Scene Feedback

[arrodiii]

Good afternoon all,

I was inspired by a scene and wonder if you all will read and give me your thoughts on it. What do you all think - is it too dark? Flat? Do you find the subtle humor? Too much dialogue?

And my apologies for the format, I am still learning how to post using this code stuff.


Cheers,

Adam

INT.  RESTAURANT - NIGHT.

JOY (30’s) and STUART (30’s) sit opposite each other.  He is trying to resist bursting into tears as they finish dessert.

JOY
Stuart?…Are you okay?

STUART
Yeah.  Sure.  I'm fine.

JOY
Good.  Well.  I had a really nice time.

STUART
Yeah. Me too.

JOY
Of course, you know I've always had a nice time with you.

STUART
Same here.

JOY
But…

STUART
Yeah.

JOY
You understand.

STUART
Unh.

JOY
And you don't hate me?

STUART
No.

JOY
Cause you know I could never hate you. At the same time, I just don't think I could ever…you know…you.    In the way you should be…

STUART
Yeah.

JOY
And deserve to be.

STUART
Uh huh.

JOY
Well.  The food here was excellent– I'm gonna recommend it to my sisters!  How many stars did it get?

STUART
Three and a half.

And the dam cracks wide open.  He bawls.

A pause.

JOY
Do you feel better now?
(STUART nods)
Me too.

STUART
I'm sorry.

JOY
It's really good we had this talk.

STUART
Yeah.

JOY
Before things went too far…You know, got too serious.

STUART
Yeah.  I'm sorry.  I'm too serious.

JOY
No, you're not.  It's me.

STUART
No, it's me.

JOY
Okay.  It's you.  I'm sorry.

STUART
Okay.

Pause.

JOY
'Cause I mean…

STUART
I know.

JOY
The thing is, I want to do what's right – for both of us.  I spent a lot of time…examining…my heart.  And I felt that you deserved my honesty.

STUART
Thanks.

Pause.

JOY
Now I just want to make you whole again.

STUART
I'm whole.

JOY
Really?

STUART
Really.

JOY
…'Cause I was afraid we wouldn't be able to be friends anymore.

STUART
(laughing, sort of)
Oh, Joy!

JOY
Oh, but you know how it is.  And well, most guys…

STUART
I'm not most guys.

JOY
I know.  If only most guys were like you.

STUART
But then I'd be like most guys.

JOY
(laughs)
Oh, Stuart.  If only I felt the way I'd like to feel with you…Life is so unfair.  It's all my fault.

STUART
I know.(a beat) Are you sure…?

JOY
Yes.

Pause.

STUART
Is it someone else?

JOY
No, it's just you.

Pause.

STUART
I want to show you something I got for you.

JOY
For me?

STUART
(hands her a gift)
Open it up.

JOY
(discovers a pewter ashtray)
Oh, but Stuart.  This is…oh, this is beautiful.

STUART
Thanks.  It's a Gainsevoort reproduction.  Boston, late 1800's.  I sent away for it just after we had our…first date.

JOY
Oh, I just love it.  It's a…it's a collector's item.

STUART
Yeah, it is pretty special.

JOY
(laughs)
It almost makes me want to start smoking again!

STUART
Look at the bottom.

JOY
(examines more closely)
Ooh.

STUART
Forty karat gold-plate inlaid base.

JOY
Oh, Stuart.  Thank you.  This really means something to me.  I'll always treasure it…as a token…

STUART
No, you won't.
(retrieves his gift; a sudden shift in emotion)
'Cause this is for the girl who loves me.  The girl who cares for me, for who I am, not what I look like.  I wanted you to know what you'd be missing.  You think I don't appreciate art.  You think I don't understand fashion.  You think I'm not hip.  You think I'm pathetic, a nerd, a lard-ass fatso.  You think I'm shit.  Well, you're wrong.  'Cause I'm champagne, baby and you're shit.  And till the day you die, you, not me, will always be shit.

 

[kinglis]

Really good start, really bad ending

 

[TheArtist]

+1.

