All new accounts must be activated. PM Kathryn to request a new account activation.


Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Ever After Part
06-11-2012, 01:49 PM
Post: #71
RE: The Ever After Part
(06-10-2012 11:15 AM)tofu Wrote:  You know what was odd about the draft of the CSC script that I had? It *actually* had a narrator....it was the paramedic, Florio (Ray Liotta). I don't know which draft it was but, wow. Really glad they didn't go that route, otherwise the movie would have been way worse. Have to wonder how many rewrites this script went through before they got to the production draft....

It's subgenre was definitely supernatural, and I agree- they didn't play that up enough. It does make me long for him to do some type of thriller...he's definitely got the chops to pull of a serious role in that genre. Here's to hoping.... Smile

tofu

The movie certainly didn't need a narrator, what was missing was someone Charlie could talk to. (Movies are more difficult than novels because you can only present the story in dialog and action, no internal narrative.) The Ray Liotta character would have been a good choice.

The supernatural element had a lot of potential. For example, there could have been lots more conflict with the little brother and how he was using emotional blackmail to force Charlie to waste his life. This could have been a stunningly emotional movie.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-11-2012, 01:59 PM
Post: #72
RE: The Ever After Part
(06-11-2012 01:49 PM)d. b. wilyumz Wrote:  
(06-10-2012 11:15 AM)tofu Wrote:  You know what was odd about the draft of the CSC script that I had? It *actually* had a narrator....it was the paramedic, Florio (Ray Liotta). I don't know which draft it was but, wow. Really glad they didn't go that route, otherwise the movie would have been way worse. Have to wonder how many rewrites this script went through before they got to the production draft....

It's subgenre was definitely supernatural, and I agree- they didn't play that up enough. It does make me long for him to do some type of thriller...he's definitely got the chops to pull of a serious role in that genre. Here's to hoping.... Smile

tofu

The movie certainly didn't need a narrator, what was missing was someone Charlie could talk to. (Movies are more difficult than novels because you can only present the story in dialog and action, no internal narrative.) The Ray Liotta character would have been a good choice.

The supernatural element had a lot of potential. For example, there could have been lots more conflict with the little brother and how he was using emotional blackmail to force Charlie to waste his life. This could have been a stunningly emotional movie.

That's probably what Zac thought when he read the script.

[Image: 2irru4n.jpg]
{c} michelle.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-11-2012, 11:01 PM
Post: #73
RE: The Ever After Part
i thought that the movie turned out good anyway though lol
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2012, 02:09 PM
Post: #74
RE: The Ever After Part
(06-11-2012 01:59 PM)mirandagirl Wrote:  That's probably what Zac thought when he read the script.

I think he was hooked by the basic little-brother situation. He would probably have been uncomfortable if the script had played up the potential emotional conflict between them. But it would have been a better movie.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2012, 11:52 PM
Post: #75
RE: The Ever After Part
lol i just realized that this wasn't the csc thread lol Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: