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!

 

[maz]

The 'how' and the 'why' are a lot harder to write, and probably even harder to sum up in a forum such as this - it's the sort of thing that film studies and literature classes delve into. Often it's conveyed by subtext, and subtle acting and direction. Without seeing your script in its entirety, it's impossible to know the extent to which you have already covered them. I only mentioned it in response to your post of things he does listed one after the other which reminded me of Wile E. Coyote in a Roadrunner cartoon, building to the point where he inevitably gets an anvil dropped on him

On believability, yes, there is such a thing as suspension of disbelief, but you need to earn it and maintain it by limiting the points at which you're expecting to get a free ride like that from your viewers. A few plot holes are inevitable - but they have to be incidental to the main story and characters, and can't be fundamental, and there can't be too many of them, or else the audience is liable to start laughing when you want them to be engrossed. There's the modern day phenomenon of terrible movies people watch just for a laugh, but is that really the aim of any writer?

Your final paragraph doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Cops work for a living, not to die. There's always that risk, just as there is for people working at sea, or in a mine or wherever, but there is no intention to gladly make a spouse into a widow. So the decision to pretty much guarantee either death (if he fails) or prison (if he succeeds) cannot be taken lightly. It would be a significant emotional turning point for a character, and needs to be given that gravity.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. It helps a lot when you say that the plot holes can be incidental as long as they are not fundemental. I will re-examine them. I also got some responses back from others who have read the previous drafts. They say that the main character can be made to be more believable but it's his accomplices that I need to explain the 'why' of.

In order for the protagonist's revenge plan to work, he needs accomplices to help. But the thing is, is that since the accomplices are not near as main of characters, and they only accompany him, near the end of his revenge quest, after a lot has gone wrong, I don't have as much time to develop them compared to the main character. But they share the same beliefs of him, and I need to develop them, with them being offscreen if that's possible for the previous portion of the story. They are just friends and/or loved ones of the victims from before, who want to assist the protagonist, and reach the common goal.

But the protagonist is given a step by step decent into darkness, where as they already have to join him, after he is already half way down to the bottom. So they do not get their step by steps compared to him. Is their any way I can write this to work?

For example, in the movie M (1931), the mob wants to capture and kill, the man who is ruining their business. But they manage to get a lot of other people to help. These other people, are not given any backstory, or a step by step process that leads them into desperation like the main characters who are motivated into capturing the killer.

So how can I take an approach like M for example, and have accomplices help, without having to give them the same treatment as the protagonist?

Another thing is, is that readers say they find it hard to believe that the protagonist would open fire on other police officers trying to capture him. Well the reason for that is, is that he believes that the cops trying to stop him from going after the villains, are part of a hypocritical, broken system. He shoots back cause they are stopping him and letting murderers go free. I just need to figure out how to convey the 'why' all convincingly to the reader.

 

[maz]

Maybe the accomplices' 'why' can feed into the protag's why. What if the protag gets the grieving families together as a sort of support group, out of guilt and wanting to help them once justice has failed them, but he soon realises that it wasn't a good idea as their individual rage and frustration only increases when they're together.

Suddenly he's a law-abiding cop who has assembled a murderous mob too weak to get the revenge they desire. Gradually, alongside his other frustrations, he finds himself agreeing with them, so when he finally flips, he knows he has some willing helpers.

This need only be a handful of 1 or 2 minute scenes early on in the story.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. However, the part that other readers say they have problems following, is that when the cops try to arrest the mob, and the mob opens fire on the cops, and ends up hitting some of them in order to escape, so they can go kill the villains.

This part I have to write carefully that not only grieving family members and friends would want to kill the villains, but they are also willing to shoot it out with the cops, because they too, believe the cops are nuisances of a hypocritical system that must not be allowed to interfere and save the villains.

 

[maz]

I would be careful with the family members - you can't lump them all together and assume that everyone would have the same reaction. In fact, to a certain extent it's unbelievable for characters who, by definition, are trying to rebuild their lives to want to do something that actively tears it down again. When you said 'accomplices', I assumed you meant that the families helped him financially, or with resources, that sort of thing - not taking up arms.

