Saturday, November 02, 2013

(Produced) Screenplay Review: Blue Valentine

*** VALUABLE SCREENPLAY ***

Premise: A couple in a strained marriage try to get away for a night at a dingy themed motel.


Written by: Derek Cianfrance & Cami Delavigne and Joey Curtis


Technical: 96 pages
















The film begins six years after Dean and Cindy Periersa marry, and they are now raising their six year old daughter Frankie. Dean paints houses for a living, and Cindy is an ultrasound technician. After their family dog is run over by a car, and the strain in their marriage becomes eminent, Dean pushes his wife into spending the night at a seedy themed motel for some time alone. During and after a night of heavy drinking, the fissures in their relationship finally begin to crack.

You know what makes this script so great to me? I could never write anything like this. The subject matter is foreign, and it's like a breath of fresh air. This isn't the first terrific screenplay I have read recently, but it is the first recently screenplay hat has challenged me.


Blue Valentine is a brief read, but not a word is wasted; with few words, the writers convey enourmous depth. The personality of the characters bleeds across the page with their every gesture. Like when Cindy (in a flashback) is sitting on the bus; all the other seats are taken, but her bag sits on the seat beside her. When Dean asks to sit beside her, she reluctantly moves it. This is a small detail, but really does reveal a part of who she is. And then there's Dean at the motel, the morning after his drunken brouhaha. He wakes up on the floor, very hungover, to the sound of the phone ringing endlessly. After yelling angrily, he finally picks it up, and the other voice a prerecorded wake-up message. Dean, calm, merely says thank you, and hangs up. 


Even Cindy's parents, who are seen more than once but don't ever do anything, have dialogue that is rich with personality; history, thoughts, worries, hopes. The best part about all of this is that it's not something one can be taught in school. It doesn't matter how wealthy you are; you couldn't pay Shakespeare to teach you to write like this. Because this-the best material-comes from the depths of one's heart. Sure, anyone can go to school, make a name for for themselves, write an acclaimed film, win an Oscar. But works by people who have always had it easy, who have never struggled, will always be lacking something. And they will never be as good as the genuine works. Screenplays like Blue Valentine cannot be manufactured; they come out in an unrelenting torrent of emotion. Luckily, the writers of Blue Valentine also have the minds to articulate the heart. They show true discipline, focus, and intelligence. This all makes up for an unbeatable combination. This is what the work of masters looks like. 


Near the end of the film, Dean shows up intoxicated at Cindy's work, and causes a violent scene. (This puts the final nail in the coffin of their marriage.) At one point during this scene, Cindy perfectly summarizes her feelings to Dean: "I’m so out of love with you. I’ve got nothing left for you, nothing, nothing. Nothing. There is nothing here for you. I don’t love you..." Dean responds with: "I couldn’t drive you crazy unless you loved me..." And they're probably both right. The fact that it's a paradox supports the logic; real people are contradictions. This is the genius of Blue Valentine. No matter how hysterical anyone acts, no matter how angry, or hateful, or broken, or spiteful they are... to themselves, their feelings are valid. And to the reader, everyone's rationale is clear. 


After the scene in the office, out in the parking lot, Dean (fuming) pulls off his wedding ring and throws it into a field. Moments later, he goes into the field, frantically looking for it. Dean thinks, then acts. He gets angry, then gets angry at himself, for getting angry. He's terribly sensitive, and terribly terrified. In the next scene, he summaries himself exquisitely: "Baby I’m just fighting you know, fighting for my family. I don’t know what to do, I don’t know what else to do. Tell me what to do, tell me what to do [...] Tell me how I should be." Every man faces the same struggles as Dean; but Dean is so sensitive, he cannot help but externalize his internal emotion.


Melancholic and genuine, Blue Valentine is a gem.




About: Made into a film, released in 2010. Directed by Derek Cianfrance, featuring Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams.

Friday, November 01, 2013

(Rookie) Screenplay Review: Thief

Premise: A successful actor holds a reunion at his mansion for some old friends. But trouble ensues when there turns out to be a thief in the group, and unresolved feelings start to resurface...

Written by: Michael Cornetto, Sandra E. Watson, Thomas Pascal, Gary Rademan

Technical: Undated draft. 115 pages.
















Gabriel's Place de Ra-Zon (above): an episcopalian-worshipping, sexually unrestrained house of drug-induced hormone horrors.

