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

critique Anomalies - First 7 pages of feature film idea - would appreciate feedback.

So I've decided to try and write a feature film (1 hr 30 mins) and I'd appreciate feedback on what I have written so far.
LOGLINE:
A cautious librarian and his best friend are forced to work with the Resistance, after being involved in a car chase lead by their charismatic leader, a loud and proud freedom fighter who's grand goal is to put an end to the tyrannical regime of the tyrannous government who want to capture Anomalies - superpowered individuals blessed (or cursed) with the ability to control a mysterious energy called Ambrosia.

Link to script: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wPp5Rb6O3yI8_QyrJrUNqWyXqn1fYHCM/view?usp=sharing

Would appreciate advice on the following:
Action lines - are they clear and concise - am I getting to the point quick enough?
How can I make my character's voices more distinctive?
Character descriptions - not the strongest and pretty functory - how can i address this?
Any other advice would be greatly appreciated.
I know its early days but I'm hoping that I've successfully established who the main character is and successfully explained the sci fi element of things e.g. that people received powers from an asteroid from out of space and that the main theme is clear from the offset?
 
Well I attempted to read your pages but you got me at the wrong time... I'll have to be in a completely different mood to read them all the way through.

You wrote:

INT. CLAPHAM LIBRARY - AFTERNOON

RICHARD (20s) strides quickly, head down, avoiding the
confused eyes of his audience: a CROWD OF TEENAGERS sat at
their desks.

MR VALEN (40s) is stood with his arms crossed.

Stood on either side of the entrance are two GUARDS, one
stocky, the other more slim, both clad in grey armour.

Attached to their sides are hostlers for their pistols and
across their backs are STUN BATONS.

He stands behind the lectern and looks down at his notes.
The library is silent.

If this is truly going to be a feature film spec? Then Richard's intro needs work. You don't tell us anything about him. Give us just a HINT at who he is and what he's made of. All you say is that he's in his 20s. Unless of course he's a super minor character but if that is true... Why open with a super minor character?

Richard strides quickly. You don't need to add "quickly" to your action sentence. A stride is a long step, right?

stride: To walk with long steps on, along, or over: striding the stage.

Isn't "strides" enough to tell us he's walking quickly? I think so.

Then you write: sat at their desks.

That just plain sounds clunky to me personally... I think it could be easily written with more clarity.

Then you write: MR VALEN (40s) is stood with his arms crossed.

"is stood?" That sounds even more clunky. Then, you use the word STOOD again almost immediately in the next action sentence which, when read aloud (did you do that yourself?) sounds clunky again.

Then of course you wrote "hostlers" instead of "holsters." I'm a professional screenwriter. You say you're writing a 90 minute spec screenplay. You want us to read your pages but they are difficult to read and quite honestly, do not compel me to keep reading because I am sure I am going to run into even more clunkiness that slows MY reading way, way down.

I think you have a lot of overwriting here. That tiny bit of material I copied and pasted could be a heck of a lot shorter and carry even more impact. If you keep writing this way? You may end up with 90 pages of overwriting that once whittled down, may not actually be enough for an entire story/feature film.

The last part of this copy and paste, you wrote: He stands behind the lectern and looks down at his notes.

Is "looks" the best you can do for that particular action verb? Always pick the PERFECT action verb for the actual action. "looks" is weak. Hell, even "glances" (off the top of my head) would be better than "looks."

Last but not least? Passive voice. You've got a lot of it. Passive voice just has an overall weak feel to it. It's fine if that's how you THINK when you're writing all this. Get it out any way you can get it on the page but then? Especially if you want us to read this? It's up to you to go back and reread everything... I would even recommend reading it aloud. Then FIX all the problems before asking us to read what you have.

I get it... You write something and you get excited and you want some immediate feedback. Been there -- done that but even so? I knew before I'd have anyone really take a close hard look at what I'd written, I wanted to make it the very best it could be BEFORE anyone actually read it.

Does that make sense? I hope so.

So... Off the top of my head? Here's the way I'd see the above copied and pasted excerpt rewritten for clarity.

INT. CLAPHAM LIBRARY - DAY

RICHARD (27) strides across the room. Meek and unnassertive, he
avoids eye contact with a crowd of teenagers sitting at their desks.

MR VALEN (47) stands -- arms crossed.

TWO armored GUARDS stand on both sides of the entrance. One
short and stocky, the other tall and thin.

Richard stands behind the lectern -- glances at his notes.

Now right off the bat? You may not like what I wrote here... And? That's fine. Based on what you wrote and the way you've written it? I'm having a difficult time creating my own movie in my head because what you have there is confusing.

Who the hell is Richard?
Who the hell is Mr. Valen?

All I can figure out so far from reading just that tiny bit of material I pasted is that there are two armed guards and a crowd of sitting teenagers. Is Richard a teacher? Is Mr. Valen a teacher? If not? Who are they and why do we not know who they are right off the bat? I would have written in my version who they are but I really couldn't tell from your pages who they were. You even mention another teacher in your pages:

You wrote:

TEACHER
You heard the guard! Line up!

Who the hell is that character? I didn't see his or her intro. And? I had to go back into your script -- and to be honest? I didn't want to but for the sake of your post, I did. I scanned further down and never did see who Richard or Mr. Valen are. We need to know that information so we can CONNECT THE DOTS OF YOUR STORY so it makes sense to us.

Does that make sense?

The reason I left out describing that the armored guards have EMPTY HOLSTERS FOR THEIR PISTOLS and STUN BATONS is because I believe just saying they are armored guards is more than enough... Then, if they happen to pull their stun batons, we'll just accept that as a reader because we already know they are armored guards.

However... If, for some reason, them having stun batons is crucial to this scene -- I have no idea if they are -- then you could easily describe them both holding their batons at the entrance. One of them could even be thumping their baton in one hand as if to dare anyone to create an outburst.

I also noticed when I scanned the rest of the script, that you have a montage... I think it's way too early for a montage to be entered into the story at this point. Just my humble opinion. You may want to explore using a SERIES OF SHOTS instead.

Don't take any of this personally... None of this is meant in a bad way. I personally think whatever way is the easiest way for YOU or ANYONE to get their story out of their heads and onto the pages is the best way. Unfortunately, the clunkier that WAY is? The more clean up you have to perform afterward... Especially when you're asking professionals to take a look and tell you what they think.

What I can tell you is this... Based on how you've written it thus far? I know of no professional reader that would have gone past the first page. They would have read the first page and promptly put your script into the dreaded shred pile. I know that SEEMS harsh right now but understand, I'm only telling you what I see.

What works for me specifically when it comes to characters is THEME. What I mean by that is that I give every character their very own theme. Some might call it an adjective. Like Richard. I might give him the theme of UNNASSERTIVE. Why? Because when I do that? It's quite easy for me to go back to all of that character's dialogue and now... Rethink it but within the context of being UNNASSERTIVE. If you were to apply that theme or adjective to Richard, how would all of his dialogue change?

Think about it. That way I don't have to waste my time with biographies and or all that other stuff gurus tell you that you need in order to create three dimensional characters.

What I would now recommend is for you to rewrite what you have... Take your time. Go for clarity. Use the very best action verb for the action. Cut the overwriting. Let us readers CONNECT THE DOTS instead of overwriting. We're smart. We'll get it.

Good luck!
 
Last edited:
Here's my contribution. You can have these for your pitch doc if you think they might be useful.

00234-683567244.png
00241-1820462983.png
00238-1820462980.png
00196-3965715815.png


00213-3619757047.png
 
Well I attempted to read your pages but you got me at the wrong time... I'll have to be in a completely different mood to read them all the way through.

You wrote:

INT. CLAPHAM LIBRARY - AFTERNOON

RICHARD (20s) strides quickly, head down, avoiding the
confused eyes of his audience: a CROWD OF TEENAGERS sat at
their desks.

MR VALEN (40s) is stood with his arms crossed.

Stood on either side of the entrance are two GUARDS, one
stocky, the other more slim, both clad in grey armour.

Attached to their sides are hostlers for their pistols and
across their backs are STUN BATONS.

He stands behind the lectern and looks down at his notes.
The library is silent.

If this is truly going to be a feature film spec? Then Richard's intro needs work. You don't tell us anything about him. Give us just a HINT at who he is and what he's made of. All you say is that he's in his 20s. Unless of course he's a super minor character but if that is true... Why open with a super minor character?

Richard strides quickly. You don't need to add "quickly" to your action sentence. A stride is a long step, right?

stride: To walk with long steps on, along, or over: striding the stage.

Isn't "strides" enough to tell us he's walking quickly? I think so.

Then you write: sat at their desks.

That just plain sounds clunky to me personally... I think it could be easily written with more clarity.

Then you write: MR VALEN (40s) is stood with his arms crossed.

"is stood?" That sounds even more clunky. Then, you use the word STOOD again almost immediately in the next action sentence which, when read aloud (did you do that yourself?) sounds clunky again.

Then of course you wrote "hostlers" instead of "holsters." I'm a professional screenwriter. You say you're writing a 90 minute spec screenplay. You want us to read your pages but they are difficult to read and quite honestly, do not compel me to keep reading because I am sure I am going to run into even more clunkiness that slows MY reading way, way down.

