SCRIPT SHADOW is an IDIOT. He does not understand filmmaking & production.

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • SCRIPT SHADOW is an IDIOT. He does not understand filmmaking & production.

    Script Shadow did not like Tomorrow War's script and movie.
    Why? Because he is out of touch with good fun movies and scripts.
    He does not know how films are made and why scripts are written with talent for production.
    http://scriptshadow.net/movie-review-tomorrow-war/
    Do you agree?
    Chris Pratt Calls The Tomorrow War The Number 1 Movie In America
    https://www.cinemablend.com/news/257...america-amazon

  • #2
    Haven't seen THE TOMORROW WAR and can't comment on its merits or lack thereof, but I do know that Zach Dean has shown to be a capable writer on other projects. His spec THE GORGE is a fun action movie. Sometimes projects get noted into oblivion and really good writers have to take the fall for the meddling that comes from above.

    As for ScriptShadow, he found a niche and has exploited it. People want to learn about screenwriting and projects in development. I can't say I find his acumen impressive though. I don't think he has very good taste. His tone is also very condescending and holier-than-thou for someone who has achieved nothing as an actual industry professional.

    His review of MURDER IN THE WHITE HOUSE is telling. He (correctly) notes that the tone and dialogue are inappropriately casual at times given the stakes and setting of the script. However, he treats this like a fatal flaw, while ignoring the numerous other things that the script has going in its favor. It was a 7 figure spec sale. Forest from the trees.

    Comment


    • #3
      The Tomorrow War
      “Organizations for writers palliate the writer‘s loneliness, but I doubt if they improve his writing.“ — Ernest Hemingway

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by WRITERRIVERS View Post
        Script Shadow did not like Tomorrow War's script and movie.
        Why? Because he is out of touch with good fun movies and scripts.
        He does not know how films are made and why scripts are written with talent for production.
        http://scriptshadow.net/movie-review-tomorrow-war/
        Do you agree?
        Chris Pratt Calls The Tomorrow War The Number 1 Movie In America
        https://www.cinemablend.com/news/257...america-amazon
        The most important aspect of Script Shadows review is that he didn't really watch the movie because he was so upset with over 40 something characters being the driving force for the defense of both worlds-- the future and the present.

        I've watched this film several times now and find it entertaining.

        SPOILER ALERT BELOW...

        Things SS got wrong, imo... these are my opinions.

        First off, the future army recruits out of shape 40 year olds to be soldiers. They justify this by saying they have to draft older people because they need them to be dead by the time they show up in the future, or else they risk a paradox, which of course makes no sense. But if you buy into it, you next learn that the soldiers will not be participating in training.
        The civilians in the present were chosen because they were going to die in the near future. They needed a selection process and this actually makes sense. Why take someone who has 30 years to live when you already know the death date of another person who will be gone in 7 years. This is also the emotional engine/conflict between Forester and his daughter in the future as well as a full circle story about Forester's relationship with his own father and coming to terms with his animosity toward him.

        So, selecting the people who travelled with Forester to the future wasn't because of a paradox that they couldn't be alive in the future, because in the future there were only 500,000 people in total left. There should be no concern for a paradox, because 99.9% of the people in the present were already dead in the future. The characters do speculate that they will be dead in the future and it's about a paradox, but didn't take the next step, which is the real truth... they would die before the future happened. Forester dies in a car accident sever years in the future. This might be a blimp or a missed change in dialogue as the story possibly changed? The paradox was with the people coming from the future to the past... the people sent to the past had to have NOT been born yet.

        They sent military soldiers for 12 months into the future. Only 50% of the military were qualified to jump when they were depleted, they instigated the worldwide draft. SS also go it wrong that they would have no training. They were supposed to have some training, 7 days, but the clock is literally ticking off the future. They were out of time. An incident happens escalating the future fight and the next batch of civilians are dispatched to the future-- without t even their 7 days of training, because they had to save the lab.

        Yes, when you spend a year depleting your armed forces what you are left with is real life people to fight, because all of your special forces have already tried and died. I think it was a smart choice that allows the audience to connect with the character on a real level. They're not superheroes, they are EVERYMAN. Also, Dan Forester is a retired military vet. So he is a leader and has skills he shares with his soldiers to help keep them alive.



        This is inaccurate as well. When you are jumped into the future you are released 10-15' above the ground. When Forrester's group jumps to the future there is a "complication" with the stability of the device and it drops them from skyscraper heights (not 10,000') and Forester and some of his team land in a rooftop pool. It's an exciting and terrifying scene at the same time. Yes, other characters don't make and that creates tension that maybe our band on would be heroes might not make it either. It's well done.

        outfit everyone with a parachute?
        Answer. No one knew they would be dropped from 1,000 feet in the air. They only knew that at the moment they jumped the system went haywire. It's like the opening in Star Trek when Kirk says, we're leaping into a trap... we are sitting in a very quiet moment as the anxiety builds-- what's going to happen when we fall out of Warp Speed? A ****ing war, that's what. It's a fast moment in TTW, but effective. Great use of a suspense device.

        As a writer, you need to understand narrative devices and how to use them to create and escalate tension. The scene where Forester is issued his jump-band is a terrific example of building suspense and dread. Any writer that wants to excel at this, should examine that scene. It's a fantastic example.

        His comment about the parachute is ridiculous. Know one knew the civilian soldiers would be dropped a hundred feet in the air. Not 10,000 feet as SS suggests. Great scene.

        First, training doesn't trip up screenwriters. Screenwriters make deliberate choices when developing story. Perhaps he saw a little movie called STAR WARS where the main character was a boy who had no skills. Or better yet, EDGE OF TOMORROW where Tom Cruise's character was an untrained military man that was drafted into service. He had no skills, that's why that film was so great.

        Writers don't "fudge" their way through training-- that's ridiculous. A writer can easily do a time cut or a series of shots that take less than 30 seconds. SS is missing the point entirely. The appeal is that the heroes are NOT trained. It is a deliberate choice. The fact that they have no training is what increases suspense, tension, and dread. IOW, the emotion, which is why we go to movies. We don't go to movies to see the heroes breeze through conflict with training that out does the enemy. The enemy has to be supremely better, more deadly, more brutal, more cunning, more diabolical, more advanced.

        ignore it
        The entire point of the film is that humanity is losing. They are at the end of their battle. A desperate, dire fight that will soon end. What really bothers me most about this approach, is SS has a platform and people believe in his reviews, which is crazy, because it's clear he either doesn't understand the film or he doesn't want to. Both are unfair and disrespectful to the efforts of the filmmakers.

        He didn't believe the story? Fine, he's entitled to his opinion, but I'm suggesting you see a film and judge it for yourself and don't base your opinion on whether you're going to see it or not on what I say or what SS says. Base your opinions on your experience. Otherwise you will never open your writing to new possibilities, skills, traps and pitfalls. Watch movies regardless of reviews and learn from what works and what doesn't work for you.

        Two things in response to this last statement. One, I disagree with his opinion. Sci-fi is a genre that is nitpicked and torn apart more than other genre, so those filmmakers have to have thick skin. It's easy to stand on the sidelines and criticize. It's easy to say they suck. The filmmakers deserve a lot of credit for getting a film of any scale into the hands of the public.

        The second thing I'd say, is if you are so desperate for a good sci-fi film, throw your hat into the ring, write one, sell it, get it made, attach A-list talent and producers, get it distributed and let's see your chops. If it's good, I'll say so. I'll pay to watch it. If it's bad, well if you can get it to the screen, ****ing kudos to you.

        That's my take.

        FA4

        ps. watching it again now. The action is terrific.



        Last edited by finalact4; 07-31-2021, 12:13 PM.
        "Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist,- Pablo Picasso

        Comment


        • #5
          I refuse to watch another streaming digital CGI trash heap where actors squint heroically O.S. at green-screen monsters and crack wise. It just isn't cinema.

          Comment


          • #6
            He is the worst. Just ignorant in every way.

            Comment


            • #7
              He started here! He did a marathon "I'm going to review every back list script" and turned it into a business. He always seemed like a good guy... but I don't think he has any important revelations into the craft or business.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by finalact4 View Post

                The most important aspect of Script Shadows review is that he didn't really watch the movie because he was so upset with over 40 something characters being the driving force for the defense of both worlds-- the future and the present.

                I've watched this film several times now and find it entertaining.

                SPOILER ALERT BELOW...

                Things SS got wrong, imo... these are my opinions.



                The civilians in the present were chosen because they were going to die in the near future. They needed a selection process and this actually makes sense. Why take someone who has 30 years to live when you already know the death date of another person who will be gone in 7 years. This is also the emotional engine/conflict between Forester and his daughter in the future as well as a full circle story about Forester's relationship with his own father and coming to terms with his animosity toward him.

