Draft 1 of Act I of my first feature-length script!

[Indiewood]

Okay, so I'm hesitant to post this because I "wouldn't want anybody to steal amazing my idea!", but I've been deprived of feedback for awhile and need some constructive criticism.

This was originally being written as a novel, but I enrolled in a screenwriting class last semester and found myself having to write thirty pages of a feature script, so I went with this and I like it much better as a film.

Anyway, I'm having trouble stepping back and viewing the script objectively, mostly because the main character and his experiences are largely based on myself, so of course I like my main character and find his experiences interesting. I turned my pages in several times for class and professor critique, and the last piece of advice I was given was:

"The writing is great, but the script sucks!"

I did a complete rewrite and HOPE that I fixed the script, but the semester ended before I could turn it in again and get any feedback. I've been lurking on Indietalk for awhile, and was finally convinced to join the conversations when I decided I needed some third party criticism of my current draft of the script. Technically it's been reworked a few times, but I still consider it my first draft.

There were three main issues that were explained to me with the script before this rewrite:

1. It had a "skit-like" quality, where each of the scenes in and of themselves were sound, but they didn't seem to be connected to the bigger picture/story.

2. People were having trouble connecting with the main character. He's not meant to be likable, necessarily, but people said they just didn't feel any reason to care at all what happened to him. (And since he's somewhat based on myself I took those comments personally! )

3. People were having trouble discerning any particular, singular storyline that would keep the momentum. This is similar to the first issue, but I mention it because even after fixing the skit-like quality of the script, (at least I hope it's fixed now), I'm concerned that the overall story isn't coming across, or at least that it's not interesting enough for people to care.

So, I tried to fix these in the current re-write. Any feedback of any kind would be much appreciated. It's almost 30 pages, so I understand if nobody wants to read the whole thing, but I figured it was worth a shot.

This script has a fairly specific and possibly narrow target audience. It will most likely be one of those movies that is love/hate. Based on class reactions I gathered that in most areas of criticism half the people hated that aspect, and half the people loved it. The overall script, on the other hand, was mostly disliked, and only about ten percent of the class said they really liked it. I think this is largely due to the primary issues mentioned above, and hopefully my rewrite remedies the issue and finds a greater balance between the lovers and the haters.

I have more to disclaim, but as you can see I'm terribly wordy and descriptive, and have probably lost most potential readers already, so here's a download link to a PDF file of Act I of "The Desert" (working title):

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NGHGNI26

(I hope MegaUpload is an appropriate way to share this...)

By the way, it's a Dark Comedy/Drama, (Dark Dramedy?), about an Iraq War veteran dealing with the transition [or lack thereof] into civilian life in Las Vegas. Fans of "Jacob's Ladder" may notice some hints of similarity, but I consider it more like "Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas" meets "Black Hawk Down". Well, Act II will be anyway! It has some very surrealistic aspects, so if you're not into surrealism I recommend you steer clear. I had some people in class saying it wasn't realistic, and that certain things weren't "physically possible" or made no sense in real life, but I attribute that to the fact that surrealism just isn't some people's cup of tea. The surrealistic aspects aren't surrealistic just to be cool or anything, they do serve a metaphorical purpose. =)

Oh forget it; I'll just finish the disclaimer : I'm aware that some aspects of the script are breaking rules, (the montage scene where I say it's a continuous Steadicam shot, and the naming of specific songs which would cost a great deal of money to buy the rights to use, etc.), but I did (and do) have reasons for those particular infractions of screenwriting etiquette.

Also, I recognize there are a few weird formatting errors, where the words have been pushed down to the next line when they shouldn't have been, (first seen when he says, "You bastards! Jaywalking! Jaywalking!) This appears to be a glitch in the CeltX software I use, as I cannot figure out how to fix it.

Anyway, I'm stubborn and think I'm ALMOST always right, but I ALWAYS appreciate constructive criticism of any kind, and take any and all advice under consideration. Actually I even appreciate non-constructive criticism. My script wasn't half as good as it is now, (even if it's bad), before I made changes to it based on criticism from others. Any and all criticism will be taken with open arms!

I know what you're thinking if you've made it this far in my post: "I hope his screenplay isn't this wordy and tedious!"

 

[FantasySciFi]

There were three main issues that were explained to me with the script before this rewrite:

1. It had a "skit-like" quality, where each of the scenes in and of themselves were sound, but they didn't seem to be connected to the bigger picture/story.

2. People were having trouble connecting with the main character. He's not meant to be likable, necessarily, but people said they just didn't feel any reason to care at all what happened to him. (And since he's somewhat based on myself I took those comments personally! )

3. People were having trouble discerning any particular, singular storyline that would keep the momentum. This is similar to the first issue, but I mention it because even after fixing the skit-like quality of the script, (at least I hope it's fixed now), I'm concerned that the overall story isn't coming across, or at least that it's not interesting enough for people to care.

"The writing is great, but the script sucks!"

The surrealistic aspects aren't surrealistic just to be cool or anything, they do serve a metaphorical purpose. =)

Well, having taken the time to read all 29 pages, I agree with all of the above comments and say that they are still true. I think saying the "script sucks" is a bit harsh, but it was a fight to keep reading. I will take the four points and give my thoughts.

As a reference, most scripts are 90-120 pages long for the typical feature. So this first act (30 pp) is 25%-30% of your movie. By this point, I should have a knowledge of the character, know the supporting characters, and the obstacle or challenge he faces. Typically, you have the first 10-15 minutes (10-15 pp) to capture the audience/reader. Many professionals will only give you 5 pages to hook their interest in your story. These are not hard-and-fast rules but guidelines. But most successful scripts (those that audiences enjoy) fall within these guidelines. Your script disregards these to its detriment.

