|
Post by Don777 on Jan 29, 2010 12:27:54 GMT -5
Echomusic,
I'd like to Echo (smile) Mr. Messerman's sentiments. I finished Alters last night and I thought: damn, I wish I'd written this! I also have to agree with what he said regarding the length of the speeches, but that's an easy fix.
What I loved about this story is that it would have been so easy to make this predicatable and it's anything but that. I don't want to post any spoilers but I liked where you went.
In addition to the titles Jeff mentioned I was also reminded of THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT and MEMENTO. That's great company to be in.
Great stuff. Congrats!!!
Don
|
|
|
Post by mscherer on Jan 29, 2010 14:30:40 GMT -5
Echo, Great read! Had me from page one, really. My take on this is: Conspiracy Theory meets The Bourne Identity, only Jason Bourne is a woman. Loved the dialogue. Loved the pace. That said, I do have some issues. 1. NATALIE HEWSON, mid-30’s -- should be NATALIE HEWSON, mid-30s – not the possessive 30’s 2. This threw me. Mention of the Towncar reminded me of Liam and Spiers’ vehicle. Why or how, do Jake and Natalie end up in a Towncar? Why not a cab? 3. Be careful with sequence of events: Spiers screams – clutches his leg – collapses. I think if I was shot I would probably scream first, then grab the wounded part of my body -- that is if I was still standing 4. Hmm shot in the chest – clutches his belly? These are all nits -- after all, I did have to find something to criticize Keep up the good work and I wish you nothing but success with this script. Well done.
|
|
tous
Full Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by tous on Jan 29, 2010 16:36:34 GMT -5
Wow, really enjoyed it! I'd have to give it another read through to analyze it, but the whole index card thing - opened up so many possibilities, it was a great concept.
Aaand this might not be a good thing to say if its not what you'd want someone to say or think, or possibly think about saying- but the ending to me-- I think it really showed a turn of things you normally don't see in boy chases girl-- that love- although is usually found to be completely selfless, can sometimes be found cloaked in selfishness. --
All around M-Azing.
|
|
|
Post by outofcontext on Jan 29, 2010 18:46:07 GMT -5
Let me join the growing list of admirers of this script. Brisk pace and intriguing plot. I, like everybody else, couldn't wait to get to the end. Since I believe your script is so fundamentally sound, any criticism I would have probably falls into the category of making the movie more to my taste, rather than better, so take it in that spirit. I think I'm going to agree with Mr. Messerman about the dialogue being a little speechy (or I guess he said verbose), and maybe too naked and clearly there for an obvious purpose. For instance, Liam was very labored about professing his respect for the love he saw in Jake and Natalie and when he tells us about how he misses their long conversations, it doesn't seem natural to me. I'd almost like to see Liam pursue Jake's friendship in the same way, Jake pursues Natalie's love--I think you do a much subtler and fuller job conveying the latter. Then again, that may just be different and not better. All in all, a complete, coherent and inventive work and I congratulate you and hope to pay my way in to see it someday.
|
|
|
Post by trellicktower on Jan 29, 2010 22:01:42 GMT -5
Great writing Echo. It's obvious you really know what you're doing. I read the whole thing in one sitting, and could easily picture it in any theatre.
NOTE: There are spoilers below. But if you're reading the script you'll read these yourself anyways!
That said, I'm not ashamed to admit I didn't quite get it. I mean the whole story. So these two were agents (for lack of a better word) in the past, then chose to leave their organization to be together. Four years later the organization tracked them down because one of them had to go back to take care of unfinished business, but soon after the two found a way to be back together again. But the organization still needed Natalie back, so they went after her, but Jake says "not so fast" and ends up killing the two guys that came after her. Now they are together again.
Please don't interpret this as criticism. I loved reading this. I just need some dots connected for my own peace of mind.
I'm also curious about the baby. I know Liam alludes to the fact that Natalie couldn't keep it, but at the end I found myself wondering if the details of what happened to the kid was in one of the envelopes. (Feel free to ridicule me mercilessly if I'm way off base!)
Let me add I had no problem with the length of the speeches. I thought the long ones were appropriate considering the content and backstory they included.