                So, selecting the people who travelled with Forester to the future wasn't because of a paradox that they couldn't be alive in the future, because in the future there were only 500,000 people in total left. There should be no concern for a paradox, because 99.9% of the people in the present were already dead in the future. The characters do speculate that they will be dead in the future and it's about a paradox, but didn't take the next step, which is the real truth... they would die before the future happened. Forester dies in a car accident sever years in the future. This might be a blimp or a missed change in dialogue as the story possibly changed? The paradox was with the people coming from the future to the past... the people sent to the past had to have NOT been born yet.

                They sent military soldiers for 12 months into the future. Only 50% of the military were qualified to jump when they were depleted, they instigated the worldwide draft. SS also go it wrong that they would have no training. They were supposed to have some training, 7 days, but the clock is literally ticking off the future. They were out of time. An incident happens escalating the future fight and the next batch of civilians are dispatched to the future-- without t even their 7 days of training, because they had to save the lab.



                Yes, when you spend a year depleting your armed forces what you are left with is real life people to fight, because all of your special forces have already tried and died. I think it was a smart choice that allows the audience to connect with the character on a real level. They're not superheroes, they are EVERYMAN. Also, Dan Forester is a retired military vet. So he is a leader and has skills he shares with his soldiers to help keep them alive.





                This is inaccurate as well. When you are jumped into the future you are released 10-15' above the ground. When Forrester's group jumps to the future there is a "complication" with the stability of the device and it drops them from skyscraper heights (not 10,000') and Forester and some of his team land in a rooftop pool. It's an exciting and terrifying scene at the same time. Yes, other characters don't make and that creates tension that maybe our band on would be heroes might not make it either. It's well done.



                Answer. No one knew they would be dropped from 1,000 feet in the air. They only knew that at the moment they jumped the system went haywire. It's like the opening in Star Trek when Kirk says, we're leaping into a trap... we are sitting in a very quiet moment as the anxiety builds-- what's going to happen when we fall out of Warp Speed? A ****ing war, that's what. It's a fast moment in TTW, but effective. Great use of a suspense device.

                As a writer, you need to understand narrative devices and how to use them to create and escalate tension. The scene where Forester is issued his jump-band is a terrific example of building suspense and dread. Any writer that wants to excel at this, should examine that scene. It's a fantastic example.

                His comment about the parachute is ridiculous. Know one knew the civilian soldiers would be dropped a hundred feet in the air. Not 10,000 feet as SS suggests. Great scene.



                First, training doesn't trip up screenwriters. Screenwriters make deliberate choices when developing story. Perhaps he saw a little movie called STAR WARS where the main character was a boy who had no skills. Or better yet, EDGE OF TOMORROW where Tom Cruise's character was an untrained military man that was drafted into service. He had no skills, that's why that film was so great.

                Writers don't "fudge" their way through training-- that's ridiculous. A writer can easily do a time cut or a series of shots that take less than 30 seconds. SS is missing the point entirely. The appeal is that the heroes are NOT trained. It is a deliberate choice. The fact that they have no training is what increases suspense, tension, and dread. IOW, the emotion, which is why we go to movies. We don't go to movies to see the heroes breeze through conflict with training that out does the enemy. The enemy has to be supremely better, more deadly, more brutal, more cunning, more diabolical, more advanced.



                The entire point of the film is that humanity is losing. They are at the end of their battle. A desperate, dire fight that will soon end. What really bothers me most about this approach, is SS has a platform and people believe in his reviews, which is crazy, because it's clear he either doesn't understand the film or he doesn't want to. Both are unfair and disrespectful to the efforts of the filmmakers.

                He didn't believe the story? Fine, he's entitled to his opinion, but I'm suggesting you see a film and judge it for yourself and don't base your opinion on whether you're going to see it or not on what I say or what SS says. Base your opinions on your experience. Otherwise you will never open your writing to new possibilities, skills, traps and pitfalls. Watch movies regardless of reviews and learn from what works and what doesn't work for you.



                Two things in response to this last statement. One, I disagree with his opinion. Sci-fi is a genre that is nitpicked and torn apart more than other genre, so those filmmakers have to have thick skin. It's easy to stand on the sidelines and criticize. It's easy to say they suck. The filmmakers deserve a lot of credit for getting a film of any scale into the hands of the public.

                The second thing I'd say, is if you are so desperate for a good sci-fi film, throw your hat into the ring, write one, sell it, get it made, attach A-list talent and producers, get it distributed and let's see your chops. If it's good, I'll say so. I'll pay to watch it. If it's bad, well if you can get it to the screen, ****ing kudos to you.

                That's my take.

