolor 3d. The killer and the deaths? Both memorable. As much as Freddy, we’d say…

But the twists and turns are under wraps. So contact writer Chris Shamburger at cshamburger “AT” live dot com for a copy of the script.

Red Light’s a horror classic in the making. Not to mention a future franchise!

Check out Coverage of Red Light by No Bull Script Consulting

About the writer: Chris Shamburger was a finalist (Top 10) in the 2013 Shriekfest Film Festival for his recently-produced script, Hiccups. He has been a semi-finalist twice and has also been published in Twisted Dreams Magazine and Horror in Words. Chris lives in Marietta, GA with his partner and their Chow-mix rescue, Walter. Aside from writing, Chris has been teaching pre-kindergarten for the past six years. You can find him on IMDb.

About the reviewer: Review by STS

Find more scripts available for production.

This screenplay may not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.

Ouija

A group of friends get more than they bargained for when they hook a Ouija board up to a 3D printer and encounter a presence from the other side.

You a ghost and horror fan? Then, let’s chat about a staple in the supernatural sub-genre… that well-known prop: Ouija boards!

Widely considered a tool to summon the dead, theories about Ouija boards abound. Some true believers consider these plywood concentrations of pressed evil to be an expressway to the very depths of hell. A gateway, in fact, for evil spirits – offering EZpass access to one’s soul. Other paranormal doubters consider the boards a harmless family game (and profit play by Hasbro Inc.) Needless to say, such contrasting views are polarizing: what are a Ouija Board’s true powers? Can they be used for Good? Evil? Or – perhaps – Comedy?

That’s the meta-answer provided by veteran writer Anthony Cawood, with his latest horror offering, Ouija. Peek, if you will, into its blood soaked pages. Beyond it, you’ll find a secluded cabin in the forest, populated by four close and fool-hearty friends: Kurt, Grace, Dean and Imogen. Yep, the candles are lit. And the patchouli incense a-burning. Toss in a copy of the titular game, and the potentially grisly scene is set. Evil Dead notwithstanding, the supernatural rendezvous date comes due…. save for one torn-from-the-script pages of The Big Bang– twist:

The gang’s Ouija board is rigged to a 3d printer, in the hopes of bringing the visions it invokes to life.

And boy, does it ever!

Shaking hands  grazing the planchette, the friends toss question after question into the whirling miasma of the spirit world. Do they get answers? No avail. But soon the printer ‘whirs’ to life, building an ominous model of their own cabin. Not to mention a premonition of the foursome’s looming deadly fate….

Will our best buds deny their fears and stick it out? Or flee the cabin, in mortal fear of their lives? Written with a dark humoristic streak, Ouija melds generic horror with quirky high-tech sensibility. Horror directors take note – this script fuses classic paranormal jump scares with fresh blood – ala Generation Y!

Pages: 8

Budget: Pretty low. A cabin, teens and Ouija board. (Well, plus a fake 3d Printer). That’s it!

About the writer, Anthony Cawood: I’m an award winning screenwriter from the UK with over 15 scripts produced, optioned and/or purchased. Outside of my screenwriting career, I’m also a published short story writer and movie reviewer. Links to my films and details of my scripts can be found at www.anthonycawood.co.uk.

About the reviewer: Based in upstate, NY, Steven Clark is the writer of over 30 short scripts, several of which are under option, in pre-production, or have already been made into films. On A Clear Night, a family Christmas feature aimed at a Hallmark Channel-type audience, is currently in the works. Steven can be reached at Steamroller138 (a) gmail.

Read Ouiji

Find more scripts available for production

This screenplay may not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.

Recently, STS reviewed Mark Lyons’ very raw, and very real dramatic script, Thistles.  (Script available here.) As readers of Shootin’ the Shorts are aware, our goal at STS is to find new and promising writers, and provide them with the platform they need to get their work seen (then hopefully optioned, and produced!)

One of our not-so-secret weapons in this quest is Danny Manus of No BullScript Consulting. Having worked as a development executive in Hollywood, Danny is an in-demand script consultant, named by Creative Screenwriting Magazine at one of the “Top 15” consultants in their “Cream of the Crop” list.   Partnered with STS, Danny provides wonderfully detailed and helpful notes for the monthly STS feature script.  This coverage is provided free to the writer, and can be posted our site or kept confidential – at the writer’s discretion. But wait – there’s more!  Any script that gets a coveted “recommend” from tough but eminently fair Danny will be featured in his monthly newsletter and may also receive further exposure to his production contacts…

Below, please find Danny’s notes/coverage for Thistles. Read, learn, comment…. and don’t forget to submit your best work for possible review!

**To submit a script, please visit STS at the page listed HERE. Danny can also be contacted directly via the No BullScript Consulting website at http://www.nobullscript.net/contact/. Or on Twitter @DannyManus.

About the writer of Thistles: Mark Lyons is a screenwriter from Youngstown, Ohio. He’s written several scripts, most notably ‘Best Film’ award winner “God’s Empty Acre”, which was filmed as ‘Girl(s)’, at the 2013 Winter Shorts Film Festival and Best Drama at the 2013 World Independent Film Expo. He has also written the feature “Thistles” which was a Quarter-Finalist in the 2013 Bluecat Screenwriting Competition and the short “Ginger” which was a Finalist at the 2013 Shriekfest Film Festival. He can be reached at markielyons “AT” yahoo

NO BULLSCRIPT ANALYSIS

Title: Thistles

Type of Material: Screenplay

Author: Mark Lyons

Number of Pages: 92

Circa: Present

Location: Ohio/Urban City

Genre: Drama

Coverage Date: 8/12/15

Budget Range: Low

LOGLINE: A junior high school student’s crush on her teacher leads to seduction, murder and brutal and shocking consequences that neither of them could have anticipated.

COMMENTS: Mark, thank you for submitting your script “Thistles” to Simply Scripts. In the subsequent pages, I will go through the things that work well and what still needs to be worked on, developed, or changed to make this a more viable and commercial script and series.

I’m going to be as blunt in the notes as you are in the writing of this script. I’ve read many thousands of scripts and this is easily one of the most disturbing, twisted, upsetting, and brutal scripts I’ve ever read. And I love films like Hard Candy, Kids, Bully, Precious, etc. that tackle disturbing topics in interestingly dramatic or artistic ways. But if Precious met A Serbian Film, this script might be the result. And while a disturbing and unsettling tone is set up early on, with the young girls talking about what they’d do to grown men on pg 9, it really goes so far over the edge in the third act that there’s no going back. I could list maybe 3 scripts I’ve ever read that viscerally made me want to gag, and this is one of them. It’s nicely written overall, but very simply, there are just some things no producer would touch or want to film. And your third act fits that bill.

The story of a disillusioned urban teen’s seduction of her alcoholic yet very caring and supportive (white) teacher is already pushing the envelope, but in a good way. That concept can work if done well. An African American Lolita meets Precious. And you have a few very intriguing plot points and shocking twists pushing the story forward, including the death of Sazha’s brother at the hands of her teacher because of the assumed affair going on. When Sazha finally seduces him in his inebriated state and gets what she wants, I actually assumed she was going to turn on him and use that to destroy him to get vengeance for her brother…but this story takes a very different direction.

It’s a morally complex story, and I do appreciate that. It gives us enough twists and turns that the reader and audience is constantly being challenged to be at odds with our own thoughts and expectations. That can be very powerful. But for me, it just. Goes. Too. Far.

Structurally, you have a very interestingly told story. Each major plot twist really pushes the story in a new direction. An unexpected direction. You have major moments that really stand out (some for good reasons, some not), and you have a solid inciting incident, end of your first act, turning points, a hell of a midpoint, and then a build in your third act (which I’ll discuss in a moment). The opening of the script made me wonder what year this movie takes place in because the use of VHS makes it seem pretty dated, and even the school and the English lesson and the pop-it’s the kids throw at him feel a bit dated.

