One last quibble with the movie...
They seriously couldn't find a better Jack Nicholson impersonator??? Fer real? He was awful. Didn't sound like him at all and barely looked like him.
That scene started to feel magical to me and then he opened his mouth and it ruined everything.
Anyway!! I have done these things professionally while editing manuscripts for people! I also do developmental editing, which is basically the same thing but *before* the story is released into the world. And I'm available for work! Book coaching and ghostwriting, too! lol
McKee's book (Story) uses parts of famous movies to demonstrate the ideas he's expressing. Here's how The Godfather created a values shift in the horse head scene, here's how The Big Lebowski is an example of an antiplot, etc.
I would break down an entire movie. Here's the inciting incident and why its timing good, here's establishing a character arc, this is where the theme is being reinforced.
A holistic look.
I really love to analyze movies and shows, at many levels of the craft: plot, theme, character development. Being sick so long, it's one of the few brainy activities I could do passively, and a way to practice my writing skills without being able to write.
I could see myself building a niche using film analysis as a vector for teaching narrative skills, along the vein of and in the school of Robert McKee.
People could watch the movie, then read the analysis written or videoed with an eye toward developing skills. Here is what they did right and why, this is how they could have done better.
Alas, I've already got my niches. And while my health has improved, I'm not exactly well yet. If ever.
This movie actually has good bones. It could have been an excellent movie. Great sets, interesting ideas and characters, visceral motifs, decent writing and acting.
But the editing continues to be bad. Simple cutting room floor decisions. Pacing. Transitions. The order of scenes.
It's a shame.
"Yes, we're... we're like vampires but instead of drinking, we... well, we sniff, ok??"
In case anyone is wondering.
I would have kept the prologue with the little girl. Then start the present day story arc with Danny waking up to the montage of flashbacks between the bar the night before, and morning as he's putting the pieces together about the fight, the binge, the sex, just like the scene is now. But then BAM before he's done with figuring it out, we insert Danny's childhood "prologue" (what comes first in the real edit) as a flashback amid the others.
It's a much longer scene than the other flashbacks. That's fine. Let it play out, as if we've moved on without finishing the thought.
Then boom, we're back to the bar, the drugs, the discoveries in his apartment.
This not only fixes the terrible pacing of feeling like I just saw the same scene twice (little girl haunted, little boy haunted), but it gives me the emotional payoff of realizing 1. This is Danny from The Shining, 2. He's coping through binging, sex, and fighting, 3. He's coping poorly.
It's a more immersive way to show those emotions. (That's what a flashback during a bender or similar copes is actually like.)
Moreover, since typical flashback montages never have that kind of pacing (a long flashback further back in time), it'll be unexpected and feel uncomfortable to the viewer, but in a good way that will set the tone for the rest of the film. Anyone who loves Kubrick will feel like these filmmakers are at least competent and may have some tricks up their sleeves, too. First impressions in a story are (almost) everything!
When I'm developmentally editing a narrative, it's really satisfying to find a single change like this that fixes so many problems at once.
I wish they would've asked me on the editing of this movie. One small change in placement of the "second prologue" would've:
* fixed the opening pacing issue
* told a more emotionally believable backstory for D
* kept his identity a secret for a couple of minutes for a much bigger payoff
* pulled every opening beat together cohesively rather than scattering them about
* set the viewer off balance in a way that complements this story
* better developed D's character without the cliche feeling tired and obvious
* set the viewer's expectations higher, which in this case I think would get them to stop judging so hard and you can get away with sucking more later.
Quite a big bang for the buck for just moving one little scene slightly later.
(Also... never, ever, ever give a story try prologues. wtf.)
This movie has a lot to live up to and I'll be judging it harshly.
Mx. Luna Corbden 🐸
Curt Johnson - Indie Genius