Mean Streets (Poster)

Genre Conventions Research: Mean Streets Poster

The poster is presented to us purely by way of graphics. The poster boasts an illustrated skyline, with uses of grey and black, to possibly highlight a lowdown and grim feel about the film. Various locales all over an unnamed city, such as rooftops, apartment windows and alleyways, are all depicted in solid grey.

Toward the top right hand side of the poster is a gun, possibly acting as a building, with smoke floating out of the muzzle, possibly trying to act as the building’s chimney. The use of the gun being presented to us as a stand-in for a building perhaps infers that violence is integrated into the everyday lives of the people and the places in and around these 'Mean Streets' connoting that this film is a very violent and confrontational one.

The use of solid black for the gun helps to make it stand out and catch our eye, and it could be argued that the gun, despite all of the other graphics shown, is the primary focus of the poster. Furthermore, in regard to the gun, it could be argued that it has been used to connote phallic imagery, reinforcing that this is very much a male-orientated film and story, and which features masculine and violent characters, “men’s men,” in a way.

The red of the title is the only strong use of bright colour featured in the poster. The way the title is presented, to the far right, toward the bottom of the poster, is very stylistic and flashy, almost giving the impression that the letters are bleeding into one another, which is a very eye-catching way of presenting the film’s title. The poster is presented to us as a sort of framed photo or painting, which is indicated via frame borders on all four corners of the poster. This may imply that the film, as well as the poster, is a picturesque, and also very personal, portrayal of urban gangster life.

The poster, whilst being very ambiguous (evident in that next to nothing about the actual content is revealed through use of photographs), is also extremely intriguing. By withholding each frame of film and letting nothing certain slip from the film, this draws us in, persuading us and making us want to watch the film just to see if it is just as effective, fierce and aggressive as the poster makes it out to be.

I very much liked the poster, as it drew my attention to the film almost immediately. It is very much characteristic of several film posters seen throughout the late sixties, early seventies, which gave as much information as it withheld. It is extremely well-made, thought-provoking and interesting.

District 9, Magazine Article Review, Empire, Oct 2009

Genre Conventions Research: District 9 Review


Language:

The article begins with cynical tone, addressing the fact that aliens have been used several times in film. The reviewer than goes through a list of the different types of aliens we have encountered in film. This is presented to us not very seriously, in fact almost comedic and playful. There is use of contrasting language, "Cute ones..." "...Nasty bastards..." The use of vulgarity infers that the reviewer possibly doesn't take the review itself very seriously, almost trying to ease the reader in, taking to them at a one to one level, rather than using journalist jargon to alienate the reader.

The reviewer than goes onto point out the unoriginality in the film, with its' constant references to other sci-fi films that the film features. For example - "Human metamorphosing into something more than human? Why, hello there, The Fly." This is, again, very playful, funny language, as it points out the faults and unoriginality of the film first and foremost, possibly to allow room for good points of the film and its' positive attributes.

The tone of the review than changes from one of cynicism and scrutiny, to one of possibly genuine respect and admiration for the film: "It's a genuinely exciting and surprisingly affecting thriller..." This entices us, by implying that, if the film, whilst being unoriginal, can still have the power to affect us in this way, it is possibly so that we may firstly want to continue to read the review, in order to gain the reviewer's own expert opinion into the film and secondly, be so convinced by the reviewer's words that we are interested in seeing the film for ourselves, to make our own judgement.

The reviewer seems to have respect for the filmmaker's convictions during the making of the film, which is evident in this sentence: "The astounding...special effects aren't dwelled upon...this isn't just a fantastical sci-fi pic...this is real..." Almost trying to imply that this film, because of its non-grandiose, rough, documentary like style, is setting itself apart from the usual run of 'sci-fi' films we are bombarded with these days, and and that, despite its constant reference to 'sci-fi' films past, that is immaterial because of the way the filmmakers have executed the film. Also, later on in the review, the reviewer makes the point of saying that the film cost $30 million dollars and that it still looks stunning, and goes on to poke fun at how filmmakers such as Michael Bay "have dreams that cost more than $30 mil," therefore ridiculing the current trend of plying 'sci-fi', or any big, mainstream film, for that matter, with ridiculous sums of cash that generate great style and visual effects but little substance, which in-turn implies that District 9 again sets itself apart from the usual run of 'sci-fi' films in that it looks fantastic and has a intriguing, deep meaning to it as well.