I think you have a lot of overwriting here. That tiny bit of material I copied and pasted could be a heck of a lot shorter and carry even more impact. If you keep writing this way? You may end up with 90 pages of overwriting that once whittled down, may not actually be enough for an entire story/feature film.

The last part of this copy and paste, you wrote: He stands behind the lectern and looks down at his notes.

Is "looks" the best you can do for that particular action verb? Always pick the PERFECT action verb for the actual action. "looks" is weak. Hell, even "glances" (off the top of my head) would be better than "looks."

Last but not least? Passive voice. You've got a lot of it. Passive voice just has an overall weak feel to it. It's fine if that's how you THINK when you're writing all this. Get it out any way you can get it on the page but then? Especially if you want us to read this? It's up to you to go back and reread everything... I would even recommend reading it aloud. Then FIX all the problems before asking us to read what you have.

I get it... You write something and you get excited and you want some immediate feedback. Been there -- done that but even so? I knew before I'd have anyone really take a close hard look at what I'd written, I wanted to make it the very best it could be BEFORE anyone actually read it.

Does that make sense? I hope so.

So... Off the top of my head? Here's the way I'd see the above copied and pasted excerpt rewritten for clarity.

INT. CLAPHAM LIBRARY - DAY

RICHARD (27) strides across the room. Meek and unnassertive, he
avoids eye contact with a crowd of teenagers sitting at their desks.

MR VALEN (47) stands -- arms crossed.

TWO armored GUARDS stand on both sides of the entrance. One
short and stocky, the other tall and thin.

Richard stands behind the lectern -- glances at his notes.

Now right off the bat? You may not like what I wrote here... And? That's fine. Based on what you wrote and the way you've written it? I'm having a difficult time creating my own movie in my head because what you have there is confusing.

Who the hell is Richard?
Who the hell is Mr. Valen?

All I can figure out so far from reading just that tiny bit of material I pasted is that there are two armed guards and a crowd of sitting teenagers. Is Richard a teacher? Is Mr. Valen a teacher? If not? Who are they and why do we not know who they are right off the bat? I would have written in my version who they are but I really couldn't tell from your pages who they were. You even mention another teacher in your pages:

You wrote:

TEACHER
You heard the guard! Line up!

Who the hell is that character? I didn't see his or her intro. And? I had to go back into your script -- and to be honest? I didn't want to but for the sake of your post, I did. I scanned further down and never did see who Richard or Mr. Valen are. We need to know that information so we can CONNECT THE DOTS OF YOUR STORY so it makes sense to us.

Does that make sense?

The reason I left out describing that the armored guards have EMPTY HOLSTERS FOR THEIR PISTOLS and STUN BATONS is because I believe just saying they are armored guards is more than enough... Then, if they happen to pull their stun batons, we'll just accept that as a reader because we already know they are armored guards.

However... If, for some reason, them having stun batons is crucial to this scene -- I have no idea if they are -- then you could easily describe them both holding their batons at the entrance. One of them could even be thumping their baton in one hand as if to dare anyone to create an outburst.

I also noticed when I scanned the rest of the script, that you have a montage... I think it's way too early for a montage to be entered into the story at this point. Just my humble opinion. You may want to explore using a SERIES OF SHOTS instead.

Don't take any of this personally... None of this is meant in a bad way. I personally think whatever way is the easiest way for YOU or ANYONE to get their story out of their heads and onto the pages is the best way. Unfortunately, the clunkier that WAY is? The more clean up you have to perform afterward... Especially when you're asking professionals to take a look and tell you what they think.

What I can tell you is this... Based on how you've written it thus far? I know of no professional reader that would have gone past the first page. They would have read the first page and promptly put your script into the dreaded shred pile. I know that SEEMS harsh right now but understand, I'm only telling you what I see.

What works for me specifically when it comes to characters is THEME. What I mean by that is that I give every character their very own theme. Some might call it an adjective. Like Richard. I might give him the theme of UNNASSERTIVE. Why? Because when I do that? It's quite easy for me to go back to all of that character's dialogue and now... Rethink it but within the context of being UNNASSERTIVE. If you were to apply that theme or adjective to Richard, how would all of his dialogue change?

Think about it. That way I don't have to waste my time with biographies and or all that other stuff gurus tell you that you need in order to create three dimensional characters.

What I would now recommend is for you to rewrite what you have... Take your time. Go for clarity. Use the very best action verb for the action. Cut the overwriting. Let us readers CONNECT THE DOTS instead of overwriting. We're smart. We'll get it.

Good luck!
Thank you for the feedback - I'm going to go back to the drawing board of my outline and rethink my main theme - I wanted to ask - what would the proper formatting be for a series of shots and how is that different to a montage?

When referring to adjectives when describing characters is there a limit to how many I should use as I would like to avoid the risk of overwriting?

