Oh okay well yes, in terms of budget, than my script would be a B movie too, but I was just told that people expect a rape and revenge film from my premise, and that means more violence, and more graphic content, and perhaps a different type of plot.

Too answer your other questions, about how mine is different from I Spit on your Grave; I think perhaps one reader at least, did not like how the revenge was not successful, and leads to other tragic consequences. Perhaps they wanted a successful revenge, and felt mine was different that way, but did not like that. But that is one guess for part of the story, as to why he may not have liked it, and may have wanted a successful revenge without consequences. Another thing that may make mine different is perhaps in other ones in the genre, the victim knows who the rapists are right away, where as in mine, the victim has to figure it out and pull on a thread to reveal one plot point, then another so to speak to find who they are first.

Another thing is, in I Spit on your Grave, the revenge of the rapists was done differently, where as in mine, the protagonist takes more of an approach where they play one against the other, so to speak. And the plan goes terribly wrong, and new approaches have to made. So I guess the structure and execution are different that way.

Instead of guessing what readers didn't like or why they didn't like a certain thing, why not EXPLICITLY ask them? Literally write down their responses. Take detailed notes. Poll as many people as you can. No one here has read more than a snippet of your script, whereas these friends etc. have apparently read however much you've written.

I asked them but it's hard for them to put their finger, and when they say things like maybe it's that they do not like how the revenge was not successful... they didn't seem sure, but was contimplating if that were it or not, as well as comtemplating other things that could be the problem.

So I ask them but feel that the feedback does not come off as 100 percent certain, but more trying to figure it out.

Ok. Well at least you tried.

Feedback is never 100% certain, it's a subjective process.

Should I still take the feedback then, even if they are trying to put their finger on it but do not seem certain?

Feedback needs to be good quality, and evidentiary. People's opinions are subjective and always coloured. Making decisions on faulty input is pointless.

You need to know what's useful and how to use it. Which parts you can use and which you can reject. You can't blindly follow feedback, because they can be wrong. There are examples where the feedback from experienced people was totally wrong - Star Wars is one example.

I thought the last time he brought up this script that the final recommendation was to either buy a good script or pay a professional to review his. Not that I would ever expect him to follow good advice. What could go wrong trying to write a script despite not being qualified then have your friends give you free advice on how to improve it?

Well the other people who read it over are also writers, and filmmakers I know or have worked with before. But I can hire a different professional if that is better. I suggested on here, hiring one to rework the dialog and perhaps other parts, but it was said on here, that that would cost too much of the budget though.

You need to know what's useful and how to use it. Which parts you can use and which you can reject. You can't blindly follow feedback, because they can be wrong. There are examples where the feedback from experienced people was totally wrong - Star Wars is one example.

Some of the feedback I didn't follow because I thought it lead to contradictory plot points. But sometimes I feel stubborn, like maybe I should have followed it, and was perhaps being too stubborn.

You can't create anything unless you personally know roughly in the direction you're going. You seem to be very tied into plot points, what if they don't work or confusing and you're blind to that?

Oh well, I've taken the advice given me to me on the plot points too and applied it the best I could. So if I have done that, is there is left is to hope for the best that they work on a bigger majority later, or should I do more than take the advice on them?

The best way with feedback is to take it, but male it your own.

But when I do that and then make it my own, they then read it over, and say I applied their advice incorrectly, so I wonder if that is a bad sign then...

You should be getting feedback from non technical people. You want to know how they feel but you shouldn't be asking them how to fix your script THAT'S YOUR JOB!

When comedian is trying out new material they will go around to small clubs and test how the audience reacts. If the joke bombs they don't explain the joke or ask them how to fix it.

Oh well it's just it's hard to know how to fix it if I don't ask though. They tell me what they think might be wrong, and I can take stabs at it, but all they are are stabs, where as I thought if I ask then I am more certain.

Ryan, have you ever actually determined you’re a good script writer. As I have said before, my one produced script was terrible. I realised after it was finished. My friends tried to gently let me know but I pushed on, and they just went with it. Eventually light dawned and I’ve never done another one in 17 years. I’m good at lots of things but script writing, and to be honest, directing are not my area of even competence. I can function as a director for certain things. But in artistic areas I am badly lacking.