(1) This is a series of events which don't seem to connect to any larger story.

If this is based largely on your personal experiences, how are you different now from then? What was the point when you changed? What motivated the change? Focusing back on the script, for the next 29 pages, the viewer is asked to share his hallucinations from one location to another. Going back to those questions. Is the purpose of the movie to show his road to recovery? One way to do that is to provide some background in the beginning. It doesn't have to be with flashbacks. It could be an exchange in the beginning, "You didn't have a problem with me when I was working last week before they laid me off!" It gives a sense that he was not always like that. This kind of leads into issue 2.

(2) The character is flat and uninteresting.

You start with a character who you portray as compromised--an asocial alcoholic with a gambling addiction along with a potential mental disorder. (Hopefully not you!) Your character starts off shallow and remains so for 29 pages. He spends so much time talking about the events around him, we never learn who he is. Even your visual scenes don't hint at his inner struggles as they mix in so much surreality as to make everything we see questionable. At some point viewers stop trying to make sense of it and leave.

One way to give depth is to incorporate some of his backstory into his surroundings. Not necessarily through flashback but it can be helpful in your situation to contrast reality from hallucination or highlight it. What if he looks over at a woman at the slot machine, says to himself, "Damn she reminds me of Becca." Such a comment creates questions in the viewer's mind--he was attracted to someone named Becca; she plays some role; they had some relationship. It hooks their interest to see how it is resolved.

You mentioned "Jacob's Ladder". I like that show but in contrast to yours, the main character is haunted by the shifting between realities and is struggling to make sense of what's happening. In yours, the character is unaware when he is shifting. Nor is the viewer because the shifts are so subtle. Subtle works for you because you have a contrast in mind. But without the context, the viewer is left confused and agitated. The scene with the malatov cocktail was totally out of place. I can see later how you wanted to draw a parallel to the Iraq warfront but asking the viewer to keep that in the back of their minds for fifteen minutes (14 pages) is a bit taxing. We like the character in Jacob's ladder because he is concerned for his lover, his wife, and his son. As the nightmare grows, we feel his growing sense of helplessness and terror. In your script, the we get no sense he cares for anyone, even his dog. The dog appears on p. 7 and we learn about him later on p. 26 almost 20 minutes later.

I would suggest you spend the first 10-15 pages making your character more real. Show where he was, how he got to where he is, who he cares about, and then spend the remaining time looking at his challenges. His "descent into madness" is more real if he recognizes that things can't be what they seem. You kind of do that starting p. 20 with the vandal scene. However, that metaphor is largely lost as he slips into hallucination. What I would do is switch back and forth between points of view. Dunbar sees "God was here" while Hobo #1 sees "Westside Rockers Rule". While I appreciate the artful attempt to be subtle, the distinction you see in your mind as author is not coming across visually to me. Which ties into part 3.

Also the characters are inconsistent. The Hobo #1 is almost buffoon like in the beginning and in the end is more introspective. Quite a change over 10 minutes. The exchanges didn't feel quite real. Dunbar is at first dismissive then trusting? Why would he trust him?

(3) Where is this thing going?

What is your logline for this story? What is your ending? Sometimes answering thos questions can help you identify the conflict. In the movie's first 30 minutes I still have no ideas what his challenge is. To change his life? How? To what? His stated purpose is:
"You know, I don’t ask for much. My needs are simple. All I wanna do is get drunk and go home to a nice warm bed." (p. 12) Everything before that and after that suggest that's what he's doing.

Okay, think hero's journey. You have Hobo #1 as his ObiWan. Who is his Princess Leia? What is the quest challenge? One of the prostitutes comes up to him to escape a drug dealer/pimp? Something has to snap him out of his self pity. In Jacob's Ladder, it was his old army buddies and his quest for his son. While it doesn't have to happen by a certain page, it needs to happen in the first act to set up the drama for act 2 and the resolution in act 3. You haven't done that. By the end of act 1 he is just as unfocused as he was when we met him, except now he's hallucinating he's back in Iraq. Does he land in a rescue mission?

(4) "Surreality is the same as metaphor"

A metaphor is a collection of symbols or elements which convey a message. Surreality is not a message but altered view from an "accepted reality based" perspective. But thrusting the audience to see through the eyes of a madman (or so he seems), you ask the viewer to question these 'facts'. The message of the Vandal as God becomes gibberish as a result. The guy is obviously drunk, possibly hallucinating. Why would he shoot his own kids? Do the names Michael and Peter mean anything? Michael was an archangel and Peter was a disciple? Apples and oranges from my perspective. Whatever view you hoped to share is now blanked by this gigantic "Oh ignore this, the guy's whacked; it doesn't mean anything."

One approach is to heighten this delusional state for the viewer. Show Dunbar talking, gesturing, and kneeling before empty space from the Hobo's perspective then flashing to see Dunbar talking to his idea of God; it allows us to see Dunbar in his madness. Then have Dunbar and the hobo share views on God to elucidate aspects of the metaphor. But try not to simply give an exposition. Again, as screenwriter, you have inside contextual information that the viewer does not. The feedback you received from others is that whatever you thought you were conveying missed the mark.

You have lots of paragraphs that could be tightened by using active tenses and cutting back on the progressive tense (is -ing). Overall the writing style was descriptive. The flaws in dialogue, characterization, and plot development are serious impediments. I think you can make this screenplay better by figuring out what your story is really about. Review the 3 Act structure and make sure you hit all the critical elements. Plan how to create a conflict. No, losing his home is NOT the conflict. He was in that state before he left page one.