The author then goes further into detail about the actual plot of the film, pointing out a weak point of the film that The aliens...clearly operate as an allegory...[one so clear] it might as well be wrapped in cling film,", but which is than made up for by a description of what the reviewer calls "some of the best...extra terrestrials..." The reviewer's description enhances the full page close up of the alien seen on the opposing page: "...Non humanoid...Clicking monstrosities...Can rip a man's head-off in a heartbeat..." The close up seen on the opposing page clearly matches up to the reviewer's description, and so possibly they may be implying that the filmmakers, through their use of special effects and their presentation of the alien creatures in this way, have coaxed the desired effect out of audience members and that their use of special effects was very well used.

After giving us a very thorough deconstruction of the film's positive points, such as the film's main character "shying away the easy, traditional path of the reluctant hero," and "the action...is absolutely stunning," the reviewer than deconstructs the film's negative points, by calling it "hugely enjoyable but flawed," that "there are gaping plotholes...which (come to you) several hours later...and just won't leave," and that "the illusion that the movie is a documentary is dropped around the 25 minute mark...only to be reintroduced arbitrarily at intervals...becomes jarring and removes us from the...action." This balanced use of evidence is key in that this gives us a two-sided review/opinion, giving us both the negatives and the positives of the film, and not drooling incessantly over the film whilst not pointing out any bad points. This implies a high sense of professionalism and non-partiality, and that the reviewer, while it is evident that he enjoyed the film, remembers that he is, first and foremost, a film critic, and that he is being paid to do this job, and that he must follow it through to the best of his abilities.

Layout:

There is lots of use of black, orange and maroon, though this is not done to stay in keeping with motifs seen during the film being reviewed, but rather a motif seen through the magazine (i.e., all of the films reviewed in the magazine, even District 9, which is the main review article, use the same black, orange and maroon colour scheme).

A marker dated from 'August 28-October 1' is seen jutting out at a canted angle from a black and orange banner above it reading "In Cinemas." This implies a very cool, laidback feel, and that these reviews are as much aimed at the general movie-going everyman than they are at the film connoisseur.

The review itself is presented through the use of columns, three long columns on every page that the review is seen on, i.e. pages 50, 52. The columns hold no more than 7 words on every line, and are in very small font size. In keeping with a traditional magazine/newspaper/journalistic discipline. Also, its' length. This is the main film review of this particular issue, and so it is expected that this will be the longest and most thoroughly reviewed film as this is the film out at the moment with the most hype and the most draw at the box-office. Almost satisfying a need within the eager readers/audience to find out as much of the film as possible before heading off to see it.

On page 52, there is a key quote from the review (paraphrased): "The action is stunning...electrical blasts splatter villains all over the lens..." The quote is much bigger than the review from which it comes from, and this instantly catches our eye and makes us want to firstly be more excited and tempted by the film and secondly, read the quote in context, to see what overall effect it has on us as readers.

A small text box on the bottom right hand corner of the image of the alien, giving us trivial facts about alien films past and the making of the film. In keeping with the style of humour of the review, the constant harking back to alien films past, specifically the reference to 1982, the release date of Spielberg’s E.T. as being “the year the aliens first came to Earth,” and where inspiration for the film and its alien creatures came from.

Images:
A full page close-up shot of one of the main alien creatures seen within the film, which is eye-catching, grotesque, oddly beautiful in its own way, and evident of the wonderful special effects seen in the film, can be used as a comparison to the reviewer's description of the alien creatures in his review. Also, the idea that this is a full page close up almost implies that this is the key
example of the special effects depicted within the film, and that this is what the budget, which, for a sci-fi film is, as the reviewer admits, very modest, was used for, and possibly, to great effect and results.

A shot from the film which takes up about one third of the page. It is a shot of two MNU (the army seen in the film) attempting to kill one of the alien creatures. Again, it is very eye-catching and grotesque and evidence of the special effects seen in the film. Also, the caption "Ohhhhh, okey-cokey-cokey," is very funny and amusing and, whilst being a slight jibe at the film, is in keeping with the playful, comedic tone of the review.

