• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

A Little Help With A Scene

I wonder if anyone would give me their opinion on a very short excerpt from my last script. It’s “finished” in the sense that it’s in circulation, the full script has been requested and sent for reading, etc. (I tend to the opinion that a script is like a poem; as Paul Valery said, “Poems are never finished, only abandoned.”)

What I’m looking for is an opinion on transition and tone-appropriateness. A pro script consultant who did a cover criticized this section as lacking a good ear for tone. Some background:

Title: GALAHAD

Genre: Comedy

Log Line: A family hires a formerly famous but now washed-up alcoholic attorney to save their family home from being confiscated by a corrupt city mayor.

Think Lee Marvin’s alcoholic gunslinger from CAT BALLOU turned loose as a lawyer in a contemporary setting.

A bit of synopsis to get you up to speed:

Middlevile, Connecticut. Springtime. ABIGAIL SIMON (60), widow and distinguished matron, is dying of cancer. The city’s Mayor, DALILI MARTIN (55), is in cahoots with businessman (and transplanted Jersey wise-guy) Sal Migliori (50) to seize Abigail’s lovely family home under “eminent domain” for a shady business deal. Abigail’s daughter, VALENTIA (Vale) DAMIAN (30) and her husband live with Abigail. Vale shows all the signs of depression: sloppy dress, horrible addiction to sugar and cynicism. She’s married, unhappily, to ETHAN DAMIAN, a man full of vastly unwarranted self-importance and who’s as incompetent in everything he does as he is vain. Neither Abigail nor Vale knows that Ethan is conspiring with Dalili and Sal.

Arrayed against the evil trio is Abigail, Vale and SANCHO VALDEZ (40), a portly and gentle handyman who lives in the family guest house. When Dalili and Sal present Abigail with eviction papers, the scene is set for a life and death struggle over the beloved family home. Abigail reveals that she’s hired a famous 70’s radical attorney by the name of GALAHAD HIDALGO. Expecting a distinguished gentleman in his 60’s to arrive, Vale and Sancho are shocked at who shows up at the airport. He’s sunburned, long-haired, and wearing a garish Hawaiian shirt and sandals from having spent Abigail’s retainer on a trip to Tahiti, Playa del Carmen and Hawaii. He’s also drunker than a hoot owl.

Galahad promises to straighten up his act and dry out, but his court date to defend the family ends with him (and Vale) in jail for contempt. Resorting to “Plan B,” a loopy scheme Galahad concocts to infiltrate a soirée for the Mayor, he plies the enemy camp with liquor and drugs and tries to seduce Dalili, all for information he can use. He ends up spiking the punch with LSD. Dalili and Galahad, higher than a kite, engage in a lascivious banquet (with a sly wink to Albert Finney in TOM JONES) with carrots, caviar, spaghetti and figs that goes horribly wrong.

It’s at this point that in the story arc that Abigail, sadly, passes away. The two scenes I’d like you to look at happen, first, in her room as the body is laid out before the funeral and, secondly, at the funeral after.

What I am after in tone is a bit of black humor, tinged with just a little poignancy. I’m convinced that the best comedy is always just half a step away from pathos.

I suppose you’d need to read the entire script to take the context, but since I’m pretty much trying to achieve the same tone throughout the script, if this short 4-page excerpt gets there, then it can’t be “tone-inappropriate.” Or so I am hoping.

I guess the only thing you need to know is that Abigail has passed away on her birthday and Galahad has not gotten the memo.

Anyway, here’s a link: http://www.politikonzoon.com/GalahadExcerpt.pdf

Thanks in advance if you have the time and inclination to take a look.

Best,

-Charles
 
I actually find it amusing.

The only thing I might add is the mariachi band playing the death march as they exit.

The poem at the gravesite seems a little long. It should climax (IMO) with the fuck line. Because that's like the taboo taboo word for a Holy Man to utter.

Just curious; Is it after this that Galahad gets his act together? If so, should he be so drunk at the cemetery?
 
- This bit of dialogue seems conflicting and confused me.

VALE
Leave me alone.

ETHAN
Suit yourself. I’m sorry Vale.

Seems like Ethan has a split personality thus far. But of course I don't know the characters at this point.



- Is this from your novel? This is a lot of action to read in a screenplay.

She doesn’t reply, so he turns and leaves. As he leaves,
Sancho enters with his painting. Ethan purposely bumps him
as they pass. Sancho is about to say something, but thinks
better of it. He shakes his head instead.

