RELIGION, POLITICS, DRAMA

While John Noyes creates a community based on free love, Charles Guiteau takes refuge in this community to exchange spiritual thoughts with the religious leader. The two start to relate, but Charles decides to end the romance and leaves the community at some point. After years, Charles will be responsible for President Garfield's death, while John leaves his own community and travels to another country far from his people.

GOOD

FIRST PERSON

Authors Writing Style: GOOD

Characterization: GOOD

Commerciality: FAIR

Franchise Potential: FAIR

Pace: FAIR

Premise: GOOD

Structure: FAIR

Theme: GOOD

The author describes John and Charles as the story's antagonists, but they are actually the protagonists, even if anti-heroes.

The early backstory sequence of John's life is touching and quite well written. We understand how that family works and how George's death actually affected John's psychological and life.

The structure is confusing and ends up taking away some of the emotion of reading. With each new chapter, a new narrator tells a part of the story from his perspective. This choice helps us understand the whole story without a single bias. However, it takes away the empathy we could feel for the main character and makes the narrative truncated.

THE STORY DOES NOT RELY ON SPECIAL EFFECTS

The meeting of a religious leader from a hippie community and the murder of President Garfield is a fascinating premise.

If adapted more clearly, with a better-structured narrative and a character that we could follow without further interference, I believe so. The two personalities have the appeal to attract a larger audience.

If the story were even more loaded with drama, the meeting of these two emblematic figures could indeed have the potential for awards.

MEDIUM BUDGET

MIDSOMMAR: A GROUP OF FRIENDS VISITS A RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, AND THEIR ENDS IS TRAGIC. THE COMMUNE: A COMMUNITY THAT TRIES TO SURVIVE PERSONAL TASTES, SOLIDARITY, AND TOLERANCE IN THE 70S.

The encounter between these two iconic characters brings authenticity to the story of the murder of the president, and also to the story of the religious leader of alternative communities. Both stories together make the plot more original.

The backstories of both make us understand a little of their personality and why they took the steps they did. The dialogues give them exclusive voices. While John is good at talking, Charles ends up becoming more and more lost in his dialogues. Characters are powerful in their developments.

It's not a rare gem. It has many good elements, but the structure in collective narration ends up taking some of the shine out of the narrative.

Film: Streaming, Indie, Studio

WORK IN PROGRESS

While the story has many positive points, it has room for improvement (see possible paths below). If you can't change the story at this point, my suggestion is using your notes as a guide to highlight the best aspects of it when taking the next steps, either putting a pitch page together, a treatment, or a presentation.

The author has a great premise. Characters are already well built, well written, with unique voices, good dialogues that even show the emotional state of each one. The meeting of two outstanding characters is exciting and attractive. Universes, shaped by faith and spirituality, are also attractive. And the way they both relate and end up influencing the other's future is also enjoyable. However, despite being well written, having good characters, having a premise that guarantees a great story, the narrative does not take off. When we start a chapter, we get in touch with the universe of that character and the problems and situations related to him. The first-person perspective helps us enter that character's private universe. However, when we are familiar with that universe, those rules, and characters, we are sent to another place, with new characters, a new perspective, and new rules. This coming and going makes reading more complicated and prevents the reader from feeling the story deeply. Having multiple points of view is interesting when we want to discover something, analyze a case without the bias of a single character. However, since the stories of these two characters are already popular, this artifice loses its impact and makes the narrative less intense, without drama. A change in the narrative structure, with a more linear story (not necessarily chronologically), would make the meeting of both characters more touching and impactful.