It’s a script review, so I guarantee spoilers or your money back.
How It Works
First read this. Next download script here. Read by next Friday and post your lovely head musings in comments. It’s almost as easy as writing the dialogue for The Artist.
50/50
Screenplay by Will Reiser
120 Pages
Right – a change of plan this week. This wasn’t the shooting script of 50/50 (as evident by the fact the title of the screenplay is I’m With Cancer) but an earlier draft therefore, as I’d hate someone to review an early draft of one of my screenplays, I think it would be unfair to critique this because it’s not finished. Instead I’m going to compare this draft with my (sketchy) memory of the film and make some suggestions as to why changes were made.
The opening of the script has a four page sequence where Adam goes to the hospital and does a number of embarrassing medical tests. In the film we never see Adam get tested instead it opens on him going for an early morning run. There’s no dialogue but I think this introduction tells us a lot more about Adam as a character as 1) it shows he’s healthy and 2) there’s a telling moment on how Adam plays things safe – as despite the road being deserted he waits for the lights to change before crossing. It lacks the humour of the script’s opening but tells us quite a bit about our protagonist in a fraction of the page count. Also there’s the scriptwriting principle that you should arrive in the story as late as possible I think the script’s opening is a case of turning up way too early.
The next difference that I noted was when Adam breaks the news of his illness to Seth. In this draft of the script the humour comes from Seth being upset Adam didn’t tell him straight away but in the film it plays out like this:
I prefer this version – I just think it’s a lot funnier, especially how Seth really struggles with the news of Adam’s cancer until he explains his chances are 50/50 – then Seth is really optimistic that Adam will beat it, showing he doesn’t really grasp the odds of the prognosis.
The character of Rabbi Jacobs is not in the film. I read an article where Seth Rogen (who plays Seth in the film and is friends in real-life with Reiser) says the character was removed (as was the coffin shopping scene) because, although the scenes where funny, it was unrealistic. Rogen thinks Reiser might have been “…reaching for the comedy too hard at times in the first draft, probably because he was scared about making a super-serious cancer movie, which none of us wanted to make.” This is something I’m guilty with my own writing – I sometimes focus more on “bringing the funny” at the expense of story development. Reading this draft I did not think the Rabbi Jacobs character really added anything extra to the story or to Adam’s character development.
The script has two dream sequences which are omitted from the film. Personally I would always resist adding a dream sequence unless it can add something to the story that you cannot do by other means. Again I think this was the right choice to make as neither of the dream sequences added anything and actually slowed down the story.
One minor character difference is that of Mitch – in the script he’s 85 years old but in the film he’s in his early fifties also he dies in the film but Alan does not. I’m guessing the age change to someone younger is to increase the potential threat of Adam’s cancer. While maybe Alan was spared in the film just to stop things becoming too bleak as it is a comedy-drama. Margaret, Mitch’s wife, only has a tiny part in the film – to highlight how supportive she is in contrast to Rachel – and does not appear in the final scene like she does in the script.
One of the film’s big moments is when Adam shaves his hair-off in an attempt to help him accept his cancer. It’s totally missing from this draft of the script but I think it shows Adam trying to make an important step and visually it’s very effective so I think it’s a nice addition.
Adam’s mother in the film, Edith, is a much more sympathetic character. In this version of the screenplay she’s a bit of a monster who adds to Adam’ stresses. I believe they made a good move as the script version of Edith was just a bit too over-the-top and distracted us from the real negative influence in Adam’s life – Rachel. In the script just before Adam has his operation, he expresses his fear that he’s going to die to Katie but in the film it’s Edith. The fact that he says this to his mother, I feel, shows how frightened he is and makes the character of Adam that much more realistic.
I think the most significant difference between this draft of the script and the film is Adam and Rachel’s relationship. In the script their break-up comes at the end of the second act, while in the film it is closer to the mid-point.
In the screenplay Adam discovers Rachel infidelity by reading her text messages and also Seth shows him some photos of her cheating. In the movie they use only the latter – maybe because Adam really only needs to find out one way otherwise it’s overkill. The way Seth obtains the photographic evidence of Rachel’s affair is slightly better as it relies slightly less on coincidence – he’s on a date with Claire (the girl he picked up at the book store) at an art gallery – and has a lot more humour.
The in the film there is nice visual moment of Adam coping with his anger towards Rachel by destroying a painting she gave him.
Earlier in the script, Rachel and Adam attempt to have sex but are interrupted by the dog and the moment is gone.This is not in the screenplay instead after the break-up, Seth takes Adam out and they pick-up two girls. However Adam cannot “perform” due to his chemotherapy. Again I’d argue this is a better scene because it puts the focus again back on his cancer as it shows how it now affects him trying to move on with his love-life.
