August 15, 2024: Fourth round of script notes!

Thanks for the fourth draft of your script. Apologies for the delay in responding, but we were addressing an issue on the set of our new movie shooting in the Philippines, a biopic of Don Santiago De Los Santos, the famed 19th century Filipino of short stature. Despite the fact he was only 2 feet, 2 inches tall, Santiago was a master of multiple languages and a popular stage performer who became a huge celebrity in 19th century England. Two days into filming, however, Peter Dinklage complained on social media, so we had to recast. Chris Pratt was brought in to take over the lead role and Hernando, the local little person we originally cast, went back to selling dried tillefish at the Taboan Public Market. Catastrophe averted!

Anyway, on to the notes…

Is there a way to give the FBI and Secret Service characters testifying before Congress some purpose? As things stand, they add nothing to the story. Would it be possible for them to provide the occasional answer to the questions asked rather than obfuscating or hiding behind their stock “We’re still looking into it and will get back to you!” response? Our audience isn’t the Pennysylvania electorate. They require results in a timely manner. At present, the only one providing any real insight is the whistleblower character.

Speaking of which…

The Secret Service lead site agent at the rally demonsrates all the competence of an Australian breakdance champion at the Olympics. Let’s come up with a reason for why they were, according to the whistleblower, “inexperienced”, “inept”, and “did not enforce normal security protocols”. Were they, perhaps, someone with an incurable disease whose final wish was to be a lead site agent for just one day, a wish granted them by the Secret Service? This might explain some – but certainly not all – of the security lapses.

According to the whistleblower, Homeland Security agents, many of whom had no experience working rallies, were primarily responsible for security instead of the Secret Service. Why? Can we say the Secret Service agents were reallly hung over from the night before and had Homeland Security cover for them?

Counter snipers communicated via text without wifi according to the whistleblower. Why not radios? Hell, why not two toilet paper rolls with strings connecting them? Maybe the lack of radios was the result of budget cutbacks? If you like this idea, please specify other ways in which they had to tighten their belts (ie using hand-me-down .300 Winchester Magnum-chambered bolt-action rifles with second hand Schmidt & Bender scopes).

According to the whistleblower, the Secret Service was in a separate command center far from the action. Did that separate command center happen to be…the Arbys’ up the road?

Some here bumped on the FBI being unable to explain why the whistleblower’s email was deleted, but I pointed out that the FBI has a rich history of accidentally deleting crucial emails so I found this beat consistent.

The old adage “Show, don’t tell” is put to curious use in this script. In sworn testimony, the Secret Service Director claims that the the shooter was obscured by the roof so the counter-sniper could not have seen him. Yet, later, we are shown video of the shooter sprinting across the rooftop for all to see! In a similar vein, the body cam footage from law enforcement on the day shows them complaining about the fact they repeatedly asked the Secret Service to secure the warehouse the shooter used, again directly contradicting the Secret Service official’s claims. Given the Secret Service’s inability to perform the most basic of duties, like communicating with law enforcement, is it possible they also failed to communicate with this Secret Service Director who may just be cluelessly uninformed because he just got back from an extended vacation in Aruba?

In scene 67, the Secret Service Director claims local law enforcement was briefed by the Secret Service. Yet in scene 79 the SWAT Team gives a tv interview contradicting this claim, insisting they never had contact with the Secret Service until after the shooting. And haven’t heard from them since. This reads like the Secret Service is trying to cover their asses, but only doing a half-ass job of it.

Slight inconsistency in the logic surrounding the shooting. The counter-sniper, who officially didn’t see the shooter until he opens fire, neutralizes him almost instantly as if…he already knew he was there. Which is it?

Why was no counter-sniper positioned on the water tower, the highest point on the property, as overwatch? Was he afraid of heights?

After not using counter-snipers for two years while running security for the Presidential frontrunner, the Secret Service suddenly decides to make use of them for this particular rally. They claim it was because they believed Iran was seeking to assassinate the frontrunner – but why all of a sudden and not a week, a month, or even a year earlier? Did he do something to further enrage Iran like, say, critiquing their allies in the current administration who granted them sanctions relief? (P.S. I see you still haven’t given up on trying to set up Iran as the Big Bad, this time by pointing the finger at them for the hacking of the Presidential frontrunner’s campaign. Unfortunately, it’s still coming across as clunky and unconvincing. Furthermore, it feels like you’re borrowing story ideas from the last political presidential campaign movie we did, “Russia Hour”, starring Willem Dafoe and Chris Tucker.)

Why has the lead site agent who was responsible for the security debacle not been relieved of duty pending the conclusion of this investigation? This is like a waiter telling diners: “Don’t worry. The chef who killed those people by serving them impromperly cleaned fugu is under investigation. In the meantime, he has made you a lovely fugu appetizer for tonight’s dinner. Enjoy!”

The scene where the Secret Service Director claims they are being unfairly persecuted could use a melancholic music cue. We suggest Samuel Barber’s Adagio for Strings.

Dialogue note! The Secret Service Director blames his department’s shortcomings on “a failure of imagination”. How the hell does that make sense? That is literally their one and only job! How imaginative do they have to be?!

The scene where the Secret Service is finally shamed into providing protection for the presidential candidate running as an independent is also dramatically satisfying.

Once again circling back to why this 20 year old has no social media. And why aren’t the journalists interviewing the shooters friends and/or schoolmates? They seem exceptionally lazy, even by today’s journalistic standards.

Okay – after absorbing the last three drafts and your attempts to plug the seemingly endless plot holes in this script, I think we’re at the point where we must choose to go one of two ways:
1) You can continue writing endless drafts, trying to explain away and excuse the unbelievable gross incompetence displayed by the Secret Service on the day OR
2) You can embrace the more dynamic and logically-sound angle that this was actually… a poorly orchestrated attempt by elements within the government to get rid of a troublesome presidential candidate!
If you go with the latter, then almost all of the elements that currently don’t make sense in your script actually do!

Think about it!

Meanwhile, the presidential campaign backdrop of this script continues to impress. Will the media darling hold a press conference before the election? Will she ever release her platform? Will she be replaced by a mop and handle and still maintain the exact same level of support? We can’t wait to find out!

One logic bump though. She promises to address key issues, yet being part of the current administration actually makes her party to the bad policy decisions that created the issues in the first place. Also, if she’s already in power, why wait to implement these fixes? Am I missing something? Let’s have the media actually push back on this a little and convey a semblance of nonpartisan integrity. To this point, they’ve proven about as impartial as an NBA ref calling a Lakers home game.

P.S. When the time comes we have a terrific casting suggestion for the VP’s VP pick. He looks like a cowardly lion too!

Finally, if you’re going to have her throw out potential policy ideas, make the effort to come up with something original rather than just cribbing from ther opponent’s platform.

Overall, we really like all of the dark authoritiarian beats that continue to loom large, like the use of the justice department to target political rivals and the global crackdown on free speech. Having said that, it has been brought to our attention that these story elements bears some striking similarities to a previously published work. To avoid a potential lawsuit, could you tweak some of these narative elements to differentiate them from George Orwell’s 1984. We don’t want people to think we’re ripping him off.

That’s all for now. Looking forward to reading the rewrite!

The post August 15, 2024: Fourth round of script notes! appeared first on Joseph Mallozzi's Weblog.