Crandall is set up as this pitiful character with a sad backstory who clearly has his demons but wants to do the right thing. And his story is really a tragedy, with his suicide at the midpoint being another shocking and pretty unexpected moment that jars the reader and makes us continually wonder – where could this story be going next? Crandall is somewhat of the protagonist of the story despite his actions or interactions with Sazha. We do pity him and feel for him, and even forgive his illegal transgressions, which makes us question ourselves. But once he’s gone, the script becomes something else.

Crandall is an interesting character in that he invites his 12 year old student to his home for tutoring, but then rebuffs her. But then gives in, but then feels guilty. And then with Crandall’s letters/notebook that Sazha finds, I at first thought that he had written letters to ALL the students he had molested and that he really was a bad guy and she was discovering this while reading the letters and realizing that she’s not as special as she thought she was. But in the end, they turn out to be really sweet, kind, redeeming letters to his students that show how good of a guy he was.

A small note with Crandall, but you introduce him twice on page 4. His physical description at the bottom of the page should come at the top when you tell us about his receding hairline.

Turrell sees what he assumes is Crandall taking advantage of Sazha through the window, but he doesn’t go right over there and kick his ass or do anything. He waits until a couple days later to actually kill him. Why?

With Clyde, he seems like a very supportive friend but we don’t meet him until the AA meeting and suddenly he and Crandall are talking about school and the kids and curriculum. We need to see him at the school first to set up that he even works there. And it’s not clear that he’s the Principal until later.

One of my favorite and most emotionally tense scenes in the whole script is when Crandall gets on the bus that Cora is driving after Turrell’s murder, and she realizes who he is and confronts him. It’s a very cool way for them to cross paths, and it’s a powerful moment and a strong scene. However, I don’t believe that a woman who could do what she does in the third act to a baby and her own pregnant mother, wouldn’t at least PUNCH Crandall and go crazy on him in this scene. It’s also a little odd that Cora doesn’t know who he is as soon as she sees him. Doesn’t she know what the killer looks like and who he is? Doesn’t she know that Sazha’s teacher IS the killer? Doesn’t Crandall know that Cora is the mother? Wouldn’t this have all been on the news or at least around the neighborhood? They live directly across the street from each other!

Similarly, it’s unclear if Cora knows that Crandall is dead or killed himself in the third act because she seems to not address this on page 76 when Sazha tells him who the father is. She connects the dots to him being Turrell’s killer, but she seems to care more about the fact that her daughter is sleeping with a grown white man than her son’s killer.

It’s almost always a good thing when a script and a story can get a visceral and emotional reaction from readers…but if you take it too far, you will lose them and then the connection is over. The sex on page 52 you could probably shoot around and if the actress is over 16 and just looks younger, it could be okay. But not what happens on page 74 and continues thru to the end. For me, the fine line between cinematically disturbing and edgy and unfilmable is crossed and then goes even further, and I could no longer tell who would watch this movie.

And it’s not just the action that Cora takes at the start of this sequence, which would be enough to turn a viewer off. It’s really the quadruple-beat of; the hardcore beating of a pregnant 13 year old, the incest reveal of her brother raping her, the stabbing of a premature baby as it’s coming out of her vagina by her own grandmother, and then seeing the actual aborted birth and taking PIECES of the chopped up baby and putting it in a box and carrying it around? There is very little that truly disturbs me while I’m reading – but these 13 pages were almost unreadable because of its truly graphic nature.

There are a number of strong themes and societal issues that this story tackles in truly disturbing albeit original ways. Obviously abortion, teen pregnancy, teachers sleeping with students, the lack of education and the growing amount of violence and sexuality in urban cities, parenting, etc. But thematic films or message movies that are too on the nose or too graphic will not find an audience (at least not a large enough one) because people go to the movies to be entertained first and foremost. The abortion protests are very in your face and I’m not sure why Cora is SO hardcore against it. Clearly she does a 180 in her feelings, but it’s so out of character for her and SO extreme, that it doesn’t feel very believable. She was vehemently against safe, medically-induced Planned Parenthood abortions in the first trimester, but has no problem stabbing an 8 month old premature baby in the head as its being born with a wooden stake and mutilating her daughter on the kitchen floor? I just don’t buy it no matter how mad she gets.

The urban market is growing and there are a number of producers, directors and actors looking for projects that connect with many of the messages and themes confronted within this story. And actresses love to play dirty, ugly and mean. But I honestly don’t know an actress who would want to play the role of Cora. There are some things actresses just won’t do and I worry this is one of them.

Turning to the dialogue, I think it feels genuine to the characters and the world, and there are a number of well-written lines throughout. The writing is strong, and it’s obviously very visceral and impactful on the page. Taking that ability and bringing it to a more commercial concept I think would really make your voice stand out.

I do have a few additional page/line notes:

Pg 20 – Crandall’s dialogue at the bottom is awkwardly worded and doesn’t quite make sense.

Pg 34 – Maybe you don’t have to tell us that it’s Turrell on page 33 that jumps out and that Crandall kills until the next page when Sazha comes in and sees the body and runs towards it and THAT is the moment we realize it’s Turrell’s and that’s why he’s there. I think that might create a stronger moment and reveal.

Pg 66 – Why doesn’t the OB Nurse advise her to abort?

Pg 67 – The egg, making sure not to break the yolk is nice symbolism. It does not go unnoticed.

Pg 69 – It’s unclear how far long Sazha is by now. You have to track that. And she’s not set up as being big boned, so I didn’t know how it wasn’t obvious and showing.

Pg 87 – Patton’s dialogue is pretty racist at the bottom.

Pg 91 – Smithers has some serious self-control. I would have looked.

Overall, the script is well-written and visually written, and the first half of the script is disturbing in an intriguing and dramatic way with nice unexpected twists. It presents timely themes and issues and in morally complex ways. But the last 20 pages just go so far over the edge that I’m not sure who could or would want to watch that on film. It’s so brutally and disgustingly graphic that even if this script were perfectly written, I couldn’t send this to executives because I don’t think they will enjoy the read. And I could only imagine the phone calls I’d get. As a writing sample, I worry that you will turn more execs off than impress them. Plus, you have a slutty black 12 year old, a creepy white adult, and some truly dark and depressing storylines, so I’m not sure what the demographic is for the movie. There are some really strong moments in this script and I can appreciate your writing style, but it’s not a commercial concept the way it plays out and I don’t know any producers who would make this. I’d give a CONSIDER to the writing, but the last 20 pages would make it a PASS for me. But keep writing! And best of luck! Thanks again Mark for submitting your script “Thistles” to Simply Scripts, and congratulations on being the featured script of the month!

NO BULLSCRIPT 20 POINT GRADING SHEET AND RECOMMENDATION:

PROJECT: CONSIDER W/RESERVATIONS

Time for Love

An elderly lady discovers an old flame in her shed

Sometimes, a script engages you from the first couple of sentences; usually for a combination of reasons. Its introduction piques your interest.. hinting at mysteries to come. Its story beats stimulate an easy empathy – compelling one to root for a character, even before you know their name. Such tales flow from simple beginnings, weaving a subtle narrative that never lets one disengage. Cracking stuff. When done just right.

Time for Love is such a script. A super-short four page piece, TFL follows Marjorie Flanagan (86), confronting an interloper in her shed. Armed with a stick, she prepares for battle – only to be hit with the shock of her life instead. Sitting in the middle of the barn is her husband, George; a time-traveling inventor who disappeared sixty years ago – vanishing into thin air, without a trace. But now he’s back. And he’s hasn’t aged. A twenty seven year old wanderer, tethered to a tempermental steam-punk time machine (a huge jerry-rigged kings wing chair). It’s a moment of sweet reconciliation for two long lost lovers. But with a caveat that threatens to ruin all. You see, George can’t stay in one place for very long. If he does, he ages. Badly. After decades of trying, he’s finally found Marjorie. And has only minutes to make up for a lifetime of lost memories.