The big-break through in Adam’s relationship with Katie is when she gives him a lift home and he can finally relax with her and open-up. In the script this scene comes about because Rachel forgets to pick him up (in the film she does eventually show after keeping him waiting for hours) but in the film it occurs because now Rachel’s gone he has to catch the bus back home from the hospital so Katie takes him home. By moving the break-up earlier, Reiser doesn’t have to junk too much of what he’s written, he just use it elsewhere and it still works.
Overall I think the “I’m With Cancer” script is okay but it’s great that Reiser didn’t rest on his laurels and kept redrafting because the shooting script is stronger than it in every aspect – character, structure, tone. If you can track down the shooting script, I’d love to read it.
Next Week
It’s a win-win situation with Win Win.
Disclaimers: Haven’t watched the film. Didn’t know that what I was reading was an early draft. Thought it would be interesting to not add any extra commentary after being made aware of the fact. Finally, even though I might sound a little judgmental below I thought it was a good script.
Overall, the script was very precise about characters and scene setup, which was necessary to pull off the specific style it aimed for—and succeeded in—namely the cynical, “smart” humor that isn’t just a typical attribute of one single character, but the actual style of the movie that tries to tackle a difficult topic in a comedic way.
On characters:
Generally, Adam is described as this tidy, organized and a bit worrying type of guy, while his friend Seth is presented as a more “loose”, fun personality who jokes about everything. I mention this because:
In the title sequence Adam’s somewhat humorous responses (e.g. cotton blend hospital gown, urine cup) seem to be coming, in the first example, out of his character’s OCD-like cleaning trait, and in most other cases out of the absurdity of what was asked of him. So this doesn’t really “scream” that Adam is the “humor” kind of guy. Then, immediately after that first scene, we jump into his story and we don’t see Adam using humor in his every day interactions, but instead we are introduced to his friend Seth who does. That is until we get to the first scene with case worker Katie and Adam, at which point Adam becomes the guy who uses humor when dealing with almost everything again. In fact, now it’s presented as a real character trait till the end and not just as the movie style. So while Seth keeps being Seth, Adam acts seemingly a bit off character and it’s not a change brought on by the new story development (i.e. knowing about his illness).
That seemed a bit confusing, off putting.
Rachael:
Upon hearing the news of Adam’s condition, Rachael is presented as hesitant as to whether she wants/can go through with it and support Adam. Then, only a few moments later, when Edith is informed of her son’s health problem, Rachael is shown as somewhat forced to say that she will be there for Adam, and not only to the reader, but also to Adam. And then the issue isn’t raised again? She stays, buys the dog, cooks, drives him to the hospital…she just doesn’t have sex with him, but she wasn’t doing that before either so…
Notes on specific scenes:
The first dream sequence on p. 54 maybe isn’t very useful and could have been omitted?
Rachael’s reaction in the marijuana smoking scene didn’t seem to be very authentic. She is a smoker and definitely not as uptight as Adam about the health and cleaning and organizing thing…so it seemed a bit overreacting even for her.
Katie and Adam’s second scene didn’t seem to work very well. How is the audience supposed to SEE that Adam’s outburst, which was not much of an outburst really, though befitting of his character, lifted a weight off his shoulders? Comedy-wise the Katie scenes didn’t seem to be working very well.
Generally, Katie is presented as the opposite of Adam. Messy, disorganized. Seemed like maybe there was another reason for that, especially since Katie was there for Adam even off-duty…but nothing happened and that’s OK. But when Seth’s apartment toward the end was described as messy then well, was that necessary? Did Seth turn into Katie as Adam, without losing his character, had sort of turned into Seth?
P. 90 Edith seemed a bit too harsh at the doctor’s office. But the ending of the scene was redeeming and maybe it worked that way because of Edith’s seemingly exaggerated harshness at the beginning.
Rachael cheats on Adam? And wants to stay with him still? Even though she can’t handle it?
Maybe that’s too much even for Rachael. Yes, as seen in the script every person deals with the situation in their own way and maybe a selfish and young and on the fence about her relationship character such as Rachael would do all the stuff she did, but she wants to stay? She is not just looking for a way out?
Also, she is not given the benefit of the doubt as Seth is. Meaning we don’t really know that her actions ARE because that’s the only way she can deal with it. And since she wants to stay and is somewhat helpful to Adam, well, she is not completely into herself either. While, up until now, Seth doesn’t sound any less selfish than Rachael but he gets a pass. That is, until later, in the car scene where he gets told off by Adam, but then Adam finds that book in Seth’s apartment and, you know, he had him all wrong after all. But Rachael? Apparently she was that bad.