                FA4



                ps. watching it again now. The action is terrific.
                This is genius.
                Do you provide script notes? What is the cost?
                You are very good Sir.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                  He started here! He did a marathon "I'm going to review every back list script" and turned it into a business. He always seemed like a good guy... but I don't think he has any important revelations into the craft or business.
                  Sometimes I find it very insulting when all the scripts and movie I like, Script Shadow.
                  Is Script Shadow the dude called Unknown Screenwriter?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Satriales View Post
                    He is the worst. Just ignorant in every way.
                    Why is Script Shadow only into simple scripts found on the The Black List ?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DaltWisney View Post
                      Haven't seen THE TOMORROW WAR and can't comment on its merits or lack thereof, but I do know that Zach Dean has shown to be a capable writer on other projects. His spec THE GORGE is a fun action movie. Sometimes projects get noted into oblivion and really good writers have to take the fall for the meddling that comes from above.

                      As for ScriptShadow, he found a niche and has exploited it. People want to learn about screenwriting and projects in development. I can't say I find his acumen impressive though. I don't think he has very good taste. His tone is also very condescending and holier-than-thou for someone who has achieved nothing as an actual industry professional.

                      His review of MURDER IN THE WHITE HOUSE is telling. He (correctly) notes that the tone and dialogue are inappropriately casual at times given the stakes and setting of the script. However, he treats this like a fatal flaw, while ignoring the numerous other things that the script has going in its favor. It was a 7 figure spec sale. Forest from the trees.
                      I really liked The Tomorrow War.
                      Is Script Shadow on mushrooms?
                      Why is he hating good scripts and movies ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Don't put too much stock in shadows. They're sunshine soldiers and summer patriots. When the sunshine disappears, they'll leave you stranded and alone.
                        “Organizations for writers palliate the writer‘s loneliness, but I doubt if they improve his writing.“ — Ernest Hemingway

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                          He started here! He did a marathon "I'm going to review every back list script" and turned it into a business. He always seemed like a good guy... but I don't think he has any important revelations into the craft or business.
                          Yea. I remember him posting back in the day. To clarify, I don't think he's an "idiot" or a terrible human being. He found a niche and built something, so credit to him for that.

                          However, in my view he's basically "average guy with average taste who has read a lot of stuff". If you read a lot of specs, you are inevitably going to "discover" some good stuff before it pops. I read PRISONERS and SOURCE CODE before they were movies, and liked both of them. That doesn't make me a development executive. With Script Shadow, it seems like he has bought his own hype to some extent and started to believe that because he built a popular site around script reviews, he is now an authority on storytelling.

                          I don't think he has actually ever worked as a writer, reader, or exec in the industry though.

                          Naive people can stumble upon his site, believe he's really a major industry player, and fall into the trap of spending big $$$ on his services without realizing that he's effectively just another random dude with a larger frame of reference than average. I won't say his opinion has zero value, but I also won't say it carries much more weight than anyone else's. I certainly wouldn't pay him for consultation.

                          Originally posted by WRITERRIVERS View Post

                          Why is Script Shadow only into simple scripts found on the The Black List ?
                          I would guess that he primarily reviews Black List scripts because those are made available to the general public, so it's the main population of scripts that he has access to. I'm sure other stuff occasionally falls off a truck and into his lap, but I doubt many people on the inside are sending him stuff. Think about it. What do you stand to gain? If he loves your project, it won't move the needle for you because his endorsement doesn't have sway with real players. If he shits on your project, it's just bad buzz and publicity. If you are a manager/agent/producer, you don't stand to gain much at all by sharing your script with him, so he probably doesn't get a lot of stuff that's circulating the insider channels. Instead he mainly gets the same stuff you and I can access, which is Black List scripts and questionable material from desperate amateurs trying to generate some heat.

                          Having said all that, it's impressive that he was able to recognize the potential demand for script reviews, stick with it, and build a viable business just from that. It's nice that there's somewhere you can go to learn about projects in development, and maybe get a second opinion on something you've read. I just don't buy into the "expert insider" aspect of it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by WRITERRIVERS View Post

                            I really liked The Tomorrow War.
                            Is Script Shadow on mushrooms?
                            Why is he hating good scripts and movies ?
                            Let's see, Tomorrow War got a 52% on Rotten Tomatoes. It got a 45% on Meta Critic.

                            So, it would appear that lots of people, that are paid to see lots of movies, didn't like it.

                            But... who cares what he likes? You don't need permission to like a movie. Like it if you want. If you think he's an idiot, why are you giving any credence to what he thinks?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Was a decent movie, entertaining and forgettable. Not much more to say about it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X