Spaihts VS Lindelof

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

    Originally posted by BurningWorld View Post
    Not really. Read Lindelof's draft. It's basically the movie that they shot, scene by scene.
    Yeah but wasn't there some back and forth collaboration with the script being developed closely with Ridley Scott's input. What about uncredited touch ups from other writers? Were there any?

    If the Lindelof draft that is floating around is practically the final movie, then how do we he wasn't making daily/weekly touch-ups with input from other creatives. Don't writers end up foregoing their own traditional "selling" style to meet their deadlines and hit those beats others are looking for?
    Last edited by Why One; 11-16-2012, 01:16 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

      Originally posted by Why One View Post
      What about uncredited touch ups from other writers? Were there any?
      No. No there were not.

      What remains a mystery in terms of writers are the folks who took a stab at it before Spaihts.
      Other than that, Lindelof was the last to touch it.
      INT. DR. GONZO'S HOTEL ROOM - NIGHT

      A glass of BOURBON in one hand and a COMPUTER MOUSE in the other,
      Dr. Gonzo contemplates getting off the message board and back to his script.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

        Do any of these drafts give any hints on whether Vickers was a synthetic or not? I ask because all that business about Weyland being her father threw me off. How could a world-famous guy like Weyland have a daughter no one knows about?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

          Originally posted by entlassen View Post
          Do any of these drafts give any hints on whether Vickers was a synthetic or not? I ask because all that business about Weyland being her father threw me off. How could a world-famous guy like Weyland have a daughter no one knows about?
          It wasn't in Lindelof's draft. I have a feeling they made that up while filming.
          Introduce a little anarchy.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

            Originally posted by entlassen View Post
            Do any of these drafts give any hints on whether Vickers was a synthetic or not? I ask because all that business about Weyland being her father threw me off. How could a world-famous guy like Weyland have a daughter no one knows about?
            didn't david call weyland "father"? i suspect the mystery of her being an android is deliberate from scott, like he did in blade runner with harrison ford.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

              Originally posted by Bananos View Post
              didn't david call weyland "father"?
              Did he? Often times I was focusing more on Ridley's amazing lighting and compositions than the dialogue.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                I think it's pretty obvious Vickers was human. Weyland lamented the fact he had no son, which is why David was created.

                Need more proof? No android would be stupid enough to run in a straight line with the Juggernaut spaceship crashing right behind them.

                Case closed.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                  Originally posted by entlassen View Post
                  Did he? Often times I was focusing more on Ridley's amazing lighting and compositions than the dialogue.
                  Good for you. The dialogue was known to cause physical pain in some aspiring screenwriters.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                    It's probably been said before, but I really like Spaihts' writing style: so clean, no unnecessary caps, bold, italic or underlines; he also doesn't abuse dot-dot-dots or double dashes.

                    That's writing with confidence.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                      Yep, Spaihts has a terrific style.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                        Originally posted by absolutepower View Post
                        And by the way, Lindelof is a much better screenwriter. Thing practically POPS off the page.
                        He has a much better writing style for sure - but that doesn't automatically mean he's a better screenwriter, someone could have the worst writing style ever, but a script is a blue print and it could work fantastic on screen.
                        It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                          Originally posted by Jules View Post
                          He has a much better writing style for sure - but that doesn't automatically mean he's a better screenwriter, someone could have the worst writing style ever, but a script is a blue print and it could work fantastic on screen.
                          Sure but why would anyone take a chance on something that doesn't work on the page? If the writing is bad, why would anyone care to find out what it's like onscreen?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                            Lindelof's voice is blinding. It looks better on the page, blinding the logistical nightmare behind it.
                            Introduce a little anarchy.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                              Originally posted by Hecky View Post
                              Sure but why would anyone take a chance on something that doesn't work on the page? If the writing is bad, why would anyone care to find out what it's like onscreen?
                              Some people can tell the difference between nice 'writing' and a movie.
                              Ridley Scott for instance.
                              It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Spaihts VS Lindelof

                                In development, it is about seeing the film. Lindelof, Abrams... they see the film and they frickin' write the film. There is a reason they were all working very, very young.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X