I would really appreciate it if I could get some feedback on my short script Running. I thought I would get an opinion from you guys, as I got so much insightful feedback from the folks on the IMDB Shop Talk Writers Board.
I'd be curious to know what feedback you got from IMDB. That's not a complete story. It's a fragment, a single sequence of a story. There's no character arc, no clear motivation, no "hero" with whom an audience can relate and root for, just a bunch of victims and a two dimensional antagonist. It creates more questions than it answers.
For instance,
in one scene, your antagonist is armed and clearly dangerous, and in the next he is voluntarily escorted sans weapon and allows himself to be tied up (poorly, at that). And no one mans up to try to take him down when he easily escapes his bonds? Where did the weapon go? It appeared out of thin air and disappeared just as quickly.
Is this just the beginning of a script you're writing (the setup sequence), or was this meant to be a complete short film?
I am confused very much. The narrative was sloppy, I didn't really know what was happening, I had to read a paragraph then go back and figure out whats going on. That isn't a story, its a indulgent action sequence nothing more. It is full of logic holes,
where did the gun come from? How did he get untied? Why can't they call the cops? Why would the boss laugh and sip from a glass after someone was SHOT? Why can't they call the cops? How did the guy poison the liquor? Who puts Tequila in a decanter? And WHY DOES THIS GUY DO ALL OF THIS?
It seems you understand the basics of format, but screenwriting is storytelling first and foremost. Even a three minute short has to have a story.
This could be a cool scene in a bigger story if the questions(could this happen? why would this happen? what would they do if this happened?)were asked during the writing process. If there was a reason for Oslo to do what he did, revenge, contracted hit, anything, it could be cool.
The script was even more of a jumbled mess before the IMDB writers tore into it. Thanks for the feedback guys. You guys gave some really good advice.
I didn't think about the gun. Oslo is mentally unstable, and a thrill seeker. He pretty much has no motive for what he is doing. He's completely bonkers.
At first, I wanted Oslo to be dying from some kind of disease, and this is just his last hurraw. One things for sure, he's very smart and skilled. He also has other people working with him, which will be revealed in the "sequel".
Now, to answer some questions:
The police station is bombed. Again, this would be revealed in the sequel. The fact that they can't get in contact with the police is alarming enough, IMO.
The manager is both poisoned and drunk as hell (opening scene, the fact that he has been drinking, come on, think.)
Tequila in a decanter? Yeah, I'm not that knowledgeable about liquor. Maybe it should be whiskey?
Real tough guys drink a lot, but don't get drunk, its part of being "Hard boiled"..
Only when they are emotionally vulnerable do we see them sloppy drunk.
The manager getting sloppy doesn't fit the knowable universe, so asking the audience to "think" about what they don't know.. well thats called confusion... what your really asking them to do, is to read your mind. .which aint gonna happen
Let the audience know that the drink is poisoned before the manager drinks it, that we all want to know how he will react, you can hype that a bit by having him ALMOST drink a few times.. it build tension as we wait for it...
The advantage you have over Hollywood is that you CAN spend the time to do the research, you can make your script have validity in the universe. If you don't know something (like that nobody would put tequila in a decanter) you shouldn't assume that it doesn't matter. Once you KNOW why things are the way they are in the real world, you could play with it. For example, maybe your manager is trying so hard to appear sophisticated that he DOES put tequila in a cut crystal decanter, which has the opposite affect of making him look like an low class wannabe. The key I think.. there are NO ACCIDENTS in your story, you are god, nothing is random, nothing just "is!" Even if in your SCRIPT doesn't explain why something is the way it is, you should know it. That way your invented universe can remain consistent.
Unless "tequila" is important to the plot, it can just remain a nondescript alcoholic beverage. A clear liquid could just as easily be vodka.
Wheatgrinder, he did forshadow the poisoning with retrieval of the white powder in the the lobby. But unless that powder dissolves odorless and clear (and not milky like it typically would) then it may be better to have a yellow tequila (or bourbon or whiskey). Or instead of white power, a vial of clear liquid that would be much easier to get into a decanter without making a mess.
Yes, we as writers must think about these things.
But, fionaman, you should have a complete story in each "chapter". It's okay to leave a cliffhanger, but wrap up details and explain details or else your audience couldn't care less about a sequel. You have to hook them. And you have to be plausible in order to suspend their disbelief. The way it's written is more confusing than intriguing. Yes, you are the artist and are free to do whatever you want, but I'm not sure I'd wait around for a sequel. I certainly won't read past the first chapter of a book if it doesn't grab me. And if it's TV, I'd change the channel.
Try giving the characters more depth. That's where the term "two dimensional" comes from, no depth.
You have a fat drunk (okay, you didn't say fat, but that's how I pictured him since you didn't give any descriptions - no ages or genders), but WHY is he drunk? You have an unstable sociopath, but the fat drunk thinks he's perfect for the job? Did this kid just wake up that morning and decide to be an unstable sociopath? No one saw warning signs? And why would the "Manager" have a subordinate deal with unruly patrons and not simply ask them to leave himself? How did he get to be a manager if he can't manage?
After the shooting, the reactions come off as too calm under the circumstances. A gunshot in the real world would result in widespread panic. I really did not see any panic, mostly "solemn" and "walking". And Howarth is just sitting there "sloppily" (which is why he became fat in my mind), apparently oblivious to what just happened despite the loud report of a shotgun. And then he laughs? I'd say the fat drunk is coming off as more of a sociopath. Doors shut "quietly", people walk "slowly". Things are "unnaturally quiet".
And THEN the action happens.
Side note, be careful and stick to present tense, q.v.
"Oslo has escaped." "They've been barricaded..."
"It all falls into place." What falls into place? A script is what is seen and what is heard. Nothing more. Reveal that things fell into place through action and/or dialogue.
A tool you can use (if you'd like - not dictating, just suggesting ) to pick up the pace of the reading and, thus, illustrate the increased pace of the action is to give it some more white space. When the action happens, try breaking it up into smaller snippets, offsetting the more pivitol actions into their own line or two. The bigger the blocks of description, the slower the pace of the reading. It's also easier to lose an important detail where the reader has to go back to find out when the protagonist lost his hand in a shower of blood and gore.
The good news is you have good foundation for being a writer.
What falls into place? A script is what is seen and what is heard. Nothing more. Reveal that things fell into place through action and/or dialogue.
) to pick up the pace of the reading and, thus, illustrate the increased pace of the action is to give it some more white space. When the action happens, try breaking it up into smaller snippets, offsetting the more pivitol actions into their own line or two. The bigger the blocks of description, the slower the pace of the reading. It's also easier to lose an important detail where the reader has to go back to find out when the protagonist lost his hand in a shower of blood and gore.