G.I. Joe, Magazine Film Review Analysis, Empire, Oct 2009

Genre Conventions Research: G. I. Joe Review

Language:

I would preface my commentary with rider that the entire review is very, very funny and comedic in tone, making constant jokes at the film and filmmaker’s expense. There does not seem to be a serious tone to the review at all, and almost as if the reviewers feel that the film is not worth the time and effort it would take to conduct a fair and balanced critique of the film, it is just bad, pure and simple. This implies a bias, and possibly that the film reviewer’s job (in this case) is to make sure that films as terrible as these do not get seen, when other films, films which may not have as much hype as a film like this but are ten times better, are fairing very poorly at the box-office.

The review begins with a snub of the film: “At least three times during G.I. Joe, you will hear...‘Let’s get into the fight!!!’ Here, the three exclamation points are justifiable because it’s hard to imagine one or two would be enough.” This immediately sets the tone for the review, in that it will be full of disparaging remarks, and that it is a wholly negative critique and will not give the film any positive praise.

The reviewer then goes deeper into both the making of the film and the possible audience hype which is surrounding the film. Firstly, the reviewer states that: “The script...was rushed into production to beat the writer’s strike...” which possibly tries to imply that the messy pre-production was detrimental to the overall quality of the film. Secondly, he makes mention that the “Blogosphere', which obviously implies that this is the sort of film which will achieve much of its hype over the internet, and that the film’s success, if it does become a success, is heavily reliant upon the 'buzz' generated from the internet. Yet the comment that  “Holy crap...G.I. Joe...is SHIT!” thereby eliminates the idea that even the Blogosphere will be able to save this film. Also, the use of the word “shit” implies that this is a laid back review, and that this film is so extremely bad that it warrants this use of profanity.

Then, we are given details as to how stupid and nonsensical this film actually is, by the reviewer giving us a summary of one of the film’s more “dramatic,” scenes: “Channing Tatum...riding about on a motorbike in anguish...in the rain...with sunglasses on.” This not only an example of the reviewer completely 'ripping' into the film, giving it no justice and bombarding the reader with one critique after another after another, but it is also an example of the humorous, laid-back, completely and totally honest quality of the reviewer’s writing skill.

The point is then made that this film is sort of a “so-bad-it’s-good,” kind of a film, in that, even though it “has a robot tuna...and such unashamed dumb-assedness...it still gained $100.5 mil...which is more than it deserves.” This infers that, despite all of the film’s flaws, and despite every bad thing that this film feature, it still managed to be successful at the box-office, and this in itself is possible a jibe at how even the most stupid and nonsensical films, when given the right amount of hype, even negative hype, make money.

Finally, the reviewer insinuates that the film is a complete misfire, judging by its “substandard special effects, the impression that the “cyber spacesuits...are being waved by a giant, invisible 9-year-old,” and that it makes references to James Bond and “wants to be Thunderball...but ends up being Die Another Die...A mess.” This is, arguably, the final nail in the coffin for this film. The reviewer concludes his article finally and completely by giving one snub after the other, giving no justice whatsoever to the film, implying that it is so bad and so full of wants and desires to be something that it is not that it just collapses under the weight of what it could be instead of what it actually is. Therefore, the review is cleverly structured by the reviewer in order to both start and end the review with negative points, possibly giving the audience no hope at all that this is anyway a remotely good film, and that they should just stay well away from it.

Layout:

Again, there is lots of use of black, orange and maroon, to stay in keeping with a particular motif/colour scheme which is associated with the reviews section of Empire magazine.The review is, like that of District 9, presented through the use of columns (one long, two medium sized and one short column), each which hold no more than 7 words per line. Again, conforming to a traditional journalistic discipline. The length of the review is very short (the film is only allowed one page in the magazine), almost to imply that there is nothing worthwhile to point out the film, except its extraordinarily bad points and to critique and pick fun out of it to the point of absolute ridiculousness.

Toward the bottom left hand corner, there is a quote from the main article, which reads (paraphrased): "The Mummy Returns had Zombie Pygmies...G.I. Joe has a robot tuna." This quote is, again, much bigger than the review from which it comes from, and this instantly catches our eye and makes us not only want to read the comment in context, but also make us marvel at the absolutely stupid and downright bizarre nature of the film, and this is possibly where the main hook of the film is - that the reviewers almost want us to see this film just to make us agree with them that it is as bad as they have concluded it is. The 'final nail in the coffin' is a small text box in the middle left hand corner of the still from the film, where it gives us three points of trivia about the film and its filmmakers.

