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

Does the audience need to know, or can I just imply?

In my script the villains kill a cop and the main character cop is angry about it and wants justice. The district attorney does not want to prosecute, because there is not enough evidence against the villains, so he feels it would be a waste of money.

So the cop ends up blackmailing the DA into prosecuting the suspects. However, I am not sure how to go about writing this. If the cop is going to blackmail a DA into prosecuting an 'evidence-less' case, what's the point if a jury will not convict, right? There has to be just enough evidence for the cop to think it has a chance, but not too much evidence cause I need the DA to not prosecute it in the first place.

Basically the cop who is killed, is shot to death in a shoot out. The main cop, also in the shoot out, then has to pretty much take the body, and escape with it, so the crooks cannot have the chance to get rid of it. Once he escapes he then puts the body somewhere, where it can be found, but wipes away his own evidence of being there.

The cop who survived cannot testify himself cause he was not suppose to be there, which is why he left the body somewhere and takes off. But even if he said he was there, his testimony could legally be used anyway.

I originally wrote it so that the surviving cop takes the crooks hostage at gunpoint and forces them to plant evidence. He gets one to spit on the dead body, one to bleed on the it, and one to sign a their gang name on it.

Then what happens is, is that the DA does not prosecute because the investigators tell him that the evidence of the spit, blood and signature, were actually planted by someone else, and not by the gang of crooks themselves. Someone forced the gang to plant the evidence, so the prosecutor does not charge the gang. So the cop learns that his framing of the gang has come off as incompetent, and the DA can tell it was a frame, he then blackmails the DA.

Is this scenario better? That was the original one I wrote, but my friend said she didn't believe it after reading it, because she thinks that a DA would take on evidence even if it could have been planted, and how could they tell really? What do you think, is that more plausible, and I should stick to the original idea?

Or should I just write it so that the body is found, but the DA says there is not enough evidence, and that's all he says. The audience does not need to hear anything more, and the cop blackmails him anyway, even though the audience does not know what kind of faith the cop has, based on evidence whatever evidence there is to go forward with even?

Thanks for the input!
 
Last edited:
Your first two pages:
Code:
EXT. HIGHWAY GAS STATION -- OUTSIDE VANCOUVER, CANADA -- DAY

CONSTABLE TYLER LAMONT, 30, of the Vancouver police force,
is a handsome young man of average build.

He's off duty, and filling up his civilian car, leaning
against it, in wait... He hears a dispatcher make an
announcement, from the radio, on his car seat, through the
open window.

		DISPATCHER (V.O.)
	All units, we have a possible two-o-
	seven in progress. All units, a
	possible two-o-seven. Keep your
	your eyes pealed.

He looks at the mountain view. There is a road going around
the mountain, up to a LODGE. He sees a MAN near the edge of
the mountain, looking in his direction who then looks away,
while walking along... He's Gang member #3, and has BINOCULARS
around his neck.

Tyler puts the nozzle back, and heads inside the station to
pay, while looking at the man who then looks back --

The man then turns his head and looks behind him to the lodge,
in concern --

INT. LIVING ROOM -- LODGE -- CONTINUOUS

MANNING, 25, is sitting in a chair, leaning forward with his
hands folded... 

LEO HENDERSON, 55, is sitting walking in circles behind him,
waiting...

They are both dressed in all black, while wearing ski masks,
rolled up above their faces. Manning's nervous and feels
just wrong being there.

		HENDERSON
	C'mon, son, the clock is ticking...

		MANNING
	Who is she?

		HENDERSON
	   (pause)
	She's someone who deserves it.

Manning is scared and thinking.

		MANNING
	Okay.

He gets up and breathes heavily... He walks over to SHEILA
FOLEY, 35, who is on bed, tied up, blindfolded, and gagged... 

She coughs and breathes hard in fear -- She has ACOUSTIC
EARMUFFS, tied around her head so she cannot work them off,
and cannot hear what they are saying --

FOUR GANG MEMBERS dressed in black, wearing ski masks are
waiting by the bed, waiting for Manning, getting impatient. 

Manning feels it. One of them has a video camera on a tripod,
ready to record.

Manning pulls out a condom and proceeds to undo his pants --

INT. GAS STATION -- DAY

Tyler is next in line at the counter --

		CASHIER
	How goes it?

		TYLER
	Good, you?

		CASHIER
	Good.

		TYLER
	   (shows his badge)
	Look, you see that lodge on the
	mountain today, with the parked cars
	over there? Do you know if there
	was a man out before?

		CASHIER
	No, I didn't really look on my way
	in.

		TYLER
	Yeah, that's understandable. I was
	just wondering.
	  (hands him his credit card)
	Thanks.

This reduces to: "Tyler, a Vancouver police officer, is filling his car when he glances up and sees a man at the mountain lodge as an alert for a kidnapping (207) comes across the radio. In the lodge, Henderson pressures Manning to rape a woman (Sheila) who is bound to a bed and surrounded by four men in ski masks. Her struggles are being documented on a videocamera. Tyler pays inside the gas station but the cashier knows nothing."

It doesn't have to be exactly one sentence but you want to be concise.
 
It definitely helps to have the whole storyline laid out like that. There are some good ideas in there, and I like that it's pretty unremittingly dark, but there are several points where logic breaks down, and you gloss over it with a breezy "this happens then this happens". Are there really keypad safes that use the same touchpad tones as mobile phones? It would seem to be a ridiculously stupid design idea if so. The immunity thing doesn't strike me as realistic either (but I am happy to be corrected on that).

While I like the idea of this overlooked group fighting back, the rape thing still really doesn't work for me, especially the motive that rape is an alternative to "having involuntary celibacy forced on them". It's a muddle of motives.

Rape is not to be taken lightly on screen - just look at the reaction to the latest episode of Game of Thrones, with many fans turning their back on the show over a particular scene.
 
Okay thanks. I asked some lawyers in an online forum about the immunity thing and they said it could work even though it's not exercised often. They said that it's a technicality, that you can admit to a crime and get away with it, as long as you are given a deal of immunity under the 5th ammendment, which you have to plea your rights to, first.

This is what I was told, so the judge has probably some say in it too, and it depends on the type of judge you get perhaps. The judge is only in the one scene, so there is not a lot of time to develop his motives of course. As far as the rape motives go, in the actual script, I have more time to develop the villains in their scenes. Sheila's motives are better explained in the dinner scene with her and Tyler as well. I was told that it's better explained in the actual script by one reader so far, but will have to see what others say.

I haven't seen Game of Thrones yet. Just haven't had time cause of other movies and shows that I make time for first right now. I know rape is not to be taken lightly. I don't plan on showing much or being exploitative. I want to handle it with maturity and depth of course.

As far as the safe thing goes, the villain has it designed that way particularly, so his own phone can be dialed to warn him that if it's been cracked. In the script, I described how the keypad was custom built in, and the original design torn out. But does that not still work? Is there anything else, where logic is defied or any plot holes? You said that there were several.
 
Last edited:
First, you did a good job preparing your treatment. It helped to layout clearly what you had in mind. I took the time to start reading through it. Below are my quick notes.

Sequence 1
I'm not sure the purpose of Manning going back if he knows she's safe with Tyler. It's a move that would make Henderson suspicious. Exposing himself as a cop to Tyler is also problematic since Tyler didn't call for back up. How did Manning happen to be there? So either Manning confesses to being undercover or he becomes suspect to Tyler as well. Finally, to keep his cover, it would have been better for Manning to go after Wray. Why didn't Wray go with the others? That Tyler could catch up after such a lag time also feels rather strained. If Manning is involved, he could have detained Tyler.
== In short, the beginning doesn't feel very convincing.

Seq. 2
So is Manning undercover? It seems that the targetting is hardly random. With multiple kidnapping/rapes, it would catch media attention, especially since they post them on the internet. Times, locations start to form a pattern. You do not put bleach inside a person unless its your intention to permanently damage them. Since Manning would be identified by Tyler, Manning would be pushed for any information he had and how he came to respond. It would identify him as a gang member. Also, most victims are raped by people who they know or are in their immediate environment. So a general investigation of co-workers, friends and general contacts who have mental or physical defects would be identified.

Seq. 3 [Not relevant--delete]
Rape is more about power and control than sexual gratification. You will lose audience members if you suggest that the public should sympathize with them. Sex crimes are one of those instances where you are guilty until proven innocent.

Seq. 4 [Not relevant -- delete]
It's evident Tyler's supposed to be sexy. Not needed.

Seq. 5
Boom. No surprise that the two guys who will have some disability and know Sheila are her rapists. At that moment you just turned the audience against Tyler. Tyler giving her alcohol prior to arresting her?
== Your audience just checked out.