By the way, I thought of this thread last night when I was watching a recent TV show which featured exactly this plot - a LEO who goes off on a personal vendetta against a particular criminal, and ultimately has to choose between doing the right thing and getting his vengeance.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. I will try to write it as naturally as possible, but somehow make them all snap at the same time when it is required. Or maybe one snaps and this causes the rest to, or the rest feel they are inclined but to join in since they have gone in too deep now.

Kind of like how in Straw Dogs for example, one of the villains kills a cop, and then the rest decide to go all the way, cause they feel they have no choice now or something. I just have to write it naturally so they decide to go all the way, rather than just all flee, and turn themselves in, ratting each other out, in fear.

 

[maz]

But cops are one thing - as FSF was pointing out earlier, there's that whole brotherhood thing. Villains too, as they are already involved in a crime and taking that extra step to go beyond where they might have planned is plausible.

Random grieving family members of victims? It doesn't really ring true.

 

[Sweetie]

I will try to write it as naturally as possible

autism

I'm curious in how you're going to do this. From my limited knowledge on the subject, the world is different for you. Or at least perceived differently. It may be worth considering writing from your own perspective instead of attempting to write from someone elses perspective. These story rules probably make no sense to you. Who knows the idea may work.

 

[FantasySciFi]

Okay thanks. It helps a lot when you say that the plot holes can be incidental as long as they are not fundemental. I will re-examine them.

Character development overshadows minor plot deficits. People go to see the characters, the action and the special effects. The plot is important but you can put superman, spiderman and any number of heroes in different scenarios and get the same interest. When you talk about non-comic films, people look at the directors and name actors involved. Yes, the plot can suck and be disappointing but the trailer usually only hints at the actual story and teases with characters, action and special effects.

If you write believable, interesting characters, the audience will ignore minor plot problems that don't involve the characters. If you write that Tyler is laid back and then suddenly he drops off the deep end, that will turn off the audience immediately if the reason for the change feels unbelievable.

In order for the protagonist's revenge plan to work, he needs accomplices to help. ... I need to develop them, with them being offscreen if that's possible for the previous portion of the story. They are just friends and/or loved ones of the victims from before, who want to assist the protagonist, and reach the common goal.

But the protagonist is given a step by step decent into darkness, where as they already have to join him, after he is already half way down to the bottom. So they do not get their step by steps compared to him. Is their any way I can write this to work?

They may offer Tyler a place to stay but if they are that upset, they're going to be pounding on the DA's door, running to the media, etc. It doesn't mean they're going to go with him and start shooting at the police and villains, if I understand your posts. I've had friends and worked with people who have had loved ones murdered. They want to see justice done but most don't want to take it into their own hands. Especially when there is plenty of evidence who did the crime. The question is not whether it can be done but should it be done. It doesn't feel believable just you didn't know what else to do to make your plot work.

Another thing is, is that readers say they find it hard to believe that the protagonist would open fire on other police officers trying to capture him. Well the reason for that is, is that he believes that the cops trying to stop him from going after the villains, are part of a hypocritical, broken system. He shoots back cause they are stopping him and letting murderers go free. I just need to figure out how to convey the 'why' all convincingly to the reader.

That's not a reason for his acting. The reason is that your plot calls for him to do it.
1. Well, they are after him. Why? No officer is going to chase down someone who hasn't committed a crime solely on suspicion. If he's committed a crime, they will chase him. He will know that he's committed a crime. That's not due to a broken system.
2. If he fires at him, he should know they are trained to use deadly force and will shoot to kill. Evasion is a better choice. Shooting at a police officer is a crime. Tyler now comes across as mentally unstable.

I was told I had trouble conveying it. How can I convey empathy without dialogue? If the protagonist explains too much about how he feels and what he should do, it might come off as preachy or too on the nose. So when it comes to describing the 'why', without dialogue, how can I convey the why? I have described the emotions you see, as if it were on screen, in the script, but if that's not enough, what else can I do to convey, the why?

