A young aspiring writer and director based in Stoney Creek, Ontario, hoping to pursue his MFA at USC's School of Cinematic Arts in Los Angeles.
The concept is very wild and I don't believe the obscurity of the story paid off. It's an unclear story with no solid themes and no intriguing direction. The concept is strange but I gave it 'Fair' because it is indeed a creative idea. However, just because it's creative does not mean it's good. The concept of a clown on his way to a child's birthday party could be very interesting, however the execution was poor and left me feeling absolutely nothing. The execution of the story is quite poor and the very few lines of action are completely drowned out by an overwhelming amount of dialogue. A screenplay is supposed to be visualized while it is read, however the writer gave very little to be visualized. There is no sense of environment and the story could have benefited from visual detail. Are we in a suburban neighborhood? Busy downtown streets? Vacant city strip? The structure of the film is well done and there is a clear beginning (Lubu meets Sammy), middle (journey to the house), and end (Sammy arriving at the birthday party). The character development is very unclear and questionable. Sammy's motivation for working as a clown sidekick for free was unexplained and a very forced and laughable idea. He clearly does not need the money as he owns a smartphone. His characterization does not explain this decision either. It is also unclear why Lubu allowed him to become his sidekick -- Sammy throwing himself to the ground is not a good enough reason. Lubu's characterization is all over the place. Is he empathetic? Rude? Generous? At one point he's insulting Sammy's wardrobe and at another point he's performing for Sammy for free while he has a child's birthday party to go to. The character development needs MAJOR work. Finally, the dialogue was very ridiculous. I was taken aback by some lines as they were very out-of-the-blue and questionable. The best kind of humor is humor that advances the plot. None of the humor in this story did that. The one-liner about homophobia was so laughable and not in a good way. The humor was also all over the place in terms of characterization; none of the jokes seemed to match the characters at all. Aside from the humor, the dialogue was uninteresting and not enough to capture my attention. Not to mention there was WAY too much of it when there should have been more focus on action rather than back-and-forth conversation.
The story left me extremely confused. It began on a high-note; fast-paced actions as we watch the woman clean her room. This got me intrigued to find out the reason for her apartment clean up. Keeping information from the audience was a good tool in order to built suspense. However, the cleaning dragged for much too long and more content alluding to the story's climax should have been added in between the cleaning. The woman smiling at her phone is not enough. The story's climax was incredibly confusing, unclear and disappointing. I was left wondering what the hell just happened. Is "Mister" a dog? (I'm assuming not) Is he the woman's romantic partner who is into some really kinky stuff? If so, what is the purpose of this? What is the story you're trying to tell? What I took away from the story is that there is a woman getting her apartment ready for her kinky husband's arrival. That's not much of a story. The lack of dialogue is interesting as it builds to the mystery of the story, but the climax at the end was absolutely lackluster and left me feeling absolutely nothing. Was the ending supposed to be a punchline alluding to some sort of popular culture reference? Was it supposed to be a romantic twist? Dramatic? Thrilling? Lack of character development is something I can forgive in a screenplay of only two pages, however lack of characterization is not. The main character was very uninteresting and she lost my attention after the first 10 seconds of reading. Nothing she did was interesting and she seemed like an object of sex appeal as she was nude for over half the story with no relevant action taking place. The "Mister" character was a secret kept for no good reason and I cannot stress enough how confusing the story's climax is. The story's structure is decent and it was very easy to follow. It did, however, feel like we were dropped into the middle of the story and I would have liked to see a prelude to the cleaning of the apartment. Despite this, the structure was still fluent and it had a clear middle and end. In terms of technicality, the format of the screenplay is well done except for the scene headers which should indicate whether the scene takes place inside or outside. For example: "INT. - FOYER (EVENING)". Overall, the story simply didn't matter and the confusing climax at the end didn't help whatsoever. Keep searching for inspiration and one day you'll find a story that's worthy of being told on the big screen. Keep it up.
The film is very abstract and very cryptic. Though there is a lot of imagery and symbolism (such as the angel losing its wings as well as the continuous feeling of time running out), there is a lack of concrete theme in the screenplay. The dialogue is well-written and I especially enjoyed the last line; "Hush now, my son. It's already twelve. The end has come". Despite this, I came out of the screenplay empty-handed, having not absorbed any concrete theme, story or moral lesson through its telling. Had the film been more direct in its purpose, the abstractness of the screenplay would have paid off. However, because the story is very loose and obscure, the artistic obscurity feels forced. Overall, the film felt as if it was abstract for abstract's sake and there wasn't a moment in which I felt the desire to see this story on a screen. Though there was a lack of characterization, the screenplay still got me to stick around until the end due to the impending promise of the "worms". This was a great plot device in order to create suspense and anticipation. It fell short, however, as the worms never made an appearance nor contributed to the narrative in any way other than killing the wife (which felt like a back-handed slap to the face and only left me confused). The screenwriter did an excellent job of building suspense and the climax was very clear, well-written and effective. The use of sounds really contributed to the payoff at the end (with the thud and the baby crying) and I could imagine the entire sequence in my head. The screenwriter does a good job of doing exactly that: writing for the screen. The screenplay was told cinematically, as all screenplays should be. Despite this, it lacked an intriguing story. While reading, I could definitely imagine the story playing out in my head, but I did not find that it is a story worth telling. It simply lacked meaning, settling for experimental obscurity over engaging story and meaningful theme. To the screenwriter, I say keep writing every day as your writing abilities are impressive but keep working on your storytelling skills as the overall concept and execution of the story is rather uninspiring. Overall, the screenplay is well-written in technical and cinematic terms. The story is creative and original as well. Keep searching for new source material and continue to implement your cinematic writing style into everything you do.