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

[harmonica44]

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!

 

[Sweetie]

Most of the time, they say they are not sure

Who exactly are you asking for feedback? Non-writers? General Joe on the street? Actors?

 

[harmonica44]

Yes outside of this forum, it's non-writers.

 

[Sweetie]

Do you go to your mechanic for medical advise?

 

[harmonica44]

I know what you mean. I will look again for more writers.

 

[FantasySciFi]

The thing, is that if he is with his friend in reality, and then the gang they happen to have a grudge against, happen to be committing a crime near by, it just feels too much like a convenient coincidence, as oppose to the cops using their skills to find them. As long as the audience does not see it that way, and it works.

It doesn't matter. If the cop drags his friend there due to a suspicion though his friend doesn't know, does it matter? How would the audience know? A big problem is you worry about the audience. You need to worry about the story first. If you write a believable story, the audience will follow and accept it. All stories have 'coincidences'. They are necessary to quickly move along plot. It's true for books, tv, plays, films, comic books, etc. If it is natural and obeys the laws of your story universe, the audience will suspend disbelief to follow along. Cartoons aren't real but they engage us despite the rather absurd aspects. Stop worrying about the audience. Coincidence happens. Don't dwell on it and they won't.

You also said blood and the gun would be found at the crime scene if the cop forced the villains to leave a gun. But the villains would just clean up the crime scene and get rid of the blood, gun and body. I could write it so that the cops get there right away, but if I do, this makes the villains escape less plausible, because the have to get passed road blocks, police dogs, etc. But I will rethink it.

Just because the police are called doesn't mean they will arrive in less than 10 minutes. So many crimes involve the criminals getting away from the scene. I'd keep it simple. If this was a simple robbery, there would be no road blocks, reason to bring in police dogs, etc. Just have them haul ass from the scene. What I said, is rather than the absurdity of kidnapping them and having them spit and contaminate the scene to make them look guilty, simply acknowledge the truth, they are guilty. My other point, is there is already evidence--gunshots heard by neighbors/shop owners/etc., blood, bullet holes, etc. You don't need to introduce more complications. There's no need for DNA evidence when forensic analysis of the shells is sufficient. If they're stupid enough to hang around, then they deserve to be caught, tried and convicted.

I was curious as to what you said about breaking genre expectations by having the cop fall for the girl. Is that really so bad? In Casino Royale James Bond chose the girl in the end and decided to retire from his job as a result even. Did that work cause it was the spy genre, and not the detective genre?

You haven't determined a genre for this piece. It's all over the place. "The Departed", "Casino Royale", "Reservoir Dogs" and all the other films you mention work because they pick one genre and stay true to its plot and character devices. Now that doesn't mean you can't be creative, but that theme will shape the story from beginning to end. In the classic western, you expect the hero, villain and support cast to behave in certain ways. If instead of riding into the sunset, he dies and disappears in twinkling lights then you've seriously broken genre. Focus on the bigger picture. How did that turn out for Bond's gf? He may have chosen her, but it wasn't in the cards for that relationship to develop. The endgame, she dies.

I just think that there shouldn't be a golden rule that the cop must not fall for the girl UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, if that's what you mean.

I agree that a cop can fall for the girl. The point Truby and those who talk about genre make is that certain aspects define the feel. He can fall for her but he doesn't get to keep her. The "curse" of the detective is to be the lone seeker. Truby's point about the artificial choice. I'm not saying it can't or shouldn't be done, but it requires a solid understanding before trying it. The audience EXPECTS certain things to happen. If not done well, it can upset your audience.

Also you say that in movies with this kind of scenario, like The Departed, where the cop wants justice for his friend, the expectation is that the killer gets wacked at the end. I didn't really want to use the wacking ending cause I thought it was cliched. That's why I thought of blackmailing the DA, cause I have never seen that done in a movie before, so I thought it would be more original, rather than just simply go sneak off and kill the killers. I will rethink the story, but I do want him to do more than just simply kill the villain. The villain can die, I just want the plan to be more original and different.