This is where your autism gets in your way. You really should have a co-writer help you with that. It would be like asking a someone born with red-green color blindness to paint a red rose accurately. He gets the shape and shading but not the right colors. He might be able to fake it with help.

The 'why' is not about the actions but about the feelings. "Sense of justice' is not a feeling but a belief. Frustration, disappointment, abandonment, grief, sadness, anger, loneliness, humiliation, and more are the range of feelings that could play into that 'sense of justice'.

I hope you show more than in your posted five pages. In that, there is no emotional or character development evident for any of the characters.

Another thing is, is that cops in real life, are willing to leave their marriages a lot. They will get into a situation like say a shootout, and get killed. Thus choosing a career in which called for them to leave their spouses. If a cop is okay with leaving their spouse by getting killed, in in the interest of getting the bad guys, then why is not believable for the audience, that a cop is willing to go to prison in the interest of getting them?

Uh, what real life do you live in? I know many officers who have no intention of leaving their marriages. As Maz points out, there are occupational hazards. There are many reasons people choose careers they choose. As a fraternal order, you find many officers have family members who are officers or in other branches of law enforcement. You need to seriously talk to your police friends about this one.

It's unbelievable because only bad guys go to prison. That's a core belief of many cops. Second, if he is arrested, he loses his pension. So his wife has no income, no pension and no husband. Also, by being arrested, he brings shame on his family for being a bad guy. Sociopaths and psychopaths don't care about others. If Tyler is a sane individual, he would feel shame and guilt from his actions. So yeah, it's kind of hard to believe he'd be willing to hurt his wife and family just because of the gang.

It would have been more logical to work with his force to build a stronger case against them. After two deaths, the public and the victims' families will be pressing the DA and police for results. There is no compelling reason if these murder victims are strangers that he would flip out. Police officers in metropolitan areas increasingly encounter violence from gangs, crime and domestic violence. It makes them view everyone outside of their intimate circle as potential perps. It's also an emotional force that creates strong loyalties.

And to be clear, I did not say you should write Tyler like you. I said to write as if you were in Tyler's place, from his perspective. If you were a cop, what would you do if you found yourself in that situation? Making him react simply to move along the plot is not character development and feels very unreal. He's not simply angry. Anger usually has some underlying feeling--fear, loneliness, sadness, guilt, shame, helplessness, etc. That nuance is what needs to be brought out and developed. I'm not suggesting you need to work with anyone on this forum, but you should use your friends to help develop your characters' emotions. Character development is what makes good story.

When you say "I need the assistants to shoot it out with the cops" you've forced yourself into a predicament. Most families would want the cops to shoot the villains. Since Tyler wants to shoot the villains, it makes no sense for him to work against the cops either since that's the goal. Once the villains shoot at the cops, it's end of the road for the villains. Tyler can just step aside and let justice take its course. It brings the whole concept to a screeching halt. The villain(s) may walk from a courtroom unscathed, but firing on the police just opens up a whole new set of charges that cannot be evaded. In fact, if Tyler were clever, all he needs to do is come up with a scheme that has the villains shoot on the cops and get out of the way. He never has to fire a shot--he gets justice and his wife--if he forces the broken system to deal with the problem.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks.

I asked some cops for research, and they said that if there was a gang of vigilantes who were about to commit murder, but one of them gets cold feet, and tells the cops about, the cops would go after the vigilantes to prevent the murder from happening. So according to that, the cops would come after you, if they think you are going to commit murder, and have already conspired a plot with other people. The crime is 'conspiracy to murder' he says, and he said that if someone confesses that it's going to happen, that will be enough evidence to arrest someone for questioning at least. At least that's what he says.

So Tyler and the associates have to evade the cops, so the cops do not stop them from carrying it through.

And yes, the cops who are killed are good friends of Tyler's, not just strangers.

