TODAY'S NUGGET: The Island of Dr. Moreau (1996) - Grounding the Unfamilar + Genre Tropes (Horror/Thriller/Sci-fi)

[Quick Summary: After being rescued at sea and brought to a mysterious island, a lawyer (Prendick) discovers his host Dr. Moreau is experimenting on animals.] 

Writer Walon Green has quite a breadth and scope of his writing.  He uses genres as tools for his stories, but is not dictated by them.

For example, this script is a mix of sci-fiction, horror, and psychological thriller.  However, it is still very accessible to someone picking it up for the first time. 

How did he make it easy and interesting for the reader?
a) He made an unfamiliar situation recognizable for the reader; yet
b) Uses genre tropes to heighten the impact of the scene. 

For example, this scene below:
- Prendick, the protagonist, spends his first night on Dr. Moreau's spooky island. 
- Prendick is locked into his room at night "for his own safety" and wakes up. This is familiar sensation to many travelers.
- Then, however, Green uses genre elements to heighten this situation: sci-fi (what kind of child is born?), horror (screams in the night), thriller (danger to protagonist?)

 INT. THE GUEST ROOM - NIGHT

...We see the following (PRENDICK'S P.O.V.) as though through a nightmare: 

Prendick is alone, deep in sleep, through which he can hear the SCREAMS, now at an unbearable pitch.

INT. THE WOMB - NIGHT

An unborn CHILD pushes through the red-veined darkness, eyes still closed, squeezed shut as if anguished by this transition from one world to another.

In the darkness of the womb the child twists and SCREAMS.

                                                                            CUT TO:

INT. THE GUEST ROOM - NIGHT

Prendick sits bolt upright on the bed. It takes him only a moment to realize that the pitch of the cries has changed. They no longer sound like the howling of man nor beast, but have become instead the screams of a child in pain.

Prendick turns and goes to the door a bit unsteadily. He tries it. Still locked.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It's easy to assume everyone knows the genre tropes as well as you, writer. So do NOT assume.

Make sure you have the basics so the reader knows what is happening (cake), then heighten with the genre tropes (frosting). 

The Island of Dr. Moreau (1996)(4/26/94 draft)
by Richard Stanley & Michael Berr
Revised by Walon Green
Based upon the novel by H. G. Wells

TODAY'S NUGGET: Judge Dredd (1995) - Inventive Way to Stage a Fight Using One's Head (Literally)

[Quick Summary: Judge Dredd, a clone who has both police and judiciary powers, is wrongly accused of a crime, and fights his way back to prevent a take over.]

This script has remarkable clarity, action, and energy on the page.  

I particularly marveled at how I was still able to connect with the script, though I did not know the underlying comic book material.*

I really enjoyed the inventive way the writers staged the fight below because it requires the opponents to anticipate and think their way out, not simply use brawn.

NOTE:
- "Mean" is Rev. Angel's henchman.
- Mean has a dial on his head.  1 is calm, 4 is frenzied.

INT. RUINED COURTHOUSE - NIGHT

... REVEREND ANGEL: And Mean - Finish Dredd - !

MEAN: My pleasure.

Mean breaks into a big smile, nods, turns the dial on his head to 4, and turns back -- He takes a big swing, and lets the meanest ever headbutt fly.

DREDD like lightning lifts his whole body weight up. Mean goes flying into the wooden pole behind, cracking his skull wide open.

KEE-RACKK-K-! Dredd and the pole fall to the floor. He throws the ropes off his wrists --

Mean is starting to get to his feet -- Dredd slides past him, twisting the dial on his head down to 1 -- continues towards --

THE ANGELS

Drop Fergie -- he scrambles away -- rush Dredd! Dredd doesn't wait for them to reach him - he charges!

REVEREND ANGEL

Cranks Mean's dial back up to 4 -- Mean starts to move --

DREDD

Sweeps past, twisting the dial back to 1, Mean drops to his knees --

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked that this is an atypically staged fight, so there's some suspense. How will the opponents figure their way out of this?

Also, I liked that this didn't feel like a comic book where no one ever suffers repercussions, but like a real action story with real consequences. 

Judge Dredd (1995)(7/25/94 draft, w/revisions)
by Gary Goldman and Danny Cannon
Previous drafts by Steven de Souza/Walon Green, William Wisher/John Fasano

*In fact, I had not interest in this script itself.  I only decided to read it after learning writer Walon Green (The Wild Bunch) had written an earlier draft.

TODAY'S NUGGET: Birth (2004) - A Turning Point that is Creepy as Hell

[Quick Summary: A 10 y.o. boy tries to convince a newly engaged woman that he is her dead ex-husband reborn, and wants to marry her again.]

Does this story have a big ick factor? Was it creepy as hell? Yes. 

However, it was very well written, in large part because the question of reincarnation - which these characters don't believe in - is played for real.  

For example, a turning point (below) hooked me because it delves into a universal fear about creepy kids.  What would you do with a kid like this who is unrelenting?

NOTE: The main character is Anna, and Laura is her sister.

INT. MORGANS' APARTMENT - HALL - SAME

The doorbell rings. BETTY emerges from the kitchen, walks the length of the hall, and opens the front door to MR. & MRS. DRUMMOND and their TWO DAUGHTERS. They are armed with FLOWERS and PRESENTS. DAVID is with them. THE GIRLS bolt into the dining room as BETTY takes MR. and Mrs. Drummond's coats. She ushers them into the dining room, then returns to the kitchen. The camera remains in the hall. Suddenly, the hall light is extinguished and, for a beat, we wait in darkness.