No, what you asked is are there conditions when the cop's killer wouldn't be brought to trial. The only time that happens is if the killer is dead. There is a fine line between cliche and genre-specific expectations. You use blackmail to stop something that would normally happen. In this case the DA would naturally pursue the case. So the blackmail makes no sense. It's just not a good choice. They will be pursued naturally. Where you can be original is to show that, despite the evidence, they are innocent.

My friend who read it said that I should write it so that the cop who is killed should kill himself instead, being driven to suicide by the gang of crooks. This will compel the main cop to want revenge, for the friend being driven to suicide, and no charges are brought, because it was a suicide. However, if someone is driven to suicide by a result of crimes committed by the gang before, wouldn't that still be considered 'felony murder' and charges can still be brought? I recall an episode of NYPD blue where a felonious crime was committed against a woman, and afterwords, she went into a severe depression and killed herself. The crooks where then charged with felony murder cause she 'died as a result of their crime', as they put it. So perhaps that idea will not work...

Again, I will repeat the most basic rule of screenwriting--"Keep it simple". Apples and oranges. You already said they committed a felony against her. Your friend is trying to help you dig out of your plot hole. While I know the stress on cops can lead to suicide, I think he would more likely pursue the gang members first. While it might work, I think the simpler, more direct approach is to start as a buddy cop approach that goes bad. Otherwise, you need to create something for the crooks to do which would make the other cop want to commit suicide instead of seeking revenge. It's far more believable to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

When you ask if I see as to how I can remain true to a detective/legal film, what is it do you mean exactly?

Referring back to your original premise, how can you start afresh? The cop was the main focus and the premise was "In pursuing 'mentally challenged men', the 'detective' becomes the victim (persecuted by society)." It would be interesting to use a Perry Mason approach where your DA brings the men to trial. But as it looks grim for them, new evidence arises that puts the focus back on the cop implicating him in his friend's death.

Do you think that maybe Truby's approach is not always the best, and I should just have my characters act naturally, as they go, and whatever ending happens as a result, happens...? That's a black and white way of looking at it, but perhaps I am being too grey area, which is what's leading to all the unnatural motives.

Yes. It's okay to work towards an end but you need them to act naturally to get there. If it doesn't quite end the way you planned, so what? A good story is not force-fit but a natural evolution.

Is there anything I can do to make people see the holes or character flaws in the treatment before hand, without having to write out several complete scripts, in order for others to know if it holds together or not?

In a nutshell, yes and no. The treatment should be very close to your script, so if it has plot flaws, they should jump out. Unfortunately character development relies in part on description, action and dialogue. Judging your characters requires a substantial part of the script to be completed.

Another thing is, is that it's often difficult to tell if a character is being unnatural or not, cause since I create the characters, I am free to make them as insane or unreasonable as I want. So I believe them based on how I created them to be that way. Because of this, it's hard to know where my limits are.

First, you are NOT free to make them behave any way. They need to be consistent in the behavior. That defines their personalities. So if they do something that they have not done or would not normally do, then don't write it. If your character does something unusual, it means something is wrong in their lives. A non-drinker drinks. A quiet person explodes. That emotional control is lost until it resets itself. Second, what would you do personally if in that situation? Writers often draw upon life experiences. Ian Fleming was an operative, so some of that life experience edges into James Bond's character. Other times, writers do thought experiments with their characters. If you had the ability to fly, how would use it? Third, base their speech and actions instead on yourself and people (or characters) you personally know. If your friend is a schoolteacher and one of your characters is a teacher, how would s/he react in that same situation? Keeping that grounding in specific known models will help constrain their behaviors to be more natural. It gives you the benefit of asking your friend. If your friend is a cop, you can ask, how would you respond in this situation? Now you have the answer. Don't cross examine, "Well, do you think you would ..?" You already have THE answer. Use it to move to the next scene. The fatal flaw of bad writers is they think "Yeah but I need this to happen, so I need X to do or say this." A good writer will stop and think "I know what X will do or say, so how can I change the scene or actions of other incidental characters to make that more likely to happen?" It's the background and not the character's actions/dialogue that needs to be changed.