Rewrite the whole gift part. And "you're shit" sounds childish, among other things.

I really liked this part :
JOY
Oh, but you know how it is. And well, most guys…

STUART
I'm not most guys.

JOY
I know. If only most guys were like you.

STUART
But then I'd be like most guys.

 

[FantasySciFi]

This would be a really long, boring sequence. Way too many filler words. All that stammering conveys nothing. One or two, okay. This should be a six or eight line exchange at most. Movies don't mimic real life dialogue. Most people understand having to use 'false lighting' to make a scene seem natural but don't understand having to use 'condensed language' to make it sound natural on the screen. If you go back and look at a movie that has a natural looking conversation, and check out the script or a transcript, you'll be surprised how terse they are. The timing and acting are what convey that naturalness.

Since it's a short segment, go ahead and tape it. But before you tape it, also have a re-written version that cuts out about 70% of what you've written so you can tape version two. Compare the two.

It may sound odd to you inside, but dialogue really needs to be tight and relevant.

PS: the highest carat of gold is 24, which is pure gold (you mentioned 40K).

 

[kinglis]

+1.

Rewrite the whole gift part. And "you're shit" sounds childish, among other things.

I really liked this part :
JOY
Oh, but you know how it is. And well, most guys…

STUART
I'm not most guys.

JOY
I know. If only most guys were like you.

STUART
But then I'd be like most guys.

+1

 

[arrodiii]

Ok, I think that misstated why I made this thread. This is the scene that inspired. Its the opening scene from Happiness, a film written and directed by Todd Solondz. Granted it didn't make a lot of money while in release, this script was nominated for an Oscar, and won some awards, both film and script (I believe).

My point in making this thread was to get feedback on the scene and see what your thoughts are on scenes like this as it will help me understand some of the small feedback that I receive when I post something.

Sorry for any confusion and sorry for any typos - I'm on my bb.

Cheers, Adam

 

[escher]

Ok, I think that misstated why I made this thread. This is the scene that inspired. Its the opening scene from Happiness, a film written and directed by Todd Solondz. Granted it didn't make a lot of money while in release, this script was nominated for an Oscar, and won some awards, both film and script (I believe).

This reminds me of when some famous old (and very good) photographs were posted to flickr to see what kind of comments they'd get. The criticisms of the photos were scathing.

Well heck, as long as I'm here: Here's a short scene that was the result of me trying to work through some writer's block on another script. Critiques welcome, compare and contrast to the original post... for... uh... science!

(context: money-launderer-turned-snitch escapes from a bust gone wrong, lots of police and the mob looking for him, and he's got a briefcase full of illicit currency cards)

INT. SPACE TRAVEL TERMINAL SECURITY STATION - DAY

Gerrard approaches one of the many entry stations, choosing the one with the shortest
line. He glances around nervously. The person in front of him is admitted access and
the security doors whoosh open as they step through, and whoosh shut just as fast.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD
    (bored)
Next.[/INDENT]

Gerrard swipes his identity card over the counter. His face and information appear on
the guards screen. The guard looks barely awake.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD (CONT’D)
Halstead Bremmer?

        GERRARD
Yes.

        STATION GUARD
Still at 25 Panzer Square, E District?

        GERRARD
Yes.

        STATION GUARD
Unit 17?

        GERRARD
(slightly impatiently)
Yes.

        STATION GUARD
Security check will take just a moment.[/INDENT]

On the guard’s screen, measurement lines appear on Gerrard’s image, measuring the
location and proportions of his eyes, nose, and mouth. Another monitor lights up and
rapidly scans through a huge series of faces, each with their own set of measurement
lines.

Gerrard looks around again. At the far end of the terminal he sees a group of police
officers approach security personal.

The guard’s monitor beeps softly and displays the text “No Match”.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD (CONT’D)
Security check passed. Any luggage to declare?

        GERRARD
No.

        STATION GUARD
Carry-on?[/INDENT]

Gerrard holds up the briefcase.

[INDENT]        GERRARD
Just this.