Suddenly, Anna appears behind Betty and they both emerge from the kitchen. ANNA carries the CANDLELIT CAKE. Betty walks ahead of her.

DINING ROOM - EVENING

Betty turns the lights off in the dining room. Anna enters with the cake. Everyone claps and sings 'Happy Birthday'. Eleanor blows the candles out. Claps and congratulations and kisses. 'Hip Hip' shouts JOSEPH. 'Hooray', they reply.

Betty turns the lights back on. And there, in the corner, ANNA sees DAVID. 'Hip Hip' shouts JOSEPH. And DAVID looks back, as baffled as she is shocked. 'Hooray', they reply.

INT. ELEVATOR - MOVING - EVENING

Anna and David travel down, side by side. He's too frightened to look at her and she's too angry to look at him. She takes a $10 bill from her purse and folds it in her hand.

They continue their descent in silence....

[I deleted several scenes here where she has the front desk put him in a taxi.]

INT. MORGANS' APARTMENT BUILDING - CORRIDOR - EVENING

The elevator doors open at Anna's floor, and she exits the elevator. LAURA is waiting there, and she and ANNA walk back to the apartment together. 

LAURA: That was him.

ANNA: Yes.

LAURA: Betty thought he was with the Drummonds, the Drummonds thought he was with us.

ANNA: You didn't tell anyone, did you?

LAURA: No.

They arrive at the apartment door. Laura rings the bell.

LAURA (CONT'D): What are you going to do?

ANNA: Nothing. It's over. It's a moot issue. (a pause) Finished.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think this turning point was very effective for me because it plays into a universal theme of fear and feeling helpless.  

Also, it's not just a crescendo into a tense moment, but a moment where a decision has to be made (turning point).

Birth (2004)(draft dated 9/1/02)
by Jean-Claude Carriere & Jonathan Glazer
Additional dialogue by Milo Addica

2024 OSCARS: The Zone of Interest (2023) - Showing, But Not Telling, That Something is Wrong

[Quick Summary: SS Commandant Rudolf Hoss and his wife Hedwig build a perfect life on the other side of the fence from a concentration camp.]

THREE THOUGHTS:

1) SCRIPT. This is well-written script that zips along at 76 pgs.  I liked the first 2/3, but the last 1/3 focused mostly on Rudolf, and I missed the family dynamics.

2) AUDIO. This film generated a lot of Oscar buzz around the effectiveness of this film's audio track because one could hear, but not see, the concentration camps.

In the crowded genre of WWII films, this was a very different, point of view.

3) SHOW NOT TELL. The script also had a very different point of view,  that emphasized a normal German family treating unusual circumstances as normal.  

It often showed, but did not tell, that things were very wrong, as in the scene below:

EXT. ROCKY INLET, SOLA RIVER - MORNING

The canoe is moored on a small beach.

Hans and Inge-Brigit splash in the shallows nearby, teasing each other.

Rudolph stands waist deep in the river upstream, a fishing rod in his hand. 

He stands very still, focusing on his float in hope of a bite.

He flinches suddenly. Looks down at the water he's standing in. Then returns his focus to the float.

Then, feeling something brushing past his thigh, flinches again.

He looks down at the water. He puts his hand in and pulls out a fragment of a bone.

A human eye socket.

We look at him through it.

He drops it then wades out Hurriedly.

He throws down his rod on the bank and hurries along the shoreline, lapping dead fish, towards the children. Signaling for them to get out as he approaches.

RUDOLF: Come on out. Out.

They come to shore reluctantly.

He towels them off anxiously.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I heard the apt phrase "banality of evil" applied to this film.  I liked that the characters' consciences are seen, even if they may not say so.

The Zone of Interest (2023)(undated)
by Jonathan Glazer
Based on the novel by Martin Amis

2024 OSCARS: Poor Things (2023) - Showing His Disconnect with Her

[Quick Summary: Bella, a child's brain transplanted into the body of her mother, learns at a rapid pace as she leaves home to explore the world.]

This is definitely Bella's story (Emma Stone).  She has tremendous arc.

However, I found the Duncan character (Mark Ruffalo) more interesting.  He is a man used to getting his way, and cannot cope with this woman outgrowing him.

One of the first scenes to show this disconnect is the scene below.  I really liked how Duncan is trying to undermine Bella's growing confidence in the subtext.  

What makes it funnier is that she has no idea he is jabbing at her and does not respond in a way we'd expect:

INT. DINING ROOM - DAY

A flambe crepe suzette, a women's hair on fire. Duncan stares at Bella who ignores it, she is drawing a postcard to Baxter. Her floating at sea, a bird sitting on her chest pushing her under. [A woman on fire in a communal dining area is unexpected and funny.]

DUNCAN: There is a woman on fire. Look. [He makes a bid for her attention.]

She continues drawing. [She ignores the woman on fire, which is amusing. She ignores him, which is our first non-verbal sign. Maybe she didn't hear him?]

DUNCAN (CONT'D): I know you are mad, forgive me my kidnapping you, but it was for love. A romantic jape. Don't be such a cunt about it.

She looks at him. [Ok, she did hear him. She may not understand the meaning of "cunt," but she does seem to understand kidnapping is not love, nor for her benefit. They're not on the same page, and the disconnect is widening.]