Perhaps my story concept is flawed though. You keep saying that the cops would catch the villains within the law and not step outside of it. But look at stories, like The Punisher comics for example. When Frank Castle's family was murdered, why did he choose to become an outlaw? Why not just work the cold case for several years after? There must have been SOME reason for it make sense.

In my script the villains get away because of lack of evidence. They don't work a cold case for years, because there is no evidence to work from in the first place. But if this is not good enough for the protagonist to turn vigilante, is there any concept for that to work at all, or is it just a flawed concept and no cop would ever break the law, to get revenge?

You also said, 'if Tyler is a sane individual'. I was planning on having the character snap and go insane. He is suppose to become more and more increasing irrational, angry, unstable, and violent.

As far as his wife, goes, he feels that his wife is not qualified to understand and that the issue is bigger than their marriage. I know it's a warped thing to think, but the death of his friends and the villains getting away with it, was suppose to transform him into a warped character.

And to say that most families would want the cops to shoot the villains, that is true in an ideal world. But the cops are not shooting at the villains. The cops have decided to go after the vigilantes instead of the villains, so the vigilantes have to fight back in order to escape and get to the villains to kill them. It's too difficult to pursuade the cops to go after the villains when they are going after you. It's kind of like how in the Bourne movies for example, Bourne works against the police all the time, and has even caused police deaths and injuries by crashing all those cops cars all around New York and Moscow. I planned on character having the same motivation as Bourne for working against the cops. I know it's a different character, but the goal is the same. The cops are helping the villains, get away, so you must escape them with force in order to get to the villains. But I need to write it so that it makes sense of course.

Okay why do stories like The Punisher work for example? Why don't cops like that, just work within law, using their own resources to catch the killer? If I start there, at the core, that will help create the character better.

I also wrote a draft before where Tyler gets the cops and the villains to shoot it out and he just sits back and watches it happen. However, people told me that that draft was underwhelming. There was too much plot, that was very dialogue driven and not enough action and suspense, and Tyler was not in near as much danger as the lesser characters, for a protagonist. I see what you are saying. A logical character would avoid putting himself into dangerous situations. However, if my protagonist is not allowed to put himself into them, cause it doesn't make sense to, what can I do to keep the suspense and action going then for him?

I also write a draft before, where Tyler does it all alone without accomplices but I got feedback from that saying it's far fetched that Tyler could take on the whole gang himself, and would need help, hence the accomplices I added in.

 

[FantasySciFi]

I thought of writing it so that Tyler sets up a clever plan where he gets the cops and the villains in one spot and has them shoot it out. But usually viewers like to see the protagonist put in danger.

Nothing about that stops it from happening. He can still be injured in the process. It could also be a way for him to be "redeemed", though it would no longer be an Anti-Hero's Journey.

I asked some cops for research, and they said that if there was a gang of vigilantes who were about to commit murder, but one of them gets cold feet, and tells the cops about, the cops would go after the vigilantes to prevent the murder from happening. So according to that, the cops would come after you, if they think you are going to commit murder, and have already conspired a plot with other people. The crime is 'conspiracy to murder' he says, and he said that if someone confesses that it's going to happen, that will be enough evidence to arrest someone for questioning at least. At least that's what he says.

But not hold them. Even Tyler would know that. There are a couple problems. Many people are killed even though restraining orders have been filed because the police do not immediately enforce them. There was a recent case where a wife killed her husband though he had a restraining order against her. And numerous cases where the genders are reversed. Also, it presumes that the cops want to save the victims. If they, like Tyler, know of the atrocities, they could be very slow to respond or choose to respond the next day since it's only alleged.

So Tyler and the associates have to evade the cops, so the cops do not stop them from carrying it through. And yes, the cops who are killed are good friends of Tyler's, not just strangers.

Whoa, killing two cops is going to bring the whole squad looking for these mutts. You'd be very hard pressed to convince me that the cops would try and stop Tyler. And even more doubtful that Tyler wouldn't work with the police to nab these goons.

Perhaps my story concept is flawed though. You keep saying that the cops would catch the villains within the law and not step outside of it. But look at stories, like The Punisher comics for example. When Frank Castle's family was murdered, why did he choose to become an outlaw? Why not just work the cold case for several years after? There must have been SOME reason for it make sense.

Are you talking comics or the movies? In the comics, Castle was an ex-marine, never a police officer. The original Chris Kyle. In the 2004 movie, he's an undercover FBI operative. In that case, the bad guys kill his family and shoot him believing him to be dead. He survives but uses his death as a cover. In the Lundgren version (1989) he was a police officer but also presumed dead with his family which he uses as a cover. In "Punisher: War Zone" (2008) he is a vigilante fed information by the police. Secondly, having one's family killed and being nearly killed is enough to push a man over the edge. That is emotionally understandable to an audience. Tyler and Frank Castle are not similar.

In my script the villains get away because of lack of evidence. They don't work a cold case for years, because there is no evidence to work from in the first place. But if this is not good enough for the protagonist to turn vigilante, is there any concept for that to work at all, or is it just a flawed concept and no cop would ever break the law, to get revenge?

It's flawed because nowadays there's almost always some forensic evidence, especially if there are two murders. You said he had videos. After they get away, the first thing he'd do is call for help. They would send an ambulance for Sheila, crime scene investigation team to start sweeping the area, a K9 unit, etc. A trained cop, he'd at least note the license number and call that in. I think it's a flawed concept to think a gang would get off killing two police officers because there's a lack of evidence and ALL the officers save one is looking to protect them. Doesn't make sense or feel right.

You also said, 'if Tyler is a sane individual'. I was planning on having the character snap and go insane. He is suppose to become more and more increasing irrational, angry, unstable, and violent.

As far as his wife, goes, he feels that his wife is not qualified to understand and that the issue is bigger than their marriage. I know it's a warped thing to think, but the death of his friends and the villains getting away with it, was suppose to transform him into a warped character.

Again, this comes down to character development. You need to make a strong emotional case that makes the audience feel it and believe it. My problem is that I don't think he would be alone in his anguish and be the only one wanting to see them brought to justice.

And to say that most families would want the cops to shoot the villains, that is true in an ideal world. But the cops are not shooting at the villains. The cops have decided to go after the vigilantes instead of the villains, so the vigilantes have to fight back in order to escape and get to the villains to kill them. It's too difficult to pursuade the cops to go after the villains when they are going after you.

That's the illogical part. In the REAL WORLD, cops go after the killers. In the REAL WORLD the vigilantes are NOT going to shoot at the cops. A smart vigilante would gather evidence so that the cops can do their job. You're better off grounding your story in the REAL WORLD not the plot-driven world.

It's kind of like how in the Bourne movies for example, Bourne works against the police all the time, and has even caused police deaths and injuries by crashing all those cops cars all around New York and Moscow. I planned on character having the same motivation as Bourne for working against the cops. I know it's a different character, but the goal is the same.

Dude, nothing about that is the same. Bourne was a government experiment, a programmed, enhanced killer. It was the sight of the child that screwed up his programming. When they started coming after him, he went and used his talents to elude them. He works against the covert government agency, not the cops.

The cops are helping the villains, get away, so you must escape them with force in order to get to the villains. But I need to write it so that it makes sense of course.

Good luck with that. So the cops are helping the villains who just killed two cops to escape from a cop who wants to kill them for revenge. Help me wrap my brain why that would ever happen.

Okay why do stories like The Punisher work for example? Why don't cops like that, just work within law, using their own resources to catch the killer? If I start there, at the core, that will help create the character better.

The Punisher isn't a cop. There are plenty of stories where the cops do just that, like about every police show ever made. Maybe you need to have Tyler nearly killed so he can now be off the radar screen like Bourne or the Punisher. His widow gets his pension and there's no shame. Now he's free to get revenge with no one being the wiser.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. I am going by the 2004 Punisher movie. He just goes after the crooks and kills them instead of bringing real evidence to the police.