View this as the opportunity to go back and enhance life events by dropping in some excitement that leads to comedy, romance, drama, mystery/thriller/crime, life changing experience, etc. as might have happened.

Good luck.

 

[VPTurner]

Actually, some of the feedback you got is backwards. The script doesn't suck, but the writing isn't great.

As you mentioned, it's only the first act. There's plenty of story that must get written before any of it could get placed in context. But I will say that it did grab my interest where I'd want to read the completed script.

And FSF, I think you have it wrong in point 3. I gathered from the symbolism that he never left Iraq and that Vegas is the delusion. Exiting the latrine brought him, and the viewer, back into the real world.

I am going to sleep on it and read through it again to get some more precise feedback on the writing. You already pointed out several missteps in your first post, but at this stage of the writing, the mechanics aren't as important as getting the full story written. Worry about the little stuff after you reach page 100. Meantime, keep moving forward with confidence that you have something worth completing. Very intriguing.

 

[Indiewood]

First of all, many thanks to you two who have read and commented about it so far! I wasn't sure anyone would read it at all, and now I've got a HUGE amount to think about. I was going to reply to the posts right now, but I'd like to sleep on it and make sure I don't respond in a reactionary way. I will tell you that everything that's been said so far is already being taken into account and is much appreciated. Of course, I'm disappointed nobody is saying, "This is the greatest screenplay ever!!!", but it being my first I think the criticism I've gotten so far is probably far more useful. =)

I'll respond to the criticism tomorrow and hope that I can use it to make my screenplay what it SHOULD be. Thanks again! =)

 

[Indiewood]

I couldn't sleep until I responded, so here's my drunken and exhausted responses! =)

Well, having taken the time to read all 29 pages, I agree with all of the above comments and say that they are still true. I think saying the "script sucks" is a bit harsh, but it was a fight to keep reading. I will take the four points and give my thoughts.

I appreciate you taking the time, and I apologize it was a fight for you. =(

As a reference, most scripts are 90-120 pages long for the typical feature. So this first act (30 pp) is 25%-30% of your movie. By this point, I should have a knowledge of the character, know the supporting characters, and the obstacle or challenge he faces. Typically, you have the first 10-15 minutes (10-15 pp) to capture the audience/reader. Many professionals will only give you 5 pages to hook their interest in your story. These are not hard-and-fast rules but guidelines. But most successful scripts (those that audiences enjoy) fall within these guidelines. Your script disregards these to its detriment.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're not hooked in the first five pages then I've failed. Duly noted, and this will probably be the criticism that affects the next re-write more than any other. This will most likely change the entire structure of the story itself. Thanks for adding hours and hours of work to my already busy schedule you bastard! (Just kidding about the "bastard" thing!) =)

(1) This is a series of events which don't seem to connect to any larger story.

If this is based largely on your personal experiences, how are you different now from then? What was the point when you changed? What motivated the change? Focusing back on the script, for the next 29 pages, the viewer is asked to share his hallucinations from one location to another. Going back to those questions. Is the purpose of the movie to show his road to recovery? One way to do that is to provide some background in the beginning. It doesn't have to be with flashbacks. It could be an exchange in the beginning, "You didn't have a problem with me when I was working last week before they laid me off!" It gives a sense that he was not always like that. This kind of leads into issue 2.

Actually the character doesn't change in prior events, he changes in the process, somewhere in Act II. Well, that's misleading. He doesn't change per se, he's actually TRYING to change - to deny what he really is, then in Act II gives in and accepts who he really is. I'm not sure that makes sense...but whatever.

(2) The character is flat and uninteresting.

You start with a character who you portray as compromised--an asocial alcoholic with a gambling addiction along with a potential mental disorder. (Hopefully not you!)

Keep hoping!

Your character starts off shallow and remains so for 29 pages. He spends so much time talking about the events around him, we never learn who he is. Even your visual scenes don't hint at his inner struggles as they mix in so much surreality as to make everything we see questionable. At some point viewers stop trying to make sense of it and leave.

One way to give depth is to incorporate some of his backstory into his surroundings. Not necessarily through flashback but it can be helpful in your situation to contrast reality from hallucination or highlight it. What if he looks over at a woman at the slot machine, says to himself, "Damn she reminds me of Becca." Such a comment creates questions in the viewer's mind--he was attracted to someone named Becca; she plays some role; they had some relationship. It hooks their interest to see how it is resolved.

Yes, I forgot to mention that one of the other criticisms was that I used "too much" surrealism. I was told all movies like mine are designed to have some scenes with surrealistic aspects scattered amongst scenes of realism. Unfortunately, I'm apparently ignorant of other peoples' idea of surrealism. I'm not a complete loon, but I have a feeling some of the scenes you and others consider surreal I consider fairly normal. Just as an example, some seem to think the first "surreal" moment is when the hobos salute him on the street. This situation happened to me in real life THREE times! But okay, I'm off on a tangent. I recognize you're right about giving him more depth, though. Backstory I left out intentionally because I felt it detracted from the overall theme, but it may be the only way I can give depth to him, so...I'll definitely consider it.