In conclusion, it is evident that Empire layout each of their reviews in a very similar fashion to one another, possibly to create a sense of consistency and to not alienate or confuse their regular readers by constantly changing the way that their articles are laid out. Creating a sense of brand identity in its own way, by strictly conforming to a set layout, they will firstly draw more readers in with their thorough reviews and secondly, create a sense of comfort and, almost, anticipation in amongst regular, dedicated readers who wish to find out the magazine's opinion of these films.

Images:

The one image comprises a large single still from the film, which takes up a little more than half of the page, features two Ninja-like characters, one in black, the other in white, in the middle of a swordfight or duel. The use of this image, when taken in context of the review, possibly implies that this is the key/most interest scene of the film, and the type of scene that will possibly be used to pull an audience, and that this sort of scene is shown again and again in the film, and that there is no more to it then that - the image sums up the film in a nutshell (i.e., duels, swords, villains in cool costumes, fire, explosions, all action and little sense, etc).

Therefore, a common theme seen throughout Empire magazine is that the images that they use tend to either, on the one hand, sum up the entire film in one singular image, possibly acting as a signifier to audiences that this is the type of thing they will see in the film and that they can make their choice on seeing the film based on this image, or, on the other hand, to enhance the former effect, they point out the very best of the film, serving as a key audience attractor, and to possibly want to get audiences to see the film because of this amazing image and the effect that it had on their review.

Julie & Julia Magazine Film Review Analysis

Genre Conventions Research: Julie and Julia Review


Image:

The review of the film Julie & Julia is dominated by a single main image of what looks to be the protagonist in a kitchen setting making food. The image connotes that the film may address the themes of family, cooking, friendship and the roles of mothers. The scenery consists of her wearing an apron cloth, in addition to having cooking apparatus such as plates and bowls again suggesting that the film may be largely based around the home or kitchen while also creating a very realistic situation that an audience can relate with. Again in terms of the image, we see a cheerful and happy smile on the centrally positioned character, suggesting a bit about her personality being warming, lighthearted with nothing to hide. This is also suggestive of the tone of the film being humorous and witty, as well as effectively easing the viewer in.

Language:
The tone of much of the review is quite humorous befitting the film's storyline and star actors; however it still contains elements of seriousness. Humour is self- evident in the use of such words like 'teeny kitchen' making the review very lighthearted. As a form of appeal to its audience, the reviewer uses terms such as 'us' involving the reader and making them more inclined to view the film. In addition to praising the credentials of the actors involved in the film like Meryl Streep, boasting 'Streep is to die for, so funny, touching so brilliant' which is effective because its engages the audience, which also makes them more inclined to watch the film. The review uses persuasive techniques in that they analysis the historical background and its relation to the film, for example,  'around the same time Kennedy brought culture and couture to the White House' which places the reviewer on a higher intellectual level and thereby making the reader more inclined to believe and trust them due to that fact that the reader themselves may not know about the historical background.

Layout:
In terms of the layout, the title is presented through the use of bold and black font immediately attracting the reader to the name of the film. The use of black and bold font is commonly used by Empire magazine as its acts as a motif for the whole magazine, this again makes them more recognisable to the reader as Empire are associating themselves with this colour and font.
The caption 'The cook, the wife, the star and her blogger' is used as a indication into the themes of the film, the use of such short words makes the reader want to view the film to find out the meaning of the collocation of these words, which is again effective in making them more inclined to view the film.

Initial/possible idea for short film (#1)

Planning - First Thoughts:


Our concept for our film is, in essence, a five minute walk, from one friend’s house to another’s, seen in real time. The idea here is to give the film a sense of randomness, realism and spontaneity. The idea is also about trying to mix reality with the weird/bizarre, and the mundane with the extraordinary. Some things just happen – they cannot be explained or justified, they simply are.
The film begins with an arresting and intriguing extreme close up of a pair of hands, which are both dripping with blood. This immediately catches the viewer’s attention, and makes them want to continue to watch the film, possibly confusing them and alarming them, but nonetheless, grabbing their attention almost immediately.