When it comes to music, some of the popular genres for younger people I am incapable of appreciating. If a director asked for a dubstep feel, I’d be totally stuck.

If you know in your hearts something is right, go for it, but production by committee is never a good way to work. If you ask ten people’s advice it will dilute your ideas to unworkable levels. So don’t ask.

Do you think other film makers work like you do, Ryan? I can assure you that none of the ones I have worked with in over 40 years do. Two from the 90s came close, and they thankfully vanished!

You seem to take things literally. Just because someone makes some points, the solution may not be exactly the one they've given. However, given how the discussions in the forums go, you may not be fully understanding what they're telling you, so you're not making use of their feedback.

We don't don't know much about your script; it may just need a number of adjustments or it might be fundamentally flawed and requires a complete rethink. For this reason, we can't offer meaningful advice.

It's also possible the advice you're getting from your readers is flawed, as the writer you need to workout what's required. You have to work out where they're coming from and how they interpret things. I once had to fire a producer, with her script editor because they didn't really understand the script and their feedback was conflicting to that of the funder's script editor (who was far more experienced)..

Oh well, I try to figure out the solution as best I can, if they cannot quite put their finger on it. I don't listen to all the feedback though, or some is just not do-able.

Ryan, have you ever actually determined you’re a good script writer. As I have said before, my one produced script was terrible. I realised after it was finished. My friends tried to gently let me know but I pushed on, and they just went with it. Eventually light dawned and I’ve never done another one in 17 years. I’m good at lots of things but script writing, and to be honest, directing are not my area of even competence. I can function as a director for certain things. But in artistic areas I am badly lacking.

When it comes to music, some of the popular genres for younger people I am incapable of appreciating. If a director asked for a dubstep feel, I’d be totally stuck.

If you know in your hearts something is right, go for it, but production by committee is never a good way to work. If you ask ten people’s advice it will dilute your ideas to unworkable levels. So don’t ask.

Do you think other film makers work like you do, Ryan? I can assure you that none of the ones I have worked with in over 40 years do. Two from the 90s came close, and they thankfully vanished!

I've gotten mixed opinions on the script so far, ranging from good to bad. I will get more opinions. I was told by other filmmakers that this is normal and you have to trust that it's good, because I will not ge a majority opinion, and it's normal for opinions to vary.

I was curious, who produced your script, or what did you do to get it produced?

That particular script is still in development. The development budget has been bigger than the budget for your feature film.

It went into theatres here, and while I produced it, we had a decent director who did what they could with my very average script. Got some nice revues, but I tried to do too much and had to give away the real roles I wanted to do to others, but I trusted them, and everyone pulled together. My usual areas were given to decent people and I ended up being music supervisor, which means all things music, including the legal stuff came down to me as we used quite a lot of pre-existing music and clearing the rights was a nightmare.

The hardest thing for me was letting others have control, and stopping me interfering. I know the script sucked in places, but we were stuck with it.

Ryan this goes back to what Bryan asked what is the purpose of this movie and what Paul just said. Every indication this appears to be a passion project with no realistic hope of any commercial success or even reel material.
1. You have little to no budget.
2. You want to micro manage and be involved every aspect.
3. You want to do everything your way. Not following accepted movie producing methods.

While in the short term it might feel good to control everything and indulge your every whim, it's not going to lead to a good result. Movie making is a collaborative process where you need competent people all doing their job.

I like how Paul’s definition of failure is “got into theaters and got some nice reviews.”

Okay sure, I can not micromanage then and be collaborative. I would definitely want success for the movie and possible release, but if that's not possible then it's good to just use it on my resume to show.

Forget the movie thing - perhaps you are a little optimistic? Have you tried perhaps doing some music videos for people in your area? Get used to the process. You might not see the link, but lets say somebody plays the guitar and sings, and perhaps noodles on the keys too. This will give you things to record and enhance, and be good test fodder. All the movie needs are there. Your actor, but s/he sings not speaks. You need to work on audio, set, lights, directing and best of all, it's not so huge. This will test your editing, and also how the audio has to fit. This is pretty much how I can make money. Big budget stuff has vanished with covid.