You mentioned "Jacob's Ladder". I like that show but in contrast to yours, the main character is haunted by the shifting between realities and is struggling to make sense of what's happening. In yours, the character is unaware when he is shifting. Nor is the viewer because the shifts are so subtle. Subtle works for you because you have a contrast in mind. But without the context, the viewer is left confused and agitated

Yes, I was afraid of this. I was trying to be somewhat esoteric and subtle, but the idea is that the main character isn't hallucinating or really experiencing anything out of the ordinary, we're just seeing things as he PERCEIVES them. In other words, when he shakes a man's hand and his hand becomes shriveled and necrotic, he's not really hallucinating that or thinking it happened, he's just disgusted by the contact and feels like his hand has been tainted by the contact. And when he responds to the man asking for a cigarette by saying "only if you get lung cancer" or whatever, he's not actually saying that, it's just what he WANTS to say. Hence why the man responds "Okay, cool. Thanks." In reality, he's saying "Yeah sure", but we see and hear him say the other thing because that's what he's THINKING. The idea is that we're seeing the world the way the main character PERCEIVES it or imagines it, not that he's hallucinating or anything. Apparently it's not working, but that's what I was going for. I think you're right that what I'm doing is working for me because I recognize it, but that it probably doesn't for anybody else because they don't have the proper context. I would enjoy this movie because I understand the context, but I guess I should consider other people, too, huh?!

The scene with the malatov cocktail was totally out of place. I can see later how you wanted to draw a parallel to the Iraq warfront but asking the viewer to keep that in the back of their minds for fifteen minutes (14 pages) is a bit taxing. We like the character in Jacob's ladder because he is concerned for his lover, his wife, and his son. As the nightmare grows, we feel his growing sense of helplessness and terror. In your script, the we get no sense he cares for anyone, even his dog. The dog appears on p. 7 and we learn about him later on p. 26 almost 20 minutes later.

*Sigh*, I think I'm being too subtle in my metaphors. I used to write poetry and everyone would say I wrote good poems, but they were too blatant; I should try to be more subtle. I think I've taken that advice to the extreme in this screenplay, as it's obvious nothing I was trying to imply is getting across. =/ The dog is...well he's a failed metaphor apparently. Anyway, one problem is that quite a few scenes have been removed in order to get to Act II by a decent time, (page 30), and also a scene or two have been added that I assumed were fixing the problems told to me before but obviously have failed. Everything you've said so far has made sense, though. I think it's time to rework the script starting from the outline.

I would suggest you spend the first 10-15 pages making your character more real. Show where he was, how he got to where he is, who he cares about, and then spend the remaining time looking at his challenges. His "descent into madness" is more real if he recognizes that things can't be what they seem. You kind of do that starting p. 20 with the vandal scene. However, that metaphor is largely lost as he slips into hallucination. What I would do is switch back and forth between points of view. Dunbar sees "God was here" while Hobo #1 sees "Westside Rockers Rule". While I appreciate the artful attempt to be subtle, the distinction you see in your mind as author is not coming across visually to me. Which ties into part 3.

Yes, I've considered switching points of view from the very beginning of writing this, however due to the overall theme and story, it made more sense for me to keep it from the main character's point of view in every scene. In fact, I went out of my way to eliminate scenes from the original novel-attempt that would have to be told from another's point of view. You may be right, though; this may not be doable.

By the way, the "God was here" graffiti is based on actual graffiti I saw when living in Vegas. The scene was written in my head as I saw it and wondered what I would do if I saw the person as they were finishing the piece of work. I decided I would pretend they were actually God, and talk to them as such. In my imagination, they responded in such a way that they actually WERE God, and both they and I continued the conversation unquestioningly, (in my imagination, of course). However, in the script as it's written, with the overall story in mind, the Vandal is not actually a metaphor for God or anything of the kind, he's a metaphor for something else that I won't explain because the whole thing is obviously too subtle for anyone but me, and I need to rewrite it.

Also the characters are inconsistent. The Hobo #1 is almost buffoon like in the beginning and in the end is more introspective. Quite a change over 10 minutes. The exchanges didn't feel quite real. Dunbar is at first dismissive then trusting? Why would he trust him?

Hm, this is another case of me basing a character on a REAL life person who was, in fact, clinically insane. I thought he was a good metaphor for the officers I served under while in the Army, but maybe his inconsistency is too obvious. As for Dunbar, I'm not sure at what point you consider him to be "trusting" the hobo, but if it's only after he exits the port-a-potty that was purposeful as Dunbar is suddenly in a state of faux-flashback and doesn't see things the way they actually are. If it happens before then, it may only be because of his sudden devastation at the loss of the money he borrowed, or it may be a massive inconsistency as you suggest. I'll read through it tomorrow and see what I can find. =)

(3) Where is this thing going?

What is your logline for this story? What is your ending? Sometimes answering thos questions can help you identify the conflict. In the movie's first 30 minutes I still have no ideas what his challenge is. To change his life? How? To what? His stated purpose is:
"You know, I don’t ask for much. My needs are simple. All I wanna do is get drunk and go home to a nice warm bed." (p. 12) Everything before that and after that suggest that's what he's doing.

Oh boy, here we go. The answer to the question of "what is the conflict" is basically this: Dunbar wants exactly what he says he wants: to just get drunk and go home. However - as he mentions - "external conflicts" keep coming up that force him to take action. I'm not explaining this very well because it's 1am and I'm rather drunk right now. Actually I'm probably explaining it better than I would if I was sober, but the point is his conflict is that he doesn't want to be a part of any conflicts, he just wants to "hang out", but "life happens" and things keep preventing him from doing any of that, (the VAST majority of which is caused by himself...) Again, this another metaphor that is probably being lost on anyone who doesn't know every fact about the overall theme I'm going for. Unfortunately, I thought it would be clever to be esoteric, but it's turning out that nobody is getting a single damn thing about the story and is wondering why I wrote it at all and wasted their time! When I rewrite it I'll make sure to make the overall theme and story more obvious, or try anyway.

Okay, think hero's journey.