I'll say it again--keep it simple and natural. Characters need to remain consistent except under duress. However, those are periods of growth in the character arc. To be believable base them on yourself or people you know. Know your genre, the expectations and respect them. Stay consistent and keep them clean in execution. Don't mix parts from different films from different genres. Scripts don't need to be fully original or have clever twists, they need to be well written, believable and engaging. When the story is forced rather than evolving naturally, it stops being believable. With too much suspension of belief, it loses engagement. At that point, the script and film fail to find an audience.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. I am retooling a lot of the story now. I think what I might do is, instead of having the cop die, I might have him live, and have the main cop want revenge for something else. It seems that killing off the other cop leads to too many complications, such as the justice system will always pursue it, cause it's a cop that was killed. Perhaps the main cop should get revenge for some of the villains' previous victims, that were not cops. Because that way it, it may not be pursued as much compared to a cop? I am not sure if that's the way to. I need to do a lot of legal research in order to still get to where I want with the premise.

Another thing, if the cop is avenging someone else, does the victim have to die? What if the villains did something else such as steal all the victims money or ruined their life in some other way? Does it have to be revenge for a death, for the revenge to be believable, that the main cop will go all the way with it?

 

[WalterB]

Well right now, since I have to wear a lot of the hats, being the writer is one of them, cause no one else is writing it. Until I can afford to purchase other scripts, I am stuck with practicing my writing, and getting better.
.................

Well, you have been given quite some ideas for free over the years to make something (really) short.
Because you need to make short things to:
- get experience
- have a portfolio
- become credible again
- get more confident about decisions you have to make
- get inspired by what you have made to explore more aspects or dive deeping into something
- build a team
- make all the mistakes in the short things, so you won't end up with an unfinished feature

 

[FantasySciFi]

Okay thanks. I am retooling a lot of the story now. ... I need to do a lot of legal research in order to still get to where I want with the premise.

No you don't. This isn't about the law. I still don't think you're clear what your actual story is. You have the ending in mind but keep trying to find a way to justify it. Though even that ending seems to be fairly fuzzy.

Who are your main characters? - Lead Cop, Partner Cop, DA, Lead Villain, Girlfriend, Police Commissioner, and possibly a few others.

What is the story about? - The Villain does something that riles the Lead Cop which provokes him to seek revenge. In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him put on admin leave by the Commish. In the interim, the Partner on assignment is killed/injured by the Villain, whom the Lead has been tracking. When something happens to others around him, the Lead realizes that Villain is after him as well. It becomes a battle of wills with many bystanders becoming collateral damage. In the end, the Lead kills the Villain but discovers that through his actions he's become a villain himself when confronted by his former Partner/Girlfriend. A life-or-death decision must be made.

At this point, the story is still believable and workable. It doesn't require elaborate ruses of contaminating bodies or blackmailing DAs to go to trial. None of that requires legal research. Keep it simple and it can be compelling and believable as long as the characters are true to their natures. No one is purely good or evil. The heart of your story is the transformations that occur.

How to develop it? After you've written your treatment, you develop each line sequentially. You already have the backbone, you just need to add flesh. You're not working backwards, the story elements are there. Just elaborate. Notice that the story has to follow the three act structure, though I often think in terms of "six acts".

Act 1 - Set Up (introduce the characters and situation)
The Villain does something that riles the Lead Cop which provokes him to seek revenge.

Act 2 - Introduce a New Situation and a Complication
In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him put on admin leave by the Commish.

Act 3 - Formulate a Plan of Action to Succeed (character throws self in headlong)
In the interim, the Partner on assignment is killed/injured by the Villain, whom the Lead has been tracking.

Act 4 - More Complications and Higher Stakes (usually a major setback)
When something happens to others around him, the Lead realizes that Villain is after him as well. It becomes a battle of wills with many bystanders becoming collateral damage.