Sancho props the painting on the night stand beside Abigail.
He bends down and kisses her gently on the forehead. He
walks over and stands beside Abigail. She reaches her arms
around him, hugs him tight. She sobs, shakes. He caresses
her hair gently.

I don't know maybe it was the PDF crunching it together (which could be) but when I saw that I felt like I should continue to read my investing in the stock market book, at least it will help me make money. In fact, please allow me to show you how this could be quicker with the same meaning.

He turns and leaves. Sancho enters with his painting.
Ethan purposely bumps him as they pass.
Sancho is about to say something, but thinks
better of it.

Sancho props the painting on the night stand. He bends
down and kisses Abigail’s forehead. He walks over and
stands beside Vale. She hugs him tight. She sobs as
Sancho caresses her hair gently.

And that took me a minute to fix up. After reading it again you need to understand that professional (and many non) ACTOS/ACTRESSES know how to act. What you wrote was telling them how to act.

EDIT: You have 83 words and I have 61. That is 25% less words and 25% time saved reading your script. Busy people like it when they save time.


ALSO!!!! Please reread what you wrote.

He walks over and stands beside Abigail. She reaches her arms
around him, hugs him tight.
She sobs, shakes. He caresses
her hair gently.

So how the hell does Abigail reaching her arm around him when she is dead? And you have already sent this out to everyone? And this "pro script consultant" didn't even catch this?!? I hope you didn't pay this douche that much to give you their advice.



- Is the 2nd bold word action (not the cont'd)? I just don't understand what you mean.

He closes his book.

MINISTER (CONT’D) <---- (hahaha....No shit! I wouldn't have known that line of dialogue was continued)
Amen.

CROWD
Amen.

LATER.

What the hell is later and why is this where action should be? I suspect this should be a slug line and to me that is lazy screenwriting. Put in the slug because people who know screenplays don't read slug lines, they scan them (if that) and continue with the story. I'm surprised people are buying this crap and not saying anything. Maybe this is a personal opinion of mine (coming from an older school maybe) and I guess that people are lazy today but when I see these LATER in action, I say, "yes, later" and put it down. Unless it's something really good, then I look past it.




It was kind of a thick read and you need to trust your audience to envision your scenes a bit more. If your entire screenplay reads like these few scenes I would put it down. I don't need you to describe every detail in the scene and it bogs down your story. I can go further on this but I don't want to. What is your beginning, middle and end this scene(s) trying to convey? Do I have to wait until the end of the sequence to understand what is going on with your characters? Note: the first scene was not bad but the next two didn't pull me into the scene which would follow the funeral. I guess Vale finding out what Galahad is up to at the end of the funeral might make me want to read into the next scene (maybe?). As for the comedy, I see this kind of like a Harold and Maude style so maybe I see what you are trying to do (I'm kind of guessing on this though). If this is the case then you might have to ignore what the "pro script consultant" is saying because I suspect Galahad is the Buster Keaton and Vale is the stern woman. Both always in conflict in some respects and you are using dark situations to communicate humor. Was I laughing, no, but I think I would have still liked the Mariachi scene anyway into the funeral (I like dark humor). I guess I don't know what is going on and the poem/prayer did not move me. At least in Harold and Maude when Harold kept seeing Maude at the funerals it left me with a mystery of "who the hell are these two" and Harold had that same curiosity about Maude. Which made me really want to see what happened in the next scene in Harold and Maude. In yours, I'm not sure if there is anything moving me to the next scene.

As for the ear for tone, I guess I would need to read the entire script to see what the "pro script consultant" was saying.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn’t mind if Vale’s grief was better held and taken to the next level from bedside to graveside. Tears run down her face as the Minister begins the poem, she looks over and sees Galahad fall off the headstone, she breaks into a sob of grief (and lost hope).

Also, I wouldn’t mind if the poem were written by Abigail (with Galahad) and was a bit shorter and more accessible to the audience in terms of rhyme scheme and posthumous comeuppance. Vale looks over, Galahad gives her a little nod of condolence, then turns and stumbles off. In distance SIRENS gather, billows of black smoke rise into the air. Vale manages the slightest hint of a smile. So we realize with the cards of corrupt legality stacked against them and no way to win, Galahad and Abigail conspired to fight fire with fire and burn the place down so the greedy bastards could have the "house of wind" spoken of in the poem… or something. (If it were the final scene that is.)


-Thanks-
 
wridingrlm, what is your background? Just curious.

Ethan's response to Vale is that he's sorry for his loss. And that he will leave him alone. Works perfectly fine for me.