In the past you've mentioned editing audio. Do you have DAW software? If your singer doesn't play keys, can you? make a basic sing and strum into something nicer.

Music videos are all about manipulation and keeping the person playing happy. All the stuff in this video was not what it seems. Nothing you hear will be recorded live. Lip sync and finger sync (not sure if that is even a term) but whatever lights you have available, maybe a hazer and for set - upturned flight cases and black drapes are what I've made do with in the past. Process wise - take a recording of the guitar - edit and tweak then s/he sings to the guitar track, then you repeat it multiple times, take the best bits, then s/he mimes in the studio for the video. It's a good test of how you can integrate everything and put it back together. Unless you can manage this kind of thing properly and comfortably, I don't see how you can jump to the project you're currently struggling with - it's just too complex for where you currently are working.

I get the impression you need to do some client work, with timescales and problems to solve.

I think you may be forgetting the three or four other threads he's started involving various client projects and their attendant problems (martial arts video, religious guy in the woods, documentary about Vietnamese guy, etc.).

Yeah I'm still working on the Vietnamese one right now, and I'm helping some others out with their movies. I want to take in all the screenwriting advice but I find there to be contradictions in some of the advice, and wonder if I could ask about one in particular. It was said on here before that I introduce too many plot points too soon, instead of spreading them out more. But it was also said that my first act seems too long and that I am leaving the audience hanging.

But what I don't understand is, if their are a lot of plot points to keep the audience busy, then how is that leaving them hanging exactly?

You should read a few more books on script writing, there's a wide range of them. Because, at the moment, you seem to have little understanding of the process and what engages an audience. .

Oh okay sure. So far I have read John Truby's The Anatomy of Story. I can read more.

Do you read novels? If so, who are your favourite authors? It's always been an interest of mine to take a novel I know really well and then compare it to the abridged audio book to see what the editors removed, or changed.

The trick of keeping the plot running yet removing the padding. The same thing is applied to movie scripts and that's where the skill comes in telling the story quicker.

You say you've been told the first act is too long? Too long as in it's difficult to follow, or too boring, or pointless or what? The length of a section needs to be sufficient to tell the story. If that means it has to be long, that's not a problem. The minute the viewer starts to drift into watching the scenery or seeing what is happening on their phone .... it's too long. There's no real rule that cannot be broken for a purpose.

Oh okay. I don't read a lot of books, but I read scripts and watch movies, to try to study movie structure more.

I was told too long, but I am not sure which of those to. It was on here before. It was said that I introduce too many plot points too soon, but also that I leave the audience hanging because the frist act seems too long. So both, I guess?

It's worth reading the books, they give other people's take on things and they have probably have thought about it in greater depth than you have.

Sure. I read some of Save the Cat before, but I could not write a story in that style, compared to The Anatomy of Story. I can try others.

I suspect the more you read, the more your questions may have some answers, Although, you will need to write more scripts in order to improve and learn that not every script will make it as a film.

In reality, the majority will not get made as films and that includes some that are way better than ones that have been..

Sure, I can write more scripts. Other filmmakers and actors I have worked with before tell me that the one script I wrote that is a submarine adventure is the best one. I wrote it more for practive, but was told I should make that one. But feel that it's too big of a challenge, compared to this one, which can be made for the lowest amount of money compared to other features I wrote.

But people say the submarine is better and keep pressing for that one.

The best bit is that there are real submarines available for hire that work, from the point of lights flashing periscopes moving and levers that turn. They thrive on the story, the acting and the feel. Nowadays with DSLRs, stabilisers and LED lighting, the old problems with technicals are much less trouble.

The current thriller doesn't seem to be that cheap, with trucks rolling over and various other things.

Well the truck rolling over plus the characters getting shot are just a couple of scenes really, where as for the submarine one, the submarine drives the whole plot pretty much.

Once you've built your submarine set, it would be there for the entire shoot. The costs would depend on how good you are at DIY and getting material at an extremely low cost.

"Dark Star" started out as a student film.They were using film, which you aren't.