        STATION GUARD
Please place it into the carry-on scanner.

        GERRARD
Oh! I uh...[/INDENT]

Gerrard digs into his inside coat pocket and produces another card.

[INDENT]        GERRARD (CONT’D)
I have a Class 2 waiver.[/INDENT]

Gerrard swipes the card over the counter.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD
    (bored and slightly irritated)
That policy was revoked three weeks ago after the
Newport incident, please place the item into the
scanner.[/INDENT]

[INDENT]        GERRARD
But I have... but this says that...[/INDENT]

The Station Guard starts to get suspicious.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD
Sir, I need you to place the item in the scanner.[/INDENT]

[INDENT]        GERRARD
I can’t. I mean, I’m not supposed to, see...[/INDENT]

The Station Guard reaches for the intercom.

[INDENT]        GERRARD (CONT’D)
Wait! Wait.[/INDENT]

Gerrard digs in his pockets and tosses out three currency cards in front of the guard.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD
    (a little too loudly)
Are you trying to bribe me?[/INDENT]

Gerrard motions to the guard to quiet down while frantically looking over at the
policemen who are making their way down the security stations one by one.

[INDENT]        GERRARD
That’s 30,000. Untraceable.[/INDENT]

The guard looks at Gerrard in disbelief, takes a currency card, and scans it. The
guard’s display beeps and displays some information. The guard’s eyes widen.

The guard immediately hits a button. There is a soft beep noise, the word “Approved”
appears on the monitor, and the security doors whoosh open.

[INDENT]        STATION GUARD
    (overly-official)
You have a nice day.[/INDENT]

Gerrard rushes through the doors as the guard hurriedly pockets the currency cards,
leans back, and deliberately looks bored.

 

[arrodiii]

This reminds me of when some famous old (and very good) photographs were posted to flickr to see what kind of comments they'd get. The criticisms of the photos were scathing.

Well heck, as long as I'm here: Here's a short scene that was the result of me trying to work through some writer's block on another script. Critiques welcome, compare and contrast to the original post... for... uh... science!

(context: money-launderer-turned-snitch escapes from a bust gone wrong, lots of police and the mob looking for him, and he's got a briefcase full of illicit currency cards)


Yes, in a way - I'm not going to lie. I need to percieve how some of the feedback I get for some of the shorts that I have written that are written in the same genre will be looked at in order to get a better feeling and understanding of what I am trying to portray.

I notice that you have only commented on this post, versus some of the othe others that I have done, so I'm not going to "call" you out. But wuld rather still try and ask the community why they do/ do not like this scene that's inspirational to me

 

[brianluce]

I agree with FantasySciFi. It just seems too long. And it wasn't Oscar nominated according to IMDB.

It's better to properly identify a passage like this, otherwise it comes of as a gotcha.

 

[escher]

Yes, in a way - I'm not going to lie. I need to percieve how some of the feedback I get for some of the shorts that I have written that are written in the same genre will be looked at in order to get a better feeling and understanding of what I am trying to portray.

I notice that you have only commented on this post, versus some of the othe others that I have done, so I'm not going to "call" you out. But wuld rather still try and ask the community why they do/ do not like this scene that's inspirational to me

Personally, I wasn't impressed by "Happiness" (although the acting was stellar). I felt it to be a bit ponderous and I didn't relate to any of the characters.

 

[arrodiii]

I agree with FantasySciFi. It just seems too long. And it wasn't Oscar nominated according to IMDB.

It's better to properly identify a passage like this, otherwise it comes of as a gotcha.

You're right, it wasn't nominated - for some reason I could have sworn that I remember being happy that such a dreary film was nominated.

And trust me, I wasn't going for a gotcha thing, I'm not here to troll people - I seriously just want feedback on what people think of this scene, I think its a gorgeous scenne, but only much more so once seeing it portrayed

 

[FantasySciFi]

It's still poorly written dialogue. Sorry. If someone directs their own writing, s/he can write whatever. As director, s/he can craft the performance to match the envisioned dialogue. And that's important to remember.