There is then a shot of a person, presumably the very same person whose hands we have just seen, walking away, into the distance. The camera than pans back to reveal a pair of legs, presumably a person’s body, lying dead on the floor. In mid pan, we cut to the title card of the film.
We are then introduced to a young man who is seen talking to his friend on the phone. His friend has asked him to come over to his house and he has accepted. We are then given brief flashes of the young man getting dressed and ready to go. His getting ready is shown in a sort of music video type fashion, possibly to highlight the fashions and styles of today’s youth, and to create a sense of verisimilitude.

The young man is then shown leaving his flat and beginning his walk. As he does, his interior monologue begins. The idea here is to create a very internalised film, almost a “documentary of the mind,” in that we follow the character, gaining an insight into their way of thinking, and learning a thing or two about them throughout the course of the film.

The young man than passes another young man, dressed in a long black coat, who is walking very rapidly, almost in a sacred, frenzied, paranoid panic. The two young men bump into each other, and the young man in the coat drops his wallet, but continues to walk. The young man bends down to pick it up and, as he does, it flips open and he sees that the inside of the wallet is stained with bloody finger prints. The other young man suddenly returns, snatching the wallet out of his hands, and thanking him very much for picking it up. He then walks away.

The young man continues his walk to his friend’s house. As he does, he begins to question whether the young man he just bumped into had done something wrong/committed a murder. He then brushes this off, thinking of his idea as stupid and nonsensical and not possible.

The young man than spots, from across the road, a couple having a very loud argument in the middle of the street, with the young woman’s dialogue along the lines of “I can’t believe you did that! How could you be so stupid? Do you know how much money I’ve saved up for that thing? Urgh, I hate you!”

The young man, unable to stop himself, yells “A bit of a strange place to have a domestic, don’t you think, mate?” The boyfriend from across the street yells an obscenity at him but he just laughs it off and continues walking.

The boyfriend from across the street is then seen crossing to the other side of the street, seemingly in an enraged rush. The young man then becomes more and more unnerved and fearful, possibly thinking that this boyfriend is going to hurt him for what he said, or there is going to be a confrontation of some sort. This is told through continuous close-ups and quick cuts back and forth between the two men.

The boyfriend is then seen striding past him, and off into the distance, as the young man is seen turning a corner, into a secluded road, which presumably is where his friend’s house is.

We are then shown the exterior of a jeweller’s. This shot confuses us, as we do not know why we are seeing this and have no idea what use this is to the plot. We then see a static long shot of pedestrians walking outside the area of the shop. We then see a very familiar figure appearing in the distance, but we have no idea who it is exactly.

We then cut to the secluded road, where the young man is seen walking towards his friends house. Everything is very quiet, and the tension here is extreme. Out of nowhere, the young man’s phone rings. He picks it up, and has a very quick conversation with his friend, telling him that he is almost there. He then hangs up. When he does, he sees a figure, walking towards him in the distance.

FROM THIS POINT ON, WE CUT BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE STATIC SHOT OF OUTSIDE THE JEWELLER’S AND A P.O.V. SHOT OF THE YOUNG MAN, WALKING CLOSER AND CLOSER TOWARDS THE FIGURE IN THE DISTANCE, UNTIL BOTH FIGURES MERGE INTO ONE, ALMOST.

The figure that is walking towards the young man is the other young man with the bloody wallet. He is seen holding something in his hands. We cannot tell what it is at first, but it is then revealed to be a knife.

The other young man, in a frenzy, lunges for the young man, and strikes him in the stomach. A close up of the young man’s face reveals his shock and pain. His hands suddenly grip for his stomach and we see that his hands are covered in blood. These are the same hands we saw at the start of the film.
There is then a brief exchange of dialogue between both young men: “Why?” “I’m so sorry.” The young man than falls, presumably to his death. This is interrupted by a shot of the boyfriend walking into the jeweller’s shop and choosing a ring almost at random from behind the counter.

We are then presented with the same shot of the killer walking into the distance, and the pan towards the young man, lying dead in the street. The image of the blood and the shot of the figure walking away from the body implies that the shot of the victim falling and dying has been deliberately cut out in order to confuse and shock the audience, and to manipulate them into thinking one thing when something completely different has taken place.