And it's my understanding that in spec scripts, having shooting-script-like perfect and complete sluglines isn't always necessary. You're writing for a reader (not the editor or the script budgeting department). To me, LATER perfectly and succinctly conveys that time passes, yet the scene doesn't change as established by the previous slugline.

And this comes from professional readers that it's perfectly acceptable. So please shed some light on why you believe what you do because there are a lot of misconceptions floating around if you are correct.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
And in spec scripts, having shooting-script-like perfect and complete sluglines isn't always necessary. You're writing for a reader, not an editor. LATER perfectly conveys to a reader that time passes, yet the scene doesn't change as established by the previous slugline.

Like I said, I might be old school but to me action is where you put ACTION of what we are seeing on the screen, not slug lines. For me it breaks my thought and now I'm not reading YOUR story. Personal opinion, like I said.





wridingrlm, what is your background?

INT. LA COUNTY, OFFICE - EVENING

From the beige walls hang pictures of industrial art. In the center of the office sits a desk with assorted personal items upon it. Beneath the desk HUMS a computer. Among the personal items a clock which TICKS as wridingrlm waits to go home.
 
Like I said, I might be old school but to me action is where you put ACTION of what we are seeing on the screen, not slug lines. For me it breaks my thought and now I'm not reading YOUR story. Personal opinion, like I said.

We're talking about abbreviated sluglines. And it's an old school technique. I learned it over twenty years ago (well, that may not be old to some people). Still in use today, apparently. And that's why I was curious. Although I've mostly seen them as redirecting reader POV within a scene in order to avoid camera references (e.g. using a character name in caps as an abbreviated slugline).

INT. LA COUNTY, OFFICE - EVENING

From the beige walls hang pictures of industrial art. In the center of the office sits a desk with assorted personal items upon it. Beneath the desk HUMS a computer. Among the personal items a clock which TICKS as wridingrlm waits to go home.

Well, capitalization of sound references is definitely old school, so now I'm really confused. :lol:

Anyway, we're off topic. I was just surprised by the harshness of your tone when I really didn't see a major transgression. Not trying to start anything, just trying to solidify my own understanding and correct where needed.

And I laughed when you mentioned "thick read" in a rather thick paragraph of your own. :)
 
Last edited:
Hi, ussinners. Thanks for reading and for the feedback. It’s appreciated. Abigail’s death sends Galahad into a tail-spin bender and crisis, including a heart-attack, from which he emerges with Vale’s and Sancho’s help just in the nick of time to save the day, yadda, yadda.

Hey, wridingrim. You’ve got some good suggestions and some tough but valid points in places.
The “Suit Yourself. I’m sorry Vale” line works in the context of Ethan’s character arc, which you don’t have access to, unfortunately, in my little excerpt. He actually IS a bit schizophrenic.

That was a good edit on the action and a valid point on acting directions. I’ve been told that by a couple other people, but it’s one of those blind spots, if you know what I mean: you know it’s a no-no, and catch yourself doing it and edit it out, but it still sneaks in and pops its annoying head back up.

“He walks over and stands beside ABIGAIL” was a major typo—should have been Vale. THAT is embarrassing, since 10 people, all good writers, missed it (but I’m not blaming them, it’s my mistake—just giving you kudos for catching it).

Not sure I understand what the problem with “LATER” is. I’ve seen it in quite a few very professional spec scripts to indicate a short passage of time has taken place WITHIN THE SAME SCENE. I use it rather than camera directions that might otherwise indicate the passage of time since this is a SPEC script, not a shooting script. (In other words, OK Mr. Director, YOU figure out a way to show it’s now SAME scene, but some time has passed…maybe a quick fade out, then fade back in, and people have moved, but only a little, yadda yadda…)

As for not pulling you into the next scene, the excerpt hits right at a major transition (FADE TO BLACK), and then the next scene (which you don’t have) begins “ONE WEEK LATER.” A lot of the problems you indicate in your final overview I think (hope?) are the result of my posting up a 4-page excerpt from the center of a 100-page script. I’ll leave it at that, and give you major props for taking a stab at it and for the advice. Much appreciated!

(p.s., the douchebag consultant done me good in other problem areas, so I’ll keep ‘em, at least for a while)
 
but it’s one of those blind spots, if you know what I mean

I totally know what you mean, it happens to all of us.......Well, maybe not for "professional" readers. Thats why it's important to have so many different eyes take a look at your script.

The “Suit Yourself. I’m sorry Vale” line works in the context of Ethan’s character arc, which you don’t have access to, unfortunately, in my little excerpt. He actually IS a bit schizophrenic.

I had a feeling there was more to it, good job of the usuage of dialogue if I was able to figure that out with so little.