Seq. 6
Sheila would not be interrogated. Theoretically that statement would have been taken when she was first rescued.
== At this point your audience is thinking of walking out.

Seq. 7
Once she's arrested, she goes to jail. There is no safe house. At that point, her "rapists" could simply bail her out.
== The audience has left/checked out. It just gets unbelievable.

Whether or not it's true, to suggest that Sheila was complicit in her rape is offensive. Now that Sheila was found a John Wray's home and a crime was committed, his house is a crime scene and all evidence would be subpoenaed including phone records, computers, equipment and anything else. So all of his phone contacts would also be investigated. Subpoenas to search their homes and offices. Scans of computer memories to see if they were used to upload the videos. There will be memory traces. Records of the edits. Manning's presence would also appear in a report leading to his implication. At this point Manning is screwed and would be better served by claiming immunity from prosecution if he wasn't undercover. After Seq. 8, it just becomes absurd and I couldn't continue reading.

Trying to seduce the man who just arrested you? Sorry, no. To suggest a man in an overcoat as a "new hire" by the rapists to free her or kill her is a undercover plant with microphone/video eyeglasses just becomes, well, absurd. That's sequence 9 with 17 more to go. I'm sorry, there's nothing of substance to keep one's attention. Good luck.
 
First, you did a good job preparing your treatment. It helped to layout clearly what you had in mind. I took the time to start reading through it. Below are my quick notes.

Sequence 1
I'm not sure the purpose of Manning going back if he knows she's safe with Tyler. It's a move that would make Henderson suspicious. Exposing himself as a cop to Tyler is also problematic since Tyler didn't call for back up. How did Manning happen to be there? So either Manning confesses to being undercover or he becomes suspect to Tyler as well. Finally, to keep his cover, it would have been better for Manning to go after Wray. Why didn't Wray go with the others? That Tyler could catch up after such a lag time also feels rather strained. If Manning is involved, he could have detained Tyler.
== In short, the beginning doesn't feel very convincing.

Seq. 2
So is Manning undercover? It seems that the targetting is hardly random. With multiple kidnapping/rapes, it would catch media attention, especially since they post them on the internet. Times, locations start to form a pattern. You do not put bleach inside a person unless its your intention to permanently damage them. Since Manning would be identified by Tyler, Manning would be pushed for any information he had and how he came to respond. It would identify him as a gang member. Also, most victims are raped by people who they know or are in their immediate environment. So a general investigation of co-workers, friends and general contacts who have mental or physical defects would be identified.

Seq. 3 [Not relevant--delete]
Rape is more about power and control than sexual gratification. You will lose audience members if you suggest that the public should sympathize with them. Sex crimes are one of those instances where you are guilty until proven innocent.

Seq. 4 [Not relevant -- delete]
It's evident Tyler's supposed to be sexy. Not needed.

Seq. 5
Boom. No surprise that the two guys who will have some disability and know Sheila are her rapists. At that moment you just turned the audience against Tyler. Tyler giving her alcohol prior to arresting her?
== Your audience just checked out.

Seq. 6
Sheila would not be interrogated. Theoretically that statement would have been taken when she was first rescued.
== At this point your audience is thinking of walking out.

Seq. 7
Once she's arrested, she goes to jail. There is no safe house. At that point, her "rapists" could simply bail her out.
== The audience has left/checked out. It just gets unbelievable.

Whether or not it's true, to suggest that Sheila was complicit in her rape is offensive. Now that Sheila was found a John Wray's home and a crime was committed, his house is a crime scene and all evidence would be subpoenaed including phone records, computers, equipment and anything else. So all of his phone contacts would also be investigated. Subpoenas to search their homes and offices. Scans of computer memories to see if they were used to upload the videos. There will be memory traces. Records of the edits. Manning's presence would also appear in a report leading to his implication. At this point Manning is screwed and would be better served by claiming immunity from prosecution if he wasn't undercover. After Seq. 8, it just becomes absurd and I couldn't continue reading.

Trying to seduce the man who just arrested you? Sorry, no. To suggest a man in an overcoat as a "new hire" by the rapists to free her or kill her is a undercover plant with microphone/video eyeglasses just becomes, well, absurd. That's sequence 9 with 17 more to go. I'm sorry, there's nothing of substance to keep one's attention. Good luck.