The plot eventually becomes a mystery, but does start out clear enough: Gabriel is a successful actor,  hosting a reunion at his L.A. mansion for some old friends. Among the cast of characters we have Fransesca (who was, until recently, a man named Frances; as well as an old lover of Gabriel's). Darnell loves cocaine, cock, and drugs. Roddy (formerly known to the group as Burner) is a recovering addict, currently sober. I'm making these characters sound way, way more interesting than they actually are. The other characters include Johnny, Cherry, Jimmy, and Jeana. Do any of them ever say anything intelligible or do anything sensical? Nope.

Ghastly. Horrendous. Murderous. These words don't even begin to describe how bad Thief actually is. Thief is disturbingly bad in every way, and truly bottom-of-the-barrel writing. It is written with English words, but might as well read in martian, as it contains serious language mistakes. Most of the descriptions are cliche (written by a person with English as a second language?) The vast majority of the language choices are bizarre ("The name hits Cherry like a hot wind.") ("Jimmy (28), still looks like a boy scout,") ("The kitchen is big enough and stainless steel enough to feed an army.")

The big thing that puzzles me is that the formatting isn't that off. Thief has the basics down: scene location, description, and dialogue. The content is atrocious, but the formatting looks like it was corrected by someone with an iota of intelligence. The formatting is clean and easy to follow. 

I read this script in its entirety. But asking for a coherent summary of Thief, is like asking your dumb buddy for a coherent summary of his last acid trip. So would it be too much to say that Thief is the worst screenplay ever written, in the history of the galaxy? Well, it's certainly not out of the question.

I am still scratching my head, wondering who or what could possibly write something of this calibre.



About: I got this script from an amateur screenwriting message board. I have tried to contact the writers of Thief (I don't know if they're still around--this script is not too new), asking for background information on it. If I recieve a response, I will post it here.

(Produced) Screenplay Review: Inception

Premise: A man must infiltrate someone else's dream, and plant an idea, in order to get his life back.

Written by: Christopher Nolan

Technical: Shooting script. 146 pages.
















Trying to portray something as infinitely creative and mysterious as dreams in such a linear, clean cut way, as is done in Inception, is inane; especially considering the fact that Nolan has no imagination (his idea of an interesting dream is movie stars in suits, getting into shootouts, racing to complete a heist? Please.) To supplement this, Nolan uses melodrama, as Inception is all falling buildings, life-or-death scenarios, and dreams within dreams within dreams. But genuine emotion, true moments of humanity, Nolan seems to know little about, as his dramatic range seems incapable of extending past mindless action sequences. There are no humans in Inception; only tools. The dialogue is one long round of endless, on-the-nose exposition. Most of it, especially during the heist, reads like it came from a six year old playing with action figures ("We have to try!" "What do we do?" "We're going as fast as we can." "Look out!" "What was that?") only a six year old has infinitely more creativity and cleverness than Inception does. And of course the screenplay follows the usual Hollywood plot arc; complete with a happy, bow-tied ending. The rules of Nolan's dream world, he seems to make up as he goes along. As a result of all this the script comes off as extremely constructed and artificial (which dreams are not). Inception tries so hard to be clever, that it becomes nauseatingly silly.

This screenplay is abominally, abysmally bad. Sheer stupidity.



About: Inception was released in 2010. Written, co-produced, and directed by Christopher Nolan.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Film Review: Beautiful Thing (1996)

*** VALUABLE FILM ***

Premise: In a London suburb, young Jamie (bullied by his peers) and his neighbour/classmate Ste (beaten by his brother and father) start to develop feelings for each other.

Director: Hettie Macdonald

Written by: Jonathan Harvey

Technical: 90 minutes.

















This is my second time watching Beautiful Thing (and it will not be my last). After the first viewing, I thought it was great, but not phenomenal. I was bothered by a few very minor things. Regardless, the film made a large impression on me. Over time, the film grew on me. After watching Beautiful Thing for the second time, I found not a single fault within it. (It doesn't matter if you can't understand some of what is said in the film, due to the accents. In fact, it makes the film more authentic, and better). Beautiful Thing is a small, quiet masterpiece.