As far as two cops being killed, what if the villains were able to make the bodies disappear entirely? Would that help? When you say that I said he had videos, no murder is recorded on video. The murders happen later on, compared to Sheila's kidnapping.

I think the problem is, is that murder is taken very very seriously and killers are almost always caught because of it. What about Sheila's rape? What if I use that as the basis for Tyler's revenge? I had done a lot of research before to write Sheila's part of the story, and I am surprised how many rapists get away with the crimes, and the police do not investigate near as hard, compared to murder. So if the police do not take it as seriously, could I use this as the basis of revenge?

The only thing though that is hard to swallow is that avenging someone else's rape, compared to avenging murder? I only suggest it, since rapists get away a lot more compared to murderers. Obviously I would have to rewrite the opening which you saw before, and I already rewrote some of it. What do you think of that idea?

As far as conspiracy to murder goes, I read that in Canada, it's punishable up to 14 years, so it is an indictable crime for sure. But I would have to figure out how they actually take it seriously, as you say. I did write it so that the captain is all about the law, and he is the type of character that would see a restraining order, something of that sort, get pushed into action immediately, even if the person being restrained against is a known scumbag. I wrote the character like that specifically, so that if he has to arrest someone for conspiracy to murder, he will because he's that type of cop. The DA I also wrote as that type as well. As far as them being slow to respond that's okay, cause I can just skip ahead to days later in the plot. As long as they respond sometime in the next few weeks that should be okay.

Perhaps my concept of vigilantism is flawed then. I need to have Tyler do the more logical thing and just bring evidence to the police. I have an idea of for him to do that. However, since he is a cop, acting on his own, a lot of the evidence he gathers may be considered legally inadmissible. There is one situation where he has to break into private property to get his hands on the 'macguffin', which can very well be used as evidence, but the fact that a cop broke in just to find it there, is questionable.

How is he suppose to bring forth evidence without warrants or probable cause this way? Another thing is, is that I also do have a situation where he does arrange for the cops and villains to meet in the same place. He creates his own sting operation and tricks the villains. But this goes violently, wrong. However, I can make this the ending and have it go more right.

But if I choose for this to be the ending, I feel the story is cut short. This will only bring the script to 70 some pages more likely because the more illogical scenarios were suppose to come after, building towards another climax, after the sting goes wrong.

I mean features are supposed to typically be 90 pages at least I read, but even in terms of story structure, it still only feels like the start of a third act, rather than a third act that follows.

As far as doing it The Punisher's way and faking his death, I do not see how that's an advantage for the character. After killing the villains, he's going to have to re-enter society at some point. Even if you stay off the grid, you are going to be rediscovered eventually, so how would it not lead to the same result, with him going to prison after being found? Plus I how would his widow get the pension if there was no body produced? If someone disappears for a few days is that enough to get a pension?

What about this. What if I wrote it so that no cop is killed, but Tyler wants revenge for Sheila's ordeal. So he talks another cop, who has the same feelings as Tyler, into faking his death. The reason why, is because it will give other cops motive for revenge against the gang, because the police department will not have enough evidence to prosecute since their is no body. They will be avenging a faked murder. Tyler can say he saw his cop friend killed by the gang, don't know where they dragged the body off to. This can give the other cops a reason to be pissed off and give Tyler assistance in revenge, because the department has no forensic evidence of a murder to investigate as a cold case for the next decade if they wanted to. The plan is a bit obsurd, but if these two cops have descended into revenge enough, could the audience understand and relate to it?

 

[FantasySciFi]

I think the problem is, is that murder is taken very very seriously and killers are almost always caught because of it. What about Sheila's rape? What if I use that as the basis for Tyler's revenge? I had done a lot of research before to write Sheila's part of the story, and I am surprised how many rapists get away with the crimes, and the police do not investigate near as hard, compared to murder. So if the police do not take it as seriously, could I use this as the basis of revenge?

I think rape is taken seriously, especially when the victim is found bound. However, it probably would not draw as much attention as killing two fellow officers.