Before I respond to the rest of this paragraph, my protagonist was meant to be the epitome of an anti-hero, but I get your point. =)

You have Hobo #1 as his ObiWan. Who is his Princess Leia? What is the quest challenge? One of the prostitutes comes up to him to escape a drug dealer/pimp? Something has to snap him out of his self pity. In Jacob's Ladder, it was his old army buddies and his quest for his son. While it doesn't have to happen by a certain page, it needs to happen in the first act to set up the drama for act 2 and the resolution in act 3. You haven't done that. By the end of act 1 he is just as unfocused as he was when we met him, except now he's hallucinating he's back in Iraq. Does he land in a rescue mission?

I will respond to this with a quote from my favorite film and favorite screenplay of all time, "Adapatation": "What you said was not just about my choices as a screenwriter, but about my choices as a human being." (May not be an exact quote, but it's a very close paraphrase...) Being that this screenpay is largely auto-biographical, I take the preceding criticism as a critique of not just my writing, but of my life. It honestly shook me to the core, and I couldn't appreciate it more. =) Perhaps my problem isn't as a writer who makes poor choices, but as a human who has made poor choices. Another quote from "Adaptation": "I've written myself into my screenplay." Perhaps I should learn a lesson from the end of that film, also...

(4) "Surreality is the same as metaphor"

A metaphor is a collection of symbols or elements which convey a message. Surreality is not a message but altered view from an "accepted reality based" perspective. But thrusting the audience to see through the eyes of a madman (or so he seems), you ask the viewer to question these 'facts'. The message of the Vandal as God becomes gibberish as a result. The guy is obviously drunk, possibly hallucinating. Why would he shoot his own kids?

The Vandal is a representation not of God, (although that's what I was trying to imply in order to be subtle about what he ACTUALLY represents), and also he doesn't exist in reality, not even in Dunbar's. He's meant to be a PERCEPTION, or a thought process or object of Dunbar's imagination which is meant to be an insight into Dunbar's actual thought process and therefore an insight into the overall theme. Once again, I'm obviously WAY overdoing the subtlety on this whole thing. Or maybe you're right and it just doesn't work. I'll attempt to remedy the situation in my re-write and hopefully it will prove more conducive to the story and theme. I concede it's entirely possible my overall theme and story are a lost cause, but I'm not ready to give up on it yet!

Do the names Michael and Peter mean anything? Michael was an archangel and Peter was a disciple? Apples and oranges from my perspective. Whatever view you hoped to share is now blanked by this gigantic "Oh ignore this, the guy's whacked; it doesn't mean anything."

Yeah, originally the names were something else that WERE meaningful, but I thought they were too obvious so I changed them to what I thought were fairly generic names in order to be more subtle. I'm not sure if it's a coincidence or not that I chose such prominent Christian names. I'm not as versed in Christian dogma as others are, so I didn't make that connection at first. They were kind of just placeholder names until I figured out some names that were not too obvious but represented the desired metaphor all the same.

One approach is to heighten this delusional state for the viewer. Show Dunbar talking, gesturing, and kneeling before empty space from the Hobo's perspective then flashing to see Dunbar talking to his idea of God; it allows us to see Dunbar in his madness. Then have Dunbar and the hobo share views on God to elucidate aspects of the metaphor. But try not to simply give an exposition. Again, as screenwriter, you have inside contextual information that the viewer does not. The feedback you received from others is that whatever you thought you were conveying missed the mark.

Like I said before, my HOPE was that I could imply these things without straying from Dunbar's point of view. To be honest, I thought the interaction with the man on the street at the very beginning, when he asks for a cigarette and Dunbar says only if he promises to get lung cancer or whatever, would be enough of a tipoff that Dunbar isn't actually experiencing everything we see and hear him experiencing. My hope was that the audience would realize that we're experiencing everything as Dunbar is experiencing it, even when it's just his imagination. That's an oversimplification and I don't think I explained it very well, but it's a complicated way of telling a story that I can't expain fully and that in all probablility isn't going to work. I liked the idea of it, though: putting the audience inside the head of a guy who isn't "all there".

You have lots of paragraphs that could be tightened by using active tenses and cutting back on the progressive tense (is -ing).

I'll have to pay attention when I re-read the script and see what exactly you mean by this...

Overall the writing style was descriptive.

Is that both a compliment and a criticism...or one or the other?

The flaws in dialogue, characterization, and plot development are serious impediments. I think you can make this screenplay better by figuring out what your story is really about. Review the 3 Act structure and make sure you hit all the critical elements. Plan how to create a conflict. No, losing his home is NOT the conflict. He was in that state before he left page one.

I've made sure my overall story fits the 3 act structure; I think the major problem is that I haven't applied that to the smaller sections of the script. In other words, (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm still new!), but each individual scene, and really each individual interaction within a scene should also usually have three acts. I don't think I've done this at all.

And no, losing his home is nowhere near being the conflict. That detail only came up in the last rewrite, by the way. I think I explained the conflict I had in mind in an earlier response to one of your critiques, but I think this post is way beyond some limit or other, so I'm going to go to bed.

Thanks again to both of you who read and responded! I can't deny I'm disappointed in the lack of praise, but I'm beyond appreciative for the wealth of constructive criticism. I think there may be nowhere to go but UP for me now.=)

View this as the opportunity to go back and enhance life events by dropping in some excitement that leads to comedy, romance, drama, mystery/thriller/crime, life changing experience, etc. as might have happened.

Good luck.

This is a suggestion for my life and not my script, isn't it?

 

[Indiewood]

Actually, some of the feedback you got is backwards.

This sounded promising!