Science fiction at it’s finest, Time for Love isn’t about gadgets or FX.   It’s a psalm to love, aging and loss, and the fragility of the human condition. Mixing in echoes of Dr. Who and classic literature, Bowcott infuses TFL with a real sense of poignancy… one that resonates on a universal level. A limited location classic, TFL has only one setting – a shed – two actors and a time machine. It’s sure to be a festival favorite – grab this one before the flow of time snatches it away!

Budget: Low. And designing that time machine is going to be fun in and of itself!

About the reviewer:  Anthony Cawood is an award winning screenwriter from the UK with a bunch of short scripts produced, optioned and/or purchased. He is currently trying to get someone to make one of his three feature scripts. Links to his films, scripts and other goodies can be found at www.anthonycawood.co.uk

About the writer: Dustin Bowcott is a self employed microbe retailer and father of four boys. He has enjoyed writing since the day he read his first novel. For Dustin, writing is something he has to do, when not writing, he’s thinking about writing and will absorb himself into multiple projects at one time. When he gets tired of writing one thing he moves onto another and has been known to work on three different stories in one day, writing for sometimes 12 hours straight and, on occasion, even longer. Dustin can turn his hand to any genre and has just finished first draft of a new children’s novel. Dustin is a BBC Writer’s Room finalist and a Shore Scripts finalist both in 2014. He is a produced and optioned writer, and has recently turned his hand to production, having produced his first short film with another in the pipeline that should be completed this year. Want to see what else he has in store? Give him a shout-out at dustin7375 “AT” gmail.

READ THE SCRIPT HERE – AND DON’T FORGET TO COMMENT!!

FOR YET MORE SCRIPTS AVAILABLE FOR PRODUCTION:

PLEASE SEARCH SIMPLYSCRIPTS.COM

OR THE BLOG VERSION OF STS HERE.

All screenplays are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. The screenplays may not be used without the expressed written permission of the author.

EVICTED

Two drug addled squatters receive an offer they can’t refuse.

Sexy Beast, Filth, Lock Stock:

Just a few select films from the small island across the pond in the crime and thriller genres. Each has made an indelible impression upon audiences worldwide.

British writers and filmmakers are masters at depicting their own special brand of crime. In his article for The Guardian earlier this year, Andrew Pulver examined the never ending popularity with audiences of Gangsters, geezers and guns and the booming low-budget crime-flick industry… both on the large and small screen.

Continuing with this tradition, and in his own inimitable fashion, STS is proud to showcase Dustin Bowcott’s short screenplay: Evicted.

We’re introduced to Steve and Baz, two down on their luck twenty-something lads who just happen to believe in that old adage: possession is nine-tenths of the law. If you’re wearing it, driving it, living in it, it’s yours – until proven otherwise. After all, home is where the heart is and when we first meet these two they are enjoying a nice quiet night in  – sitting back and relaxing amidst a little candlelight. Okay, that ambience is perhaps a little deceptive. There is candlelight but that’s because the power’s been cut off long ago. There’s also rats, broken glass and the general putridness and squalor associated with a ‘squat’.

What are these two up to? Well, they’re just about to partake in their first hit of heroin for the night – shared needle and all.  Just about to, when…

Will you look at what the wind just blew in – an unannounced visitor by the name of Gianni. In his forties, and in a whole other league to the boys. He’s well spoken, wearing high-end clobber – exquisite Italian leather shoes, tan crombie and black fedora with tan hatband. This is a man in charge.

So, what’s this hotshot want with two no-hopers?

Gianni’s got a few problems – or as he likes to put it, a few ‘most hated things’ that need fixin’. Which is where the lads come in. Contrary to what we first fear Gianni is not concerned with how this lot came to be here, nor what vices they may indulge in.  He’d rather take advantage of their less than altruistic attributes, in the form of a very tempting proposition.

Steve, being the brains of the outfit, (and I use that term loosely) is at first a little circumspect, despite his drug-induced haze. But when Gianni drops a bag of the good stuff at the boys’ feet with a few choice verbal reassurances and the promise of some cold hard cash, it’s an offer neither can refuse. After all, the job sounds like a piece of cake – no stealing, no violence – a little light stand-over is all. What could be simpler than scaring a few old people out of their homes so Gianni can recoup some of the money he’s owed.

An easy five hundred quid. Or, if you’re au fait with your cockney – easiest monkey ever.

Or, is it?

I’m not letting any more out of the bag on this one, suffice to say the denouement to this gritty crime thriller is not for no nancy-boys.

Filmmakers: So, you’re done with your RomComs and gentle slice of life dramas. Want to add seedy underbelly crime-thriller to your reel? Ready to tackle real hard men characters, dark humour, and dialogue that sings with authenticity – not to mention a liberal amount of gore to top it all off?

Alright then guvnor, don’t bovver with the rest, get on it. Now. You heard. That’s an order, son. Why are you still here?

Pages: 6

Budget: No problems at all here. A few ramshackle locations will do you fine; and some seedy characters to fill the space!

About the reviewer: Libby Chambers has been writing all her life. Over her career, she’s worked in the Features Department for ABC TV as a Program Assistant, trained as a FAD, and served professionally as a freelance web-content editor and proofreader. She lives with her husband (also a screenwriter) in Sydney, Australia, and describes him as being both a good and a bad influence on her writing. You can contact Libby at libbych “AT” hotmail

About the writer: Dustin Bowcott is a self employed microbe retailer and father of four boys. He has enjoyed writing since the day he read his first novel. For Dustin, writing is something he has to do, when not writing, he’s thinking about writing and will absorb himself into multiple projects at one time. When he gets tired of writing one thing he moves onto another and has been known to work on three different stories in one day, writing for sometimes 12 hours straight and, on occasion, even longer. Dustin can turn his hand to any genre and has just finished first draft of a new children’s novel. Dustin is a BBC Writer’s Room finalist and a Shore Scripts finalist both in 2014. He is a produced and optioned writer, and has recently turned his hand to production, having produced his first short film with another in the pipeline that should be completed this year. Want to see what else he has in store? Give him a shout-out at dustin7375 “AT” gmail.

READ THE SCRIPT HERE – AND DON’T FORGET TO COMMENT!!

FOR YET MORE SCRIPTS AVAILABLE FOR PRODUCTION:

PLEASE SEARCH SIMPLYSCRIPTS.COM

OR THE BLOG VERSION OF STS HERE.

All screenplays are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. The screenplays may not be used without the expressed written permission of the author.

Recently, STS reviewed John Dowgin’s desert thriller, Mile 42 (Script available here.) As readers of Shootin’ the Shorts are aware, our goal at STS is to find new and promising writers, and provide them with the platform they need to get their work seen (then hopefully optioned, and produced!)

One of our not-so-secret weapons in this quest is Danny Manus of No BullScript Consulting. Having worked as a development executive in Hollywood, Danny is an in-demand script consultant, named by Creative Screenwriting Magazine at one of the “Top 15” consultants in their “Cream of the Crop” list.   Partnered with STS, Danny provides wonderfully detailed and helpful notes for the monthly STS feature script.  This coverage is provided free to the writer, and can be posted our site or kept confidential – at the writer’s discretion. But wait – there’s more!  Any script that gets a coveted “recommend” from tough but eminently fair Danny will be featured in his monthly newsletter and may also receive further exposure to his production contacts…

Below, please find Danny’s notes/coverage for Mile 42. Read, learn, comment…. and don’t forget to submit your best work for possible review!

**To submit a script, please visit STS at the page listed HERE. Danny can also be contacted directly via the No BullScript Consulting website at http://www.nobullscript.net/contact/. Or on Twitter @DannyManus.

