Oh, Baby, Take Me To the Other Side by **DELETED ACCOUNT**

Who are you and what have you done with Mickey Lee?
.
This script is so vastly, wildly, unquantifiably superior to the last one I read that had I not known this was written by you, I doubt I could've guessed that these two stories came from the same writer. I just can't believe it.
.
I was thrilled to see the superb grammar and formatting throughout. I was excited about it as soon as I started reading it with the Secondary Headings in the opening sequence. Just great. That kind of thing makes a statement to the reader: "Trust me. I know what I'm doing." And it works. It impresses you, as a reader. You give yourself over to that writer because he's showing you that he is a skilled craftsman. Then the next question in your mind suddenly becomes, "Okay, how good is this guy?" And that's exactly what every reader should be thinking when they begin reading your spec. There is so much competition from other screenwriters, both amateurs and pros, that your spec must excel on every level. As you probably know, I just recently posted a subtext submission on my blog from a great guy who is Universal's professional story analyst - Billy Mernit. In the last decade alone, Billy has read nearly 4,000 screenplays. You don't think a guy like Billy isn't going to notice (and be impressed by) great formatting? Or that a sloppy spec probably makes him want to jump out a window? "Proper formatting" simply means that you know how a screenplay functions and you are using all the techniques available to you in order to tell your story as well as it can be told in this medium.
.
I mean, for God's sake, did you see how SHORT my notes are? I nearly got teary-eyed when I read ON PAGE 1, "Darwin's face is out of view." Beautiful. We all know that every amateur under the sun would've written "WE cannot see Darwin's face." Mickey Lee knows that, too, and he's clearly endeavoring to surpass his competition.
.
[SOAPBOX - We have a century of filmmaking behind us. It's high time we collectively admit what we already know, that screenwriting has become its own art form. I firmly believe that we are entering a new era where the next generation of screenwriters must write at a more heightened level of craftsmanship than ever before (because of history and competition and also) because if your film gets made and it's popular, it's inevitable that your script will hit the web and people will study your work and make judgments on your craftsmanship. You cannot make a good movie from a bad script. But it's very possible (and easy) to turn a good script into a bad movie. And if that happens to you, if your script hits the web, you want people to look at it and say (like they said of Shane Black's "The Long Kiss Goodnight"), "hey, you know, the script was actually pretty great but they screwed it up." It's not enough to have an idea and get a sale. In this day and age, you're only as good as your last script, and you must deliver the storytelling goods every time you're at bat. When "The Da Vinci Code" came out with all of its endless talk and exposition, Akiva Goldsman was no longer written about as the great screenwriter who won an Oscar for "A Beautiful Mind." In fact, critics the world over HAD to remind us that this was the dork who wrote "Batman & Robin." Your screenwriting career really depends upon how well you adhere to what you know are the principles of great screenwriting, because once you get sales and climb to the top, you enter a world where there is no discipline, where people tempt you to abandon everything you know and write shit for them, which will bomb, and then the world rips you apart and sends you packing back to amateurville. I don't need to explain to anyone that it's a cold, vile, vicious world out there, and frankly, I find comfort in like-minded writer-friends. Endless feedback, constant back and forth, I push them to do better, they push me to do better, and we both stay focused over the long haul on what's important about the art of storytelling.]
.
Okay, okay… I'm stepping off my soapbox now. SO sorry I rambled. (I do feel better having gotten that off my chest. Thank you.)
.
Let's talk story. How do you judge a good story? Given the parameters of a given storyline, you simply have to ask yourself, was this story told as well as it can be told? And I'd say here, that yeah, it was told really, really well. I'd give it 3 out of 4 stars. I don't feel the need to talk about the characters, because there were all very distinct and there were plenty of contradictions in leads. I felt satisfied with them. I think that as it is now, it could be made, a good time could be had by all, and Mickey could move on to bigger and better projects. But I wouldn't be a friend or good reviewer if I didn't try to challenge you, help you get that fourth star, and so, I'm going to ask a bunch of questions, the kinds of questions I ask myself after every draft:
.
* How much can I cut?
* Was there a point to all of the details?
* How can I find more humor in the transitions?
* Are there any places in the story that ring false?
* What dialogue can be rewritten so there will be more subtext?
* Am I spending too much time in any one location?
* How can I shorten the longer scenes?
* Am I repeating myself anywhere?
* Are there places where I can illustrate something visually without having a character verbalizing that idea? In other words, show not tell?
* How clearly did you get the overall point across in the story?
* What kind of subplots could be added/changed/deleted to improve the story?
.
Have you heard this joke? Q: How do you know which is the development executive in a meeting? A: He's the one who, when you're pitching a remake of Moby Dick, says, "Great! But does it have to be a dick?" It's inevitable after you do a pitch-perfect-pitch that the exec in the suit will ask, "Okay, so what's it about?" After you get past images in your head of leaping across the desk and beating him to death, you might realize that it's actually a question that should be respected. Essentially, it means, "what's the reason we should invest in this story?", i.e., emotionally and financially. It means, "What universal issue is the story speaking to?" "What will the audience relate to?" "What about it is going to speak to us, as personally as it speaks to the writer?" And so, my question to you is, can you answer that question? You don't have to answer me; I just want you to be prepared. Make your answer short, simple, and unforgettable.