Okay thanks. Tyler does call for back up. Sorry I forgot to mention. The gang has a police radio scanner, and that's when Manning gets the idea to get back and pose as back up, in order to see what is going on, and be on the other side of the situation. Tyler tells him to stay with Sheila so he can go after the gang. Basically he stays behind with her, because Tyler tells him to then takes off running. So he stays there to watch her to make it all look legit. Wray and the others just end up splitting up in the escape.

Manning cannot confess to Tyler about being undercover, because it creates a huge plot hole. Tyler will write that in his report, then his superiors will find out if Manning is actually undercover, and then find out he is lying. This will draw much more suspicion onto Manning so isn't it logical that he just says he got the call on the radio, and responded?

As long as the call goes out and Manning shows that he had his radio with him, wouldn't that be enough to believe he responded to the call?

What if Tyler bought Sheila a non-acoholic drink in order to try to get her to talk about the crime to him? Would that make more sense?

Also Shiela never said anything in the original interview. She kept her mouth shut the whole time, which is why they put out a material witness warrant for her arrest, if Tyler cannot get her to talk about it one last time, before bringing her in. Doesn't this make sense that they would want to interview her if she never said anything before at all?

Sheila also has a reason for trying to seduce the man who arrested her. I don't know if I mentioned this before but she is part of the gang, and it was all a set up to see if Manning was really a crooked cop, or undercover. I don't remember if I mentioned that before. I see what you mean about Wray's computer and phone records being subpoenaed. I will have to think of something for that.

I was told that a judge can choose not to grant bail, if they believe that the witness will skip the trial likely. I can check it again to see if I was fed wrong information.

As for Suru suggesting that the rapists be sympathized with, just because he says that, does not mean that the movie itself is asking the audience to sympathize. What can I do to make clear to the audience that just because a character does something wrong, it is not supported and glorified by the writer?

However, I have shown the script to other people who have read further, and they very different opinions. Some are similar to yours, but others say they felt it made sense, and it holds together no less than any typical thriller story. They said they bought it. Others say they believe their to be holes but they point out different ones, and tell me to go in a different direction. So I am very confused about what to do next to try to make it better. Every reader tells me something different.
 
Last edited:
Ultimately you will have to decide for yourself which way you want this screenplay to go. I don't know your plans with this particular screenplay but there has to be a point where you say "I am happy with what I have." and then either take the next step with it or move on to another screenplay while you take your next step, whatever that may be.
 
Well I plan to use money to make it into a feature. However, I want people to understand it as well. It seems that out of everyone I show it to, about every 2 out of 5 like it. Some have said that even though not everything is explained, like a character could have done this or one could have done that, every thriller is like that he says, and you will find one story in the history of fiction that is not.

But then there are others that say everything that could have possibly been done but is not has to be explained as to why and every option must be explored as to what it's not taken.

So because of two very different philosophies of advice, I am not sure which one is correct, or maybe they both are, and it's a matter on one type of audience liking it over the other?

One person who read it told me that there is no way to tell if an audience is going to like a movie until after it is mad, and that in the writing stage, you will always get varying opinions, but there will never be a general consensus. So I really do not know what to do with it at this point.
 
They say that a movie gets made three times - screenplay, filming, and finally editing. So, you will definitely find things change from one part of the overall process to the next. Maybe what you could do is organise a table read with anyone who would be willing to speak as your characters, and record the session then play it back later to find out how it all flows and sounds in it's entirety. At least you will have something you can use to compare when writing another draft, to make improvements, add things or take things away.
 
Tyler does call for back up. Sorry I forgot to mention. The gang has a police radio scanner, and that's when Manning gets the idea to get back and pose as back up, in order to see what is going on, and be on the other side of the situation. Tyler tells him to stay with Sheila so he can go after the gang. Basically he stays behind with her, because Tyler tells him to then takes off running. So he stays there to watch her to make it all look legit. Wray and the others just end up splitting up in the escape.

Manning cannot confess to Tyler about being undercover, because it creates a huge plot hole. Tyler will write that in his report, then his superiors will find out if Manning is actually undercover, and then find out he is lying. This will draw much more suspicion onto Manning so isn't it logical that he just says he got the call on the radio, and responded?
Knowing what we do later--that this is basically a porno shoot to test Manning--it doesn't make sense that they would scurry to bleach everything or panic. It's still not clear why, without a search warrant, Tyler wouldn't just leave. She received immunity for the events in Wray's house, not what she did to Tyler. That's a new charge. Manning could expose Henderson and the others. I think the beginning is just very weak and hard to believe. Sorry this is story is a sieve, not much of it holds water.