Solondz already had previous productions behind him. He was directing his own work. He didn't 'break rules', he simply has a different set of rules as director of his own work. A new screenwriter who submitted that dialogue would be ignored by mainstream agents and readers. Readers for studios and agencies look for tight dialogues. Solondz worked as a runner for the Writers Guild so he had many contacts before his first production. Good writing is essential but often people are produced through contacts and advocates for their work. That may be a flaw in the system but it's how it is. Nothing succeeds like success.

In the "Partridge Family", the older sister is subbing as English teacher for her brother Danny's class. He feels that she's being unduly hard on him, so he submits an early work by Ernest Hemingway. She gave Hemingway a "D". We tend to think people are brilliant throughout their careers but forget that their is a learning curve. Screenwriters write many screenplays before their first production. And not everything is stellar.

Here is the scene above. I still feel it's a boring exchange to watch. Does it need to drag out 5:35? Is it an effective use of the camera to keep bobbing back and forth between the two heads. Or is that just keep interest in a poorly written exchange? This is a good illustration of 'talking heads'. In my opinion, it could have been shortened with equal effect if they had started at 2:35 and maybe just a sampling to lead in. At that point, the actors really come alive with the dialogue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b_x9R44qoI

 

[brianluce]

Amazes me how comedians do drama so well. I don't even find John Lovitz funny, nor Robin Williams for that matter, both annoy me, but gotta tip my hat to both as dramatic actors.

I think this scene coulda been shortened but who am I to say. It's not my cup of tea but The film won critical acclaim and a lot of awards so...

I'd want to make the point that it's not always useful or fair to read a scene out of context. I think it's weak as a standalone. But story is context. For example, imagine a scene with two guys joking about who has to drive to the liquor store to buy beer. They yack at each other for 4 minutes. "I drove last time", "I don't care, you owe me". They carry on like that and that seems boring. But what if the scene before showed a guy planting a car bomb tied to the ignition. The boring scene just got front loaded with dramatic tension. Same with this scene, I don't know what happened before, but it makes a huge difference where these characters have been prior to this moment.

 

[arrodiii]

It's still poorly written dialogue.

Why do you think that it's poorly written? Is it because it is something that you'd prefer to not watch or do you say this for another reason? And I guess that is where we differ because I like this section of dialogue.

He didn't 'break rules', he simply has a different set of rules as director of his own work. A new screenwriter who submitted that dialogue would be ignored by mainstream agents and readers.

So, in a way, are you saying not to try and write anything as "avant-garde" or "different" than other features if one wants to get their screenplay produced? That is what I am kind of getting out of this statement.

Good writing is essential but often people are produced through contacts and advocates for their work. That may be a flaw in the system but it's how it is.

Are you saying that you believe that is the only reason he was able to get this, or even "Welcome to the Dollhouse" produced? I mean I understand some people are able to use their connections to get their movies made - there was a movie about the Garbage Pail Kids made- but I dont think that is a flaw in the system per se, especially if that artist is able to have a couple of people actually like his story/work.

 

[FantasySciFi]

I am not suggesting you abandon or avoid avant garde writing. Indie filmmakers can produce their own works as they see fit. If you have a work which you are proud of, by all means produce it. Keep in mind that if you were submitting the script for consideration in mainstream market, most are not looking for avant garde writing. They are trying to make money so they don't like taking risks. That does not mean that some studio would not consider it for production, but it is much more likely to be rejected without support or a previous success. My suggestions are based on mainstream TV & film writing styles.

The 'flaw' which I refer to is that there are movies out there that cause us to ask "How the heck did THAT get made and marketed?" And the reason is that the script project had someone with connections (and/or money) helping to push it through. Elements of plot, dialogue, structure, and cinematography play into that perception by the viewer. Since Dollhouse, Solondz' other movies have earned progressively less at the box office. ["Welcome to the Dollhouse" (1996) grossed about $4.8M, "Happiness" (1998) about $2.8M, while "Life During Wartime" (2009) earned $280K.]