.
Let's talk Cast Design. As I'm sure you know, Darwin is the sun around which all these other characters rotate. But the supporting characters have to serve a storytelling function by bringing out of Darwin very specific and very different dimensions in his character. In the Hospital Scene, which began on page 10, I thought his interaction with Pamela could've been more distinctly different than with Steven. With Pamela he’s, I don’t know, confident and charming, but with Steven, she’s vulnerable and needy. Or maybe just the opposite. Or something different. You might want to clearly define how Darwin feels and treats all the other characters in the story so that we get to see ALL the different sides of him. I also think this hospital scene might be a little too long. Remember that axiom to "come in late and leave early." Darwin repeats too often here that he's been shot in the head. I think there was a lot of talk that needed to be shortened, like with Darwin and Vincent, which began on pg 17; Pamela, Steven, and Darwin in the Dressing Room, which started on pg 33; Gomez, Pamela, and Darwin at the Restaurant, which started on pg 40; all the talk throughout Darwin's Superstardom Montage, which started on pg 53, particularly Nora's voice overs; Nora and Jay banter, which stated on pg 56; Wendy, Darwin, and Steven in the Hospital, which started on pg 79; Darwin and Steven, which starts on pg 90; Nora and Jay, which started on pg 92; and then the Courtroom section, which started on pg 98.
.
You might want to consider finding a way to connect the opening and closing shots in order to make a statement. Jim Emerson, the editor of Roger Ebert’s website, has his own movie blog called "Scanners" in which he has been conducting an Opening Shots Project (http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/opening_shots_project). It has been, to me, such a great reminder of how much information a single image can tell an audience without one word being spoken. He also shows us how the opening shot of a movie sets up what the movie’s about as well as the expectation of what is to come, and in good movies, the first shot and the last are usually connected in some way. Perhaps your connection might have something to do with the audience or the fans?
.
I'm almost done. I don't think these are faults, nor do these questions mean that they are essential changes but I have to ask them to make sure that every consideration is being made. I wonder, did you perhaps reveal too soon that Darwin is a fraud? It happens on page 20. Would it be better to reveal that card later in the story? Or not reveal it at all until the trial? Hmm... Was it necessary for Darwin to kill people he knew? What if he killed completely random people who weren't connected to him in any way and he does it simply for his show? What if Gomez invited Darwin to help him with the disappearance of Vincent Vitale not because of his own personal beliefs but because he discovered that Vincent was SECRETLY working hard to out Darwin as a fraud and so Gomez was basically giving Darwin the chance to dig his own grave? Hehehe... And that would, of course, get revealed when Gomez is on the stand? What if, while the jury is deliberating, the press asks Darwin what the outcome will be, and he, of course, tells them that the jury will find him "not guilty," which they do, and that restores his reputation? What if he and Wendy have kids, and Darwin almost drops one in public? What if Darwin tells Barry Prince that he's "glib?" What if Darwin screams a bunch of racial slurs when he gets arrested? Hehehe... And that, of course, leads to another question? How far should you take the satire? You should most assuredly have an answer to that question before you do any pitching.
.
Good job, Mickey.
.
-MM
.
-----------------------------------------
.
Pg 1 - I would do an establishing shot first of the studio. Or just say "THE OTHER SIDE STUDIO" DRESSING ROOM - DAY "Darwin's face is out of view." Excellent! Here's the work of an obviously advanced student. And great use of Secondary Headings. Good job! I'd cut "battening down the hatches." Pg 9 - I'd cut "Holy dog shit!" That sounds rather unprofessional coming from a paramedic. Maybe someone else could say that? Pg 10 - I'd cut "gone awry." Pg 13 - The hospital scene might be a couple lines too long. Pg 18 - Avoid the two dashes in the Master Scene Headings. Just say "DARWIN'S KITCHEN" and either do an establishing shot or mention in the action lines somewhere the fact that it's an apartment. Pg 19 - Avoid "ALONG" in the Master Scene Heading. Pg 20 - Great scene. Pg 23 - Get rid of the extra space above "INSERT" and cut the "(on the T.V.)" because we know we're still looking at the television. I think Gomez should say "HAS" a wife. He doesn't know he's dead yet. Maybe get rid of "for better or worse." Pg 24 - Shouldn't be "(OS)" but instead "(V.O.)" Pg 27 - Cut "MOVING" out of the Master Scene Heading. You already say in the action line that the car "races down West Side Highway." Pg 31 - Again, shouldn't be "(OS)" but instead "(V.O.)" Pg 37 - "IN THE CARRIAGE" made fuckin' emotional. I'm so THRILLED to see such great craftsmanship in the formatting. The Secondary Headings are beautiful. Pg 47 - Cut the "He looks good in drag." Avoid commentary in the action lines. Pg 53 - Personal preference as there are multiple ways of doing a montage, but I think it's best and easiest for the reader to write the location first in each action line in the montage:
.
MONTAGE - DARWIN'S RISE TO SUPERSTARDOM
.
- PAMELA'S GRAVESITE - Gomez speaks to reporters.
.
Pg 57 - I don't understand this line: "Look, Miss Graduated from Columbia Journalism..." Did he mean, "I graduated from Columbia..?" Pg 110 - Call me sentimental and old-fashioned, but I prefer "FADE OUT."

Review

Reviews of The Other Side (58)

Reviews by DELETED ACCOUNT (3,429)

How it Rates

Details

Trigger Updates

Screenplay of
the Month

Reviewer of
the Month