BELLA: I want a drink.

DUNCAN: Of course darling. The ship is fun, a world to explore. I love you. Do you love me? [He's not listening to her. She doesn't know how to address what's going on yet. They are operating on two different levels. Even if they cannot can see the misunderstanding, we can, and it's humorous too.]

BELLA: Describe the elements I should be looking for within myself to be sure.

DUNCAN: You just feel it or not! [He's getting impatient, but has no idea why. He doesn't know there's an infant brain inside of her, literally. In subtext, he assumes she's being dense, and expects her to behave like an adult, but she cannot. I like the irony here.]

BELLA: So it is no evidence base as God would say. And so how judge it empirically?

DUNCAN: What the fuck are you talking about? Who are you? You don't know what bananas are, you've never heard of chess, and yet you know what empirically means! [He's getting more upset that she makes no sense, though he is not either.]

BELLA: Bella needs a drink. Said twice now. [She may not know what he's talking about, but she does know he's not listening.] 

DUNCAN: I have never felt anything like this. Is this true for you? [He continues to press, even though she can't give him the response he wants.]

BELLA: ...I suppose empirically it is. Oh I am out of ink. [She is literally out of ink, and of words. This was really smart. I also liked that it is a line puts a button on the scene. She has no subtext, and is speaking of ink.]

DUNCAN: Then you shall have ink my love. [Duncan seems to think their agreement re:ink also means they're on the same page about the two of them.]

He gets up and heads across the room.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked that we see the disconnect in the non-verbals, and also subtext (what characters believe, but not being said). 

We also think it's amusing because the audience can see what the characters can't.  

Ex. Duncan is insisting Bella behave a certain way without understanding where she is coming from, nor her lack of psychological development.

Poor Things (2023)(final, Dec., 2023)
by Tony McNamara
Based on the novel by Alasdair Gray

2024 OSCARS: Oppenheimer (2023) - Simple Symbol of Shouldering Responsibility

[Quick Summary: After Dr. Oppenheimer develops the atomic bomb at Los Alamos, NM, he suffers a politically motivated investigation.]

I liked, but didn't love, this script.  On the plus side, it did show me something I'd not seen before, i.e, being written in Oppenheimer's first person POV.   

On the negative side, it is mostly dialogue, so there are fewer visuals on the page. 

My favorite one (below) is a wonderful economy of writing. 
- Oppenheimer has come to consult Einstein on whether to go forward with atomic energy research that could destroy the world.  He shows him his research (papers).
- You can almost see the action IN the dialogue (but not "telling").
- I love how Einstein handing back that piece of paper has a deeper meaning in the very last line.  It symbolizes responsibility.

EXT. LAKE, INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY - MOMENTS LATER

EINSTEIN: And here we are, lost in your quantum world of probabilities, but needing certainty.

OPPENHEIMER: Can you run the calculations yourself?

EINSTEIN: About the only thing you and I share is a distain for mathematics. Who's working on it at Berkeley?

OPPENHEIMER: Hans Bethe.

EINSTEIN: He'll get to the truth.

OPPENHEIMER: And if the truth is catastrophic?

EINSTEIN: Then you stop. And share your findings with the Nazis, so neither side destroys the world.

I turn to leave.

EINSTEIN (CONT'D): Robert? (holding out paper) This is yours. Not mine.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: In this dialogue heavy script about big ideas (there's a lot of telling), I really appreciated a simple visual symbol (showing).

Oppenheimer (2023)(revised, 1/3/22)
by Christopher Nolan
Based on the book, "American Prometheus The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer", by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin

2024 OSCARS: Barbie (2023) - Things Lost in Execution; Capturing the Tone of Child's Play

[Quick Summary: Barbie leaves Barbie Land to find out why she is starting to feel real feelings, and finds out things are not as perfect as she thought.]

THE FILM: I saw the film first, and liked act 1, but not 2 and 3. I got confused, and I'm afraid, slightly bored.  Was it the script's fault?

THE SCRIPT: The script surprised me. It is clearer than the film, well-written, inventive, and reads at a zippy, carefree pace (even acts 2 and 3).

So if the script is pretty much the same as the film, why do I think the film does not quite deliver the promise of the script?  What got lost in the execution?

I don't know exactly, but here are my two cents:

1) PATRIARCHY DOESN'T LEND ITSELF TO SNAPPY REPARTEE.  I admire the writers' ambitions to tackle a BIG topic which read well on the page.

However, the arguments require time and explanation...which bogs down the speed that satire needs for laughs.*  As a result, the film was more telling than showing.

2) TOO EARNEST? Satire also requires a good dose of ridicule. In Acts 2 and 3, I found the tone...too earnest?  Trying to make a point? I wish there were more irony.

I do think this script is worth reading, especially for Act 1's breezy, ridiculous fun.  

I particularly like the first description of Barbie Land (below), which captures the mindset of how little girls play with Barbies, with exuberance and female-centric:

EXT. BARBIE LAND. DAY

Barbie Margot waves happily, sometimes with both hands, to other Barbies as her car silently drives itself through a bustling town. It's like Richard Scarry's Busy Town for Barbie. It's a wonder of color and shape. The houses are all see-through, like the toys, it's a Noah's Ark of doll-tastic magic.