Act 5 - Final Push to Succeed with it looking unlikely (suspenseful moment, climax)
In the end, the Lead kills the Villain but discovers that through his actions he's become a villain himself when confronted by his former Partner/Girlfriend.

Act 6 - Resolution and the Ever After
A life-or-death decision must be made.

Whatever the something is, it has to anger the Lead Cop. You're introducing your characters. This is a story of revenge and descent into darkness ("Anti-hero's journey"). Keep that in mind. That is the essence that drives the action. When you lay genre on it, certain elements are added or highlighted.

It's not about detectives, spies, or legal drama specifically. Those are simply window dressings to the actual plot elements. I'm not saying that genre doesn't impact plot but the essence of the story is one of revenge. Genre just adds spin to the story. This could easily be re-cast as

The Evil Duke does something that riles the Musketeer which provokes him to seek revenge. In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him discharged from the King's Guard by the Cardinal. In the interim, the Partner is killed/captured by the Duke's henchmen, whom the Musketeer has been tracking. ...
​

Or,

The Overlord's Governor does something that riles the Colony's Peacekeeper which provokes him to seek revenge. In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him relieved of duty by the Space Colony's Legal Emmisary. ...​

The role of protecting law and order carries with it certain attitudes and behaviors. Certainly there is a sense of right and wrong. The problem that your character must face in his "arc" is how that certainty begins to blur. When the black & white world begins to muddy into greys, it is reflected in the disintegration of their behavior.

Like I said, it's best not to re-tool a bad script. Yes, I'm sorry, from everything you've said, it's a bad script. Start from scratch. The story idea itself is good. However if you allow the trash you've created to continue to guide your development, all you will get is more trash. Throw it in the bin and move on. Start the project with a fresh perspective. Keep it simple. Keep true to your premise. Make the characters act believably. It is easiest to do that by developing your script sequentially from your treatment backbone. Things may change and that's okay but follow your outline/treatment.

I could give the above outline to a dozen students and get a dozen very different screenplays.

 

[maz]

No you don't. This isn't about the law. I still don't think you're clear what your actual story is. You have the ending in mind but keep trying to find a way to justify it. Though even that ending seems to be fairly fuzzy.

Who are your main characters? - Lead Cop, Partner Cop, DA, Lead Villain, Girlfriend, Police Commissioner, and possibly a few others.

What is the story about? - The Villain does something that riles the Lead Cop which provokes him to seek revenge. In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him put on admin leave by the Commish. In the interim, the Partner on assignment is killed/injured by the Villain, whom the Lead has been tracking. When something happens to others around him, the Lead realizes that Villain is after him as well. It becomes a battle of wills with many bystanders becoming collateral damage. In the end, the Lead kills the Villain but discovers that through his actions he's become a villain himself when confronted by his former Partner/Girlfriend. A life-or-death decision must be made.

At this point, the story is still believable and workable. It doesn't require elaborate ruses of contaminating bodies or blackmailing DAs to go to trial. None of that requires legal research. Keep it simple and it can be compelling and believable as long as the characters are true to their natures. No one is purely good or evil. The heart of your story is the transformations that occur.

How to develop it? After you've written your treatment, you develop each line sequentially. You already have the backbone, you just need to add flesh. You're not working backwards, the story elements are there. Just elaborate. Notice that the story has to follow the three act structure, though I often think in terms of "six acts".

Act 1 - Set Up (introduce the characters and situation)
The Villain does something that riles the Lead Cop which provokes him to seek revenge.

Act 2 - Introduce a New Situation and a Complication
In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him put on admin leave by the Commish.

Act 3 - Formulate a Plan of Action to Succeed (character throws self in headlong)
In the interim, the Partner on assignment is killed/injured by the Villain, whom the Lead has been tracking.

Act 4 - More Complications and Higher Stakes (usually a major setback)
When something happens to others around him, the Lead realizes that Villain is after him as well. It becomes a battle of wills with many bystanders becoming collateral damage.

Act 5 - Final Push to Succeed with it looking unlikely (suspenseful moment, climax)
In the end, the Lead kills the Villain but discovers that through his actions he's become a villain himself when confronted by his former Partner/Girlfriend.