TT
|
|
|
Post by echenry on Jan 30, 2010 1:00:31 GMT -5
Erin Gould/echomusic, Tailoring my comments to you what you asked I'll start with what I thought worked: What you had to get right; you did get right. 1) Jake is a good protagonist for an audience to follow this mystery through. 2) The Jake and Natalie love story through a mystery works. As a reader I found myself empathizing and rooting for them. ;D What (I though) could use some improvement is: 1) Your title. I don't think its a good one for the kind of story your telling. I realize that line is used in the script, BUT "Love Alters," to me doesn't fit a mystery thriller about two people involved in some covert spy organization. 2) The bad guys covert organization needed to be explained better. Now I realize the story is seen primarily through Jake's eyes, and you're trying to hold back and create intrigue. BUT I would have liked to understand the organization Liam and Spiers were involved in. As written now I think the bad guy's organization that we come to find out Jake and Natalie are seeped in is borderline hokey. You tend to ignore it because Jake and Natalie's story makes you want to forget it. But I think you can do a lot much better job there. And, if time permits, that's where I think you should concentrate improvement efforts. Cool beans your production company is looking at producing you script. That's exciting! Thanks for sharing it with us. It was an honor to read your work. It read fairly easy. Your hard work has paid off! - E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA
|
|
|
Post by echomusic on Jan 30, 2010 9:09:02 GMT -5
First off, a tremendous thank you to everyone for taking time out of their day(s) to read this thing. As I said somewhere else on here, we spend so much time toiling over what we write that we can get to a point where we don't know if what we have is good or not.
I'll try and address comments and questions as best I can and hopefully they won't come off as knee-jerk reactive...more like jerk chicken reactive...spicy and tasty.
SPOILERS ABOUND
The dialogue (the speeches) -- If you think these are long, you should've seen the first few drafts. Natalie had a two and a half page monologue about how Jake and her met and how they fell in love and blah blah blah...boooooring.
The long bits of dialogue -- speeches -- in this I feel are somewhat necessary because they represent the characters (mainly Liam and Sullivan).
Liam, in his own way, is trying to drop subtle hints to Jake about who he really is. He's also trying to reach out to his friend. In a weird way, this is also a love story between two friends and once you know the finite details of the story, you can go back and look at Liam in an almost sad way. He simply misses his friend and this opportunity to bring Natalie back is a possible way for Jake to come back as well.
Sullivan. Well...he's a talker. That's what he does for a living, basically. He plays the role of the informer in noir stories. He's just a little more upbeat than what we've seen. His dialogue, while lengthy on the page, will undoubtedly be fast to accentuate his character. I will admit, there are a couple of scenes where he goes on and on and believe me, most of that is severely cut down.
I will say that these lengthy bits of dialogue seem to be me trying emulate (poorly) some of my heroes -- Sorkin and Whedon and Bendis.
Jeff -- yes to Vertigo, yes to Bourne and Eternal Sunshine -- all films I watched while writing this to get inspiration. I’d also include Frantic, Three Days Of The Condor, and oddly enough, Serenity. And thanks for being a fan of The Sundays. I doubt we’d ever get the rights to the song, but I figured it would be obscure (yet fitting) enough that we might have a shot.
Don777 -- How was jury duty? Did you show up dressed like a hobbit? That usually gets you out of it. Thank you for saying the script wasn’t predictable. I’ve been so immersed in this thing that I feel every plot twist is telegraphed.
mscherer -- you are correct, sir -- it shouldn't be possessive. Thank you for catching that. It has been fixed.
The Lincoln Towncar is kind of a common taxi service here in NYC. I think with writing this to be filmed in mind, I just took it as everyone knows that towncars are like cabs. They call 'em gypsy cabs here in NYC. And sadly, they do NOT tell you your fortune when they deliver you to your destination. But they do give you a wolf curse if you tip poorly.
The clutching leg, screaming thing is poor writing on my part. What I was trying to do was have him get shot, grab the wound while trying to hold back the scream, then the pain becomes unbearable and he collapses. I will rewrite that.
Thank you again for your keen eye to these details.
Tous -- Yes, yes, yes! One of the things that I set out to say in this (which sadly did not come in to view until later drafts) was something about love and our identity. Jake goes through the movie acting as if he’s some badass super spy. Turns out, he was a desk man -- analysis (which oddly enough carried over into his new life) And the ending should beg the question, ‘Which enevelope did he open? Was he selfish or did he allow himself to be ‘broken’ -- as Natalie did for him originally -- in order to make his wife happy?’
Outofcontext -- (great name, by the way) Though Liam misses his friend (and there are things he says that allude to that) he is a man with a mission -- and he is a company man, so he knows he can’t deviate from that -- so to pursue Jake would be an act of insubordination. It’s quite possible that he wasn’t even supposed to even see Jake in the first place -- that alone could be seen as an act of pursuing his friend. Don’t know if this makes any sense as to what you wrote.
Trellicktower -- You do know there is a quiz, right? Just kidding. Briefest of rundowns -- Natalie (super spy) and Jake (analyst) worked for an organization. They fell in love, and in order to leave said organization they had to undergo a personality change. Years later, one of Natalie’s projects resurfaced (it’s briefly mentioned by Sullivan when he’s talking to someone on the phone and played a much bigger part in earlier drafts -- in the end, I realized it wasn’t a part of the story and just window dressing) so since Natalie was the key player in that job (and still has the information needed in her noggin) she’s called back to duty.
As far as Jake killing Liam and Spiers -- you have to look at the motivations on this one. Why is Jake doing it? Or rather, why does Jake THINK he's doing it. And what was the catalyst for him doing it? Without giving too much away, Natalie has her motivations for telling Jake what she ‘carefully’ chooses to tell him. Jake may think he’s doing something for one reason but that doesn’t mean that Natalie doesn't have other intentions. Once again, don’t know if it makes sense in the way I described it. But hopefully would be something to stir discussion.
E.c. Henry -- Thank you for your comments. Regarding the title -- I agree with you on this one. It doesn’t fit a mystery thriller involved in a spy organization. Despite the big picture items that appear in the film, that’s not what it is about. I’ve labored over other titles but constantly come back to this one -- not because it is a bit of spoken dialogue, but because it is possibly the biggest comment the film is making. It also goes back to what I spoke of earlier about identity and love.
Regarding the unnamed organization -- I honestly don’t think I’d be able to come up with anything better than what the Bourne movies or Mission Impossible 3 came up with (yes, I love that movie, it’s the best in the series). It’s one of those cases where what the viewer comes up with in their mind paints a better picture and in the scheme of things, it’s not that important to what the heart of the story is -- Jake getting his wife back and then realizing that they both might not be who they think they are.
Once again, my sincerest thanks to everyone for reading and commenting on this. I really hope we can get this up and running.
If you know a good lit agent who would like to rep me, by all means, I won’t turn you down.
Or if you know anyone with a ridiculous amount of money who wants to fund a low budget feature...I would pretend to have second thoughts about accepting.
Thank you again. I am truly grateful.
|
|
|
Post by justhiltz on Feb 7, 2010 21:26:57 GMT -5
Echo: After reading all these great replies I'd love to read this piece! I noticed it's pulled from the link. Could you email me a copy or allow me temp access to the link? I'm anxious to see what the buzz is about.
Best Regards,
Steve Huerta(JustHiltz)
stevehuerta505@gmail.com
|
|
atb
New Member
Posts: 46
|
Post by atb on Feb 9, 2010 19:25:00 GMT -5
I agree with Steve.
Love to read this script.
abarker05@msn.com
... any way I can get a copy? Love to read and throw my comments in the mix.
|
|
|
Post by echomusic on Feb 9, 2010 23:07:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Csheep on Feb 23, 2010 23:05:40 GMT -5
The link doesn't work anymore. Would love to read this!
|
|
|
Post by echomusic on Feb 24, 2010 9:28:10 GMT -5
The link doesn't work anymore. Would love to read this! Link above should work
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Mooney on Mar 1, 2010 2:18:31 GMT -5
Wow, just started reading your script and I love it so far. It reminds me a bit of a John Grisham novel. I will let you know more when I finish, but great job.
|
|
|
Post by Jonathan on Mar 1, 2010 14:23:41 GMT -5
Some spoilers. . . . This one lost me on page 13 when Natalie inexplicably agrees to just trust her husband and get the hell out of dodge.
He comes home in the middle of the day acting like he's suffering a paranoid delusion, saying things like "they're listening," but, no matter, this woman who discovered just hours before that she's going to be a mother decides that the smart, prudent thing is to blindly go along with her husband's plan, even though by all appearances he's mentally unstable?
It seems crazy even if she's not pregnant, but I'd think those motherly instincts kick in right quick and she'd probably want to find out what in the good lord's name is making hubby act loony.
That's as far as I got. I do plan on reading the rest, and maybe it's as good and thrilling as the other comments suggest. But, if so, there must be a way for the writer to make these first 15 or so pages more believable. Even accepting the premise of "mystery man shows up and makes threats" to create a situation, I still like to see the characters' act rationally given those threats. Sure, you can argue that Jake is doing that by wanting to get away and hide. But there's no way that Natalie just allows him to avoid explaining anything because he says "trust me." That's not rational on her part, it's just a shortcut to the next scene.
Maybe for other people the merits of these kinds of scripts/films are made after the initial setup based on their twists and turns and races against the clock. But for me, if something happens in the first 15 minutes that makes me roll my eyes, I don't forget. Come the 90-minute mark when shit's going crazy, I'm sitting there thinking how it never should have come to this in this manner.
Maybe it's the pressure people feel about page 10 or page 15 or whatever, or maybe the writer felt he needed to end the scene because it was already three pages long. But I think that some tightening of what's there (do we really need to hear the phone conversation about decorating? Maybe, I haven't read the whole thing, but I'm guess it's throwaway.) and then a little more arguing between the couple would make it much stronger. Surely there's something about Natalie that we can discover as they hash this problem out. As it stands, though, she sounds like nothing more than a yes-wife.
|
|