It's also completely run by women. They hold every kind of job. Barbie Margot waves to a Barbie mail carrier, and an all Barbie construction crew. There is the occasional Ken, but mostly it's Barbie.

Barbie Margot drives past the Barbie White House which is, of course, pink.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I was most moved when this script captured the fun, weird spirit of a child playing with Barbies. The movement of the characters even feel like play.

Barbie (2023)
by Greta Gerwig & Noah Baumbach

*Margot Robbie recounts (here) that Gerwig wanted her actors to speak at a certain pace and referenced His Girl Friday, one of my all time favorite screwball comedies. 

One of the things that I love about His Girl Friday is that it seemed to speed up as it went along.  It also had a small cast, and a personal, simpler story.   

I don't know if speeding up would even be possible with Barbie.  Barbie had a much bigger cast, and tackled a larger societal problem. The pace would inevitably slow down with that many moving parts.

2024 OSCARS: American Fiction (2023) - What Happens After the Satire's Punchline?

[Quick Summary: While he faces family issues, a frustrated black writer writes a book that's meant to be insulting, but it becomes a best-seller, much to his dismay.]

I think one of the hardest parts of satires is not losing that edgy irony.

I hate it when a script has a great scene with a zinger punchline, but then it dies.  Why couldn't the writer couldn't sustain the momentum? What happened?  

Many times, the script will simply plateau, instead of continuing to build. 

ex. Perhaps the writers were so happy with a joke that they keep going back to that same well, trying to keep cashing in on that one great scene. 

I liked this script because it never resting too long on a punchline. It also never allowed the protagonist to get too comfortable, so the tension continues to build.

For example, in the scene below:

- Carl is the head of the Literary Award committee.
- He is oblivious to the veiled insult Monk delivers ("I'm honored you'd choose me...") If it ended there, that would just be a great punch line.
- However, the writer turns the tables on Monk and plays to his weakness: "you can judge other writers like they judged you."
- This last bit of conflict is what makes the scene fresh and unpredictable.  We want to know what will happen next.

INT. CARL BRUNT'S OFFICE - SAME TIME

...MONK: Every writer knows the Literary Award, Carl. Especially those of us who haven't won it.

Carl laughs a little.

CARL: Well, that's related to why I'm calling. Like many American institutions, mine was recently rattled by the notion that our lack of diversity has led to a blindspot in our work. So we're kind of trying to remedy that and, to that end, I was wondering how you might feel about being a judge for this year's award.

Monk pauses his browsing for a moment.

MONK: Um, let me say first say, Carl, that I'm honored you'd choose me out of all the black writers you could go to for fear of being called racist.

CARL (oblivious): Yeah, you're very welcome.

MONK: But I think this sounds like a lot of work.

CARL: Yeah, I can't deny that. I mean, you're going to have to read dozens of books. We could offer you a modest stipend.

MONK: Even so, I'm not sure.

CARL: OK. One other crass perk I reference when people are on the fence is that this will allow you the opportunity to literally judge other writers for once, rather than just figuratively.

Monk considers this for a moment.

MONK: Alright. I'm in.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Beware of resting on a punchline too long. Satires particularly do well with a conflict after the punchline. 

Perhaps one reason for this is that an audience feels good after a punchline, and will want another jolt. They'll feel let down unless there's another upswing of emotion, and conflict can deliver that.

American Fiction (2023)
by Cord Jefferson
Based on the novel "Erasure," by Percival Everett

2024 OSCARS: Past Lives (2023) - Voice Over in a Setup for Later Payoff

[Quick Summary: Nora, who left S. Korea as a child, reconnects twenty years later with Hae Sung, her childhood friend.]

I loved this script because it evoked such poignant emotions of love lost and found.

In several interviews, the writer/playwright Celine Song, mentioned that this is also about the characters' younger selves getting to say the goodbye that they hadn't had.

I liked how she set up that goodbye payoff with an earlier setup, in the scene below.

We can see that the two characters still have an unresolved connection because the voice over bridges them, despite the distance of space and time:

EXT. BARN HOUSE PICNIC TABLE - NIGHT - SOMETIME THAT SUMMER

The artists are all a little tipsy with empty bottles of wine and beer -- the evidence of a good night out --splayed out all over the table.

They listen to slightly-drunk Nora with varying degrees of interest:

NORA: There is a word in Korean: In-Yun. It means providence or fate, about it's specifically about relationships between people.

Nora's voice over plays out over the following silent scenes of Hae Sung in Shanghai:

INT. PLANE TO SHANGHAI - MORNING

Hae Sung is on a flight to Shanghai.

NORA (V.O.): I think it comes from Buddhism and reincarnation.

INT. SHANGHAI DORM ROOM - DUSK

Hae Sung is sleeping in his new dorm room. It is small and crappy, but the view of Shanghai is magnificent. 

On the bed is an information package about his language exchange program in both Korean and Mandarin with things like class schedule and local restaurant recommendations.

NORA (V.O.): It's an In-Yun if two strangers even walk by each other in the street and their clothes accidentally brush -  

EXT. SHANGHAI NIGHT MARKET - NIGHT

Hae Sung and the other language exchange students walk around the fish market on a group outing. Steam emanates from the food stalls, and it is full of late-night lovers.

It smells pungent and looks gorgeous.

There is a very cute GIRL (Korean, fellow language exchange student, 20) in the group who keeps glancing at Hae Sung.

Hae Sung doesn't notice.