About the writer of Mile 42: John P. Dowgin is a playwright, screenwriter, director and actor, as well as a founding member of the production company The Porch Room (porchroom.com) for whom he directed the original work ‘Antony & Cleopatra: Infinite Lives” at the 2013 New York International Fringe Festival. Two of John’s plays have been published in the compilation “Accidents Happen” by Samuel French, and have been performed in New York, Los Angeles, Indianapolis, Toronto, Dublin, and Australia. A number of his screenplays are also in ‘development’, which he suspects to be a theoretical dimension like Oz. He lives in New Jersey with his wife and son.

**********

NO BULLSCRIPT ANALYSIS

Title:  Mile 42

Type of Material: Screenplay

Author:  John P. Dowgin

Number of Pages: 96

Circa: Present

Location: Arizona Desert/Border

Genre: Thriller

Coverage Date:  6/20/15

Budget Range:  Low

LOGLINE: When an extreme distance runner encounters a human trafficking ring during a desert ultramarathon, he must battle a corrupt group of Border Patrol Agents and his own mental and physical exhaustion to save innocent lives – and himself.

COMMENTS: John, thank you for submitting your script “Mile 42” to Simply Scripts. In the subsequent pages, I will go through the things that work well and what still needs to be worked on, developed, or changed to make this a more viable and commercial script and series.

Overall, I think this is a very well-written, easy to read script with some strong action scenes, memorable dialogue, and a likeable protagonist in Victor. The Latino market is growing considerably and there are a number of Latino actors that are becoming more bankable and if you can bridge the demographic gap through a commercial action/thriller concept, it could do well. It certainly feels like it’s something that could sell to an international audience if cast right.

I think the story is pretty straight forward for the most part, and while there is an ever-expanding conspiracy, we basically know who is involved and who isn’t pretty quickly and we know exactly what they’re doing other than the whole Russian angle. I do think that there could be more inklings of this larger mystery or operation so that the Russian coming in at the climax answers some questions instead of just feeling like another guy in the mix. And while I do think the backdrop of this race is very interesting, I don’t think it’s a race anyone has really heard of and so a bit more set up could help especially since we only see 2 other people running this race.

Structurally, the script is very strong. The opening scene is visual and tense, though I didn’t know why there would be a bridge in the middle of the desert. You have a solid inciting incident that pulls us into the story, a great exciting midpoint, and some really strong individual scenes and turning points with a number of deaths that get quite extreme and gory, starting with Jeter and his severed arm. The subject matter of the story is dark, but it’s really only in the kills (and Victor’s feet) that the tone gets gruesome and graphic. Decapitations, venom poisoning, gangrene, shootings, etc. It gets pretty hardcore for a thriller that doesn’t seem quite as hardcore as the murders within it. But it makes it visual and shocking and it works.

You hit all the right beats at the right moments, and your midpoint definitely stands out as you cut back and forth between the action with Victor as well as Borden and Carlos until they come together. The red ants were unexpected and it feels like a strong mini-climax that gives the story a nice boost and puts our characters back together. The only issue I have with the scene is I kept wondering where Somes is, as he seems to disappear.

The Shadow Wolves find the same group of immigrants that McCaffrey and Otilio are looking for, but how did they know the rest of the immigrants were hiding there? It’s not totally clear where THERE is in this scene other than in the desert. When the Shadow Wolves drop off the immigrants at mile marker 30 for catch and release, do they do anything or literally just drop them off? It’s not really clear since minutes later it seems, Somes, McCaffrey and Otilio find them there and tie them up again.

I think Victor’s mental state could become even more tenuous. The delusions he has and seeing Timson is great, and it puts us in Victor’s head, but we could get a bit more of that and see his downward spiral mentally as he’s trying to survive. It isn’t clear at first on page 71 if the bombs dropping on this mocked up town are real or if that is all in his head. We realize it in the next scene when Somes and McCaffrey are discussing it, but this bombing feels out of nowhere.

With the bombing, I’m not sure how Victor lived, but more than that, I don’t know who dropped the bomb or from where or how they knew to drop the bomb there. It feels like there’s a much bigger story going on here once the bombing occurs – perhaps with the Russians – than just some corrupt agents and minutemen or an immigrant trafficking scandal. But who is calling the Russians to drop the bomb (if it was them)?

One important scene that seems to be missing is when McCaffrey apparently shoots Carlos. We don’t get to see this – we only see him drag Carlos’s body to the SUV having already been shot. Yes, in the previous scene he seems to line up his shot, but it still feels like there’s a moment missing in between. The shot itself, Toraidio’s reaction, how they got down there and found them and tied him up, etc. If Carlos is shot, it’s a moment that could create a moment for Toraidio of if he runs or stays with his dad. Carlos still moving is a great moment, and his subsequent death is emotional and a strong scene.

The way Somes kills McCaffrey with the rattlesnake is definitely original and awful (in a cool way), but how did Somes grab the snake and put it down his shirt to begin with?

Victor is a likable and castable hero and it’s nice that he wants to save the immigrants he comes across, but I’d love to get a bit more about him to know why. We get backstory on him and why he’s doing these races, but is there anything in his personal history or family that makes him connect with Carlos and his son?

Victor’s backstory of being in the army and killing that young boy because he didn’t have a choice is certainly powerful and gives us some insight as to his deeper need and want and the redemption (or perhaps punishment) he’s seeking by doing all these crazy sports and races. And his dialogue in this scene is quite moving as well. But his list of extreme sports and activities/events he’s done is insane. What kind of person could do ALL that?

He’s virtuous and wants to do the right thing, but almost to a fault. I’m not sure why he confesses to the killing of Jeter, especially since he’s trying to run this race. Does he really think he can confess to murder and then just keep on running without having to go talk to cops or fill out reports, be interviewed, etc.? I don’t quite get this. And Somes’ response of “you’ll have to fill out a report” seems pretty flippant considering he just confesses to killing a Minuteman. Is that all you have to do when you kill someone? Fill out a report? This was an odd moment and reaction.

Perhaps one of the more surprising moments is when Victor gives Carlos and Toraidio over to the authorities even though it will save Toraidio’s life and he does it for good reasons. But his relationship with Toraidio becomes quite sweet and is a driving force in the story and in Victor’s motivations. And I think in the end, the fact he and Cynthia have seemingly adopted him is a great end.

Cynthia is a likable character, but I had no idea they were together until later in the script. She seems like a friend and a caring volunteer, but I didn’t feel any true LOVE between them in their first few scenes together. She blows him a kiss on page 19, but it felt more flirtatious than loving or like they were in a relationship already. There’s the “ove yo” message on pg 24 and that’s where I realized they might be in a relationship, but I think this could be a bit clearer, sooner.

You have created this quite large conspiracy and it’s interesting to watch it crumble not only from the outside, but also from the conflict that erupts from within the group and that it’s all over simple greed instead of the principle of the horrible things they’re doing. None of them really take issue with that.

Cutter makes for a solid secondary hero, though he’s mostly a desk jockey throughout the story until the climax. You do set up a suspicion around him so we’re not TOTALLY sure if he’s a good guy or not until the second half of the script, which is great. But if there’s one thing that could be set up a bit stronger, it’s Cutter’s relationship with Somes. Because while they seem like partners and they’re friendly, they are really only together in the very beginning of the script. I think their friendship could be seen a bit more, at least in the first act, so that when Cutter has to bust him in the end (and shoot him dead) he’s at least torn about it and the moment resonates not just as the good guy killing the bad guy, but a good man who had to kill his friend.

The Shadow Wolves sound like they could be a movie unto themselves (it’s a great title anyway), and could have their own agendas and motivations, storylines and rivalries, but right now they don’t bring anything DIFFERENT to the table than regular federal agents or border patrols. Even their names are pretty white-angle sounding. The fact they are Native American and working on the reservations is an original hook, but I’m not sure it actually pays off or makes a real difference in the plot. I’m also not totally sure you need THREE of them in a story where there are a large number of characters already, but it’s fine. I just think Terrence, Tom and Chris (and their personalities) get a bit lost in the story when really they should stand out more than anyone.

