Home Your Ad Here

Go Back   IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum > Making The Film > Screenwriting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-25-2016, 03:44 PM   #16
alex ma whitmer
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: mex
Posts: 62
Watch the film Erin Brockovich, and how opposing sides handle the tug of war over what evidence can or will be used, and how it's gathered.

Then compare it to the script ...

http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/e..._shooting.html


It is not that uncommon for a surprise witness to be introduced. The opposing side will object, the judge will call them to the bench, and maybe to his or her chambers to discuss the ramifications of possible new evidence and testimony. The judge may call a recess to allow the opposing side to interview this surprise witness.


a

Last edited by alex ma whitmer; 11-25-2016 at 04:04 PM.
alex ma whitmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today   #1A
film guy
Basic Member
 
Posts: 17

 
Old 11-25-2016, 04:08 PM   #17
harmonica44
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 6,498
Okay thanks. I am still not sure where to draw the line on what audiences will accept or not. For example in my story, a video is recovered of a villains committing murder on the video and the villains are worried that their faces will be identified and the video will be used as evidence, and in the end, they are arrested on this evidence.

But I was told by readers that this is legally inaccurate and that video evidence is not allowed in court, if the source of who made the video is not identified, such as in my story.

However, other movies do this all the time. In the TV show 24, season 5, the villain is worried about an audio recording of him confessing to a murder and acts of terrorism, will get him charged with the crimes. But the person who made the audio recording is dead, and therefore it cannot be used in court.

In the movie The Departed, it's the same thing. A character is worried about an audio recording incriminating him, but the person who made the recording is dead, hence the evidence cannot be admissible in court.

In Enemy of the State, it's a video recording but it's the same thing.
In the movie, a political figure character (Jon Voight), is captured on video accidentally murdering a congressman. He spends the whole movie trying to get the video back, after it is planted on Will Smith's character.

However, video evidence is not admissible in court unless the source who made the video can corroborate it. In Enemy of the State, the source is killed. So even though there is a video floating around there, that can be turned in, since the source who made it is killed, the villain has nothing to worry about and would legally be indicted.

Will Smith's character is also a prosecutor, so he would know this, and come to that conclusion, wouldn't he?

So why did the villain spend all that time trying to get the video, even putting a gun to Gene Hackman's head, when legally he had nothing to worry about?

So if audiences cannot accept it in those movies, then why are readers saying it's not plausible in my script for me to do the same thing, cause it's not legally accurate. I don't understand where the line is drawn.
harmonica44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2016, 04:58 PM   #18
mlesemann
IndieTalk Moderator
 
mlesemann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lakewood, NJ
Posts: 1,359
The answer is simple (and not simple): you need a good writer, good director, and good actors to "sell" it to your audience. The answer is neither more nor less than that.
mlesemann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2016, 05:04 PM   #19
harmonica44
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 6,498
Okay thanks, that makes sense. But when the script is on the page and the actors and director haven't been chosen yet, how can I sell it on paper, beforehand, since they are not being sucked into a visual movie yet?

Last edited by harmonica44; 11-25-2016 at 05:22 PM.
harmonica44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2016, 05:44 PM   #20
alex ma whitmer
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: mex
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by harmonica44 View Post
In Enemy of the State, it's a video recording but it's the same thing.
In the movie, a political figure character (Jon Voight), is captured on video accidentally murdering a congressman. He spends the whole movie trying to get the video back, after it is planted on Will Smith's character.

However, video evidence is not admissible in court unless the source who made the video can corroborate it. In Enemy of the State, the source is killed. So even though there is a video floating around there, that can be turned in, since the source who made it is killed, the villain has nothing to worry about and would legally be indicted.

Will Smith's character is also a prosecutor, so he would know this, and come to that conclusion, wouldn't he?

So why did the villain spend all that time trying to get the video, even putting a gun to Gene Hackman's head, when legally he had nothing to worry about?
There was more to it than that.

Also, the way I understand the rule, is that the 'sourceŽ must be authenticated. The source could be the camera in which the video was made. It could have markers on it that only that place uses, such as its method of dates and time, initials, and it could also be proven by other landmarks that the video could not have come from any other place or camera.

The defence then must prove - or at least create reasonable doubt - that the video could have been faked. This will likely turn 'motivation' in a new direction (plot point).

a

Last edited by alex ma whitmer; 11-25-2016 at 06:08 PM.
alex ma whitmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2016, 02:40 AM   #21
harmonica44
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 6,498
Okay thanks. I got differing opinions on it. Some say it will make into court with the prosecution having to prove authenticity, and others say that it would be rejected long before it even made it to trial, on the basis of not having an actual person source to corroborate it.

What if in my script the video of the crime was shot with a long range zoom lens, so at some point, the killer's face is zoomed in close and looks just like him to everyone, and they can prove that it's not special effects at all?
harmonica44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2016, 03:05 AM   #22
film_autre
Basic Member
 
film_autre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: London
Posts: 312
H44 video tape leaked of when he was younger, the girl seemingly represents the indietalk community
film_autre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 12:45 PM   #23
gorillaonabike
Basic Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by film_autre View Post
H44 video tape leaked of when he was younger, the girl seemingly represents the indietalk community
gorillaonabike is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2016, 04:37 AM   #24
harmonica44
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 6,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex ma whitmer View Post
There was more to it than that.

Also, the way I understand the rule, is that the 'sourceŽ must be authenticated. The source could be the camera in which the video was made. It could have markers on it that only that place uses, such as its method of dates and time, initials, and it could also be proven by other landmarks that the video could not have come from any other place or camera.

The defence then must prove - or at least create reasonable doubt - that the video could have been faked. This will likely turn 'motivation' in a new direction (plot point).

a
Okay thanks. Do you think I could just write it like how Enemy of the State and 24 did and have video evidence that is admissible without authentication? I mean they did it in Enemy of the State and 24, so if the audience is willing to suspend legal disbelief in those cases, could I get away with it as well?
harmonica44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


©IndieTalk