As for not pulling you into the next scene, the excerpt hits right at a major transition (FADE TO BLACK), and then the next scene (which you don’t have) begins “ONE WEEK LATER.”

Got ya, so this sounds like an ending of a sequence (or very close to) where you move to a week later and things are changing for our characters.

As for the Later stuff, I would rather see the writer’s transition of time. Using the props in the scene, dialogue, a sound(s) occurring at the same time switching into the next scene. And ideally you would want something which shows the passage of time if able. What's used a lot is a lot of films is a siren blaring and in the next scene someone is screaming, is in trouble or it's a frantic scene. Etc. Etc. Leaving it up to a director allows them to make a mistake and ruin your story. I know that most writers are not good at that part of screenwriting but for me LATER breaks my train of thought when I'm looking for action at that time, even in spec scripts. That is why I would perfer a slug instead (and say later in the slug if you have to). And like I said, most people who read screenplays scan slugs or don't really read them at all and it gives more white space on the page. But if the "professional" readers say this is good practice then I would keep it up. No harm no foul then. Also, the types of transitions I explained should not be used in every scene to transition but they should be seasoned throughout the script. EDIT: but try to make the transitions from scene to scene as smooth as possible visually.


(p.s., the douchebag consultant done me good in other problem areas, so I’ll keep ‘em, at least for a while)

;) Now that I will admit I was kind of hard on them. I just hate it when I see errors on a page and it's been to consultant. But I'm sure they gave a good hand thus far.

Also note, the set up of the screenplay and how it looked was good. I just felt it was a bit too much and could have been quicker.

Good luck with it and it seems like a neat story you have going there.



Well, capitalization of sound references is definitely old school, so now I'm really confused.

;) Glad you caught that.

Peace our resident professional reader. I will keep my P's and Q's from this section of indietalk from now on because I hate to disrupt the local professionals.
 
Last edited:
I liked the excerpt a lot. My only real criticism matches what someone already said. I think that the poem drags a bit after you've given us the 'fuck'. I think it's because the way it's written makes it feel like it should be the climax of the monologue. That's the way it felt to me while i was reading it anyways.
I still liked it all, so maybe just move some sentences around to save the ex lovers fucking like autumn cider nearer to the end.

This makes me wanna read the rest of the script.
 
;) Glad you caught that.

Peace our resident professional reader. I will keep my P's and Q's from this section of indietalk from now on because I hate to disrupt the local professionals.

No, please don't leave! I am certainly no professional reader. Just another writer trying to find his way in the world.

I am an engineer by trade (day job) so when my mind sees inconsistencies or conflicting data, it has to ask questions and get clarification. :)

Your input is most welcome, and I look forward to critique from you when I post my screenplays for shredding and feedback.

:cheers:
 
I liked the excerpt a lot. My only real criticism matches what someone already said. I think that the poem drags a bit after you've given us the 'fuck'. I think it's because the way it's written makes it feel like it should be the climax of the monologue. That's the way it felt to me while i was reading it anyways.
I still liked it all, so maybe just move some sentences around to save the ex lovers fucking like autumn cider nearer to the end.

This makes me wanna read the rest of the script.

Alright, here it is. Only my second feature, though. Remember, we all have to start someplace...

http://www.politikonzoon.com/Galahad.pdf
 
:beer:
No, please don't leave! I am certainly no professional reader. Just another writer trying to find his way in the world.

I am an engineer by trade (day job) so when my mind sees inconsistencies or conflicting data, it has to ask questions and get clarification. :)

Your input is most welcome, and I look forward to critique from you when I post my screenplays for shredding and feedback.

:cheers:

Awwww.....Shucks. And I hope you can accept my apology for riding you so hard in my last post. I suspect you read a lot of material and give valid feedback when ever you can. I do understand spec scripts don't have to be perfect and there are many of ways to approach a screenplay. Hell, have you ever read Joe Eszterhas' Basic Instinct or a Shane Black script? They tend to break many of the rules which we all have to follow and they get away with it (or have in the past). And that goes for many others out there too. I have to admit, I still can't get through the script Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, damn thing is a novel.

Anyway, I hope I didn't come off as to much of a prick in that last post (but I suppose I did and will in the future at some point ;) ) and I would critique your stuff any time (and I hope vice versa).

hugs and kisses......

:beer:


EDIT: And note: please feel free to challenge anything I say because this can help us all learn and make better films. This goes out to anyone out there in TV land.
 
Last edited:
First, thanks to everyone who read and gave me some feedback. It's very much appreciated.