The climax is exciting and action-packed without it being huge budget and it really creates nice tension and builds well as everyone converges. Cutter finally takes a more active role while Victor still gets enough revenge on Somes and saves Toraidio. It’s a really tight and nicely written climax that tracks a large number of moving pieces, and that’s not easy to do in a visual and clear way.

Turning to the dialogue, I think this is where the script stands out nicely. There’s some very strong dialogue throughout and a nice voice. Some of the banter and the way you get across your themes in subtle ways in most scenes is quite strong. This type of story could have gotten very preachy or message-heavy, and it’s not. The “limits are there to be tested/limits are there to limit” conversation stood out, as well as a few other lines listed below. You even have a few nice moments of levity in a story that’s awfully dark and serious. You walked a really fine line very well, and it was an enjoyable read.

“Your feet only get you into the desert. Your mind gets you out.” Another great line.

A small note, but after 22 miles, how has Victor only burned 800 calories? Feels like it should be way more than that.

I do have a few additional page/line notes:

Pg 35 – Victor’s reply “Fuck would you know” is pretty rude in the moment. Not sure why he’s so harsh.

Pg 45 – You can cut the scene heading EXT. COTINUOUS and just say MINUTES LATER.

Pg 47 – Typo – THAT’S=THAT’D

            “You’re just a citizen” is a weak line that caps off a really impressive and powerful 2 pgs of dialogue. It doesn’t quite feel like what Somes would say. Plus, while there is a nice callback to this line on page 92, Victor was out cold when Somes said it.

Pg 51 – I keep wondering where is Somes?

Pg 65 – I don’t know what the phrases “who cut sign on foot” and “cut so much sign” means. I’m not sure if it’s a typo or just a saying I’m not aware of but I didn’t get the context.

Pg 75 – “You could’ve lived a hero. Now you’ll die an alibi.” – That’s a great line.

Pg 79 – The line “He just wanted to pick cantaloupe” almost comes off as funny in this moment even though I know it’s not meant to. But it’s kind of a comical line.

Pg 81 – Good angle Victor brings to his dialogue here to Cynthia.

Overall, I think the concept and the action is commercial and exciting, and at is budget level I think this could be a successful project if cast correctly. It tackles an issue without becoming an issue movie, it could bridge the gap between Latino demographics and mainstream thrillers, and it’s an enjoyable and easy read. The story is a bit straightforward, but the structure is strong, it keeps moving nicely and tosses in some gory, gruesome deaths for flavor. I do think there’s a bit more you could do with the Shadow Wolves or with the larger operation involving the Russians, and I think Cutter could seem a bit move active and connected to Somes. But generally, the story is strong. There’s some great dialogue moments throughout, and a nice voice that knows how to write visual action, economically. And knows what level of levity is appropriate at what times. There are many companies out there looking for a good $1-$2M thriller and many companies looking to cater to the Latino demographic, and I think this could easily be optioned if it’s not already. So stick with it! Keep writing! And best of luck! Thanks again John for submitting your script “Mile 42” to Simply Scripts, and congratulations on being the featured script of the month!

NO BULLSCRIPT 20 POINT GRADING SHEET AND RECOMMENDATION:

PROJECT: RECOMMEND

Recently, STS reviewed Gary Rowland’s ultra limited location horror, Offline. (Script available here.) As readers of Shootin’ the Shorts are aware, our goal at STS is to find new and promising writers, and provide them with the platform they need to get their work seen (then hopefully optioned, and produced!)

One of our not-so-secret weapons in this quest is Danny Manus of No BullScript Consulting. Having worked as a development executive in Hollywood, Danny is an in-demand script consultant, named by Creative Screenwriting Magazine at one of the “Top 15” consultants in their “Cream of the Crop” list.   Partnered with STS, Danny provides wonderfully detailed and helpful notes for the monthly STS feature script.  This coverage is provided free to the writer, and can be posted our site or kept confidential – at the writer’s discretion. But wait – there’s more!  Any script that gets a coveted “recommend” from tough but eminently fair Danny will be featured in his monthly newsletter and may also receive further exposure to his production contacts…

Below, please find Danny’s notes/coverage for Offline. Read, learn, comment…. and don’t forget to submit your best work for possible review!

**To submit a script, please visit STS at the page listed HERE. Danny can also be contacted directly via the No BullScript Consulting website at http://www.nobullscript.net/contact/. Or on Twitter @DannyManus.

About the writer of Offline: Gary Rowlands cut his teeth writing sketch comedy and was a commissioned writer on the hugely popular Spitting Image broadcast on national television in the UK. He has since branched out into writing features and is actively seeking representation. He can be contacted at gazrow at hotmail dot com.

NO BULLSCRIPT ANALYSIS

Title: Offline

Type of Material: Screenplay

Author: Gary Rowlands

Number of Pages: 89

Circa: Present

Location: Bedroom

Genre:   Supernatural Horror/Thriller

Coverage Date: 4/14/15

Budget Range: Low

LOGLINE: When a young, bed-ridden hacker with a tormented past meets a girl online who turns out to be dead, he realizes nothing is as it seems and the girl’s murderer may lie closer to home – and she may not be the only victim.

Warning: Spoiler Alerts!

COMMENTS: Gary, thank you for submitting your script “Offline” to Simply Scripts. In the subsequent pages, I will go through the things that work well and what still needs to be worked on, developed, or changed to make this a more viable and commercial script and series.

Overall, I think this is a nicely written, easy to read, and potentially commercial script. It’s Rear Window-esque with a Psycho and supernatural Sixth Sense twist. It can certainly be produced for a very low budget with basically 1 location and a handful of characters, and you set up a nice creepy tone immediately and it remains consistent throughout. You’ve got a couple nice twists in the story and there are some strong visuals and moments, though I do think there are a few issues that need to be addressed still.

There is a strong supernatural feel to the whole story, from page one, and that continues throughout. However, I’m still not quite sure what supernatural entity is possessing his computer which types out messages to him and makes it go on and off randomly, etc. Or what entity makes the vase and nightstand levitates. His phone is possessed, his computer is possessed – but this story isn’t about the devil possessing technology. I think it COULD be – especially with the title being Offline – but it’s not really about a Hacker who caused deaths, and now possessed technology is taking revenge. If the supernatural elements were more directly tied to technology (especially since he’s a hacker), that might make it stand out even more. But I’m not totally sure what Dave killing all those women has to do with his hacking or technology or Satan.

The biggest issue for me, is that I knew pretty quickly that Dave was probably dead and that this was some Sixth Sense situation. I suspected it by page 20 and was pretty sure on page 24 as soon as he starts talking to Nichola. There are just too many obvious clues and hints along the way, and there are too many other logistic issues for it to be anything else. So while the MOM being dead already is a nice twist, and the hero turning out to actually have been the killer is interesting, I knew he was dead almost the whole time. I also knew there was a dead body in the closet, which I think is pretty obvious as soon as the fly comes out of there on page 27. And because of that, I think the story gets a bit predictable and repetitive and we’re just waiting for the reveal I knew was coming.

Lucy and Nichola’s characters are obviously evil and not really human because logistically, what they are doing and saying just don’t quite ring true. I knew Lucy was likely Lucifer from the start. What they are asking David to do doesn’t make sense unless they are something much different than they appear, and the random and awkward way they just appear doesn’t feel real or plausible. How would Lucy get in? His mother doesn’t notice? And if she is the cop on the case, wouldn’t she be on TV or seem more professional? If Lucy is a cop and Nichola is a psychic, would Dave really need to tell her that some serial killers take trophies? Wouldn’t they know that? I know that, and I’m not a cop or psychic.

