After posing as a pro reporter to receive information, a young asthmatic African American must escape annihilation and run the story to expose the corrupt policy of European business consortium in Africa.
SummaryNote: Some dialogues are written in KRIO. A lighter form of the Nigerian pidgin English. So watch out.
Set in a fictional country of Mawange in West Africa, Michelle Falega (a rookie reporter) stumbles on information about a new type of fossil fuel called "fomusil". She seeks the help of captain (ex military and local transporter) to get her out. Along the way, they pick up Dr Lomax (fomusil project lead scientist) who reveals to them a way fomusil can be used to make a nuke five times stronger. Together, they embark on a bumpy journey of victories and losses.
You have a good basis for an action/thriller script. This has a 80/90s action movie feel to it. Key details and action are skipped to move the story forward, but a 21st century audience will struggle with the logically missing parts. But for a thriller there must be a reward for the audience after enduring all the twist and turns you wrote into your script. When you introduce the twists of Frank and her father, they don’t do anything to elevate the thriller. They are just emotional betrayals for her – and not the audience. In other words their betrayal doesn’t change the story or her actions: she was going to reveal the information regardless if they betrayed her or not. So what was the point other than make it seem emotionally distressing for her? Now if she took down her father at the end, then you would have a twist with vindication. What would make a more rewarding climax is if Goldman turned out to be her father. Then the betrayal would have been felt by the audience since we know that he has been thwarting her all along.
One of the basis tenants of screenwriting is “show, don’t tell”. Much of your script tells us what they are feeling and thinking. This is something you are going to have to research how to show your character’s internal struggles versus explaining them in the descriptions.
The lead character has asthma sometimes and not others. Only when it seems convenient to the scene.
There is an international cast but their accent and language structure do not stand out.
This is a typical corporate power vs the underdog story. The first ten pages pulls you into the story. But the parallel conflict that is escalating in story never comes together in the end. The military coup and corporate scheming never meet up with Michelle and her father. They happen separately so it seems to the audience that neither will affect the other even though you have told the audience they are both related.
The final ten pages… If Michelle has condemning information wouldn’t she die soon after giving it to the press, just as Pyramid has always done? Wouldn’t her father be keeping tabs on her the whole time, or most likely keeping her confined in some way? I understand the goal of your story is to attack the corporations that have exploited Africa. But you did not really hurt or stop them in this story, only delayed for a brief time. Yes Michelle, for now, is speaking out about their machinations but will the audience feel vindicated at the conclusion? Maybe your intent is to insert some realism into your ending by letting the audience know that even though the corporations weren’t vanquished there are some who will never give up fighting? If so then your 80s/90s type of script needs to be rethought as the casual demeanor of Michelle and skipping key logic points of dialogue and response does not take in the gravity of your ending. A movie to reference for this kind of international intrigue is The Peacemaker (1997) amongst many others. If you decide you want this moralistic story to resonate with 21st century audiences, then you’ll need to revamp the casual dialogue and work out the subplot so they have a real-world feel. You have a good structure to work from. Keep refining the scenes and this will become a rewarding script!