Also, regarding character voice - how can I make this distinguishable - I know often times when we talk in real life our grammar is off etc but I also know that dialogue in a script can't mimic this as each character might represent a theme? Would the solution be subtext?

Regarding passive voice, how can I address this in my writing? Is it a matter of using present tense more often or am I missing the trick here?
 
Thank you for the feedback - I'm going to go back to the drawing board of my outline and rethink my main theme - I wanted to ask - what would the proper formatting be for a series of shots and how is that different to a montage?

When referring to adjectives when describing characters is there a limit to how many I should use as I would like to avoid the risk of overwriting?

Also, regarding character voice - how can I make this distinguishable - I know often times when we talk in real life our grammar is off etc but I also know that dialogue in a script can't mimic this as each character might represent a theme? Would the solution be subtext?

Regarding passive voice, how can I address this in my writing? Is it a matter of using present tense more often or am I missing the trick here?
A montage is used to convey a theme... i.e., all your shots in the montage contribute to and reinforce the same idea or mini-story. Think ROCKY and his training montages.

A series of shots is usually used to speed up the time within a series of events rather than tell a complete story.

As for the formatting of a series of shots... LOL. You can Google that you know but it's probably a good thing you asked since you didn't format your montage correctly anyway.

There is no hard and fast rule about most screenwriting elements. The trick is to be CLEAR and CONCISE so what you've formatted doesn't slow down the read and is CLEARLY UNDERSTANDABLE.

One way to format a series of shots...

SERIES OF SHOTS - ARMORED GUARDS SCAN TEENAGERS

A) Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
B) Tall Thin Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
C) Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.

I've also seen LETTERS used without the closing parenthetical and substituting a period in its place.
SERIES OF SHOTS - ARMORED GUARDS SCAN TEENAGERS

A. Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
B. Tall Thin Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
C. Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.

I've seen numbers used instead of letters in both ways I've described. I've seen a complete master scene heading used with SERIES OF SHOTS also used right next to it like this...

INT. CLAPHAM LIBRARY - SERIES OF SHOTS - DAY

1) Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
2) Tall Thin Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
3) Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.

I've seen single dash marks used instead of both letters or numbers like this...

SERIES OF SHOTS - ARMORED GUARDS SCAN TEENAGERS

- Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
- Tall Thin Guard scans a teenager -- green light.
- Short Stocky Guard scans a teenager -- green light.

I could actually go on but I don't want to... I think you should get the idea from what I've written.

Let me be clear as to the number of adjectives (theme) you should give your characters. I did NOT say to use these when describing characters but yes... When you INTRO a character, I would very likely use an adjective or two to add to the intro and then pick the BEST one of the two as context to write the character's dialogue. This does something very subconsciously to your Reader(s) i.e., it sets up the personality of your character and the dialogue REINFORCES the personality of the character.

Make sense? Something you won't get in a screenwriting article or book. But again? This is just HOW I DO IT and not THE way to do it.

Assuming you want to use this particular technique... I've personally found that using only one adjective is best for me personally (to write dialogue) because writing within the context of that theme gives my character a very clear and distinct voice when used consistently throughout the script. I would never use more than two but as I said... One is usually enough in most cases.

And? None of what I just wrote about using a theme should be confused with overwriting... LOL. Again, I never said that this technique would lead to overwriting... In fact? Your overwriting had NOTHING to do with that at all.

You wrote:

Also, regarding character voice - how can I make this distinguishable - I know often times when we talk in real life our grammar is off etc but I also know that dialogue in a script can't mimic this as each character might represent a theme? Would the solution be subtext?

First off? You should, as a general rule... Always go for subtext with all your character's dialogue except maybe with small children, law enforcement and authoritative characters depending on the scene. They tend to speak more on-the-nose but yet again... This is NOT a hard and fast rule. Just something to be aware of.

As I've already said... If you give your characters their own theme -- a theme that sets them apart from other characters, and then write their dialogue WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT THEME, your characters will be distinguishable from one another.

You wrote:

Regarding passive voice, how can I address this in my writing? Is it a matter of using present tense more often or am I missing the trick here?

It's actually very EASY to address it in your writing... LOL. DON'T USE IT. How easy was that? There is not nearly enough space here for me to give you all my thoughts on passive vs. active voice when it comes to writing but it is an actual THING to be aware of in both writing screenplays and fiction especially when it comes to OVERWRITING.

Here's a few links to get you started... I highly recommend you research everything I've talked about here instead of just winging it especially if your idea is to eventually sell your screenplay(s). Research it until you fully understand it and have no need to ask any more questions about it.

Active vs. Passive Voice

Active Versus Passive Voice

Use the active voice

GRAMMAR AND MECHANICS Active and Passive Voice

Active and Passive Voice
 
Last edited:
Back
Top