With Nichola, I don’t get how Dave just picks up the phone and she’s already on the line (seemingly). She never gave him a number to call. I think Nichola feels so over the top and desperate and clearly out for her own reasons – and without any proof she is who she says she is – that I don’t know why Dave believes her. I didn’t believe her from the get go. I think that much like Ruth, they have to feel more convincing at the start. Nichola starts feeling childish and too obvious, especially on pg 44, and it made me wonder why Dave keeps believing her or talking to her. Then Nichola tells him “We’ll take you with us” on pg 44 and that makes it very clear to me that Nichola and Lucy are going back to hell and are going to take him with them because he was already dead.

The second thing that made me very quickly think Dave was already dead (or dying) is how he simply turns on the computer or just picks up the phone – and Clare and Nichola are instantly there. He doesn’t go to a website or any specific place or program where a girl would even BE on camera to talk to him. She’s just magically there. And I’m not sure how/why the computer dies and then suddenly comes back to life. It all feels very suspect. You tell us on pg 14 that “Clare’s offline” – but what program is he looking for her on? Skype? Instant Messenger? Gmail chat? A website? Women don’t just appear when you turn on your computer. And if she’s offline, then she must be from a specific program he’s looking at. The lack of specifics makes us not believe.

With David, I like the way you set him up and describe his room with the Star Wars figures as it helps him seem the young innocent, though with the big rat he sees in the room it paints a picture of David and his mother living in a dilapidated shithole. It’s a great visual and it does make us wonder if he’s having delusions or not, but it makes us think he lives in a hovel.

David’s backstory with his father’s suicide could be sad and impactful, but I am not sure what a child could steal from a Church that would lead to their father killing themselves over it. I mean, he could kill a Priest and I don’t think it would make a child’s father kill himself over it unless it’s set up that the father was incredibly religious. David’s crime didn’t feel important enough to force his father to do that. Yes, he stole money from the Church that was set for a mission, but it’s really his mother who is the bad guy. If there is a strong religious connection in this family, I think that needs to be set up and clear.

One of my biggest issues with Dave is that I have a hard time believing he’s a good hacker. His Google searches are incredibly vague and simple (“shyness” “psychics” etc.), and he’s not doing much on the computer before this whole thing happens and I would think he’d be all over it trying to hack something, find something, do something, etc. The Star Wars figures might make him seem a little nerdy but it doesn’t make him feel like a hacker. He doesn’t show off he has those skills until he suddenly needs them, and I would suggest you set that up earlier by showing him trying to do some serious hacking online – maybe even trying to find out who hit him or something that can connect later. Also, I’m not sure why he needs to look up “haunted house” on Wikipedia – does he really not know what one is? I’m pretty sure it’s self-explanatory.

My other major issue with David and his connection with Clare is that they never speak for more than 30 seconds, and every single conversation they have ends abruptly with David slamming his computer shut and just ending the conversation. It seems very rude and immature, and I’m pretty sure that you only get to do that to a woman once – maybe twice – until they never speak to you again. Yet she never seems to care. But the even bigger issue with him doing this, is that it stops them from ever REALLY creating a connection or chemistry that’s more than just instant physical attraction. And for US to connect with them and feel a connection, I think we need to see them talk a bit more and a bit deeper. Then you wouldn’t have to tell us that the chemistry between them is palpable because we’ll see it on screen.

While Dave’s willingness to sacrifice himself for Clare is sweet, and perhaps that’s part of him subconsciously seeking redemption for his crimes, it feels forced. They don’t seem to have a deep enough connection for him to do this, plus – he KNOWS she’s already dead! Why would he sacrifice his life so that a dead girl doesn’t find out she’s dead? It just doesn’t quite make sense. It would be one thing if he was sacrificing his own life to save her from dying, but just finding out she’s dead? I’m not sure those are big enough stakes.

A small note, but the way David tries to find out who Clare is seems to be a bit silly. He doesn’t know anything about her or where she lives, but he’s going to search through online yearbooks of every high school in the state? He doesn’t even know what state she’s in. If he was a real hacker, wouldn’t he be able to take a screen capture of her face and run it through some face recognition software or google images software to find a match? If she WAS killed or kidnapped, her face would have been all over the news and pretty easy to find on Google, wouldn’t it? It just feels like there’s a SMARTER way to find her and who she is online than looking at ever yearbook in the unnamed state.

Clare’s a nice girl but we know she’s dead by page 15. It’s a solid moment, but again he reacts to seeing her scars by just slamming his computer shut. The fact she’s a ghost is fine, and it makes sense with the witching hour being when she comes online (though you don’t have to keep telling us it’s the witching hour – we know!).

Ruth is an interesting character because her introduction is as the doting, caring mother who seems to genuinely love and care about her son. But it very quickly becomes unclear what type of relationship they have – even by the second time we see her – and then with each subsequent time she comes in, she seems more and more cold and insane. I appreciate that she’s bipolar and she makes a great red herring for the killer, though perhaps too obvious to actually BE the killer. I think perhaps she changes a bit too quickly – by page 10 she’s already psychotic. I would suggest stretching out a bit longer her downward spiral into psychotic behavior and her mental illness so that it takes a little longer for her to reach that point.

The ending is exciting and visual and I like how Dave’s story ends, however, it’s not clear who hit him in the first place and killed him. Was it Clare’s mother? Was it someone involved in the story or just some random person at the wrong place at the right time? I think you need to find a way to tie everything together and perhaps the way to do that is to reveal who killed him. I keep wondering why Nichola and Lucy need to put him through all of this stuff with Ruth and Clare and everything else instead of just taking his soul and sending him to hell from the start.

Turning to the dialogue, I think it’s nicely written but it’s not very subtle, and with supernatural/paranormal mysteries and thrillers like this, subtlety is important so that the audience doesn’t suspect what’s going on by page 10. I think that even though David is 18, his actions and words feel a bit young, as does Lucy and Nichola’s and that’s part of the reason I knew exactly what they were from the start. So, I think that while it’s great to place those little breadcrumbs in the dialogue so that when we look back, we recognize all the little nuances and hints that make us realize the truth, if they’re giving it away then they ruin the mystery.

Pg 61 – You can cut the INT. BEDROOM scene heading because we’re already there.

Pg 68 – Why are the clocks in military time and not regular time? Shouldn’t it be 11:45?

Pg 70 – Can cut the Scene heading at bottom – we’re still in the same location.

Pg 71 – For me, the maggot scene is really gross. Not just the maggots, but the puking all over himself, etc. It’s visual for sure, but it’s a visual that would make me gag.

Pg 72 – I thought Ruth smashed the computer. It’s ok again? I’m also not sure why he thinks he can amputate a leg with basic scissors? I’m not quite sure what that would do anyway, but it’s a dumb idea to try and cut your leg off with scissors.

Pg 82 – Why is Clare calling out MOM?

Pg 87 – I get the visual, but I’m not sure why the disgusting bugs are needed in this supernatural thriller.

Overall, I think the concept and premise is commercial and visual and works for a low budget horror/thriller with a recognizable Rear Window/Sixth Sense hook, but for me I think some of the major elements of the mystery are too obvious. It has to be much less obvious that Dave is dead, it has to be less obvious that Nichola and Lucy are evil and not who they say, and it has to be less obvious there’s a dead body in the closet. There are logistic issues and some character issues that I think need to be addressed with Dave and Ruth. It needs to come together a bit better and use the supernatural elements to stand out more and make it LESS obvious that Dave is dead instead of more obvious. It’s got potential and these types of projects are always getting made, especially since this could probably be produced for $100-250K. So stick with it! Keep writing! And best of luck! Thanks again Gary for submitting your script “Offline” to Simply Scripts, and congratulations on being the featured script of the month!

NO BULLSCRIPT 20 POINT GRADING SHEET AND RECOMMENDATION:

PROJECT: CONSIDER

Earlier this month, STS reviewed Tim Westland and John Robbin’s TV Pilot Loose Screws. (Script available here.) As readers of Shootin’ the Shorts are aware, our goal at STS is to find new and promising writers, and provide them with the platform they need to get their work seen (then hopefully optioned, and produced!)