That's true. Another thing is is that the actors will have to have accents since it's dealing with a Russian nuclear missile submarine, or a nuclear missile submarine of some nation... But they will have to take on accents though, and wonder if that will be challenging, compared to the other script, which can be set where I am located.

But maybe accents are easier than I think.

Well, Sean Connery played a very decent Russian sub Captain and his Russian accents was abysmal - in fact, he only really had one accent for every movie he did.


Seriously though, much depends on the calibre of actor you intend to employ, but the usual technique with certain accents is to produce what the audience expect. Us Brits find the American range of accents quite confusing - We sort of have an angle on east vs west coast, and the southern accents, but the extreme ones we find problematic. US actors make us smile as they have the same trouble with British accents, and generate completely terrible ones, by and large. Some actors however are really good. I discovered one actress I thought was English is an American, and then the Americans had Hugh Laurie and many didn't realise he was a Brit.

The traditionally trained actors have lessons in language and accents. Your actors may or may not be able to pull it off, with accuracy and consistency. Exactly the same accent doesn't matter they just have to sound realistic.

Beware though - if your acting people are not up to it, the accents could become the thing people will hone in on - somebody struggling can easily become comedic and you don't want that.

In my opinion you have the wrong approach to film making. By that I mean you are trying to emulate feature films despite not having any of the resources. The advantage of small indie films and shorts they can be more personal and explore smaller ideas. Where as big budget films need to be a certain length, meet standards and expectations to satisfy the audience. For example, I recently saw a short that made a satire of 1917 set in today's pandemic. The set included an apartment scene and the rest took place on the streets. There were only 2 main actors, and a few supporting, and some extras. Where as you would try to copy the movie 1917 and do it poorly, they limited the scope to match their resources.

If theres one thing ive learned from two years of Ryan threads its that hes gonna do what he wants and small scale personal/indie films are not his bag, baby.

If theres one thing ive learned from two years of Ryan threads its that hes gonna do what he wants and small scale personal/indie films are not his bag, baby.
You're right, but I can't help state the obvious.

In my opinion you have the wrong approach to film making. By that I mean you are trying to emulate feature films despite not having any of the resources. The advantage of small indie films and shorts they can be more personal and explore smaller ideas. Where as big budget films need to be a certain length, meet standards and expectations to satisfy the audience. For example, I recently saw a short that made a satire of 1917 set in today's pandemic. The set included an apartment scene and the rest took place on the streets. There were only 2 main actors, and a few supporting, and some extras. Where as you would try to copy the movie 1917 and do it poorly, they limited the scope to match their resources.

Well I wanted to make the lower budget script but other people I know said they would rather be part of the submarine one, or were more excited for it. So I thought it was other people who were wanting me to go for a higher budget.

I feel that the the one I was already developing and doing some pre-production on, is a personal and a more smaller idea to explore in comparison.

Also, when it comes to taking advice from others on my writing, I got some feedback and was curious about something.. A lot of times if there is a plot hole according to other people, I will ask other writers and filmmakers, if they have any ideas on how to fix it and their advice is to always add a new character. 9 times out of 10, the advice is to add a new character to bridge any gaps in the plot. But I don't like adding new characters, especially if I were to do it as often as they say, then I would have way too many characters. So I feel that this 9 times out of 10 advice of adding a new character each time to solve the problem is not good advice? Or am I wrong, and adding new characters to bridge any gaps in the plot is pretty much writing 101?

What a thread. We've now gone all the way from "blue sunlight" to "deep in the blue ocean."

What a thread. We've now gone all the way from "blue sunlight" to "deep in the blue ocean."
Out of the "blue" he switched over to a submarine movie and back. Maybe he should combine the two scripts. "Spit on Das Boot"

Adding new characters doesn't always cover holes in the plot or story, quite a few films have holes if you stop and think about them. It's how you handle them with a slight of hand that covers them, so the audience don;'t notice them. Solving them may need the writer to do some thinking and may involve going back and rethinking their set ups.

An amusing thing about the time of the USSR was that a number of Russians would speak English with a North American accent.

Sometimes, I get the feeling that your film making friends like winding you up.

then that would be very cruel of those “friends”.