The boyfriend who was just in the jeweller’s returns to his girlfriend and, slapping the ring in her hand, shouts “There’s your bloody ring!” and walks off into the distance.

The film ends with a close up of the young man’s dead, serene face, before a white-out and credits.

'Hell Is Around the Corner,' - Final draft script

FADE IN ON

EXTREME CLOSE UP of a pair of BLOODY BLACK HANDS.

(NOTE: The atmosphere here should most likely be surreal and dreamlike).

CUT TO

A PAIR OF FEET IN SHINING BLACK LEATHER BOOTS walks away and OUT of FRAME.

HOLD on vacant shot of STREET for a moment or two, then SLOWLY PAN to the RIGHT to reveal a pair of LIMP LEGS (more than likely a person's body) lying on the ground.

In MID PAN we CUT TO the film's TITLE CARD.

A FLASH OF WHITE LIGHT brings us to

THE INTERIOR OF A YOUNG BOY'S (DAMMY'S) BEDROOM.

He is in bed, on the phone, with his friend, who is not heard.

(NOTE: During his conversation of his friend, we get brief shots of items around his rooms to connote a sense of naivety and youthfulness, such as a Willy Wonka DVD, a stack of comic books, and a tall pile of school books).

DAMMY
(into phone)
Yo, man, what's up, you alright? What's the plan for today?
(beat)
I don't even know, man.
(beat)
We could hit up Westfields if you like. I think they've got sales on?
(beat)
Yeah, alright, then. I'll see you in a bit.

We are then presented with BRIEF SHOTS of Dammy getting ready and putting on ARTICLES OF CLOTHING (i.e., baseball cap, coat, shoes, etc).

CUT TO

ESTABLISHING SHOT of Dammy's HOUSE.

Dammy is seen exiting his house and beginning his walk.

CUT TO

A TRACKING CLOSE UP shot of Dammy's face as we hear his INTERIOR MONOLOGUE:

DAMMY
(voice-over)
Bloody hell, what a great day! Gonna get my Vans...oh yeah! Saw a top in H&M, need to get that, too. Only £25 pounds, I think. Absolute bargain!
(beat)
Bit grey, this weather, isn't it? I hope it doesn't rain. Days like these really bring out the worst in people.

CUT TO

OVER THE SHOULDER SHOT of Dammy.

In the distance, we see another young man (Steven), a man who is taller and a bit more stocky, wearing a long black jakcet and a pair of leather gloves. He is walking in a paranoid, frenzied shuffle.

CUT TO

TWO SHOT of both Dammy and Steven BUMPING in to one another.

(NOTE: This shot is presented to us in slow motion to add emphasis to the action).

CUT TO

EXTREME CLOSE UP of Steven's WALLET dropping out of his pocket. It FLIPS OPEN and we are given a brief, teasing look into the inside of it. We see what appears to be bloody fingerprints all over the cards and the inside leather money slip.

(NOTE: THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE SHOT AS WRITTEN - Dammy is positioned to the LEFT of FRAME. He is shown PICKING UP the wallet. On the RIGHT of Dammy, in the background, is Steven, watching him looking at the wallet.

CUT TO

CLOSE UP of a Dammy's face as he sees, in horror and confusion, the bloody sight.

DAMMY
(interior monologue)

What is this? Blood? Is this blood?

Steven slowly approaches Dammy, appearing more and more in focus.

Steven extends his hand and SLAMS it down on Dammy's shoulder.

Dammy suddenly jerks around in FEAR AND PANIC:

STEVEN
(coldly)
That's my wallet you've got there.

CUT TO

TIGHT TWO SHOT as

Both look down at the wallet, then stare up at each other. Dammy looks at Steven for a moment.

CUT TO

DAMMY'S POINT OF VIEW

He sees a dab of red blood in amongst the vast sea of black leather.

Dammy and Steven stare up at each other, Dammy fearfully. Steven looks at him seriously.

DAMMY
(unsure, trying to contain his panic)
Oh, sorry, sorry! Here!
(shoving the wallet into his hand)
Take it! It's yours! I found it on the floor!

Once Dammy gives back the wallet, they trade ONE FINAL GLANCE, before Dammy turns and exits.

CAMERA STAYS POSITIONED BESIDE STEVEN. He watches Dammy walk away into the distance.