One of our not-so-secret weapons in this quest is Danny Manus of No BullScript Consulting. Having worked as a development executive in Hollywood, Danny is an in-demand script consultant, named by Creative Screenwriting Magazine at one of the “Top 15” consultants in their “Cream of the Crop” list.   Partnered with STS, Danny provides wonderfully detailed and helpful notes for the monthly STS feature script.  This coverage is provided free to the writer, and can be posted our site or kept confidential – at the writer’s discretion. But wait – there’s more!  Any script that gets a coveted “recommend” from tough but eminently fair Danny will be featured in his monthly newsletter and may also receive further exposure to his production contacts…

Below, please find Danny’s notes/coverage for Loose Screws. Read, learn, comment…. and don’t forget to submit your best work for possible review!

**To submit a script, please visit STS at the page listed HERE. Danny can also be contacted directly via the No BullScript Consulting website at http://www.nobullscript.net/contact/. Or on Twitter @DannyManus.

About the writers of Loose Screws:

Tim Westland – an award winning screenwriter, 2014 Page International Quarter Finalist and co-author of the acclaimed comic book series/graphic novel “Chasing The Dead”.  Tim is currently writing the adaptation of the novel, “Quantum Lens“, by New York Times Best Selling author Douglas E. Richards.

John Robbins – a 2014 Page Quarter Finalist, John resides in San Diego and can be reached at jpjrb1 “AT” gmail, or via website: http://www.johnnyrobbins.com.

******

NO BULLSCRIPT ANALYSIS

Title: Loose Screws

Type of Material:  60 Min TV Pilot

Authors: Tim Westland & John Robbins

Number of Pages: 55

Circa: 2012/1999

Location:  NYC

Genre: Drama

Coverage Date: 1/10/14

Budget Range:  Low

LOGLINE: When a successful psychiatrist finds himself losing his grip on reality and hunted by a clandestine group in search of his numerically coded journal, he must turn to an old patient – a girl with a mysterious mathematical talent – that he betrayed years ago.

COMMENTS:  Tim and John, thank you for submitting your TV Pilot “Loose Screws” to Simply Scripts. In the subsequent pages, I will go through the things that work well and what still needs to be worked on, developed, or changed to make this a more viable and commercial script and series.

A great TV series pilot has to do a number of specific things;  it needs to create an interesting world and pull us into that world, it has to set up characters that are not only special, original, have great chemistry and have a specific goal and dilemma, but that we are going to want to follow week after week and care about; it has to set up an overarching plot and theme to the show and to the specific pilot; and it has to set up the conflict and types of conflict that are going to drive the show. Plus, it has to be original and visual and have a strong hook that audiences will be able to understand. And most of all – it has to make it clear what audiences would expect from the series going forward. We have to know that there is somewhere for the series to go that isn’t the same episode week after week so it doesn’t feel like it will get stale quickly.

I think your script does a few of these quite well, but is lacking a bit in others. It certainly feels pretty original and I really like the concept of a psychologist who is himself going crazy. And you definitely raise a ton of questions and mysteries as to what’s really going on and what everyone wants and what this story is really about. But there aren’t too many answers. I’m not totally sure where the story is going – not that we should know everything from the pilot. But I would love to know a bit more about the scope of the story and the world you’re setting up.

The mysteries and questions seem to increase as the pilot progresses. First, it’s what is wrong with William? Then it’s who/what is this clandestine group of “psychologists” who are searching for this journal, then it’s what the code means and why they want it, etc. It’s great to create questions that we will figure out over the course of the series, but we also need at least ONE important answer in the pilot for us to be enticed enough to seek out more answers.

The concept of these numbers seemingly affecting people (at least William and Miriam) in such drastic ways, and the fact that some clandestine group with a dry cleaners torture room is going to great lengths to recover this number-coded journal, sets up that it’s important. But I don’t know anything about the larger over-arching story yet.

We never get to see what William has written on the postcard – we just know it’s some numbers. But are the specific numbers important? They seemed to be a clear code that Miriam was able to decipher and it made something clear to her. So, it feels like WE should see or know the numbers as well even if we don’t know what they mean yet.

Structurally, the script works and you have nice act end points, though the opening seems a bit short for a drama. These days, cold opens seem to be quite long and give us a bit more set up to the show or the episode. I think the cold open could give us a bit more insight, foreshadowing or something a bit more compelling that clues us into the world and what this show is about. And in a pilot especially, the cold open needs to give us more – either more on the overarching series or more about the story contained in the pilot. I’m not sure the WHOLE open needs to be set in the past. Perhaps you could set some of it in the past and then cut to the present so that we know that the story/series actually takes place in 2012 and not 1999, and that it’s not about Miriam and William when they are younger. That might help set up a bit more of the world and story if we saw some of the present day in the cold open.

I will throw another structural suggestion out there that I like even more. What if you actually opened the show in 2012 with the Parkinson scene on pg 5 and had your First Act actually be the Cold Open. And then start the new first act with the flashback in 1999 and introduce Charlie, Miriam and that whole scene then. We will have already heard Miriam’s name in his delusion, so we will make a connection. And this way, we will already have the world set up, it would set up the major series dilemma of William’s mental illness right from the start as well as what’s interesting about William’s character, and I think it would be more interesting to then go back and see a bit of how he got there or who he used to be and a bit more of the hook once we have a better grasp of the show.  Plus, as a viewer, I think the scene of William’s delusion and freak out is a much stronger scene that will grab people and keep them watching. So having it happen in minute 7 instead of minute 15, means viewers stick around.

The Parkinson storyline with his lie about being molested is fun, though I’m not sure if he’s important to the series or just being used as an interesting scene to set up William in the present day and his high-powered clientele. I didn’t quite get his reference about his father on pg 7 – “He was one of a handful of short straws on the 89^th.” I don’t know what that’s supposed to mean.

The concept of a psychologist to the rich and powerful who holds all these important secrets to some of the country’s most powerful people who is slowly losing his own mind is interesting because he becomes a total liability for a great many people who could probably have him killed or would have reason to shut him up. But that doesn’t seem to be the issue here. The issue is that he’s broken some numeric code that means something important to a group of people. But why now? He seemingly discovered or broke this code with Miriam over 10 years ago – so why are people after it now?

What I think is missing in the pilot is some dynamic or relationship that we care about and can really invest in that we can see developing over the course of the series. Look at Bates Motel, Breaking Bad, House of Cards, Touch, Fargo – they were all based around a specific relationship and dynamic and how it changes with each obstacle, goal, action, reaction, etc. And I feel like that is what could make us invest a bit more in the characters and story. Is this show about William and Miriam? William and Kendorski? Is there a core relationship/dynamic that is driving the series?

William is a complex character and seems to fall under the incredibly popular tag of “anti-hero.” It seems a dramatic series can’t succeed these days without one. He is an adulterer, he unethically slept with a much younger patient (though it’s not clear if he waited until after she was legal) and his secretary, and he did something seemingly controversial years ago and is now paying for it with a debilitating mental disease. He has a clear dilemma, he has obstacles, and his visions are very intriguing and compelling, but I am not sure what William’s goal is for the episode or the series. I’m not sure what he actually needs to do in the series.

I think there are some compelling supporting characters, especially Miriam. But it’s not clear how long it has been before page 34 since she has seen William. It’s pretty easy for him to find her and he’s pretty mean to her right off the bat regarding her talent. And she seems pretty paranoid, which made me wonder if she’s been followed all her life or what she is so scared of. And when she and William end up sleeping together again, I’m not sure why he would bring her back to his house when he knows his wife could either be there or come home at any time, not to mention Sean. Feels odd that he would do this.