Hae Sung lights up a cigarette, and offers one to his fellow students, who eagerly grab one from the pack.

NORA (V.O.): - because it means there must have been something between them in their past lives.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked that the voice over bridges the characters and keeps them emotionally connected, and is not merely an information dump.

Past Lives (2023)(undated)
by Celine Song

2024 OSCARS: May December (2023) - Suspense, Which Lends an Edge, Lies in Character

[Quick Summary: To portray their relationship, an actress spends time with a controversial couple (Gracie was 36 and Joe was 13 when they met).]

Q: Isn't sex with an underage minor is an icky subject matter for a feature?
A: I thought so, but this the writer did something interesting with it.  

Q: What was so interesting?
A: She added suspense, which lends an edge to the story, akin to a psychological thriller.

Q: Like waiting for the other shoe to drop?
A: Yes.  After Gracie went to jail and exited, she still married the guy. Now this actress (Elizabeth), shows up to study them, and Joe is seeing his life differently.  

Q: How do the other characters add to the suspense?
A: We never know what they're thinking or going to do next. ex. As Elizabeth starts to mimic Gracie, is she getting involved with Joe for herself or for the film? 

Q: What do you think is a key to this suspenseful edge?
A: One of the keys is the Gracie character. They all say she knows exactly what she's doing, but are we sure?

The scene below showcases Gracie, who the writer said she wrote as the "center of her universe."  In her worldview, everything is cheery, and/or ignored. 

Note the hold she has on everyone, and her obliviousness (is it?) that it affects anyone adversely.  We keep on reading to see if she really is that oblivious, or not:

INT. ATHERTON-YOO KITCHEN - DAY

...Gracie thinks about it, skeptical. Then, suddenly lightly: 

GRACIE: Alright.

Elizabeth and Joe both look relieved.

GRACIE (CONT'D): Of course I talk to Georgie. And to Billy and Cassidy. I'm their mom.

ELIZABETH: Sure...

JOE: Cassidy was just here last -- (looks at Gracie) What was it? ...And we'll see everyone at graduation...

GRACIE: The twins are in the same class as Cassidy's son Peter, my grandson. So we'll all be at graduation together, which you're welcome to come to if you're still in town.

A big smile.

GRACIE (CONT'D): Now who wants cake?

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This script surprised me on a few fronts:
- The basis of this relationship is an unpleasant topic, but it wasn't the point of the script.
- I'd never thought to put this kind of suspenseful spin, and that it would work because it's about character.
- Going deeper into character made this script more interesting than my initial glance at the logline.

May-December (2023)(undated)
Story by Samy Burch & Alex Mechanik
Screenplay by Samy Burch

2024 OSCARS: Maestro (2023) - Music Intersecting with Action = Shows Her Impact on Him

[Quick Summary: A portrait of the up and down marriage of composer- conductor Leonard and Felicia Bernstein.]

Though well-written, I was not wildly moved by this script. 

I think it is a bit too much "slice of life" for me.  It's not exactly a biopic, but the story of a marriage between a passionate conductor and his equally vibrant wife. 

However, I did like how the writers crafted moments where Bernstein's compositions intersect with important emotional moments. 

The scene below was one of those moments:
-  The combination of music and action carry the theme of the film: Felicia's emotional impact on Lenny.
- As the first composition bursts forth through Lenny on the stage, we see how her support enables him to reach the highest emotions.
- Then with a second composition, the music breaks them apart.

INT. HOUSE/STAGE, ALDEPHI THEATER, NEW YORK - NIGHT

He smiles at her. A smile that'd make another woman blush. Felicia pulls back up against her seat to watch the ballet. We've jumped later in the piece to Fancy Free: VI. Three Dance Variations, Variation III (Danzon) and one of the sailors is dancing solo, like a serenade for the other two sailors. We PUSH IN on the dancer; the movements are sensual.

And we see the sailor is not LB himself, through Felicia's eyes, lost in his own movements, the eroticism of it all, titillating both to himself and his audience. We see this land on Felicia's face, this recognition of this complicated man.

On stage, LB moves through the end of the Variation, closer and closer to Felicia. First coming up to the barstool, drumming on his knee. Then standing on top of one, pounding on his chest, gorilla style, declaring his art form and then leaping up, landing almost in front of her as the music stops. 

Felicia shoots up from her chair and claps energetically for LB breaking free and expressing himself fully. LB beams, and moves right toward her, and they embrace and kiss.  [I thought this was great descriptive writing:"breaking free and expressing himself."]

We go into the kiss, close on them, the passion of their embrace as the top stage lights fair and BAM!!!

We hear the horn wail that marks the beginning of On the Town: Act 1: Opening: New York, New York. This breaks them apart.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think this scene, with only music and action, may have been the best way of explaining the unexplainable impact Felicia had on Lenny.

Maestro (2023)(undated)
by Bradley Cooper & Josh Singer

2024 OSCARS: The Holdovers (2023) - When a Juxtaposed Sound Is Ironic

[Quick Summary: A cranky teacher, a grieving cook, and sullen student stay at a 1970s boarding school over Christmas break.]

I liked this script much more than I thought.

I think it's due to the unexpected combinations of humor and humanity.

I particularly liked the scene below in which Mary, the cook, pours out her heart. It's especially poignant because of the two moments of irony (see comments): 

INT. KITCHEN STAFF COMMON ROOM - CONTINUOUS

...MARY: I took this job when Curtis was little, so he could get a good education. You know, he flourished here.