The players in Beautiful Thing are not merely characters. They are familiar, and they are real, and they are family. We see all their different shades; rude, vulgar, dirty, desperate, scared, loving, selfless. They really do struggle; they are living life, and doing their best, and being pushed back three steps for every one they take forward. Some parts are hard to watch, because the emotion is just so genuine. (To be clear: I am not saying that this film has the realism of, say, an Italian neorealist film. This is a different type of realism.) Beautiful Thing does not show you what you want to see. It is not an easy film. The story is effortless to follow, but still requires the viewer to think and feel.

This is not a film about homosexuality (though Ste and Jamie's relationship is quite touching.)  In fact, this film has very little to do with homosexuality. It has everything to do with being human. This is a film about bigotry and ignorance, viewed through one particular lens, but having universal meaning.

Thankfully, this lens ain't rose coloured.



About: Based on the play of the same name (which was also written by the screenwriter, Jonathan Harvey.)

Sunday, October 27, 2013

(Unproduced) Screenplay Review: The Brigands of Rattleborge

*** VALUABLE SCREENPLAY ***

(Note: read this script with a dictionary beside you)

Premise: A group of bandits ransack and terrorize a small town. After the rampage, the sheriff seeks revenge.

Written by: S. Craig Zahler

Technical: Original 2006 draft.











As a whole, Rattleborge is bombastic and verbose.

At first, I enjoyed the "thesaurus writing". It adds another dimension to the screenplay. It is a different style, refreshingly unique. While reading I looked up every word that I didn't know in the dictionary (online dictionary, not paper). It is refreshing to be exposed to such foreign, precise words. After all, part of reading is to improve your vocabulary, is it not? The problem is that it got old fast, and stopped developing the world of Brigands, and started detracting from it. The verbiage eventually becomes over the top, and unecessary.

Here is an example from page 2:
Billy SNAPS the reins to his horse, a subtle and efficient flicker. The horse obediently takes to the steep decline beyond the lip of the plateau, and picks its footing down.
Another example (from page 27):
Pickman runs his hand over his bare scalp to the point from which his retreating hair has not yet surrendered.
And it goes on. Further into the screenplay, about halfway through, the verbosity noticably slowed my read down, making it draggy. Trying to get through the pages felt like trying to run through water.

The wordy writing is a double edged sword. When it does work the situations and characters are wonderfully articulated, conveying as much as words can (on page 14, Ermine the barber is creepy before he even says or does anything!)

If used carefully, and in moderation, this writing style could have enhanced the script. In Rattleborge, this was the case sometimes. But overall, the language weakens the screenplay significantly.



The first third of the script was really good. But from post-rampage to the arrival in Quarterstone, everything dragged, and the quality of the writing declined significantly. By page 75, it was utter garbage.

By that point, it's blatantly obvious that the script is too long, in that there is a lot that should have been cut. Speaking of which-the journey to Quarterstone was painful to get through. All of the travel through the plains, or most of it, is very unnecessary. (This fluctuation of quality was extremely frustrating.) Aside from quality, there were other inconsistences. For some sections, the author uses normal, clear description. At other times, it seems as though large portions were written using a thesaurus.

Once Pickman and Abraham get to the Higgensford residence, the screenplay becomes brilliant, once again?? It's better written, and is really tense. And when Billy Lee comes home... it has to be one of the best scenes I have ever read in a screenplay. Intensely, sickeningly satisfying, and terribly exciting, it is the absolute definition of badass. Reading through the entire screenplay, just to get to the climatic ambush scene,  is worth it. After this, thankfully, there is an avalanche of chaos and violence, and things go full force until the end.

For the most part, the characters have razor sharp personalities, and are well developed. Even the smaller characters pop off the page. But the inclusion of some characters is unecessary (Ermine, The Gouley Brothers, Grant and Donna Tylor, etc.) They are introduced, and then die. They contribute nothing to the screenplay. They aren't very interesting or entertaining alive, nor are they dead. Cutting superfluous characters and situations like these would shorten 9and tighten) the script significantly.

Rattleborge is quite a creative, clever piece. It has moments, even sections, of brilliance. But some heavy reworking still needs to be done.

As it stands, The Brigands of Rattleborge is better than mediocre, but far from great.



History: Rattleborge was the number one 2006 Black List script. It has rotted in development hell, probably due to its extremely violent content. As of October 2013, the the project is unproduced.

search screenplay isles