2016 OSCARS: Room (2015) - What Peril Looks Like

[Quick Summary: A 26 y.o. mother and her 5 y.o. son, who are hostages in a 10' x 10' shed, dare to escape.]

I was afraid of this script. I did not want to read it.

I kept saying to myself, "This is the most I've ever dreaded reading a script."

But to complete my tour of the 2016 Oscar scripts, I had to read it.

So I did, and I'm telling you, "You should read this script."

If it helps, I list the top three questions that I had prior to reading this script:

QUESTION #1: Why would I want to go there?
ANSWER: Yes, the story takes place in a horrible situation, but Donoghue, the writer/novelist, finds the joy and empathy. By p. 2, I knew I was in good hands.

QUESTION #2: Is it scary? I'm squeamish.
ANSWER:  Yes, in a good way. It's more about the non-stop suspense and tension.

QUESTION #3: I've seen characters in danger. What's the big deal?
ANSWER: This is tension of the highest order - peril, I tell you, PERIL.

The stakes are extremely clear, and the consequences more immediate.

It boils down to a razor's edge, minute by minute survival.

ex. Can Ma's mental health hold out one more day?

In the scene below, note how the writer ups the stakes (Jack is hurt, Ma might be).

Note also how she simultaneously:
- explains what happened (a 5 y.o. escaped alone)
- moves the story forward (need to find Ma ASAP)
- ends the scene (writer lets the reader piece together what the cops are thinking through action, not dialogue) 

ex. "JACK (louder): Old Nick. But that's not his name.

OFFICER PARKER: Did this Nick guy hurt you?

She goes to touch his lip, but he flinches away.

JACK: I bit me by accident. And the, the, the -

He pats the ground to remember the word.

JACK: The hard of the street. I jumped and smasheded my knee.

He remembers Bad Tooth and takes it out of his mouth.

OFFICER PARKER: What's that, Jack?

JACK: A bit of Ma.

Both officers peer at Bad Tooth, and exchange a dark look."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Peril is an extremely dramatic device. Keep all other things (B story line, settings, etc.) fairly simple so as not to draw focus away from it.

Room (2015)
by Emma Donoghue
Based on the novel by Emma Donoghue

2016 OSCARS: The Martian (2015) - Hats Off

[Quick Summary: An American astronaut is stranded on Mars while his team tries to bring him back home.]

Hats off to you, Mr. Drew Goddard.

Hats off for making me read 118 pgs. lickety split.

Hats off for getting me emotionally invested despite all the astronaut gibber jabber that I did not understand, did not need to understand, but made me believe.

ex. "BRUCE: The hull's mostly there to keep the air in. Mars' atmosphere is so thin you don't need a lot of streamlining. By the time the ship's going fast enough for air resistance to matter, it'll be high enough that there's practically no air.

VINCENT: You're sending him to space under a tarp.

BRUCE: Yes. Can I go on?"

Hats off for the combination of humor and adventure.

ex. "ANNIE: How do you know that? Why does "Elrond" mean "secret meeting?"

BRUCE: The Council of Elrond. From Lord of the Rings. It's the meeting where they decide to destroy the One Ring.

ANNIE: I so quit right now."

Hats off to some of the best lines in my recent memory:
- "I'm gonna have to science the shit out of this."
- Pathfinder rides on top of Rover 1 like Granny Clampett.
- He labels a few ration packs as he sets them aside: "Departure," "Birthday," "Last Meal..."

Hats off for an exceptional script, both moving and poignant.

Hats off to you, sir.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I was impressed that all the elements (narrative, dialogue, story, characters, ensemble) were balanced just right to strike the exact right tone: adventure, serious, funny, moving.  I do not know how he did it.

The Martian (2015)
by Drew Goddard
Based upon the novel by Andy Weir

2016 OSCARS: Carol (2015) - The Bridge to Take Us Between POVs

[Quick Summary: Therese, a young 1950s shopgirl, gets involved in a relationship with Carol, a married woman and mother in a difficult situation.]

This well-written script has:
- an elegant tone (which I expected) and
- nearly constant movement (which I did not).

The writer moves us from one POV to the next seamlessly.

(OK, there's a lot of black print on the page, but the movement makes it work.)

In the scene below, note how a package is used to bridge us between POVs:

ex. "EXT. THERESE'S APARTMENT. LATE NIGHT.

THERESE stands in front of a postbox, wearing a coat over her night clothes. There's not a soul in sight in the cold night.  She looks at a small package addressed to "Mrs. H. Aird" for a moment before dropping ti into the postbox. She looks up at her window a moment before being seized by a chill and running up the stoop to her building.

EXT. SUBURBAN NEW JERSEY STREET. LATE MORNING.

A MAILMAN pulls up to a large stone house with a gabled roof, along the stately residential street. He grabs a handful of mail, jumps down and begins walking up the driveway.

INT. CAROL'S HOUSE. ENTRANCE. LATE MORNING.

Mail is dropped through the letter slot, including THERESE'S package to CAROL. FLORENCE, CAROL'S housekeeper, glances over to the entry while mopping the floor."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It's handy to use an object to bridge the viewer between POVs.

Carol (2015)
by Phyllis Nagy
Based on the novel, The Price of Salt, by Patricia Highsmith

2016 OSCARS: Brooklyn (2015) - Romance is Emotional Risk

[Quick Summary: Eilis is a 1950s young Irish immigrant who is torn between New York and Ireland.]

What a lovely, lovely read!

I loved the quiet drama of heartache and homesickness.

I especially loved watching Eilis and Tony fall in love.

This kind of romance is a dying art in a world where it's so easy to hide behind electronics and pretending rejection doesn't exist.

Romance requires connection, which requires possible rejection and risks.

The scene below is probably the midpoint of their romance, where they're "bound together...and has further implications for the outcome of the relationship." (p. 113; Mernit)

Note the bold emotional risks:
- Tony puts himself out there for rejection.
- Eilis takes a chance on a guy with a much bigger home field advantage.

ex. "TONY: You're in a good mood, right?

She looks at him.

EILIS: Yes. Why?

TONY: It's just...I like how you're being, I don't know the word. When you go along with everything.

EILIS: Amenable?

TONY (delighted with this addition to his vocabulary): Yeah. Amenable. OK, so while you're being amenable..Can we go see a movie this week? When you're not at night classes? And if the date goes well, can we see a movie next week too?

EILIS: I'll sign up for two movies.

TONY: Really?

EILIS: Yes. Even if the first date is a disaster, I'll give it another chance.

Tony's smile couldn't be any broader."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Lacking romance? Try larger emotional risks.

Brooklyn (2015)
by Nick Hornby
Adapted from the novel by Colm Toibin

2016 OSCARS: The Big Short (2015) - The Appeal (or Not) of Fact Intensive/ Documentary Style

[Quick Summary: When a U.S. investor foresees that the housing market will fail (and bets millions that it will fail), others notice and follow suit.]

Here's the story in a nutshell:

- Everyone believed mortgage bonds were fail proof.
- In 2005, Michael Burry, an investment banker, saw that mortgages were being given to people who should not get them, i.e., bad credit plus no jobs. (subprime).
- Burry bought MILLIONS in credit default swaps, i.e., insurance on the mortgage bonds.
- If the bonds tanked, Burry would get paid HUGE (10 to 1, 20 to 1).
- Other investors got wind and started doing the same.

The sad parts are:

- These investors were betting for a U.S. financial collapse so they could profit.
- This was all legal and based on greed.
- The Securities Exchange Commission wasn't paying attention.
- The government had to bail banks out for their greed.

Did I like the script? Yeeessssnooooo.

I admire the filmmakers for attempting to crack this subject matter, as it is very complex and dense.

The script is well written, but there are so many facts that it felt like a documentary.

I focused more on learning than getting involved in the story.

ex. "MICHAEL BURRY: Did you find it odd that when the tech bubble burst in 2001 the housing market in San Jose, the tech center of the world, went up?

YOUNG ANALYST: Huh. I guess. I mean, no. It's housing. It's always AAA rated, low risk.

MICHAEL BURRY: Yes....That's the idea... (he knows what he needs now) I need you to get me the top 20 selling mortgage bonds.

YOUNG ANALYST: So you want to know what the top 20 selling mortgage bonds are?

MICHAEL BURRY: No. I want to know what mortgages are in each one.

YOUNG ANALYST: Wait, aren't those bonds made up of thousands and thousands of mortgages?

MICHAEL BURRY: Yes.

The Analyst waits for Burry to complete the thought but he doesn't.

YOUNG ANALYST: Right away Dr. Burry."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Writers need to know what kind of story they're dealing with (& what the producers want), in order to see if you and the project are a good fit.

I learned that a fact intensive story/documentary style doesn't really appeal to me.

The Big Short (2015) 
by Charles Randolph and Adam McKay
Based upon the book by Michael Lewis