There are a couple characters I didn’t quite “get,” and I think Kendorski is the biggest one. His personality is a bit all over the place. One second, he’s an esteemed elder-seeming doctor and the next he’s ordering his wife to stop acting like a damn bitch, roll over and take care of daddy. One second he’s William’s best friend for 20 years, and the next he’s throwing him out and threatening him and seemingly cold and uncaring. I don’t know why he seems so heartless on page 32 when he throws William out. I think it makes it too obvious in this scene that he really wants the journals, when there seem to be other options or more subtle ways to get them. He turns on his best friend in an instant for seemingly no reason. I just couldn’t quite wrap my head around who this character is. Cyrus is a fun character and a bit of comic relief like Mike in Breaking Bad, but the scenes with him and Cyrus are so secretive, that I often had no idea what they were talking about.

William’s son Sean is an interesting supporting character. His storyline certainly seems a bit twisted and sexual, in a good way, and I like that he’s in conflict with his parents, but it’s not clear why he seems to hate his father (and mother). There certainly seems to be some depth there more than just teenage angst, but I’m not sure what the dynamic is or why he’s SO viciously angry at them, especially William. The reveal that he enjoyed being whipped by the S&M lady/prostitute is intriguing, and it’s a strong end to the third act, though I’m not sure I get how it’s related to the story. The one thing I’m not sure I believed was that 19 year-old sexpot Monique would be with 16 year-old Sean.

The Homeless Family that William sees in his delusions are handled well in the visions and they are interesting, but when he tells the backstory of his mother giving the money to a homeless family, I wondered if that was the family. And if so, why they would haunt his thoughts so often. I was expecting a bit more connection there.

Turning to the dialogue, I think it’s purposefully and intriguingly vague at times, and there are some really strong lines throughout. However, there could be a couple more moments of clarity for the audience.

One of the biggest dialogue notes I have while reading this is that everyone treats each other with such utter contempt. Everyone is just straight-up mean to everyone else, and I am not sure why. William to Miriam – mean.  Kendorski to William – mean. Miriam to Kendorski – mean. Janet to William – mean. Sean to William – mean. Cyrus to Kendorski – mean. Monique and Sean – mean.  Everyone in the script seems to dislike and distrust everyone else in the script and I’m not sure why, but it doesn’t help when you’re trying to create a dynamic between your characters. Creating anti-heroes is fine, but SOMEONE has to be likeable and like someone else.

There are a few random lines and moments that seem to come out of nowhere and they create a few too many “huh?” moments. For example, on page 21, William says “I doubt any amount of financial aid would help her.” But no one has mentioned anything about financial aid, money, or helping Miriam. And it’s odd that he brings up how his wife’s laugh reminds him of his patient. Is this the first time she’s ever laughed? Why does it remind him of the laugh now? The whole conversation here feels random.

On page 41, Kendorski is arguing with his wife and listening to the dog barking and suddenly says “Wait a minute. What if Bill was MY therapist?” This comes out of nowhere and has no connection to anything being discussed. There needs to be a stronger context or set up here.

A couple additional specific scene/page notes –

Pg 11 – I’m not sure who William is referring to when he says “You sound like them.” Who is them – patients?

Pg 24 – I think you can cut this Convenient Store scene. I’m not sure what its purpose is. Can cut right to Chinatown.

Pg 28 – I’m not sure why they beat Kendorski up when he’s agreed to their demands.

Pg 43 – Would tweak line to “One that I’VE put together over and over…”

Pg 52 – Kendorski sounds even more evil here with “Don’t make me do this.” But I’m not sure to what he’s referring because right after that he just walks out and leaves without a word. It’s a bit of an awkward moment here.

Pg 54 – Kendorski peeing his pants feels like it’s supposed to be funny, but I’m not sure that it is. He’s more enamored about the fact that he did it than he is mad or scared.

I think overall you have an intriguing set up but the concept feels more geared to a limited series, kind of like Twin Peaks or Fargo or Under the Dome, where it’s a more limited 10-episode run that tells a whole story, but there could be more to it if it does well and could be extended. I’m not sure it totally feels like a 22 or even 13-episode series to me because I can’t really picture what the week to week of this show would be, at least not past about 10 episodes or where it could go from the pilot. Being totally honest, I would certainly watch a second episode to see how it develops and get a bit more information, but I’m not all in yet from the pilot.

It has some traces of other series like the Keifer Sutherland show Touch (where a mute kid held the code to the world basically), Bates Motel, and Black Box. Maybe a bit of Boss as well, where the lead suffers from a debilitating disease that affects his cognitive ability, but with a more esoteric and mysterious antagonistic force.

A small but important note – the title Loose Screws I think needs to change as it connotes a pretty comedic story and series, and this is not a comedy at all. Or even a lighthearted dramedy. I think it sets up a context that the story doesn’t support. Also, the title of the episode is “Miriam,” which makes me think she’s just one of the many patients we’re going to meet that play into this story, but this isn’t a patient of the week type story and the only 2 patients who seem to matter are her and Charlie. So, while it’s a very easily fixable and small note, I’m not sure Miriam is really what this pilot episode is about.

Overall, I think you have an intriguing and original concept and there are some cool mysteries and questions you’ve set up. There’s some nice voice in the writing and a solid anti-hero, and I think there is some potential here but I think there are some issues that still need to be addressed. I think it needs to be a little clearer what the story is about, what the scope of the world is, where the series could go week to week, and why we should care about these characters when they don’t even seem to care about each other. Stick with it! Keep writing! And best of luck!  Thanks again Tim and John for submitting your script “Loose Screws” to Simply Scripts, and congratulations on being the featured script of the month and our first TV series.

NO BULLSCRIPT 20 POINT GRADING SHEET AND RECOMMENDATION:

PROJECT: CONSIDER W/RESERVATIONS 

Bump in the Night

A foul mouthed drug addict decides that burglary can get him his next fix, but he picks the wrong house and the wrong couple to mess with.

Our culture has such a schizophrenic view of old people. On one hand, we infantilize them. Awwwww, they’re so cute and polite. Innocent beings brimming with wisdom, and memories of days gone by. Then we discard ‘em like yesterday’s trash. Old folks’ facilities. Left to fend for themselves in broken down homes. Especially after the children move away. They’re vulnerable to falling; breaking that oh-so vulnerable hip. Not to mention violent home invasions by ruthless predators…

Meet Alexander and Agnes, 60s. A sweet couple living out their golden years in a comfy suburban neighborhood. We meet them in bed. They’re cuddled together – fast asleep. At least until they hear a noise.

It’s an intruder. Baz – a strung-out teen junkie in search of a score. Alexander and Agnes slip out of bed, and tiptoe quiet as mice downstairs.

Baz grabs Agnes’ purse, and turns to go. But his path is blocked by Alexander, wielding a baseball bat. He tells the old codger to F* off, but Alexander’s not deterred. For a mortal battle’s about to ensue. An epic fight for the ages.

Low budget and high entertainment, Bump in the Night has loads in its favor. Colorful characters. A wicked sense of humor. Twists. There’s even a moral hidden deep down in here: don’t assume that old people are helpless. They were once young bastards, too….

About the writer: Anthony Cawood is an aspiring screenwriter from the UK with a number of scripts in various stages of production, two of which have just wrapped shooting. His script, A Certain Romance, recently won in the Nashville Film Festival Screenwriting Competition (short script category). You can find out more at http://www.anthonycawood.co.uk.

Pages: 10

Budget: Pretty low. A handful of actors. A bar, and a house. That’s about as easy as it gets!

READ THE SCRIPT HERE – AND DON’T FORGET TO COMMENT!!

FOR YET MORE SCRIPTS AVAILABLE FOR PRODUCTION:

PLEASE SEARCH SIMPLYSCRIPTS.COM 

OR THE BLOG VERSION OF STS HERE.

All screenplays are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. The screenplays may not be used without the expressed written permission of the author.