Act 6 - Resolution and the Ever After
A life-or-death decision must be made.

Whatever the something is, it has to anger the Lead Cop. You're introducing your characters. This is a story of revenge and descent into darkness ("Anti-hero's journey"). Keep that in mind. That is the essence that drives the action. When you lay genre on it, certain elements are added or highlighted.

It's not about detectives, spies, or legal drama specifically. Those are simply window dressings to the actual plot elements. I'm not saying that genre doesn't impact plot but the essence of the story is one of revenge. Genre just adds spin to the story. This could easily be re-cast as

The Evil Duke does something that riles the Musketeer which provokes him to seek revenge. In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him discharged from the King's Guard by the Cardinal. In the interim, the Partner is killed/captured by the Duke's henchmen, whom the Musketeer has been tracking. ...
​

Or,

The Overlord's Governor does something that riles the Colony's Peacekeeper which provokes him to seek revenge. In the process, he does things which creates a rift with his Partner and gets him relieved of duty by the Space Colony's Legal Emmisary. ...​

The role of protecting law and order carries with it certain attitudes and behaviors. Certainly there is a sense of right and wrong. The problem that your character must face in his "arc" is how that certainty begins to blur. When the black & white world begins to muddy into greys, it is reflected in the disintegration of their behavior.

Like I said, it's best not to re-tool a bad script. Yes, I'm sorry, from everything you've said, it's a bad script. Start from scratch. The story idea itself is good. However if you allow the trash you've created to continue to guide your development, all you will get is more trash. Throw it in the bin and move on. Start the project with a fresh perspective. Keep it simple. Keep true to your premise. Make the characters act believably. It is easiest to do that by developing your script sequentially from your treatment backbone. Things may change and that's okay but follow your outline/treatment.

I could give the above outline to a dozen students and get a dozen very different screenplays.

*applauds* Great post! I don't know how you find the time!

 

[harmonica44]

Yes thanks FantasySciFi, I will do that. I am not sure where to go when starting fresh, as I know question every other idea I have as perhaps not being natural. I have other ideas on where to go with it, but not sure if they are natural or not. I still need to do some legal research though, because when it comes to a plan of revenge, the main character, is still going to want to get around the law with it.

So I feel I need to do research as to learn how he will avoid the system, or use it to his advantage, or both, when it comes to his plan of revenge, once I figure out what his new plan will be. You say not use complicated things like DNA planting and all that, but he will still need some sort of plan to hatch, right?

Whatever plan I come up with, I also want to make it so that the police find out about it and try to stop him before he finds out who the villain behind it all is. Basically it's a race against time: Cops try to stop him before he gets to the villain. Or at least this is the formula I want to use. This is why I wanted him to blackmail the DA, so the DA would then tell the cops, and the cops would go after him, thereby making his revenge plan more challenging. So I will need to think of another way for the cops to find out about his revenge plan, since it's illogical for him to allow them to find out in anyway, such as going around blackmailing people that can tell call the cops on him.

 

[Sweetie]

I am not sure where to go when starting fresh

A blank piece of paper or a blank screen if you're on a computer instead.

Whatever plan I come up with, I also want to make it so that the police find out about it and try to stop him before he finds out who the villain behind it all is.

This is a horse before the cart thing. You're putting shackles on yourself before you even start again. You might figure it out how to tell this story this way. I'm not sure why you insist on making it more difficult for yourself since you're already struggling.

Last tidbit, I consider the anti-hero stories among the easiest to write. When you start writing stories with broad appeal, you'll find a plethora of additional issues you'll also need to deal with. Most specifically originality issues. There aren't that many anti-hero stories compared with more traditional hero stories where the difficulty of writing original material is much greater.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks.

