You are both right in some senses (I leave many things unexplained in my own stories), but if the writer gets the reader to think a lot, it is a good thing! As a writer, you want people to use their imagination and delve into the story with imaginative reasons for why and how things happen. So, if Gore wants me to think of my own reasons why Vincent killed, then I will be content; I will be satisfied with the devilish, pleasurable grin of the pre-killing character and the variable turmoil that drives him in his lust.

Well to put it this way all the backstory will be explained in the next installments. I wrote this as a part of an Anthology. It is part 2 of a five parter. Part 1 is the prequal and then the next few are the aftermath. When they are all finished being written I will let you all read them.

@John - I know man I was just effin with ya.

That changes a lot! I cannot complain at all now! Give me more!

I'm really glad to see you still posting sharkbait:)

Thank you. I have come to see the clandestine sparkle of twilight in this modest but sincere community.

aka: webcrack:D

Changing my thread huh nova?

What was this thread about?:D

you little buggar!!!

Oh come on sweetie, you know my mindless prattle could never upstage your brilliance:)

lol I doubt its brillance. I knew you were kidding so was I. :)

I never got an answer from Murderdoll on what she thought of my dialogue now.

It's cool, but the dialogue's sort of on-the-nose. They need to sound a bit more organic, other than that, if they have a motivation and this goes somewhere good it will work.

I didn't bother to read it all, but wanted to let you in on a very simple secret of filmmaking: you make a movie 3 times.
Once is your script. You may have it all laid out shot-for-shot in your head and know exactly how it's supposed to look and feel. In this form, it is always a perfect movie and there is no wrong way about it because it is pure.
Second is the way it is actually shot. Welcome to reality. You can't film at some location for permit reasons. Your perfect 10 starlet won't do topless scenes. Ain't it a bitch that you can't really blow up a building because the budget doesn't allow it ? Guess what ? You've allotted 12 days of schedule to shoot your masterpiece and time (and likely money) is dwindling so you're not going to get everything that was written into the script. Time to start trimming down scenes to get to the parts you "really need". You can get by on them and not "compromise artistic integrity" so you're still in good shape, but that topless chick blowing up the UN building would've been sweet !
Last, but extremely not least, the editing phase. You wanted what's behind Door Number One, got what's behind Door Number Two and now this is what you are left with to make your masterpiece. Even when you cover all the "important" plotlines and got them in the can, they might not always be your best stuff. Your best takes might be flawed. Even trying to piece together the best of the best can be a headache because little things don't match up (ie an actor has moved out of position, something in continuity is wrong so you have to take a subpar shot to make it work). Any editor who doesn't notice or care about such things should be replaced ASAP. The worst part ? A good editor who can make the movie flow at a natural pace is likely gonna chop out a whole lot of your hard work to make it happen. I've been accused of doing this often: the movie gets better with more detail to cuts, but unfortunately ends up losing a lot of running time. It is unfortunate that so many "directors" are more interested in running time than quality (I've worked with plenty myself) and will want to pad the movie with extra long credit scrolls, etc to get a film up to a feature length (I think there was over 9 minutes in 'The Gingerdead Man' in end credits alone, but the movie was a joke to begin with and that was the point of renting it with friends on a weekend. Padding the time at every possible chance just proved it was even weaker than expected).
So what are you left with ? A movie that may or may not remotely resemble your original script. That may be good or bad in the long run. Maybe you didn't have a lot of interesting characters or interaction to begin with, but visually it came out stunning looking. That's a plus. Maybe there was a huge plotline left out because you didn't get all the scenes shot exactly the way you had planned all along. Sucks, but it happens. I know what it's like to write "important" stuff that gets cut and I'm the one who has to cut it myself. It's like losing a finger that has gangrene: you want it there because you personally are used to it, but overall it's not doing you any good in the long run and most likely detrimental to the rest of your hand. Start with a strong plot and characters that can survive a lot of cuts cuz what you write most likely won't be your end product at all. That's just my 2 cents. I'm still not going to read your script - show me what you do with it is all that matters :D
CK

That's all good man. You don't need to read it.

I am not doing this film for anyone like a studio or anything. There isn't a budget so I didn't write it with a budget in mind, I wrote it knowing I can't have anything blow up. My locations are all locations I can get and everything. When I shoot it considering it is only about a ten minute short if I don't like what I get the first time I will reshoot because I have no time restraints or money restraints.

And last but not least I am the one editing it so I will have complete control over everything and anything that has to do with this film. It's just the way I like it.