POW: November 14, 2010 - A Soldier's Honor

[mscherer]

Here we go...

This was the first screenplay I ever attempted. I have tweaked it over the years, so don't go thinking this was how I wrote right out of the gate -- not so by a long shot.

Hope you enjoy.

Logline: During World War I a young Quaker farm boy experiences the reality of war and struggles to remain true to his peaceful values.

Attachments:

[mydoggeorge]

Downloaded. Will read. Thanks for sharing.

[dwight]

Sounds good, Mike!! i'll give it a read.

And an idea of keeping the current week at the top of threads. There should be a "Sticky" option to tack the current weeks to always be at the top.

[mydoggeorge]

Hi Mike,
I liked the story. It was well written.

Here are a couple of items:

I liked how you set-up H. Krieger right at the start with just the four simple words – “It’s in God’s hands.” It speaks volumes to his character right off the bat – brilliant.

Page 3 – Stoney Jackson should maybe look at Henry with a blank stare or something. He certainly is not thanking Henry for what he did so…possibly more tension between the two.

I liked the turning point of the screenplay where he beat the crap out of that guy. I mean really what was she (Brei) going to expect? That Krieger wasn’t going to step in and do something. She should have been a little more compassionate to him, but hey that’s the point of the story.

Carson nice set up as the protagonist – but I don’t think he’s the only one. There’s Jackson and of course Krieger having an inner struggle later on after Brei and he part ways…he tries to win her back.

Just a thought about trying to give a little more about the hardship of the trenches - I would put something in there about the trench foot that devastated a lot of the guys. Must have been quite a nightmare.

So, Jackson really honestly gives a shit about how the Germans are treated? Earlier he shot a German guy. I mean wouldn’t it work better the other way around where Krieger questions them and Jackson comes in and smacks the guy around – then maybe Krieger still having somewhat of a compassionate nature tries to talk to Jackson??? Just a thought. (Side note – I just went back through and read it again and now realize there are two Jacksons. I would change the name of one of them.)

To me it seems like he went through a transition – but my biggest problem is when he was out there in no where land and he pauses – lets the rain fall onto him. Where is the epiphany? When he finds out that he really can’t be like Jackson or the other troops? He’s not a killer?

If these flashbacks happen slowly – the German guy is going to blow Krieger away – I would maybe try to have the flashbacks go FAST Motion or something. I am also not sure of the sequence of the flashbacks – maybe change them up…have a flashback of the German holding the knife to the throat from earlier. A flashback of Henry fighting the Germans and then the last Flashback with Brei telling him she doesn’t know him anymore…that is the last straw…he turns and walks off…



I could almost tell what was going to happen with Krieger. It was a set-up from the beginning where he has the girl, they fall in love – they part ways but get back together and spend the rest of their lives together.

I’m thinking it’s more of a drama than a war movie. Good job with it. Thank you for sharing.

[mscherer]

Mark,

Thanks for taking the time to read and post notes... much appreciated.

Your comments made me realize that I have two (2) characters named Jackson. Sgt. Stoney Jackson and Captain Jessup Jackson. Rookie mistake that have already been fixed. Instead of Sgt. Stoney Jackson, he is now Sgt. Stoney Hartman.

I will take your notes under advisement (as they say), wait for additional notes (if any), then make my changes.

Thanks again and always,

Keep Writing!

[dmedley]

I've downloaded this and read it. Thoughts coming shortly.

[dmedley]

Mike:

First off, I want to thank you for providing this to read. Also, everything that follows is nothing more than my opinion.

The first thing I want to mention is that I know that spec “rules” seem to change almost weekly. As far as I understand, this week’s “rules” frown on the use of caps other than for screenplay elements and character introductions. Personally, I feel that it makes for a better read to limit caps to just character introductions and screenplay elements. But that’s me.

A Soldier’s Honor is a story of a young Quaker pacifist who struggles to hold on to his principles, indeed his humanity, amidst the inhumanity of the Battle of Verdun on the Western Front during World War I in 1916.

The struggles, the fall from grace, and, in the end, the catharsis is pretty standard, well trod territory. That’s OK because the reason it’s so well trod is because it’s so damn interesting. Everyone who’s lived for more than three minutes can relate on their own level. The story, as a whole, has a finished feel to it. The characters are for the most part well drawn and express fully developed individuals. The setting and the theme are exceptional. I really like this story.

Your introduction of Henry Krieger is wonderful in that it firmly and economically establishes who he is. He unquestioningly adheres to the pacifist credo so much that he cannot even explain it beyond “It’s in God’s hands”. One thing that did confuse me a bit in the opening scene was:
“German batteries pound the entrenched American Expeditionary
Forces two miles away.”

Are you directing the reader to the German Forces? If so, a Slugline would be in order. I think it’s unnecessary. It interferes with the flow. I feel that by removing that bit of business, it pumps up the cinematic drama in my mind’s eye substantially. It would allow us to read it exactly how Henry experiences it.

Anyway, you quickly introduce Brei. I believe that, ultimately, this is Henry and Brei’s story. I’m not sure if that is your intention. I do feel that their story could have been pumped up quite a bit because it is Brei who is the personification of Henry’s cherished principles. I would like to have seen a more thorough development of their relationship in order to more firmly exemplify Henry’s fall from grace in the context of their relationship. It may require one or two more scenes between them, maybe not. I’d rework every scene between them, working hard to develop meaningful subtext in their dialog. Especially the picnic scene where Henry tells of the horrors he has witnessed. Currently it simply reads as exposition and Brei’s reaction. Put it to better use by creating dialog that says the unspoken. It’s difficult to quantify, and I’m not doing a very good job. I’m sorry. I can provide an example, though.

Remember the film Unforgiven. The Kid and Munny have regrouped outside of town. The Kid has just cold-bloodedly shot the cowboy in the outhouse. He has a breakdown, sobbing. He says (pleads) to Munny, “Well, I guess he had it coming.” Munny’s reply: “We all got it coming, Kid.” On its own it doesn’t say much, but within the context of the film that simple exchange hugely exemplifies Munny’s transformation while showing The Kid for what he really is: a young boy who’s not cut out for this.

Also, I feel that Henry’s declaration of his love for Brei was a bit on the nose. Again, in their dialog, think subtext with regards to the overall story/theme. Love shown through actions is far more meaningful than declarations. My opinion. Finally, by reworking the Henry/Brei scenes, it would add more meaning and context to their breakup. Right now, based on their previous scenes, the breakup almost seems a bit trite. Also, you may even approach Henry/Brei as if their love is already established as the story begins. Just an idea.

I really like the Morning Hate plant and the idea of the payoff later. One thing that I’m thinking, though; the payoff, where Henry and Koslovsky bring the wounded back to the trench and must suffer through Morning Hate. This is a transformative moment for both Henry and the soldiers who hate his ideology. This scene definitely needs to be pumped up. How about having Henry and Koslovky knowing that they absolutely must beat Morning Hate or die? They know it, and Captain Barns knows it. Surly, we know it because we’ve already seen Morning Hate. Captain Barnes and ALL of the soldiers know they are out there in No Mans Land. They know that if they are out there when it hits, Henry, Koslovsky, and the comrades they have been sent to rescue are all dead. A ticking clock moment. They all wait, peering out over NML, hoping, praying as Morning Hate draws closer. Finally, Barnes spots them, “There they are!” Henry and company emerge from the thick fog, the soldiers cheer and urge them on. As they draw nearer, the Morning Hate begins. Soldiers, Barnes, Adams, they all scream their encouragement amidst the chaos. Shells exploding, Henry and company struggling, fighting their way. They fall into the trenches, take cover with their comrades and wait out the storm. Morning Hate ends as suddenly as it began, all is quiet. The whole platoon erupts into cheer. A cherished bright moment in an otherwise bleak existence. Again, just my personal opinion.

I’d also rethink the SERIES OF SHOTS: element. It is disconcerting for a spec script. Generally this kind of thing is used in production scripts. Or so I understand. From a reading standpoint it would read much smoother to just use action description, breaking it up in paragraphs. I see that done all the time in spec scripts, but I almost never see the SERIES OF SHOTS: element. Again, a nit.

Also, I think that turning the battle scenes into actual scenes would be much more dramatic as well as a much better read. The way it is now, using the SERIES OF SHOTS: is a timid way of demonstrating that Henry has transformed. By making them actual scenes it would lend itself to actually augmenting the transformation. Especially when Henry takes out the pill box with a grenade. I feel it’s a missed opportunity for a very powerful, transformative scene. Especially with regards to the interrogation scene that follows.

I have to say that I do like the Carson character. I wouldn’t change anything with him or the role he plays.

Finally we come to the moment of catharsis. This is a big moment and I like the idea of what you’ve done. Because it is such an important moment is the reason I think you need to take another look at it. The idea of using flashbacks is fine, but I’d trim it down to just the most relevant moments. Edit it down to no more than two very short flashbacks. One would be best. The reason is that the present moment is THE dramatic moment. We already know what happened in the scene where Stony shoots the hungry German.

GERMAN: You will kill me.
HENRY: No, I promise.
A shot rings out.
German soldier falls dead.
HENRY: No!

Or something like that with, of course, the proper sluglines and description. Just one flashback. Impactful, edited if need be.

I don’t know if the scene where Koslovsky visits Brei is particularly useful. In fact I think it kind of diminishes some of the dramatic impact. Once the scene occurs we, as an audience, know that Brei will be at the ceremony. No mystery, no drama, no stakes. By omitting the scene, it allows the audience to share in Henry’s perceived loss, sadness, and uncertainty regarding Brei. Then, when he sees her at the ceremony, we get to share in his surprise and joy.