PAUL: He was a great kid. I had him one semester. Very insightful.

MARY: Uh-huh. He hated you. He said you were a real asshole.

PAUL: Well, like I said, sharp kid. Insightful. [This is one of my favorite ironic lines. She was blunt, and he appreciated the truth.]

MARY: He had his heart set on Swarthmore, and he had the grades, but I didn't have the money. Even with financial aid it wasn't enough. So when he got called up, no student deferment, off he went. You know what he said to me? He said: "Hey ma, look at the upside. When I get discharged, I can go to college on the GI Bill." College. (keeping it together) And here we are. With my Curtis in the cold ground, and those boys safe and warm in their beds. It's like you said. "Life is like a henhouse ladder." That's right -- I can hear everything you're saying from the kitchen. Especially that little Kountze kid. Crown prince of all the little assholes.

Silence, which is broken by APPLAUSE from the studio audience. [This juxtaposed sound afterwards is so wonderfully ironic. It's an audible contrast to what she's just said (mourning vs. happy). Also, it encapsulated my visceral reaction to her words: bittersweet, funny.]

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This is a sharply observed story about coping with sadness, which might've been too depressing, if not for its unusual ways to insert irony.

The Holdovers (2023)(undated)
by David Hemington

2024 OSCARS: Anatomy of a Fall (2023) - How a Supporting Character Shapes Our Opinions

[Quick Summary: After her husband falls to his death in France, his  wife is on trial, and their sight-impaired son is the main witness.]

Did Sandra hit her husband?  Or did her depressed husband commit suicide?

Though I did not know for sure, I found myself having decided opinions, and was impressed how this script played with those assumptions. 

One of the characters that shaped my view of Sandra was her defense attorney.  

I found him believable, and not flat, i.e., he didn't exist just to make a point about Sandra.  It was clear he had a life of his own outside this case.

Their conversations dropped hints about their previous relationship (more assumptions!). I had to re-think again when he started asking questions.

I changed my mind yet again after he argued her position in court. 

The last line below hit home because it was a subconscious belief that I had not realized I was carrying: 

VINCENT (on his way) Embarked on a headlong rush, he only postpones the moment of realizing that transcribing is not writing: Paul Nachez's silence has enlightened him all too cruelly on this truth. The energy we hear in the argument of November 23 is that of despair, a desire that insists before giving up. What marked the last months of this man's life was not a war in his relationship, it was the realization of a personal bankruptcy, one failure too many. If Sandra Voyter is guilty of anything, it is that she succeeded where her husband failed. (bolded emphasis mine)

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  I liked that this supporting character brought out something (both literally in this dialogue, but also in their interactions) about the main character, which she alone could not do.  

Anatomy of a Fall (2023)
by Justine Triet & Arthur Harari

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Horseman on the Roof (1996) - One of THE Most Romantic Lines of Dialogue

[Quick Summary: During the chaos of a cholera epidemic, a heroic Italian officer hiding in France offers to help a young wife find her husband.]

Is romance dead?*  The scripts have been scarce.

However, this script restored my faith with one of the most romantic lines of dialogue I've ever read.  

First, I have to give credit to the story which leads up to that moment.  There are a few elements that really work well together:
- Angelo, the hero, is honest, brave, and trustworthy.
- He's attracted to mysterious Pauline, who barrels about, looking for information.
- There are real stakes and conflict that builds and builds the tension.
- The drama is heightened by the situation, i.e., in the middle of a cholera epidemic.

Second, this line of dialogue comes at the end of a great build up (last 1/3 of script):
- Pauline is jailed and Angelo gets inside the prison to rescue her. 
- For the entire script, he's been delaying getting back home to help her.
- He continued to help her, even after finding out she's been looking for information about her husband.
- Also, notice the transition out of this very romantic moment. It reminds us that despite this very important moment in their lives, life goes on.

INT./EXT./ TOWER WINDOW; VAUMEILH - DAY

PAULINE: I came over here a little while ago, before you arrived. I looked down...I thought that it would be so easy to die, so swift, just a second or two, you just let yourself go...

ANGELO: Stop that!

PAULINE: There's nothing we can do, you know it as well as I do. The illness is out there, everywhere. I'm not even afraid of it anymore. Maybe it's already in us.

ANGELO: That's not true!

She sits on the stone ledge inside the opening.

PAULINE: What I see, what I do, nothing makes me want to live...

ANGELO (sitting beside her): Go and rest some. Go sleep.

PAULINE (looking up at him): Aren't you ever hesitant, or flustered?...Are you always sure of what to do?

ANGELO: I think it over and do the best I can.

PAULINE: It's as though the illness were your battlefield.

ANGLEO: You could say that.

PAULINE: Why are you always following me?

A beat.

ANGELO: Because I don't feel lonely when I'm with you. [My emphasis. This is an elegant expression of what all of us seek: someone putting us above them, and wanting that connection, togetherness. Also: note what happens after this important line.]

PAULINE: I don't even know your name. [This is a reminder that they hardly know each other. It makes everything previous to it more romantic because he did this for her, not her status.]

ANGELO: Pardi. Angelo Pardi.

PAULINE: My name's Pauline.

Just then, the drape is pulled back REVEALING the HANDSOME MAN who looks like a horse dealer, his notebook in hand.  [Notice how the writers pull us back to the present. Romance does not happen in a vacuum. Life goes on.]

