A couple spends a night in a film theater. But as the night deepens, things become nightmarish and surreal.
SummaryA film about seeing.
As a couple spends a night in a film theater, nightmares escape through the screen. Designed to be told through a single static camera, PAURA is a surrealist short horror film inspired by the works of Bunuel, Dali, and David Lynch.
- Is the Concept strong/original?
I genuinely didn't understand the concept too well. It didn't have much purpose and the only shock value was the word "plak" that was written in caps on the last page.
- Does the logline/first ten pages draw the reader?
The logline gave enough info, but again, there wasn't much to draw from in the story.
- Are scenes well-written?
Meh. It wasn't terribly written, but there was a lot to be desired. In 3 short pages there were a handful of grammatical and formatting errors, but nothing that drew away from the story (or lack of one).
- Is the protagonist/antagonist compelling enough?
- Does the character drive the story? Do you feel for the character?
- Does the dialogue drive the story/character?
There isn't much dialogue, except for David's countdown and mention of the worms. Again, the dialogue was somehow expository without giving me any information.
- Is the conflict real/genuine?
As far as a horror basing itself in a biblical/religious connotation, I guess.
No, it doesn't. The buildup felt rushed. If we're going off of David's countdown it's the short should last at least 8 minutes, but there's nowhere near enough going on in the script to account for that.
- Does the Climax/Resolution satisfy the reader?
Like, is David the devil? Was this movie they watched an omen? Is Diane a fallen angel? What do any of the 3 pages mean? Again, I liked "plak" being written in all caps, but the story didn't do enough to give me a satisfying feeling when that actually happened.
- Does the script read well?
It doesn't read bad. But it was a weak script overall. It felt like it was missing a lot of background information and lacked any development in character and plot.
This script is very short which could be good for a story like this, however, I get the feeling that the writer was trying to avoid spoiling the end so hard, that it made the character development non-existent.
Apparently, at 12, a baby gets born out of the death of an Angel. For the viewer, this leaves a lot of questions. There is zero explanation about any of it. Is this a private viewing? What does the movie have to do with it all? There is a fine line between show and tell. For me personally, it feels as if the writer wants to leave us with questions that will never be fulfilled. There is something to be said about this and what is there, is finely written. Dialogs are snappy and compact and don't add anything that is unuseful. Diane however, is a character that I don't get. Why would you stay in that theatre, after your man tells you that it doesn't matter what you want? You wouldn't. Basically, it's more likely the man would get a slap in the face for that.
This is one of those occasions where a short script could have done with a bit more. All in all, I see the potential, but I miss some execution. I would consider filming this script, but would definitely add something more to make it work better.
I hate all my own loglines, so please ignore my logline for this. I SUCK at loglines.
The reason for the fairs and the passes –
Honestly, the symbolism and metaphors (if they are actually there) I do not understand.
The “fear” (Pauna), doesn’t really play a part in either The Angel or Diane’s story. Diane has fear watching the film. But, it’s the growth and explosion that plays more a part of her story.
As a person who is not religious, I do not quite get the significance of the “worms”. It probably means death, since Diane explodes. But, if it is, it’s kind of lame. Also, I kept thinking of Pink Floyd’s The Wall.
It was fairly obvious that the Angel and Diane were both going to die.
To make this better you need to make the connection between angel and Diane less obvious.
You might want to consider having Diane try to go to the bathroom and David not letting her. It could be that she’s feeling ill and not having something grow in her.
This is three pages and there’s numerous questions that could be asked. For something so short (and for what it is). It really needs to be self-contained. Here’s three questions this left me with -
Who is this couple, and why are they alone in a theatre? Who is the angel, and why is it being slaughtered? Who are the three men, and why did they just slaughter an angel?
This script could be taken AS IS and shot, if you were doing it yourself or were going to be working closely on it. It would be an all right short given what I wrote about the story (this of course is only my opinion). If gory enough, it might make it to some festivals.
Just a note: On the TV show Lucifer, he cuts off his wings. So, this bit of the story has already been done on TV.
If you are looking to get someone else to shoot it, there are some changes that need to be made.
The first is, the angel film needs its own sluglines.
There should be brief descriptions of all cast, especially the angel. You just describe it as it. Example: Diane (20s), a few words about her personality… If she’s not pregnant at the beginning and the baby grows within minutes, it should be noted that she’s sleek in the beginning.
There needs to be more description on what we see, especially Diane. Does her stomach grow? What is David doing while she’s writhing in agony?
Overall, I'd consider adding the answers to all the questions. Which would mean a complete rewrite.
Right now, it's just agony and explosion.
For a short I think it would be visually appealing. The descriptions of the angel getting tortured and Diane pain were written very well. Although the whole concept was lost on me. I never once understood David's motive, why Did he go see this movie, what did it have to do with Diane and the baby. There were a lot of questions and no answers. If that was what you were going for then I say it was a success. The writing was good, just confused on the whole story. Although I liked that you use the Italian word for "Fear" for your title.
It is an interesting concept for a scary short film. I didn't understand why you put this in the action line.
"We are facing the blank screen. We hear an unseen couple enter and take a seat." Who is "we"? I'm not sure if you were referring to a camera angle or just using the term "we".