I did not say Solondz' story was flawed. I said the presented dialogue didn't work for me. And seeing it, I feel it drags for the first 2 1/2 minutes when nothing substantial is said. If it inspired you, great. The dialogue does not work for me. It does nothing to set up why he should be upset with her. In that sense, the last 3 minutes come out of the blue. There is no indication that she dated him only for the gifts or that she ever insinuated he was fat. So that final explosion is without context. The result is you have 2 1/2 minutes of stammering bouncing back and forth between headshots followed by 1 1/2 minutes of cooing and 1 1/2 minutes of ranting for no apparent reason. That doesn't mean the rest of the story is bad. It comes across to me as a poorly thought out intro to jump into his real story. That's my opinion why the dialogue doesn't work as written and filmed. It is poorly done based on its impact on me as a viewer/reader.

Consider the situation:
Say Ed Wood's productions inspire you. His "Plan 9 ..." certainly gets a lot of screen time. His productions have entertainment value. Wood was quite an avant garde visionary tackling difficult social issues like transvestism. I mean, he had big name stars--Gene Autry, Lon Chaney Jr, and Bela Lugosi--attached to his productions. Should that convince me that he's a great writer/director? How would I know one way or the other? What is the measure of quality? What makes some "art" museum quality? gallery quality? flea market quality? Now if a budding writer/director seeks comment on a 'script' fragment (uses a page from Ed Wood's production) and it's reviewed negatively (or positively), what does that really say? Does that mean he should try (or not) to emulate Ed Wood if he admires his writing and directing style?

What I appreciate about Indie filmmakers is their willingness to push boundaries. I want to encourage that. I'd say go for it. You're entitled to your opinion and develop your own style. Please realize that when you request feedback and opinions from others, you may take and use it as you choose. You can disagree with it, but it doesn't invalidate it. When you direct your script, it will match your vision. That is what Solondz and other writer/directors have done.

 

[don patterson]

I like what I hear.

Sort of.

MOST important, what are the visuals?

The dialogue would be absolutely dynamite, (depending on PACE of delivery, casting, director's style, camera work), IF YOU HAVE the right VISUALS behind it!

You have none...

FOR THE FUN OF IT -- IMAGINE

Example (casting & delivery style):

STUART is portrayed by Anthony Hopkins (as Hannibal Lecter).

JOY is portrayed by Madonna (as Amber Leighton).

(visuals)

at the INT. RESTAURANT - NIGHT.

The SERVERS in the background with NO dialogue are the 3 Stooges.

Fellow PATRONS in the background with no dialogue (imagine Dinner Scene Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps).

(director)

Robert Rodriguez doing his -- Grind House at it's best...

NOW -- this is really WELL WRITTEN! My sides are HURTING from laughter.

I like minimal -- realistic dialogue -- BUT visuals ALWAYS come FIRST.

 

[kinglis]

Story comes first

 

[escher]

Story comes first

According to Michael Bay, story is what fills in the dead time between explosions.

 

[kinglis]

That's why I've never seen a MB film. I have to though. One learns a lot from "how not to".

 

[arrodiii]

I am not suggesting you abandon or avoid avant garde writing. Indie filmmakers can produce their own works as they see fit. If you have a work which you are proud of, by all means produce it. Keep in mind that if you were submitting the script for consideration in mainstream market, most are not looking for avant garde writing. They are trying to make money so they don't like taking risks. That does not mean that some studio would not consider it for production, but it is much more likely to be rejected without support or a previous success. My suggestions are based on mainstream TV & film writing styles.

Ok, this is what I was trying to understand. Myself, I would prefer to write/direct a film that won a handful of awards on the festival circuit as opposed to making a ton of money, though the latter would be great. I understand the need to make a studio a ton of money for the ability to get more funding and better distribution. I picture my writing and ideas as receiving more appreciation from outside the mainstream audience as opposed to inside.

The 'flaw' which I refer to is that there are movies out there that cause us to ask "How the heck did THAT get made and marketed?" And the reason is that the script project had someone with connections (and/or money) helping to push it through.