The only thing though that is hard to swallow is that avenging someone else's rape, compared to avenging murder?

Again, if someone close to Tyler is raped and later commits suicide, it may motivate him. Indeed, if the DA is ruthless enough to subpoena her forcing the police to arrest her to testify, it may be enough to cause her to commit suicide. It could make Tyler view the DA and police as indifferent. He still wouldn't act as rashly as you've written but it would give him some motivation to seek vengeance and be pissed with the system as well. Sheila should be Tyler's sister or former love interest.

I did write it so that the captain is all about the law, and he is the type of character that would see a restraining order, something of that sort, get pushed into action immediately, even if the person being restrained against is a known scumbag. I wrote the character like that specifically, so that if he has to arrest someone for conspiracy to murder, he will because he's that type of cop. The DA I also wrote as that type as well.

Just take time to develop their personalities in a way that the audience believes it. Just saying it and suggesting "this is the reason" is not enough.

Perhaps my concept of vigilantism is flawed then. I need to have Tyler do the more logical thing and just bring evidence to the police. I have an idea of for him to do that. However, since he is a cop, acting on his own, a lot of the evidence he gathers may be considered legally inadmissible. There is one situation where he has to break into private property to get his hands on the 'macguffin', which can very well be used as evidence, but the fact that a cop broke in just to find it there, is questionable.

I think this would definitely make your script easier to read and believe. As long as he does it in the criminal's abode when a crime is not in progress, he would need a warrant to gather evidence. In the US, police are given some leniency if there is reasonable doubt.

How is he suppose to bring forth evidence without warrants or probable cause this way? Another thing is, is that I also do have a situation where he does arrange for the cops and villains to meet in the same place. He creates his own sting operation and tricks the villains. But this goes violently, wrong. However, I can make this the ending and have it go more right.

There are ways you can do this that I'm sure you can think up. I think keeping it simple will make it go more right.

But if I choose for this to be the ending, I feel the story is cut short. This will only bring the script to 70 some pages more likely because the more illogical scenarios were suppose to come after, building towards another climax, after the sting goes wrong.

I used to worry about that but found that stories that are given room to develop will surprise you. It will give you additional time to develop your characters and make them believable. Story is about characters first and plot second. You really want to make Sheila, Tyler and the others more interesting. You have some good ideas you might be able to fit in once you have a smooth plot structure in place. On the other side of the coin, figure about $150-200 per page for production costs. Seventy pages over ninety can save you about $3K to $4K in expenses. I'm supposing you're still planning to shoot this yourself. Honestly, at this stage, I wouldn't worry about length.

As far as doing it The Punisher's way and faking his death, I do not see how that's an advantage for the character. After killing the villains, he's going to have to re-enter society at some point. Even if you stay off the grid, you are going to be rediscovered eventually, so how would it not lead to the same result, with him going to prison after being found?

I think you're right. When you suggested writing it based on those characters, that is how they make it work. I think by shifting your ending, you can keep Tyler on the grid and make it more believable. "Dexter" is kind of an anti-hero in the way he works for the police, uses their resources to exact a vigilante justice right under their noses. Good luck.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. But in order for the story to go how I want, I don't think I can make Sheila a former love interest. They will have to be avenging a woman they didn't know before. Well they can be friends before, but not lovers. What about the idea about the other cop faking his death? Will this work if I write him so that he wants to help Tyler cause he feels the same way?

I can rewrite the opening so Sheila is not found bound of course. I can show people the whole script to get more accurate help later I just need to know how to write the next draft, since it's been picked apart so much now though. What about the other cop faking his death as part of a revenge plan? The only question is, would the two cops be able to predict that the others would take revenge on him.

 

[FantasySciFi]

They will have to be avenging a woman they didn't know before. ... What about the idea about the other cop faking his death? Will this work if I write him so that he wants to help Tyler cause he feels the same way?

Who is they? Who is the other cop? What prevents Sheila from being someone Tyler and/or the other cop knew? Too many unknowns because the script is unavailable.