As for Suru suggesting that the rapists be sympathized with, just because he says that, does not mean that the movie itself is asking the audience to sympathize. What can I do to make clear to the audience that just because a character does something wrong, it is not supported and glorified by the writer?
The whole film feels rather poorly thought out. Sheila is raped. Tyler is raped. Proper procedures aren't followed. The rape is justified in the perpetrators' minds because they feel undesirable to women or men. Pulling in Exley and his group as advocates to sympathize with the rapists? Your story ends trying to drum up sympathy for "involuntary celibacy". That's the message of the film, WHY the actions happen--rape is justifiable. As a writer, you constantly are projecting your personal ideas (conscious and subconscious) onto the media. That message will be associated with you. The idea came from somewhere. If you don't want the audience to think that of you, don't write it.

With Manning's change of heart he could have gone to the police and ended it. For his testimony, the DA probably would have given him immunity. Identifying Henderson would have led to a complete resolution. Unbelievable actions, unbelievable circumstances, unbelievable characters and unbelievable choices.
However, I have shown the script to other people who have read further, and they very different opinions. Some are similar to yours, but others say they felt it made sense, and it holds together no less than any typical thriller story. They said they bought it. Others say they believe their to be holes but they point out different ones, and tell me to go in a different direction. So I am very confused about what to do next to try to make it better. Every reader tells me something different.
I understand where you tried to go. You have some interesting elements but they are awkward and don't hang together well. To be accurate and fair, I read all the way through. However, after segment 9, the whole thing sinks like the Titanic, in my opinion. It comes across as rather lame porno for people with low self esteem. For those who 'bought it', how much are they willing to pay for the DVD or to view it streaming?

I'm not sure why male rapists who feel rejected by women want to stand around as a woman rapes a man. They later chastise her for enjoying it. When Tyler's girlfriend returns, that has bad things written all over it. She just walks away in huff not noticing the handcuffs or ropes on his feet. Or all the cars from the other rapists in front of the house. It's so bad, I can't even see an adult video distributor wanting this film. It's bad dumb porn. I can't ever see this film recouping the money put into making it.

As Sweetie and PSW have stated, at some point you need to make the decision to move forward or put it aside and work on something else. Your opinion is really the critical one, the one that counts in the end. A reader who is honest with you about its potential will say scrap it. It needs a massive overhaul. A reader who just wants to see you spin your wheels and waste money will encourage you in this endeavor to keep tweaking it.

The story concept is irreparably flawed in my opinion. The message will offend the audiences--"If you can't get a date boys and girls, it's okay to rape." It just screams bad taste and bad choices. The characters read as unbelievable and flat. The story is convoluted and not terribly engaging. It's more like a half-baked sexual fantasy that makes sense when masturbating but not when put into the real world with attempts to justify it.

No further iterations can improve it. If you truly believe in this story idea then stop. It's time to run with it. It doesn't matter how many times you put shit through a blender; it's still shit. Sorry to be direct.If you don't 100% believe in this story idea, then it's time to abandon it--tossing roses into whirring shit won't make it smell any better. You've taken this as far as your ability has allowed. You could turn it over to one of your 'positive readers' and give them free rein to re-write it. Then, at least, they can share part of the blame.

Remember to clean out the blender. Actually just pitch it and buy a new one. Remember to thoroughly bleach where it was sitting. Good luck.
 
As FSF says, your premise is flawed, and because of that everything else collapses by association. You would be wise to start again from scratch. That said, I think there are two redeemable ideas in your story:

1) The idea of socially excluded people ganging together to cause havoc - not raping people because of some weird understanding of the purpose of rape, but actually causing havoc in some relevant way. It's not completely original, but you could do some interesting things with it, and have a cop who is determined to stop them, and keep the audience's sympathy wavering between the cop and the gang.

2) The idea of victims ganging together to support the cop's vigilante efforts. Not suddenly becoming firearms trained and cold-blooded killers, but using whatever resources they have available to them (knowledge, skills, money etc).

Beyond that, I don't think there's a whole lot to salvage.
 
Okay thanks. I will think about what I want to do with it. Run with it or not... However, one thing I want to make clear, the story is not suppose to sympathize with the villains. The message is not suppose to be 'it's okay'. Even though other characters in the story sympathize with the villains, that does not mean it's the message. But there are lot of stories, where more than one villain will agree on the same philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the message is, is that the audience is suppose to.

I thought that by the outcome of the story, the message was suppose to be against what the antagonists are supporting. But I will try to make that more clear in the next rewrite if I continue.
 
H44, you have to remember: NONE OF US HAVE READ YOUR SCRIPT. We can only go on the descriptions you have posted up here. So none of us have any idea if your script encourages sympathy or antipathy or apathy to your villains.

Based on what you have posted, we can get an idea, but we're only guessing.
 
But if it's a flawed premise to begin, then a whole script is not going to make a difference.

There are very few flawed premises. Only flawed executions. Unfortunately, your other worldly logic has killed your script.

You could have saved yourself months of heartache.... If only you listened. You may find yourself better suited to writing porn. They don't care if plots make no sense.

To everyone else:
z6mW0qxW8w30aDon-LT1sL4aBH38kOBrvOrVjK89TBQ=w720-h515-no


/please continue with the popcorn fest
 
A couple comments/points:

------------
The raping of a woman as an "initiation" into a gang seems over the top and VERY unrealistic, especially once the initiate is unable to perform everything seems to be ok

The reason for the gang perpetrating these crimes is over the top/absurd. There are plenty of people who are unable to get women that do not rape people. Also, how did this gang get together and meet? One of them accidentally blurts out that he is a rapist and the other says, "Hey, me too! We should go rape people together!"?

Why is Manning in the meeting with other, regular officers? Is his undercover assignment over? It seems foolish for him to be in a meeting with regular officers/detectives while still undercover.

What was the court date for Sheila about that she missed? On what grounds did Tyler get the warrant? How did the warrant specify the pool hall as a place for her to be arrested?

A police officer CANNOT issue contempt of court charges, only a Judge can do that and that is only allowed for things that occur inside his/her courtroom/chambers

Safe house? Like the US federal witness protection?

Wray's attorney CANNOT ask a potential witness questions ESPECIALLY when that person is not in a deposition or an attorney is not present for that potential witness. How does Tyler know that Sheila is a material witness? And what is she a material witness to?

So, Kimble and Tyler come across Sheila as co-working cops but then when they see her Kimble does a complete 180 and starts to attack Tyler so he can play off being a gang member? Seems kinda absurd.

Cops CANNOT delay a trial. Only attorneys, through a written motion and a Judge may not accept it due to his calendar

What kind of a trial is this? How much time has passed? Trials of important magnitude, in the US, do not happen immediately. Usually it takes a couple years for a case to be brought to trial

You make this "trial" sound like a motion hearing. The whole thing of Tyler not identifying himself as a cop would be an issue for a hearing through a motion to suppress and WOULD NOTt be brought up in a trial at all

I don't understand that "probable cause cannot be used as a defense..."

Again, cops DO NOT have any bearing on trial procedures, only attorneys do. While shows like Law and Order portray that they do, that is the long running suspension of disbelief of the show

Why is Sheila claiming the 5th Amendment? I thought that this was taking place in Canada? The 5th is a part of US jurisprudence, not Canadian jurisprudence.

Cops do not sit at attorney tables.

Witnesses CANNOT produce evidence

Sheila CANNOT claim immunity on the rape of Tyler as that has NOTHING to do with this hearing/trial (what is this hearing/trial about anyway?)

WHY WAS SHEILA CHARGED? Wasn't she initially a victim in the cops eyes???

Tyler screaming that she is a rapist in front of tv cameras sounds petulant

I don't think that you understand the concept of "blood out" when it comes to gangs
------------

Sorry, but I stopped at the start of the 15th sequence. As other say above this is a hard one to digest. It has a lot of lapses in logic and asks the audience to suspend a TON of disbelief in order to make it through this film. Also, it is kinda hard to get through due to the seemingly carefree attitude of the characters when its comes to rape. FSF is correct in that the message that will be perceived is "If you can't get a date boys and girls, it's okay to rape," the way it currently is because there are too many instances where that crime is seemingly shrugged off or that a character comes out to defend the nonsensical "mission statement" of the gang.
 
Last edited:
You should submit to the WideScreen Film & Music Video Festival through Film Freeway.

WSF accepts indie films and screenplays, submissions begin June 1, 2015. Submit for your chance to win recognition and a coveted WSF award.
 
Back
Top