HANDSOME MAN: I beg your pardon, colonel, and I hate to disturb you thus...I'm Alexandre Petit, dealer in seed and feed! 

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I really liked how the peak of this romance happened in the middle of normal life, and not in a vacuum. It felt even more real. 

Also, I was swept away by the couple's aching and longing, which I think the writer Jean-Claude Carriere writes very well.

The Horseman on the Roof (1996)(10/20/93 draft)
by Jean-Paul Rappeneau and Nina Companeez & Jean-Claude Carriere
Based on the novel by Jean Giono

* Also, I wonder if the lack of good romantic stories is the reason Gen Z is valuing friendships over romance: "An inability to find quality romantic relationships could be one reason Gen Zers want more friendships, or commitment-free romantic relationships."

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Unbearable Lightness of Being (1988) - Sex as a Metaphor

[Quick Summary: On the 1968 eve of the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia, a serial bed-hopping surgeon meets a woman who wants monogamy.]

Q: Is there a lot of sex in this script?
A: Yes (and nudity too*).

Q: Is it gratuitous? 
A: No, because the main character, Tomas, focuses a lot on it.  But when it debuted for its sexuality and sensuality. 

Q: But if that was all, why does the film still resonate with audiences? 
A: I think Roger Ebert said it best: 

What is remarkable about "The Unbearable Lightness of Being," however, is not the sexual content itself, but the way [director Phillip] Kaufman has been able to use it as an avenue for a complex story, one of nostalgia, loss, idealism and romance.

Q: How? What's so great that this script got an Oscar nomination?
A:  I think it's the way the story unfolds and how Tomas arcs. Ebert made very astute observation about where Tomas begins:

For him [Tomas], sex seems like a form of physical meditation, rather than an activity with another person.

Tomas then learns that freedom from any commitment (that "lightness of being") becomes unbearable. 

Q: What surprised you about the script?
A: I'd heard a lot about the writer (the often cited Jean-Claude Carriere), but little about what makes his writing so special. I came to see:

1) He writes longing really well. I felt it build through the script.

2) This script surprised me at how deftly Carrier gets to the heart of the matter. There's a direct simplicity that is deceiving because it's really difficult to write well.

In the scene below:
- This is a very early scene (p. 2), in the hospital operating suite.
- Dr. Tomas has just gotten his latest fling (Nurse) to flash him in another room, while his colleagues have been eavesdropping on them.
- Notice how each of the characters voices the various opinions about sex (spoken), and how they think it will satisfy (ex. unspoken need for attention, status, etc.)

IN PREPARATION ROOM. Nurse's face is flushed as she buttons her robe and silently brushes past Tomas. Their cheeks touching. 

IN PREPARATION ROOM. Nurse's face is flushed as she buttons her robe and silently brushes past Tomas. Their cheeks touching. 

NURSE: Will I see you in three weeks?

TOMAS: Exactly three weeks.

ADJOINING ROOM. She exits. Tomas goes into adjoining room and sees JAN and JIRI have been eavesdropping on him.

JAN: Tomas, I caught him spying again.

JIRI: Not spying, just learning. I want to know how you do it, you bastard. She's incredible. How can you not see her for three weeks?

Tomas and Jan being to have some fun with Jiri.

TOMAS: Because it's the rule of threes, Jiri.

JIRI (he wants to know - a pupil): What rule of threes?

Tomas acts like he doesn't want to explain, so Jan volunteers.

JAN: It's simple, Jiri. But it must be very carefully worked out. Either you see a woman three times in quick succession and then never again, or you maintain a relationship over the years but make sure that the meetings are at least three weeks apart.

JIRI: And what else?

TOMAS: Nothing else. That's the basis of the erotic contract.

JIRI: A contract?

TOMAS: Yes. An unwritten contract that stipulates that sentimentality has no place in a relationship.

JIRI: But what about love?

JAN: The contract stipulates that you exclude all love...

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Sex is a metaphor for Tomas' life: It's his way, all the time.  However, his shift from "I" to "we" did not happen as I expected it to.  

It's hard to explain, but it's truly moving how his imperfections become exposed upon meeting Tereza and facing war, and the longing becomes contentment.

The Unbearable Lightness of Being (1988)(revised draft, 9/4/86)
by Jean Claude Carriere and Philip Kaufman
Based on the novel by Milan Kundera

* In Roger Ebert's review, he wrote: 

There is a lot of nudity in the film but no pornographic documentary quality; the camera does not linger, or move for the best view, or relish the spectacle of nudity. The result is some of the most poignant, almost sad, sex scenes I have ever seen - sensuous, yes, but bittersweet.

TODAY'S NUGGET: The Grifters (1990) - One of the Very Best Solutions to a Problematic Introduction

[Quick Summary: A small time con man is torn between his high-stakes con mother and con girlfriend, who have their own interests.]

I'm always interested in how writers solve story problems.  This novel was one of those problematic adaptations.

According to screenwriter and novelist Donald E. Westlake, he turned it down at first, and director Stephen Frears asked him why. 

"It's too gloomy," Westlake said. Frears said it wasn't if you looked at it from the mother's point of view, which was about "the price of survival." 

Still, Westlake saw other pressing problems:

The problem is the mother comes into the story third. The son has to come first and the girlfriend has to come second....[H]ow are you going to tell the audience that the third character on board is the one you're supposed to watch? And he [Frears] said the thing that they always say sooner or later: "Well, you're the writer."