The script doesn't suck, but the writing isn't great.

In all honesty, this was the most hurtful thing anyone has ever said to me. Not that I'm complaining; like I said: I appreciate all criticism if it will help me become better. It's just that you contradicted the greatest compliment I had ever received, so your comment made me cry!

As you mentioned, it's only the first act. There's plenty of story that must get written before any of it could get placed in context. But I will say that it did grab my interest where I'd want to read the completed script.

While I'm ecstatic it "grabbed your interest", if it doesn't really get you in the first act, or preferably in the first page, I feel I've failed.

And FSF, I think you have it wrong in point 3. I gathered from the symbolism that he never left Iraq and that Vegas is the delusion. Exiting the latrine brought him, and the viewer, back into the real world.

Well my original intention was for that particular detail to be left open to interpretation until the end. I don't know if that's good or bad, but that was my plan. The transition is based on an actual hallucination I had going into a port-a-potty and coming out and actually thinking I was back in Iraq. Maybe I'm still there right now and don't even know it!

I am going to sleep on it and read through it again to get some more precise feedback on the writing. You already pointed out several missteps in your first post, but at this stage of the writing, the mechanics aren't as important as getting the full story written. Worry about the little stuff after you reach page 100. Meantime, keep moving forward with confidence that you have something worth completing. Very intriguing.

I appreciate the encouragement, and I'll admit that I have plans to rewrite all of Act I once I know exactly how the other two acts play out, but it's always disappointing to hear stuff like this. Nonetheless, I can't thank you enough for reading it at all and giving me any feedback, much less the very constructive kind you've offered! =)

 

[VPTurner]

In all honesty, this was the most hurtful thing anyone has ever said to me. Not that I'm complaining; like I said: I appreciate all criticism if it will help me become better. It's just that you contradicted the greatest compliment I had ever received, so your comment made me cry!

You completely took that the wrong way. Believe me, if I thought it sucked, I wouldn't have read past page 10 and wouldn't have bothered to respond.

Screenplays are present tense, active voice, what you see and what you hear. Shit "happens", not "is happening" or "was happening" or "happened". Subject performing the action goes before the action being performed. There are several areas where you can clean up the writing to make it more concise and active. That tidbit alone makes it less than "great" writing. Nowhere did I say the writing sucked.

While I'm ecstatic it "grabbed your interest", if it doesn't really get you in the first act, or preferably in the first page, I feel I've failed.

You did get me in the first act. That's why I told you to move forward because it's worth completing. The little details as mentioned above are considerably less important than getting the full story down. Story trumps mechanics, especially in the draft stage. And there's no doubt you have an intriguing story here (at least in my eyes).

Well my original intention was for that particular detail to be left open to interpretation until the end. I don't know if that's good or bad, but that was my plan. The transition is based on an actual hallucination I had going into a port-a-potty and coming out and actually thinking I was back in Iraq. Maybe I'm still there right now and don't even know it!

I have a good friend who was special forces who still deals with horrific hallucinations. But that's another discussion.

Much of the symbolism in Vegas doesn't happen in Vegas, but it could happen in theater. Cops aren't Vegas cops but Iraqi police. Hobos are members of your unit. Gang members are insurgents. Not a Mal-toff cocktail, but a grenade. You're not in your apartment, but in your tent or barracks. I have another friend who served two tours in Iraq as a Marine dog handler, so there's easily a connection there, too.

These were impressions from a quick read-through as though I was sitting in a darkened theater watching your "movie". I even had a thought at one point that Hobo #1 and and your protagonist could in fact be the same person and that Hobo #1 was simply a mental reflection in a Man versus Himself storyline. And "Vegas" could easily be a manifestation of "anywhere but here". But without the rest of the story to go with this open-ended and subjectively interpretive segment, it's impossible to draw any conclusions on the story as a whole.

I appreciate the encouragement, and I'll admit that I have plans to rewrite all of Act I once I know exactly how the other two acts play out, but it's always disappointing to hear stuff like this. Nonetheless, I can't thank you enough for reading it at all and giving me any feedback, much less the very constructive kind you've offered! =)

I didn't want to hear it either when I was first starting out because I really thought my writing was "great", too. In fact, I got the exact same feedback that my story wasn't good, but the writing was (although I'll admit nobody said the screenplay "sucked"). I wish there was someone who told me twenty years ago that the writing wasn't great. It took several more years of trial and error before I started figuring it all out. And I still don't know everything.

Your foundation is there. Now go write Act II.

 

[Indiewood]

You completely took that the wrong way. Believe me, if I thought it sucked, I wouldn't have read past page 10 and wouldn't have bothered to respond.

Nah, I was more joking. Obviously that hadn't been the greatest compliment I had ever received.

Screenplays are present tense, active voice, what you see and what you hear. Shit "happens", not "is happening" or "was happening" or "happened". Subject performing the action goes before the action being performed. There are several areas where you can clean up the writing to make it more concise and active. That tidbit alone makes it less than "great" writing. Nowhere did I say the writing sucked.

Oh, this is something I will definitely fix. Thanks for pointing it out. =)

You did get me in the first act. That's why I told you to move forward because it's worth completing. The little details as mentioned above are considerably less important than getting the full story down. Story trumps mechanics, especially in the draft stage. And there's no doubt you have an intriguing story here (at least in my eyes).

Yes well I've been debating whether to finish the whole script and THEN do a major overhaul, or do a major overhaul now to what I have so far. I think your advice to finish it first is sound, though I do get a little worried that I'm probably going to be restructuring it quite a bit, so it may mean a lot more work when it's a whole script. I dunno.

