posted
Yeah, we figured that there wasn't much way to do a comedy, so...
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
But, if it had been named before the anti-religion regime took over, and these leaders wanted to eradicate all semblance of Christianity, wouldn't they rename anything w/ "saint" in it? Wouldn't they be afraid of something like this?:
child: "Why is the hospital named 'Saint Somewhere'? What does that mean?" adult: "It's named after a person." child: "Who was Saint Somewhere?" adult: "A very bad person who devoted his life to evil beliefs." child: "Then why did they name a hospital after him?" adult: "Er... Um... Shut up, kid! *thwap!*"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Maybe the person's last name was "St. Somewhere". Not everyone with St. in their name actually was canonized.
Of course, I might add a bit of symmetry to the line...
"Welcome to the psychiatric ward of St. Somewhere. Of course, when I worked here, it was called [insert amusing secular name]. And, in a few days, it'll be known as a pile of rubble."
I think I like that...
[ January 18, 2002: Message edited by: Omega ]
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Is there anyway you could at least TRY to present two sides of an argument? At all??
And there's really no conflict to it. Drama is conflict. Without conflict, you don't have a play. It's all too easy.
$$$$ Omega's play spoilers $$$$
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Lady checks in, lady gives them book, they read, they conquer the planet. The end. Someting needs to oppose them to make a good conflict. Maybe they resist, but the patients revolt against it. Maybe the grandfather was a patient who was part of the rebellion. Or if you want to be more traditional, maybe one of the other attendees resisted and held firm to the secular philosophy, and threatened to turn them in to Big Brother.
Also, the dialogue could use a little tightening. Try to listen to the way people talk in real life, today, around you and imitate that style.
Oh, and watch "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" for an awesome psych ward movie.
[ January 18, 2002: Message edited by: OnToMars ]
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Is there anyway you could at least TRY to present two sides of an argument? At all??
The other side of the argument being that facism is a good thing? That the invariably resulting horrors are not quite so horrible, and not a thing to be avoided?
I find it difficult to present, as a rational argument, that which is not one.
And there's really no conflict to it. Drama is conflict. Without conflict, you don't have a play.
We didn't have such a conflict last year and we won.
Remember, we've got, like, ten minutes to do this. This isn't "Lord of the Rings". It's just a short morality play.
Also, the dialogue could use a little tightening. Try to listen to the way people talk in real life, today, around you and imitate that style.
I did that. I specifically avoided using my own speech patterns.
Any specific area you think needs work with that?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
He can't present the other side of the arguement, because that would defeat the purpose of his play entirely. It's not drama. It only exists to say "Look! Yahweh == good! Anyone who tells you otherwise == bad! Convert them before they convert you!".
"It's just a short morality play."
Or, as the the rest of the world calls it, "propaganda". :-)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Bearing in mind this is going against my better judgement and my policy of encouraging the oppression of rationality. I do however support the propogation of art as an examination of humanity. Even if the examination is flawed.
quote: The other side of the argument being that facism is a good thing? That the invariably resulting horrors are not quite so horrible, and not a thing to be avoided?
The other side that secular government might not be such a horrible thing.
quote: I find it difficult to present, as a rational argument, that which is not one.
I won't say it...I won't say it...I won't say it...
quote: We didn't have such a conflict last year and we won.
Well, I doubt it's the Pulitzer committee you're trying to win over.
quote: Well, why were they in here, then?
Well or then. One or the other.
quote: But� but� how�
But...how? Stuttering usually doesn't work out.
Generally, tightening dialogue is really just getting rid of unneccessary so's, well's, then's, etc.
Anyway, you got five scenes, which is a pretty substantial one act play. It's tough to pull off, but good stuff can be written in one act. Nobody's expecting you to be Samuel Beckett, but hey, there's always room for improvement.
*patiently awaiting the Quantum Leap joke*
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The other side that secular government might not be such a horrible thing.
Considering that it invariably has been so, from Julius Caesar to Jaing Zamin, I'd say there's very little chance of that. Once a government decides that it's all-powerful, and answers to no higher morality, you're screwed. Which is, coincidencly, the entire point of the skit. Look at Nuremburg. The entire premise of that trial was that all people everywhere are answerable to a higher authority than their government.
How do you think the Roman empire deteriorated so far that the barbarians could take it out? Because it became an empire! Under the Republic, back when it had a healthy respect for morality, is where it gained its power, but once the government stopped being answerable to a higher morality, they also stopped being answerable to the people. Then everything started disintegrating, starting with the inflation of the money supply and working down from there all the way to people watching murder for sport.
Well or then. One or the other
Yes, that might be good grammer, but people in my part of the country use such terminology as I wrote frequently.
Generally, tightening dialogue is really just getting rid of unneccessary so's, well's, then's, etc.
Yeah, but people USE those unneccessary so's and well's. It doesn't quite sound real otherwise.
It only exists to say "Look! Yahweh == good! Anyone who tells you otherwise == bad! Convert them before they convert you!".
Actually, I have the purpose of the play writtein on the cover sheet for the copy of the script that we hand the judges:
"To illustrate the necessity of God in the moral functioning of a country; to illustrate that any country anywhere is susceptible to the false premise that true law and morality flows from government mandate, instead of from God, a premise which has caused untold destruction throughout history"
Recommended reading:
"Ancient Rome: How It Affects You Today" by Richard Maybury "What Ever Happened To Justice?" by Richard Maybury
Very good books. Read. You may learn a thing or six about facism, and how, regardless of how many different countries try it, it's still a bad idea.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
quote:"To illustrate the necessity of God in the moral functioning of a country; to illustrate that any country anywhere is susceptible to the false premise that true law and morality flows from government mandate, instead of from God, a premise which has caused untold destruction throughout history."
And of course, there couldn't possibly be a moral standard - or form of justice - without christianity.
[ January 19, 2002: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
I STILL want to know what facism is.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It seems to have lost whatever its original definition was, much like "conservative" and "liberal" in the US. The current definition, as I use it here, is that facism is a system under which there is no guiding philosophy. The government has no limits, and no rules. It does whatever is deemed "necessary", and since the government determines what's "necessary", they have all power. Most governments today follow this form.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You keep claiming that, and you keep neglecting to say exactly what the frell you're talking about.
But that's for the flameboard. Let's drop it.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
And of course, there couldn't possibly be a moral standard - or form of justice - without christianity.
Christianity? Did I mention Christianity in my script? Must have missed that...
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, Omega, both Jay and I have discussed it in detail, in the flameboard. You really should pay more attention to threads you participate in.
Topic Closed
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic