The Script
FFFMentor
When her agent drops her, a shy ?love story? author attends a horror movie workshop where screenwriters are kept prisoner by a perverse guru who makes them die like their characters, so that only the best writer will survive.
Share
When dropped by her agent, a shy ?love story? author attends a horror movie workshop where a perverse guru makes screenwriters die like their characters?until only the best one survive.
This?seems to be ?close to Cube,?etc.
And again, it seems to be a story of a random act of heartless sadism. What is the guru’s motivation for subjecting the writer’s to such torture? And again, I point to “Saw” where Jigsaw’s choice of victims and torture is more than a random act of heartless sadism.
Hello, I certainly have a problem in explaining my idea.
I try!
guru’s rules:
-you are my prisoners, there is no way to escape.
-you must write a scene where another guest dies. For exemple Mister white write a scene where Mister Brown (one o the writers) is drawned in the bathtub. Mister Brown write a scene where Mister White dies because all the chess pieces are inserted in his ass one by one.
-at the end of the day the guru read the scenes and choose the better one.
-Mister White is forced to have all the chess pieces up his ass until he dies.
-The writer who is alive at the end will be free to leave. To stay alive they must write the most original scenes.
When they are actually killed, they all ‘play’ their role better than any actor because it’s real!
When the guru reads a scene, sometimes we “saw” the scene, so all the characters can virtually be killed many times.
‘…then the guru kills the writer that stars in the best scripted scene…’
So the scenes have to be performed by all the writers — certainly they’ve heard of improv? As in, isn’t in an actors hands whether or not a scene is good or not? And what would constitute a ‘good’ scene?
It’s got plausibility issues, but if it branched into whacky comedy cum horror it could be gold.
Best of luck.
I’ll try a different angle to face or avoid all problems.
Sure, I understand what you mean. In reading a synospis of chuck palaniuk’s novel I see some similarities and I see that he did it really good and surely better than what I can do- I’m still proud to have had some small ideas that palaniuk had 🙂 of course I must differenciate from his work because now that I know it (thanks to your comment) I don’t want to do the same. I think that there is still some place in this zone of survival plot with writers as characters.
I just want to point out that even in a 10 lines synopsis we don’t know why the host kidnapped them, and we ignore what motivates the writers to join the workshop. Probably in the novel all this is clear but does-it belongs to a one sentence logline?
I’m gonna buy the novel immedialtely because this is just the kind of story that I love. And thanks again for your comment! And they’re doing a movie from the book.
Logline structure and plot aside I think there are some fundamental problems with the concept.
1 – plausibility; to actually be able to threaten, torture and ultimately kill someone or a group of people the scenario needs to enable the mechanism that allows the bad guy to do this. As such you’ve added in the most recent drafts a generic description of the characters are being kept as prisoners. This is the same as in so many other movies that have a similar premise and as a result doesn’t sound interesting. What is unique about their entrapment?
Just a quick thought; If you don’t want to involve any super natural themes, could they have a movie contract at the end as in the surviving writer is guaranteed to sell their script? The antagonist can then use their career aspirations and greed against them.
2 – motivation; the antagonist seams ruthless for almost no reason, normally an antagonist’s motivation can be omitted from loglines, but as the genre in this instance requires it, his motivations needs to be crystal clear, compelling and unique. It’s his motivation that will determine how bad an antagonist he will be and therefor how interesting the characters fight to survive will be.
If these fundamental problems can be solved after several iterations of the logline then this could make for an interesting concept if not and after many re drafts the logline is still not working maybe it won’t make for a good concept.
I don’t want to sound mean or inappropriate just trying to be helpful in my (all to well known) direct way.
Also, if you need some reality to ground your premise in, Kim Jong-Il kidnapped a couple of South Korean movie names and forced them to make a pro-North Godzilla movie. Maybe your the guru is just a ‘mis-understood’ genius who aims to make the greatest horror movie ever.
It sounds like the framework for a bunch of short stories. Is that the idea?
It isn’t a compliment; it sounds like you’re using the same idea without giving your characters any reason for their actions. Not an insult either, just questioning what the creative forces are.
>> I can?t add this kind of details in the logline
True. But I suggest that properly motivating the bad guy would be a plus factor in the story, given the genre. Consider Jigsaw in the original Saw. His victims are not randomly chosen, nor is he capriciously tormenting them for sheer sadistic glee. He is punishing his victims for their existential “sins”, for frittering away their lives with foolish pursuits, or destructive vices like drug addiction, for lacking the necessary will to live, really live their lives to its fullest potential.
There’s an intriguing theme being explored. There’s a daemonic method to Jigsaw’s “madness”, more to the story than just some clever plotting.
I think the guru has some satanic ambitions. I can’t add this kind of details in the logline, if the logline doesn’t work there must be something else.
I take this as a compliment 🙂 I didn’t know this book, I’ll go check it.
This is starting to sound more and more like Chuck Palahniuk’s “Haunted” except I’m not seeing anyone’s motivation here.
I’m lost, too.
Why does the guru want to inflict such sadistic psychological torture and death upon the screenwriters?
Hello, I’m a bit lost now,
I should mention that the screenwriters are kept prisoner, so they can play the game or die.
The idea is that each writer must choose a writer as victim in a death scene (he can choose to be himself a victim but that would be a suicide), then the guru kills the writer who stars in the best scripted scene. They must play the game: pick a victim and write at their best to survive. If someone is reluctant to write at his best, he is tortured. If the guru dies the house is irradiated by anthrax and everybody dies.
Is credibility really an issue here?
I don’t think I should bring supernatural elements.
I think the theme is what motivate an author to write a horror.
Any of these has some kind of potential?
1)
“When her agent drops her, a shy ?love story? author attends a horror movie workshop where screenwriters are kept prisoner by a perverse guru who makes them die like their characters, so that only the best writer will survive.”
2)
When a group of aspiring screenwriters join a ?horror? screenwriting workshop, a perverse guru kepts them prisoner and sets up a deadly training game where the writers die like their characters so that only the best one will survive?
3)
When a wealthy psychopath invites the best horror screenwriters to a symposium in his isolated country house, he kepts them prisoner and sets up a deadly game where his guests must write the best horror scenes or die like their characters?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
The premise seams weak and lacks an essence of probability. In Saw which you mentioned earlier the characters were physically trapped in a complex where as that doesn’t seam the case here. As such what is it that makes them want to go through the horror of what they write?
If the killing is supernatural and out of their control and will happen regardless their being in the house or not (like in The Ring), then presumably they would need to stick around and find a way to stop it. So if their motivation becomes survival against the odds which could be interesting.
My primary issue with the scenario is credibility: why wouldn’t they just say “No” to the guru either individually or as a group, refuse to play along? Even if they think he’s joking — after the 1st writer dies, I can’t imagine any other scenario than that they would subsequently refuse to continue playing along, that they would revolt and resist him, individually and collectively, with every fiber of their being.
And if they would continue to play along, then the writers are too weak for any one of them to be cast in the role of the protagonist. As I said before, the Alpha character, the one driving the plot is the guru. The writers are foolish sheep being led to the slaughter.
And if that’s your point, well, the writers are to be pitied, but that’s not the same as empathy. And if isn’t the point, what is the point of your premise? What is your theme?
Will you be more interested in this kind of logline? :
“When a group of aspiring screenwriters join a ‘horror’ screenwriting workshop, perverse guru sets up a deadly training game where the writers die like their characters so that only the best one will survive”
Or,
“When a wealthy psychopath invites the best horror screenwriters to a symposium in his isolated country house, he sets up a deadly game where his guests must write the best horror scenes or die like their characters”
This one can be interesting because I can easily come up with a motivation for the main character, something like a son who died because of a horror movie. Maybe the guests are not only screenwriters but many people who worked for that movie. Or maybe all this is too clich?? I think that the setting of a screenwriting workshop is more original.
I said main character, not hero. They are not always the same. My point is the guru is the most compelling character. And he drives the story.
I imagine the guru as a charming evil figure, besides he is supposed to be an opponent, like Jigsaw in Saw- I don’t think he can be a hero.
I see this movie as a version of “ten little indians” where the “guests/indians” in the house would be screenwriters who are killed one by one. The rules of the workshop are: each writer must write a death scene where the setting is the house, and another writer plays the victim. In the death scene, they can use only things that can be found in the house (there will be many potential weapons available). The guru will assure that the best scene becomes real.
Why not make the guru the main character, the screenwriting guru from hell since he’s the more interesting character anyway and is going to steal the limelight? The “love story” author could be one of several authors attending the workshop out of desperation.
And her agent shouldn’t threaten to drop her; he has dropped her. Which ups the stakes, makes her career predicament more perilous, her motivation more urgent. And the other participants have similar horror stories of rejection, frustration and failure. They’re all there because they are desperate, at the end of their tether. The stakes are that they all see the class as their last chance, their only hope.
“When her agent threats to drop her unless she takes a new turn in her career, a shy ‘love story’ author attends a horror movie workshop where a perverse guru makes the aspiring screenwriters die like their characters, so that only the best writer will survive.”
This strait away grabbed my attention I think the premise has potential.
This could work i a similar way to Stranger Than Fiction but needs a clear distinction from the basic dramatic mechanism at its core.
The inciting incident may need some clearing up as her joining the group is less a significant and radical event. Perhaps after her publisher threatened to drop her or her publishing deal is put in danger, point is something drastic needs to happen to push her to do something.
Other wise you can use the first death of a writer in the group as an inciting incident.
Also the goal needs clarity, do they need to write the best book to survive? Do they need to fight a super natural power with their writing somehow? Do they need to satisfy a psychotic publisher that entrapped them?
Hope this helps.