Much of the symbolism in Vegas doesn't happen in Vegas, but it could happen in theater. Cops aren't Vegas cops but Iraqi police. Hobos are members of your unit. Gang members are insurgents. Not a Mal-toff cocktail, but a grenade. You're not in your apartment, but in your tent or barracks. I have another friend who served two tours in Iraq as a Marine dog handler, so there's easily a connection there, too.

Some very close to being nail-on-the-heads, some a little more than off. =) Also, although I admit this is based on personal experience, much of it's made up and even the true stuff is hugely exaggerated, so I'm not really comfortable with referencing Dunbar's experiences as "my experiences", or that the hobos are members of *my* unit. Interesting you did that, though...

These were impressions from a quick read-through as though I was sitting in a darkened theater watching your "movie". I even had a thought at one point that Hobo #1 and and your protagonist could in fact be the same person and that Hobo #1 was simply a mental reflection in a Man versus Himself storyline. And "Vegas" could easily be a manifestation of "anywhere but here". But without the rest of the story to go with this open-ended and subjectively interpretive segment, it's impossible to draw any conclusions on the story as a whole.

Food for thought for me, anyway. =)

I didn't want to hear it either when I was first starting out because I really thought my writing was "great", too. In fact, I got the exact same feedback that my story wasn't good, but the writing was (although I'll admit nobody said the screenplay "sucked"). I wish there was someone who told me twenty years ago that the writing wasn't great. It took several more years of trial and error before I started figuring it all out. And I still don't know everything.

I always expected criticism, and got plenty of it. I'm always open to it, but I'll always be insulted in some way or other at criticisms of my skills as a writer, more so than those of any particular piece of writing. Not that that's a bad thing, if I wasn't insulted a bit I'd have no reason to become better! =) Thanks again for all your thoughts!

I'll take it all and run with it, hopefully in the right direction!

 

[FantasySciFi]

Novels, poetry, screenplays and stage plays--as mentioned by Robert McKee in another post--have different "rules of engagement". Novels you can be as verbose and crafty as you want for 600+ pages. Poetry has a very ethereal nature that can be rigid in its rhyme scheme or experimental. In stage plays, you are intensely focused on the words and physical presentation that must be restrained to a single stage. Then you have movies, which in my opinion share a lot with graphic novels and comic books. You need to be concise with your words and pictures and tell a good story.

If you ask 100 screenwriters what it takes to make a good movie, you will get 100 different answers. However, there are constraints. Adapting a book to a movie can be extremely hard, especially where the book makes heavy use of internal dialogue. Plus making a 250+ page book fit into a 120 page script involves more than mirroring all the dialogue. Unless you are writing for a mini-series or episodic TV where you can carry a storyline along over several viewings, you need to make the tale concise. So the craft of screenwriting is really about discovering the major story and presenting it dramatically.

There are well over 50+ books on the art and mechanics of screenwriting, storytelling, and other elements. In the end, a good film tells a good story. A good story is not necessarily a good film. In your film you have the objective plot (the events we see) and the subjective story (the meaning we experience). You must nail the latter for the film to be memorable.

In school, when the teacher assigned the 20 page paper, I made my outline of my paper. It gave me a rough idea how many pages I needed to dedicate to each point. When you are restricted to 120 pages, you need to think in a more disciplined manner of what you are going to cover. Again, that doesn't mean you must write only 40 pages for act one. Since 1 page is roughly one minute when properly formatted, it means that in the first 40 minutes or so I have addressed the elements needed to lead to act two.

Again, screenwriters differ on what constitutes a "formula" or "act structure" or if they are even necessary. My opinion is that as cultural beings, we have rituals that guide us through our lives. We get up, do ablutions (shower/brush teeth/comb hair/etc.), we observe meals, we go/work/return by customary patterns, and we recreate in patterned ways (clubs/TV/movies/dating rituals/etc.). As children we are taught stories--"Once upon a time, there was ...". Iconoclastic artists out there go about smashing these stereotypes all the time. Sometimes successfully, other times not so.

In my opinion, until you have written at least five or six screenplays, it is helpful to follow a pattern. You are still an apprentice working towards journeyman. Apprentice artists would start out copying the work of their masters. Then as journeymen, they would be assigned creating small additions of their own. At some point, the Master would give a final nod and they would go off and do their own work. If you look at the evolution of Pablo Picasso, you see very conventional art school realistic drawings transform to the cubist unique style he is known for today. There is nothing wrong in using a pattern to master the skills of telling a good story in 120 pages and mastering the underlying mechanics.

Your first act shows potential. Honestly, I would re-work it. BUT you should write out a complete draft of your outline so you can fill in the pieces in a disciplined way. In RodriPau000's thread ("Tips on getting started?"), there are good suggestions. I am including a portion of my response below.

Everyone here has different techniques which work for them. Some use index cards, others just start writing. My advice is that film tells a story. So rather than worrying immediately about characters and description, write a one page version of your story. Getting the idea onto paper (or computer) is the first step.

"A boy sees a girl across the street, and he falls instantly in love. He goes to cross the street but the lights are against him. He sees her get on the bus and his heart falls. He grabs a pen and writes the bus number and time of day on this palm. He goes back the next day a half hour early to see if she is there again. She doesn't show. He's disappointed. The bus pulls up and leaves. Just then the girl comes running up and is upset because she was running late. ...."