CUT TO

A CLOSE UP TRACKING SHOT of Dammy's face.

DAMMY
(interior monologue)
He was bloody strange! The way he looked at me, it was like he wanted to kill me! Argh, he gives me the creeps!
(beat)
...And that blood! That blood! What was with that blood?
(beat)
Nah, forget it. Out of sight, out of mind. Just put it out of mind.

CUT TO

"THE TRAIL OF DEATH."

On the approach to his friend's house, Dammy notices the following:

A) A DEAD PLANT.

B) THE FRONT PAGE OF A NEWSPAPER DETAILING MANY DEATHS/A VERY FAMOUS HISTORICAL DEATH.

C) A DEAD ANIMAL.

These shots are complemented with CLOSE UPS of Dammy staring at them in bewilderment.

CUT TO

Dammy turns the corner and begins to walk down a long, secluded alleyway/side street. The atmosphere here is very dark and chilling. There is hardly a sound, except for Dammy’s worried breathing and the quiet hubbub from the main street.

DAMMY
(interior monologue)
Just a couple more minutes. You’ll be there in a couple of minutes. Just calm down.

As he walks down the alley, he sees, in the distance, a man, dressed in a black coat, walking at a slow, casual pace. As Dammy gets nearer and nearer, he/we begin to consider whether it is Steven, the man from the previous scene:

Dammy’s eyes light up with panic:

DAMMY
(interior monologue)
Is that him? Is that HIM?! Oh, my God!
(beat)
No no no no no it’s not possible it’s not possibly it’s not him!

From Dammy’s P.O.V., we get closer and closer to the figure in the distance until there is absolutely no denying that it is him.

DAMMY
(interior monologue)
Oh my god oh my god what does he want what does he want???

Dammy and Steven meet in the middle of the road. Dammy, scared out of his wits, says, stuttering:

DAMMY
La-listen, I-I, uh, I don’t want any...

Steven slow pulls something from out of his pocket – a pair of keys. He holds them forward, offering them to Dammy.

STEVEN
(in a slow, deliberate fashion)
You dropped your keys, mate.
(putting them in his hand)
There you go. Always believed in being the Good Samaritan, me.

Dammy breathes an immense sigh of relief.

DAMMY
Phew! Thank God!
(beat, laughs)
You know, for a second there, you really frightened me...

STEVEN
It’s alright, mate. No harm done.
They both look at each other.

DAMMY
(putting his hand on his shoulder)
Thank you...!

From Dammy’s P.O.V., we see Steven quickly glance at his hand on his shoulder, then slowly look up at him, squarely in the face.

He smiles, very faintly, before QUICKLY BRANDISHING A HAMMER AND SMASHING DAMMY OVER THE HEAD WITH IT!

CUT TO BLACK!

THE END

Notes for script

Planning - Working Notes:

1) Ahmed could play the naive boy and Dammy could play the killer. Dammy is capable of pulling off being very intimidating and cold and detached, and Ahmed can pull off being naive and stupid and oblivious to what is going on.

2) If Ahmed were to play the boy, we would have to slightly tone down the opening dialogue and replace it with something a little less “street.”

3) When he sees the blood on the killer’s coat, there should be a ZOOM IN, so that it not only takes on a raw, bloody meaning but also almost engulfs the screen in red, almost as if it is a flashing light or an alarm bell of this boy’s guilt/crime.

4) When he hands back the wallet, there should be a shot of the hands, which connotes a passing away, and also that his life is now in the killer’s hands.

5) There are so many different ways in which we can show/signify the killer killing the boy. We do not see blood, but we see the actual hit, possibly from the young boy’s point of view, putting us right in his shoes. Also, both the slamming of the hand on the shoulder and the killing should both be presented with a similar sound, such as a crashing sound or a distorted scream; something violent sounding, basically.

6) There should also be a shot of the clouds up above when he says “I hope it doesn’t rain...” Grey clouds connote a sense of foreboding, and the feeling that there is not something quiet right going on here.

7) Places/things would could connote death include a bordered up pub (which is near my house, but I do not know if we need permission), a boarded up house, and lilies. The lilies could be one or a dozen, a wrecked bouquet that the boy sees on the ground with the petals blowing in the wind, for instance.