I restructured a new plot for the past day, and I thought of another ending to the story, and to be honest it would work a lot easier, with less complications. However, I feel that it's too low key. It doesn't deal with legal plot holes to fill near as much, but it doesn't really speak to me either though. It just comes off as underwhelming but would tie up loose ends better for sure. However I feel it's about one quarter shorter in story, and feel that the script may not be long enough for a feature if I use it, so I would have to fit more in or something. But maybe I am just being too picky and write a shorter, quicker, and simpler ending.

But I will restart from scratch with my characters. FantasySciFi, you said that I should start with my characters being the DA, Police Commissioner, etc. Before coming up with more of the story, I don't the DA will be a necessary character, if I am not going to use him. It's difficult to say since I have not made up a new story yet, but maybe I won't need him. In my writing experience, I actually find myself inventing at least half the characters, after the story is made up, since I later find out I will need additional characters to fill roles after the story is developed more. Unless I am doing it wrong, and I should come up with most of my characters right at the start?

I should probably start with the antihero's goal and natural motivation. Why would he want revenge on the killer, when the killer is just going to be arrested and go to trial anyway? What's his motive for not waiting to see how that will turn out? Since killing a cop will almost always lead to a trial, I need to get inside the character's head and figure out why he feels revenge is the only option.

 

[Sweetie]

I would have to fit more in

I don't know. A quarter lighter is subjective. Does it work?

Unless I am doing it wrong, and I should come up with most of my characters right at the start?

Do what works best for your process. You've been doing it a while now. You should have a feeling for what works best for you.

I need to get inside the character's head and figure out why he feels revenge is the only option.

No. You need to determine that, so when you write it your audience can get inside the characters head.... If that's right for your story. You may be getting into trouble because you're trying to let the story lead you, instead of you, the writer, moving the story. When driving a car, do you let the car tell you where to go?

 

[Sweetie]

It just comes off as underwhelming

Might be an indication that you have a problem which you need to fix.

 

[FantasySciFi]

I still need to do some legal research though, because when it comes to a plan of revenge, the main character, is still going to want to get around the law with it. ... Whatever plan I come up with, I also want to make it so that the police find out about it and try to stop him before he finds out who the villain behind it all is.

Those are two essential issues. If he simply follows the law or does it badly, the police will figure it out. So right there you don't need an elaborate ruse. Second, he needs to know who is plotting against to come up with a plan for revenge. That is the critical flaw.

If I don't know you stole my book, then I'm not going to plan how to frame you so the teacher calls you into the principal's office. If I don't know, I can't plan. If I can't plan, there is nothing for the teacher to figure out. You've set up an impossible conundrum.

For him to make a plan, he needs to know who the villain is. Once he knows, he needs to leave clues that point to them. However, he could discover the villain did a crime, the police are probably already on his track too. So the villain will be caught regardless.

Basically it's a race against time: Cops try to stop him before he gets to the villain. Or at least this is the formula I want to use.

Again, I'm not sure about the logic. Why try to stop him? If the villain is guilty, story over. If the villain is not guilty, the other cops could use him as a decoy that draws the cop in. Just keeping the villain and cop under surveillance would do.

I thought of another ending to the story, and to be honest it would work a lot easier, with less complications. However, I feel that it's too low key. It doesn't deal with legal plot holes to fill near as much, but it doesn't really speak to me either though. It just comes off as underwhelming but would tie up loose ends better for sure. However I feel it's about one quarter shorter in story... But maybe I am just being too picky and write a shorter, quicker, and simpler ending.

Give yourself a break after all these struggles. Low key ISN'T bad. From previous posts you've said your scripts have run long, so being a quarter shorter may make it just the right size. Shorter, quicker, simpler can be good. Don't be quick to judge. After you've written your revision, have your friends read it. Sometimes we're our harshest critics.

In my writing experience, I actually find myself inventing at least half the characters, after the story is made up, since I later find out I will need additional characters to fill roles after the story is developed more. Unless I am doing it wrong, and I should come up with most of my characters right at the start?

