MovieChat Forums > Deathwatch (2002) Discussion > Awful Script

Awful Script

posted 17 years ago by bapeman-1
29 replies | jump to latest

Unlike some people on her I didn't have a problem with the performances and would have really liked to have seen more of Kris Marshall (the first 'self-loving' victim).
The cinematography was also really good as was the set.

BUT oh my god what a script. There's no sense of cause and effect, instead just a bunch of stuff happens, as we work out which order people will die in. It's all horribly predictable and...

***SPOILER ALERT***

The "twist" at the end that they're all already dead and are in purgatory was so flippin' obvious it was painful. And as for the German guy being the grim reaper and judging each of them, well, he's pretty bloody unreasonable.

"Yes Charlie, you are the only one who tried to save me, and that is why you're free" - so what, everyone else in the film was bad and deserved to go to hell, did they? Please explain Mr Reaper how the guy who has been shot through the spin and is having his legs eaten by rats is supposed to prove himself and save you?

Nah, this is just a really bad script...

[–] invisiblehen 17 years ago

Haha, you are adsolutely correct here! It wasn't so much the script, which was only a little below average in my opinion, but the plot that was howlingly awful. The whole stages of purgatory seemed unfair, with Chevasse already paralysed from the start and Doc. Fairweather shot in the head for no good reason really and the ending wasn't even a twist. If it was then it was a bit obvious to me anyway, but there was no revealing that it even was purgatory and not a weird deus ex machina conclusion. I think the characters needed work, because they are always essential to a good script but it still had some decent lines in.

Personally, I think Bassett would be very good if he teamed up with a proper writer and kept control of the cinematography.

[–] zbyszanna 16 years ago

The whole stages of purgatory seemed unfair, with Chevasse already paralysed from the start and Doc. Fairweather shot in the head for no good reason

But who said it was going to be fair judgement? Why do you think that German was such a nice and just fellow? My take is that he is some kind of daemon lured by atrocities of war and who masqueraded his little private hell as trenches - indistinguishable from what those poor soldiers got used to. And now he plays with them as he likes, condemning some of them, while giving other chance to change their fate.

[–] pfnuesel 14 years ago

That's how I see it, too. There's no need to call that special trench purgatory or whatsoever and there's no need to expect a fair judgement.

[–] HorodyskiJ 17 years ago

I didn't get anything at all about purgatory, or about them being already dead. Shakespeare saw all the other men after they had died and already belonged to whatever was in the ground. He saw he would end up there with them lost as well if he didn't make the right choice, it was more like a warning (how could he therfore leave if he was already in purgatory?) It had nothing top do with being already dead or in purgatory.

[–] bapeman-1 17 years ago

When he leaves he goes to heaven, the others are in hell. You might be the only person who doesn't get this....

[–] zbyszanna 16 years ago

It's not said he was going to heaven. Maybe he was just left alive? And who said it was test for all of them? Maybe they were condemned from the beginning and they just didn't know about it? Maybe it was only the chance for Charlie from the beginning? I don't say I think that's what happened there, I just give some possiblities that came to my head while watching Deathwatch.

[–] mortimerj190 16 years ago

I didn't get the pergetory thing ever - like so many horror films, it's got a small budget and it does the best it can with it, the sets were realistic ( I think) the sound and script weren't too bad, and for a 15 there was an OK amount of blood and gore?? I enjoyed it, not the best film and yes it had a few flaws but I finished the film thinking I could watch again.

The world largest Villain Index!
http://villainabode.com/index.html

[–] Unicorn-9 16 years ago

"like so many horror films, it's got a small budget and it does the best it can with it"

Pencils and paper are very, very cheap, and there's absolutely no reason for shooting a movie with such a lousy script; if it's not done, rewrite it until it is.

[–] son_of_vazkor 17 years ago

This movie is "Death of a Salesman" compared to the other drivel that's being hurled at us. Texas Chainsaw Massacre Part 12? Some Japanese Movie remade with Sarah Michelle Gellar Part 6? Saw 7?

I wasn't fond of the ending - the "twist" of having the entire movie take place while the protagonist(s) are dead or dying is rather trite by now. But endings are rarely important for a horror movie compared to the atmosphere and the success or failure of the director's attempt to stir up nasty things in your imagination. The dialogue and interactions between the men were convincing enough. As for the plot, that also is secondary to the evocation of fright. There are certainly better scary movies but I enjoyed this one quite a bit.

[–] StevieGB 17 years ago

Actually the dialogue was pretty bad. The whole 'Is it a Scottish thing' is a very modern idiom and was not in use in that period.

It did made me long for the great WWI movies of the 60s. And the whole thing would have looked better in B&W.

[–] beacitizen 16 years ago

I think the film/script dances around a couple of interesting ideas (the horrors of war/morality in un-moral situations/religion/hell etc.) without knowing what it's actually trying to say. When you try to explain the film (as i did before deleting every word) you come to realise that many aspects of it contradict and so it's impossible to say what the writer(s) actually want to convey. But the sets and depictions of war are very imaginative and (i'd imagine) very accurate.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 4cSlater 16 years ago

what lawrence fox! oh poor lawrence! can i just blame budget. i mean if you listen to the commentary-yes i bought it on dvd-they're all really intelligent people, especially bassett,and he seems to know exactly what he did wrong. I'll go for a combination of first time directing innocence and hierarchy/money problem. Although wilderness dont look much better

save the world recycle urself

[–] heaventwemet 16 years ago

loved the movie :)

[–] zbyszanna 16 years ago

**SPOILERS**

"Yes Charlie, you are the only one who tried to save me, and that is why you're free" - so what, everyone else in the film was bad and deserved to go to hell, did they? Please explain Mr Reaper how the guy who has been shot through the spin and is having his legs eaten by rats is supposed to prove himself and save you?

Charlie was let go because he was the only one that tried to save that German. It doesn't mean others were doomed because they didn't try to save him. We know nothing about this Mr Reaper. Popular understanding of this movie is that this German guy tests them if they should go to purgatory/hell/heaven. But maybe he is not such a kind guy. Maybe he is a daemon that condemns some people to hell while giving others chance to avoid such fate. No one said it was going to be fair judgement.

[–] bapeman-1 15 years ago

That's a whole lotta maybes, bud.

[–] by_candlelight 15 years ago

I agree that this whole movie kind of danced around several different ideas. It was a clever idea, but just got too messy and confusing.

Which is a shame, I do get what they were trying to do and it was a good idea, but it just didn't happen. And they had some cracking actors too who were wasted in this.

[–] snap-21 15 years ago

Awful movie !

[–] Gibski 15 years ago

Good movie.

[–] keirmartin 14 years ago

Just a movie.

Seriously, I'm starting to hate the imdb boards. This movie had: Great acting (apart from Jamie Bell IMO) Great set pieces, great atmosphere and believable dialogue between characters.

I just read through this whole topic and found nothing more than nitpicking. Okay, I agree. The ending was very sloppy and didn't make much sense but nevertheless a bad ending does NOT equal a bad movie.

I saw people talking about the dialogue being very unrealistic for the time period in which it was set. Are you serious? who honestly in the general public would notice such a thing? Or care for that matter. I hate how everyone dissects movies on this site. YOU'RE NEXT ASSIGNMENT. GO ruin the LOTR trilogy or maybe you could go find some plot holes in The Shawshank Redemption. Hell,tell us how its awful because one guy said something stupid or because the ending was unbelievable.

I give you an A for your attempts here. Good execution, pointless cause. Flame away, I'm just saying what a lot of people are thinking. Imdb boards are dead to me.