At this point, I'm not sure how I want it to end. I haven't really thought about the boy or girl. But I've started my story going. At this point, I would break it up into the "6 Act Model". Put a header on six index cards or sheets of paper. What I'm going to talk about can be found at Michael Hauge's site: http://www.screenplaymastery.com/structure.htm

Act 1 - Set Up (introduce the characters and situation)
Act 2 - Introduce a New Situation and a Complication
Act 3 - Formulate a Plan of Action to Succeed (character throws self in headlong)
Act 4 - More Complications and Higher Stakes (usually a major setback)
Act 5 - Final Push to Succeed with it looking unlikely (suspenseful moment, climax)
Act 6 - Resolution and the Ever After

I would go through and put the elements of my story above onto the index cards under the headings

Act 1 - Set Up (introduce the characters and situation)
A boy sees a girl across the street, and he falls instantly in love.

Act 2 - Introduce a New Situation and a Complication
He goes to cross the street but the lights are against him. He sees her get on the bus and his heart falls.

Act 3 - Formulate a Plan of Action to Succeed (character throws self in headlong)
He grabs a pen and writes the bus number and time of day on this palm. He goes back the next day a half hour early to see if she is there again.

Act 4 - More Complications and Higher Stakes (usually a major setback)
She doesn't show. He's disappointed. The bus pulls up and leaves.

Act 5 - Final Push to Succeed with it looking unlikely (suspenseful moment, climax)
Just then the girl comes running up and is upset because she was running late.

Act 6 - Resolution and the Ever After
??? Maybe, I'll have him small talk with her. They hit it off and go grab a cup of coffee.

Now I can go back and add details and think about dialogue. The structure of the film is in place. I want it to be a bit more robust so,

Act 1 - Set Up (introduce the characters and situation)
A boy sees a girl across the street, and he falls instantly in love.
- The boy is dressed in a giant Hotdog suit advertising for the deli behind him.
- The girl sees the giant hotdog and flashes one of those "you're adorable" smiles.

etc. ...

Let me repeat--don't sweat the page counts and minor details. This is about organizing your thoughts to tell your story. As more than one person has said, "If you can't tell your story in a two sentence logline, you probably don't have a story." I slightly disagree with that. You may have a story but it's probably not a story that can be made as a film.

In that same thread, VPTurner has very good example of loglines:

A good exercise I like to use before I begin to write is to develop my logline, my one to two sentence "pitch". Then I'll pitch it to a few people to see their reactions. If it falls flat, I look at revising it or going with something completely different until I get a positive reaction. Then I'll begin developing the major characters and the spine (http://www.blakesnyder.com/2008/04/21/the-story-spine/) of the story.

With credit to Karl Iglesias:

(Title) is a (genre) about a (description of hero) who, after (inciting incident), wants to (outer goal) by (plan of action). This becomes increasingly difficult because (obstacles and complications).

Or...

(Title) is a (genre) about a (description of hero) who must (outer goal) or else (dire things will happen).

Part of growing is learning to think strategically about how you approach the story. Part of the story is its organization to fit within the 90-120 pages. For those who are novelists, this tends to be more of a challenge. Most life stories are written by outsiders because the subject is too close to the life details to decide which are relevant to telling the story.

There are different ways you can emphasize the contrast between Dunbar's perceptions and reality for the viewer.

STRANGER
Hey, man. Can you spare a cigarette?

DUNBAR
(politely)
Yeah, sure ...
(voiced mentally)
... if you promise to get lung cancer and die, leech.
------------------------------------------
The man takes the bait and sets his bid at maximum. Dunbar smiles slyly until he sees the hand he got back from the man: it’s shriveled and necrotic.

MAN
Can you spare a cigarette? Good karma for you...

But Dunbar doesn’t hear. [Dunbar] grabs his wrist with his good hand and grimaces as he looks into the stranger's face. The stranger looks at him oddly before Dunbar races away.
--------------------------------------
Hobo#1 watches as Dunbar ducks and covers. Dunbar talks to someone and jumps back by the dumpster.

Dunbar stops short.

DUNBAR
Hey! I’m ...

He turns with a disgusted look on his face, but the vandal is gone.

DUNBAR (CONT’D)
... talking to myself.

Spins about and searches. He glances up at the sky. He shakes his head and staggers to join the hobo.

HOBO #1
I told you. That guy creeps me out. C’mon, the latrine’s just over here.

Strengthening the images helps me to see that his perceptions are distorted. With the malatov cocktail scene we are seeing him splitting between the war and Vegas. I might 'ground' the scene by adding a line. "A smashed whiskey bottle litters the storefront as the cops hustle the guy who threw it ...". Jumping back and forth allows the audience to see both versions of reality. In a way, that helps to further your story by heightening subtler aspects. You may want to view other films in your general genre to get some ideas of how to develop your story. Below are two classics and a recent film which follow a men who fight against addiction/ptsd, succomb, and must somehow work through obstacles. In the case of the first, you have a sort of 'anti-hero'.

The Man with the Golden Arm (Drug Addiction & Gambling)
The Days of Wine and Roses (Alcoholism)
Reign over Me (PTSD)

In particular, look at how the story is told on two levels: the objective (events) and the subjective (emotional struggle). Look at the development as described above. Then write your story outline as the backbone for your screenplay. Then start writing. I can guarantee that the first few drafts will need to be revised. That's part of learning. However, each time it will get better. Once you have written a few screenplays, all of these "guidelines" will seem natural and fall away. As much as I will be flamed for it, I think it helps in the beginning to be original and imitate what is successful. It saves heartache down the road.

 

[Indiewood]

A lot of great advice, FantasySciFi; I've got my work cut out for me! All the advice I've gotten will be taken into account, and I think my screenplay will turn out a hundred times better for it. I think posting on here was a good idea, after all. =) Once I get Act II finished I'll probably post it also, although I may wait until I finish the whole first draft.