Now I'll give you my consultant's final verdict:



___________________________________________________

Charles,

Budget considerations notwithstanding, your Hayward script was a lot further along than Galahad. You have a series of dealbreaking problems with this presentation; I'll touch briefly on these.

1) It's already been done, twice. True Believer came out in 1989 as a feature film with James Woods in the Galahad role, followed by a television series two years later (Eddie Dodd, with Treat Williams). Neither were hits, and twenty years have passed.

2) There's nothing at stake. Eminent domain is a well-known, legal caveat emptor for homebuyers. And the villains are…willing to pay market price. This is inconvenience, not peril.

3) There's no character separation. From the get go, Vale wants what Abigail wants what Sancho wants. Ditto Ethan, Sal and Dal. Individual motives never change or realign—not plausibly, anyway. I can't imagine moviegoers buying Gal's overnight rally after a heart attack, nor Ethan's last-minute waffling. Right now, when Vale swears, she's indistinguishable from Sal swearing. And right now, you could simply deliver Gal vs. Dal and eliminate every other character.

4) There's no memorable dialogue. It's a low-budget talking heads script, but none of the talk is interesting. The case ends before it starts, with one bit of embarrassing evidence. The characters are stock (the lesbian is butch and rides a Hog, the judge plays golf, the gardener is a renaissance man, the Italian is a hothead), so much so that you're caught in the no-man's-land between comedy and drama.

5) Your hook isn't a hook. Swearing, drinking and conventional sex aren't shocking or titillating in 2010. Not when kids steal their parents' meds and/or choke each other to get high, and they all know what a trinity is before they hit puberty.

6) There's no paying audience for this film. In the last dozen years, here are the only post-Law & Order courtroom movies I can think of: The Reader (Kate Winslet, nude), Erin Brockovich (Oscar vehicle for Julia Roberts), A Civil Action (Oscar vehicle for Travolta) and The People vs. Larry Flynt (lurid subject matter, nudity, and a complicated legal argument). All of them offered something the Law & Order franchise couldn't deliver on TV. Galahad can't make that claim.


Look, I think of script as a blueprint. The creator imagines a construct at the cost only of his/her time, and then asks for lots of financing, lengthy commitments from hundreds of people, and the belief that this project won't break them in terms of their reps or bank accounts.

Which means knowing things that don't have anything to do with writing--like the fact that Cat Ballou lost so much money that it almost singlehandedly paved the way for Easy Rider to get distributed--matters.

In 2010, you have to walk in knowing that the fat part of the moviegoing market is 15-year-old boys (hence explosions, uberanimation and Megan Fox), date night films (which explains J-Lo, Knocked Up, horror flicks and costume dramas, barely), and...that's it. Everyone else--including all married or single middle-aged adults--are waiting for the DVD or online rental to be seen via a big-screen in the living room, or (increasingly) on a computer. So that's whom you're writing for, and everything--and I do mean everything--works backward from that kind of market consciousness. Is there a character to "root for," a conflict that the viewing audience can map back to their own experience, and are there "movie moments" they're going to tell their friends, etc. The math of it precludes any other kind of thinking, even for an indie film, which still has to draw, oh, half a million paying customers from somewhere, a number that would put an also-ran flick atop the NYT bestseller lists for a few weeks if it were a book instead of a film.

I think Haywood had more of a draw for the arthouse crowd, the history crowd, adult marrieds looking for a DVD experience. The budget was the big obstacle, and it needed fixes, but Galahad looks to me like it has daunting marketing problems.


______________________________________________


-----SO.... I'm not sure what I'll do with this. Maybe turn it into a novel?
 
Last edited:
Ouch! At least you have the experience gained from the script. I don’t know about a novel, I might just keep it on the side and maybe someday you will see how to revamp it into something that works. Don’t know. (But it's only your 2nd feature, just keep plowing along)

-Thanks-
 
I haven't read the script, yet I believe everything this person wrote about how Hollywood works.

With that said, it's one person's opinion. If you have a well-written script don't give up. If you agree with their assessment of your characters and story, re-write.

In the end, it's only time spent in front of a computer (or typewriter).
 
What he is saying is key when writing a screenplay when trying to sell it to Hollywood. I would take everything he says and break it down in your script so you understand why he is making those comments. I think it is very kind that you shared this with the entire community and hopefully it will help all of us with our stories in the future.

A novel? Well that is up to you to decide.

Good luck.
 
Is this consultant the guy who you spoke to on the phone? If so, does he help sell scripts? Or does he charge a fee and then give you feedback on the script?

I know nothing about the actual business. Everything I've ever done I've done on my own.
 
Back
Top