Personally, I’d rework the ceremony scene. Perhaps as Henry receives his medal, he sees Brei in the audience, crying, proud. Happy to see the real Henry, the Henry she loves, again. After the ceremony, they come together, reunited. I’d even think of ending the story there. Sure, it’s a bit ambiguous, but only a bit. We’d see that their world is now theirs again. That life, once again, is theirs to live for who they are. They now have their future back. It may or may not work, but it’s something to think about.

Overall, this has the feel of a very good idea and story, but one in need of, perhaps, another rewrite or two. I do thank you for the opportunity to be able to read it.

Good luck.

[mscherer]

Daniel,

Thank you for the very extensive notes. Much appreciated.

I will reread your notes -- digest them -- then revisit the script. As I said in the original post, this was the first script I ever wrote, and, although I have rewritten it over the years, this is the first I have read the darn thing in many a moon.

Thanks again for your time and thoughts and always,

Keep Writing!

[jimmy7]

I thought this was a great read. Very familiar ground which can be a blessing if done well or a recipe for disaster if done badly - luckily it was the former.
There's been some pretty decent in depth analysis already so there isn't much for me to add although if i had to nitpick i would say that the character change that happens to Henry after his rejection by Brei feels a bit sudden and a bit too far out of character. I get that this is the whole premise of the screenplay but it just felt a little too extreme - from complete pacifist to all out action hero is a bit of a jump for me and i would've prefered him to be a little more.... scared i guess is what i'm trying to say.
Anyway, like i say, really enjoyed it, great work.

Jim

[waltkurtz]

Mike,

After finishing A Soldier's Honor I couldn't help but be struck by the fact it was written by the author of Red Frenzy. They are so diametrically opposed in terms of sensibility, tone and world that I marvel at your range and imagination.

To start with, Soldier's Honor reads like a breeze. The characters are clearly defined, and the conflict is always dramatic. I especially enjoyed your ability to create the feeling of war in the prose styling. It reminded me of Hemingway.

There were a couple of typos here and there, nothing major. The only one that stood out was on page 9 and that was the spelling of "peal". I think you meant peel.

I know people will rarely say something like this, but I felt the film could have been longer. The nature of the setting and the violence could support more story.

I'd be especially interested to learn more about Henry and how he came to serve in the war if his religion forbade it. I realize he starts off as a medic, but even still, Quakers have avoided war on religious grounds even back to the civil war. Why is he here? What was it about his home or the religious values inculcated in him that he is privately and then publicly rebelling against? I feel if I knew these answers it would make his internal struggle deeper. I think there's more than religion behind his choices. It's like a guy who forcloses on homes for a living offering the explanation, "it's a job, somebody's gotta do it", as his reason for the work. But there's got to be more. Why that job? What is it about that man that enables him to sleep at night not bothered by the harm he's inflicted on people? I think these questions get to the essence of the person and I found myself wanting to know them about Henry.

For example, it's clear he's of German origin. Is this part of his reluctance to kill Germans? Also, Henry mentions at one point that he doesn't want to commit violence "again". Was this in reference to something in his past that isn't revealed in the narrative, but could raise questions about Henry's relationship to violence. Is he paying penance for some past sin? Answers to these questions might make his inner turmoil easier to comprehend and relate to than his blanket assertion that this is his religious belief and allowing that to sum him up.

I'd also like to know more about Brei. She's is so opposed to violence, but isn't she the least bit angry at the Germans for this conflict that has killed so many of her fellow countrymen? I must say, this character I found the most inscrutable. At least with Henry his nonviolence is a byproduct of his religious background. Her's is a total mystery. She seems to have no concern about the outcome of the battle being waged on her doorstep. Hasn't she lost friends or family? What makes her tick?

Answering these questions would help bolster the love story at the center of the picture, I think.

Also, while the battle scenes are expertly rendered, I feel like there are too many of them. Maybe you could string together a longer block that combined some of them and create one or two battle set pieces that help shape Henry and serve as the backdrop of the romance. I kept thinking about Paths of Glory and the way that there is only one battle sequence in the picture, but it is harrowing and sets the stage for the absurd trial that is really what the movie is all about. The same thing can be said of The English Patient. I found your cutting back and forth between the lovers and the battlefield undermined the power of each.

Ultimately, a fine read and excellent job, but a story that left me wanting to know more about the leads so their relationship had more resonance.

Thanks for posting this.

Walt

[mscherer]

Walt,

Thank you for reading A Soldier's Honor and for your kind words.

During my research I discovered that many Quakers served in the military during WWI in non-combat positions: drivers, cooks; medics and the like.

As for Brie, I never gave her attitude toward violence much thought. Maybe I should have. Thanks for pointing this out.

If I decide to pursue this script in the future I will certainly keep your thoughts and suggestions in mind.

Thanks again.

[waltkurtz]

My pleasure. I think this has all the elements of a great epic war story.

Walt