So I said, "Alright, give me a week, and if I can find a way to let the audience know that they should watch the mother, then ok, I'll do it. But then otherwise, not."  He said, "Alright."

And then six days later, I called him and said how about we open with a triptych, where we see the three characters entering their lives through three different doors and three different locations. And that way, at least we're on a level playing field for who's our main character, and let the audience work it out. And that's what we did. (bold mine)

Wow! What a genius solution!

So when you read this scene (below), pay attention:
1) that it's not about the techniques (split screens, wipes), but how they're used to convey meaning (these three characters are equally important).  

2) that this kind of cinematic language is crucial for film, i.e. things seen but unspoken and understood, but may be less important in other art forms. 

EXT. RUIDOSO DOWNS - DAY

...WIDE SHOT, track in b.g., as Lilly parks the Chrysler, gets out, locks the car. As she walks toward the track, WIPE RIGHT, as SCENE TWO WIPES IN from the left. SCENE ONE CAMERA FOLLOWS Lilly as she walks across the large parking area. SPLIT SCREEN.

SCENE TWO:

EXT. SIDE STREET - DAY

Downtown Los Angeles, near the courts and the business section. ROY DILLION, 25, handsome and charming but self indulgent, parks his orange Honda convertible, gets out, picks up a large ledger book from the back seat, goes around to open the trunk.

AN ANGLE on the trunk, establishing the tools of the salesman's trade: catalogs, samples, ledgers full of manuals and product sheets. Roy adds the ledger from the back seat, shuts the trunk, walks away.

EXT. 6th STREET - DAY

Roy walks around the corner near a bar/restaurant. As he approaches it, WIPE LEFT, the two half-width scenes contracting to one-third each as SCENE THREE WIPES IN from the right.

SCENE ONE: Lilly approaches the track's entrance doors.

SCENE TWO: Roy approaches the bar.

SCENE THREE:

EXT. SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD - DAY

A baby blue Cadillac parks in front of a jeweler.

AN ANGLE on the driver's door as MYRA LANGTRY, 36, beautiful in an impersonal calculating way, gets out, carrying a small jewelry case, and locks the car. At first glance, Myra looks rather like Lilly. (Myra always wears large dangly earrings, and usually wears big-lensed dark sunglasses.)

SIMULTANEOUSLY:

SCENE ONE: Lilly enters the track.

SCENE TWO: Roy enters the bar.

SCENE THREE: Myra enters the jeweler's.

WIPE RIGHT AND LEFT, as SCENE TWO takes FULL SCREEN.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED:  So much of the writer's job is "if I can let the audience know..." without telling them.  

When I watched the film, I was truly impressed that I caught on so quickly, just with these visuals, and without being told.

The Grifters (1991)(2nd draft, March, 1989)
by Donald E. Westlake
Based on the novel by Jim Thompson

TODAY'S NUGGET: A Haunting in Venice (2023) - Unspoken Horror/Angst + Using a Swinging Door

[Quick Summary: A medium is murdered the night of an orphans' Halloween party. What did she know?]

I am going to tread lightly here, as I:
1) am an avid Agatha Christie fan (and admittedly a bit of snob),* and
2) have not been the biggest fan of the latest Kenneth Branagh remakes.**

This third film uses the book's setting of a Halloween party, but not the plot (the latter of which, in my opinion, is loosely adapted from another Christie novel). 

However, the script is well written and spooky. 

I particularly appreciated writer Michael Green's use of a swinging door that bodes ominous things (below). 

In this scene:
- Alicia and Maxine were engaged. He broke it off when her mother, Rowena, wouldn't approve.
- Maxine left. Alicia got sick and died.
- Years later, a medium now claims that she knows Alicia was murdered.
- After her Halloween party for orphans tonight, Rowena has agreed to hold a seance to contact Alicia.
- Maxine has returned to be a part of the seance.
- I felt the visual below captures the unspoken horror/angst between Rowena and Maxine, especially how she blames Maxine for Alicia's death, though he is innocent.
- The movement and rhythm of the door also increases the psychological horror, tension, and suspense between these two.  What's going to happen next?
- We are standing in Maxine's POV in the kitchen.

INT. KITCHEN/ PANTRY / DINING ROOM. PALAZZO. NIGHT.

A PANTRY DOOR SWINGS, OPEN / SHUT / OPEN, giving SWIPED views of ROWENA AND LEOPOLD. Inside eating cake at A SERVANTS' TABLE (by a PHONE). Rowena's gaze lasers up on the last swing, hate in her eyes. The door closes.

ON MAXINE. Feeling it. She was looking at him.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I thought the swinging door was an apt metaphor for this strained relationship, and wonderful way to amplify that strain.

A Haunting in Venice (2023)(undated)
by Michael Green
Adapted from the novel, Hallowe'en Party, by Agatha Christie

*For those who are curious: my favorite Poirot actor is David Suchet, and my favorite Miss Marple actor is Joan Hickson.

**This is the best of the three remakes.  My main issue with two prior remakes is that they spend a lot of Act 1 dwelling on Poirot as a person, establishing him with an ego, as the "most celebrated detective." I feel this: a) completely undercuts the joke, i.e., he's not as famous as he thinks he is; b) is distracting and unnecessary.  Mysteries are not really about the detective, per se.