I can show people the whole script to get more accurate help later I just need to know how to write the next draft, since it's been picked apart so much now though.

Nobody can make suggestions in a vacuum. While you have the whole story in your head, the rest here only have bits and pieces. And you're continually making changes, so we have NO IDEA who is in your story, what the beats of your story are, locations, or anything. Your best bet would be to revise your draft and post it in full if you want suggestions. Otherwise, as your friend suggested, you need to just go it alone.
Good luck.

 

[harmonica44]

Who is they? Who is the other cop? What prevents Sheila from being someone Tyler and/or the other cop knew? Too many unknowns because the script is unavailable.


Nobody can make suggestions in a vacuum. While you have the whole story in your head, the rest here only have bits and pieces. And you're continually making changes, so we have NO IDEA who is in your story, what the beats of your story are, locations, or anything. Your best bet would be to revise your draft and post it in full if you want suggestions. Otherwise, as your friend suggested, you need to just go it alone.
Good luck.

By the other cop, I mean the one that the villains were suppose to kill. I am saying maybe he could live and fake his death instead. That way, the villains get away with it, cause there is no body or evidence found. But 'they', I mean the associates who want to help Tyler in his revenge plan. Tyler will lie to them and lead them to believe the cop was actually killed, in order to manipulate them into helping. The faked death would be Tyler and the other cop's plan in order to manipulate others into helping. Is that better maybe?

I could revise the script and post it later. I am just not sure what to do about the murder though. I can write it so the villains get away with it as best as I can, or I can write it with the new faked death idea. But Tyler and the other cop would have to count on the associates actually wanting to help. He would have to predict their decision in advance, before faking the death, if that's plausible enough to predict.

 

[PhantomScreenwriter]

Harmonica44, let's get back to basics: What is the synopsis for your story in a nutshell?

 

[FantasySciFi]

By the other cop, I mean the one that the villains were suppose to kill. I am saying maybe he could live and fake his death instead. That way, the villains get away with it, cause there is no body or evidence found. But 'they', I mean the associates who want to help Tyler in his revenge plan. Tyler will lie to them and lead them to believe the cop was actually killed, in order to manipulate them into helping. The faked death would be Tyler and the other cop's plan in order to manipulate others into helping. Is that better maybe?

I could revise the script and post it later. I am just not sure what to do about the murder though. I can write it so the villains get away with it as best as I can, or I can write it with the new faked death idea. But Tyler and the other cop would have to count on the associates actually wanting to help. He would have to predict their decision in advance, before faking the death, if that's plausible enough to predict.

As PSW said, it would help to have a synopsis or treatment of your existing script. Because as you describe above, it is no longer the Anti-Hero's Journey which is taken alone. You've made it into a "buddy cop" film or 'Two Samurai' type film. I'm not sure it's better since attempting to take the life of a cop brings its own set of issues. A cop faking his death has more ramifications. Frankly, I'm not sure that makes it more believable.

You see how you keep shifting the landscape of this story. It's no longer clear what the beginning, middle or end are supposed to be, who the main players are, or even what events are happening in the script. If you prepare a treatment as a snapshot of your current script, that will help everyone be on the same page.

A synopsis or treatment will usually run 3-6 pages. The simplest approach is to take each scene and write one sentence that says who is involved and the overall action that results in moving the script forward to the next scene. There is no dialogue or elaborate description in a treatment. So a 100 page script has about 100 scenes. That becomes 100 sentences which usually translates to 150 formatted lines. There are about 50 lines per page, so about 3 pages. That's a rough guide; it can run longer. Good luck.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay. How am I suppose to describe everything that happens in a scene though in just one sentence?

 

[maz]

Okay. How am I suppose to describe everything that happens in a scene though in just one sentence?

Just sum up the purpose of the scene and the characters involved. If there's a three-page scene where two characters at the station discuss the best way to bring down the gang, that could be written as: "X and Y at the station discuss how to bring down the gang, and decide Z". Three pages summed up in one sentence, and on to the next scene.