You need to know your drama triangle: protagonist/rescuer, antagonist/persecutor, and protege/victim. They occur over and over in all genres. You can have more than one and shifting roles. The protege can be a buddy, a love interest, a mentor/teacher or a rival (though lower level than the antagonist). The rival is the obstacle (Malfoy) as separate from the 'big bad' (Voldemort). My advice is that you have no more than seven main characters, and it's better to keep it to 5 or 6. Anyone else you introduce is background. The key characters who end the story in Acts 5 and 6, have been introduced in Acts 1 and 2. I would say that by the time you've done your outline, you know all your active, central characters.

Go back and re-read my post on the six acts. Sketch out your new story in that format. As you flesh out your story, you should only need to add background characters. However, develop them by moving forward. If you work forward progressively, you minimize introducing unnatural behaviors. But really REALLY, you want to keep it simple so the plot doesn't become complicated. You should always try to use the fewest number of characters and locations as possible.

I should probably start with the antihero's goal and natural motivation. Why would he want revenge on the killer, when the killer is just going to be arrested and go to trial anyway? What's his motive for not waiting to see how that will turn out? Since killing a cop will almost always lead to a trial, I need to get inside the character's head and figure out why he feels revenge is the only option.

That's a large part of writing good characters. To make this story work, you need to get inside your characters' heads and know how they will react. Then when you put them in a scene, you know how they will respond. Followed by the villain (antagonist) then the protege (supporter/victim). The protege often vacillates between the villain and the hero (or anti-hero). As I said, you should adjust the scene parameters so the characters' actions reflect natural choices but in the direction that supports your story. If the story and characters engage the audience, the viewers will suspend disbelief and overlook minor issues.

 

[harmonica44]

First I need to start with the main character's motive for revenge, instead of waiting for a trial. Because all of his natural actions from then on, will come out of this original driving motive. My instincts tell me there are at least two reasons, he can go after villains.

1. He feels that the justice system, even if it goes to trial will not dish out a harsh enough punishment. Although life in prison is pretty harsh, so maybe this is justice enough and there is no natural reason for him to want revenge.

2. He feels the killer may kill again before the trial, but that's a may, and not sure if he would risk heavy jail time over it, without knowing more about if he's going to kill again or not.

 

[FantasySciFi]

Revenge is not rational, it is a gut response. Revenge is about "the last straw". It has to be something that hits close too home and provokes a simmering rage. While you're thinking in the right direction, the question I would ask about these TWO characters is "What did the villain do to the hero that caused this irrevocable hatred?" The other question I would ask is, "What were they like before the trigger event?" You want to identify what the trigger event is that sets all this off. Your character doesn't start off rabid with rage. It's that trigger that launches off your story.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. Is it possible for the antihero to have an accomplice in his revenge or does he have to act alone? Can two or eve more people snap at the same time and want to help him cause they share the same goal, or does it become far fetched that more than one person will snap in the same way for the same reason?

 

[FantasySciFi]

Again with any strong fraternal order (soldiers, police, firefighters, mob, etc.), what is done to one, is an offense to all. That is why when you talked about a cop dying, I mentioned ALL the cops would be hunting for the killer(s). It is possible for the anti-hero to have a partner but ultimately it becomes a one-person show.

To me, it would feel more believable along the lines of "Taken" where touching his family provokes a revenge response. He first finds out who and then goes about getting her back. Along the way, he is aided by friends. He has a controlled rage. With the rescue and return, he resumes his "before life". In the case of "Lethal Weapon", you have a cop who is devastated by the loss of his wife. He and his partner bond in their seeking of revenge. So yes, it's possible but you need to think about what your story is.

Who does what to whom and why?

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. I never saw Lethal Weapon as a revenge film though. The guys who killed his wife, are not in the first movie, and he and Murtaugh, are rescuing their kidnapped daughter, so it's more of a protecting your loved ones survival thriller. At least that's how I always saw it.

In comparing my script to Taken though, Taken ends on a more positive note, with the revenge being successful, where as my story ends with the antihero failing and ends up being persecuted. So I consider the tone quite different from Taken, if that's okay, genre wise. Plus I don't want it to be a one man show in the end, cause his accomplices play a vital role in his final decision making, if that's okay.