Yes, there was a movie based off of the Garbage Pail Kids trading cards - I've always wondered how films such as these were green lighted, not to mention have a segment on national television promoting the film (the Today show - and before anyone fully questions - another recollection that I am nearly positive happened. I was a child and didn't know Today was a morning news program at the time).

Elements of plot, dialogue, structure, and cinematography play into that perception by the viewer. Since Dollhouse, Solondz' other movies have earned progressively less at the box office. ["Welcome to the Dollhouse" (1996) grossed about $4.8M, "Happiness" (1998) about $2.8M, while "Life During Wartime" (2009) earned $280K.

Though in this regard, doesn't this also equate to the number of theaters that screened his film? Unfortunately I don't know how to find out how many theaters screened this, as well as the lenght of their runs. A buddy and I spoke about Happiness this past weekend over a beer and he reminded me of a warning that was issued at the box office he saw it at that informed patrons that the movie contained controversial and disturbing plot lines and no refunds would be allowed for the film. I vaguely recollect the same thing when I saw it opening weekend.

It does nothing to set up why he should be upset with her. In that sense, the last 3 minutes come out of the blue. There is no indication that she dated him only for the gifts or that she ever insinuated he was fat. So that final explosion is without context.

I don't understand this, and this is what I love about films because we are seeing the same story in two different ways. I think that it sets up entirely why he is upset with her - he's upset with the fact that she is breaking up with him. His explosion about being fat is due to his insecurity and his self-image, which I think is an underlying connection between all the characters and the entire film. For me its like he had opened himself up too much to her, leaving him vulnerable to being hurt to her. He's probably been rejected multiple times in the past but still is unable to cope with it in a healthy, adult way. I mean he is dating the one daughter in the family (learned later) who is the most unstable and it makes a lot more sense, to me at least, as to his reaction as her character is the one that is always getting the raw end of the deal as her decisions are not properly and thoroughly thought out, as opposed to her sister, Trish.

...I didn't relate to any of the characters.

I think what I was able to connect with is the insecurity that people have when they are vulnerable to another person they are in a relationship with, which I think that a lot of people can relate to. Can I directly relate to a pedophile, a sexually explicit prank phone caller or an overly dramatic drama queen? Nope, not in the overall gesture but I can to some small portion and I tend to think that every one can in one small way or another - just not with the actions/decisions that they act upon.

You're entitled to your opinion and develop your own style. Please realize that when you request feedback and opinions from others, you may take and use it as you choose. You can disagree with it, but it doesn't invalidate it.

And I hope that you don't feel that I'm singling you out in any way. I am not speaking for anyone else, though I think a lot of other new writers on here will agree, that you offer some of the best and well thought out feedback on here in regards to screenwriting and it is very much appreciated. I know it's helping me question the motivation, purpose and choice of the words my characters use within the works I've shared. That is what I have asked for and need in order to create and write a better, tighter script that will hopefully help me win an award at some point in the future.

I like what I hear. Sort of. MOST important, what are the visuals? The dialogue would be absolutely dynamite...IF YOU HAVE the right VISUALS behind it! You have none...

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - especially with the whimisical imagining you put forth of actors, directors, etc. I think that what you put out takes away from what the writing is trying to convey. I mean at what point do you let a script just be about the characters and the story and leave the visuals, as you put it, to the those hired to do work that aspect of the film? Or if you are the director and already have the vision in your mind, is that enough to get the story out on paper first? But again, that is just me.

Story comes first

I agree, wholeheartedly. To me, the story is the most important thing, unless you are going for a summer blockbuster. I mean if you don't care about story, you might as well write something as implausible as having a team of American roughneck oil drillers save the world from impending death. Oh wait, that's already been done.

As for the inspiration that this has had on me, the feature that I'm writing has an opening scene of a break up. After watching Life During Wartime last week and seeing a different, yet same opening of Happiness, I realized that this is something that I am wanting to come from my 8 or so pages of dialogue my characters break-up.