If there’s a point in there I guess it’s this: maybe a few more hints scattered throughout the script about Seth’s concern would be better, and, perhaps, a more clear-cut character for Rachael would be better too.
p. 114. Surgery scene: This is a training hospital. Med students are watching the operation, taking notes. This is a very delicate, difficult procedure because of the area the tumor is located. There are only two nurses. The doctors debate about pirates. Fine. OK. But did the nurse have to be sent to go Google, something, anything at all, in mid surgery? Maybe that was a bit much, even as a comedic effect.
Was the scene really necessary anyway? Nothing happened and the script already had all these other small scenes that added to the stylized humor the movie wanted to pass off, like the medicinal marijuana doctor office scene.
Overall though, the script makes a good comment on how people react to such news. It shows, in a comedic way, plenty of examples of how ignorant, falsely helpful, uncomfortable, misinformed and outright unsympathetic people can be on the issue when it doesn’t directly concern them or even when it does.
On dialogue and story:
The dialogue and story worked. But I can’t help it not mentioning the movie “Witty”. That movie too dealt with a hard subject in a comedic way. In it, from what I remember, you had this middle aged woman who was dealing with leukemia. Now, I remember commending when I had seen it that the title for this movie was spot on. The dialogue was truly witty. I can’t say I felt the same with 50/50.
Please allow me a few thoughts on this. In “Witty” you had this character that was, to try to be brief, a smartass. She was not a sympathetic character. She was hard on her students, isolated in her life out of work as well, and counted on her self-sufficiency. She was cold. Upon finding out about her disease she had to start counting on people, younger people who had been her students and she just happened to be the only professor that hadn’t given them an A. Her character and her “smarts” made her dealing with the treatment process and the people she had to face, well, funny. The kind of funny all movies dealing with difficult subjects try to pull off anyway.
In 50/50, the “smart” dialogue, for me, didn’t work quite as well, probably because of the small inconsistencies of character as mentioned above. There was also “juvenile” humor in it. So it was almost as if one moment you were watching a comedy about two guys in their 20’s trying to get laid or score some marijuana and then you were watching this “smart” comedy about cancer. That was not necessarily a problem though if you consider the age of the protagonists. Meaning that you were presented with this scenario of someone dealing with something that serious at a very young age and this is how their life was and this is how they managed to go through it. So the movie and its comedy were based more on the age of the characters and not so much on their personality.
I’m not sure if this moment was in this draft or not, but there’s a beat where Adam and Kyle have had an argument, and Kyle gets drunk and Adam has to help him home. Adam thinks Kyle is being a selfish prick, only out for and caring about himself. And then he goes to use Kyle’s toilet and finds a book, title something like ‘How to care for your loved ones who have Cancer.’ And Adam realises he’s pegged Kyle all wrong. It’s absolutely brilliant and one tiny moment turns the whole dynamic and relationship between these characters, and how we perceive it and indeed how Adam perceives it, on its head. It’s got to be one of my favourite moments I’ve seen in a long time.
That was my favourite moment in this script!
The book by the toilet is such a tiny detail yet so powerful. Sometimes I think it’s easy to get obsessed about dialogue and you forget that sometimes a visual shot can say more.
Thanks again Georgevine for another comprehensive and compelling critique. I agree with everything you’ve written.
In the finished film Rachael is slightly underwritten as character but she is less involved in the overall story so it’s not as noticeable. However I think you can argue her only real character trait is “bad girlfriend”!
By the way I’ve never heard of Wit (Does it star Emma Thompson?) but I will hunt it down.
50/50
Haven’t seen the film and didn’t realise this wasn’t a shooting script.
Obviously as a tragicomedy this has to tread a fine line between creating tears of laughter and getting the audience to laugh through their tears – both emotionally exhausting – but I think setting the tone can be tricky. Too jokey and the serious issues seem too flippant, too serious and you’re in danger of turning people off the concept. That there were many changes from this script to the screen doesn’t surprise me.
However having not seen the film it’s difficult to tell if the right balance is achieved or not, and realistically the right balance is a subjective decision anyway.
Does the script do a good job of making us care about the characters? I’m there with Adam (and then later with Katie) and quite quickly too. The use of the contrast between the deadening power of the awful news at the start and the day-to-day bustle around Adam really plays on that sense of dislocation there is at terrible news. But the medical test scenes went on too long for me and the riff on the alarm clock was pretty laboured so I’m not surprised that the start was changed – and hopefully improved.
The dialogue reads really well – funny and smart. Is it too smart? Possibly but it ticks the genre box and echoes numerous smart arse comedic delivery tropes we’ve all seen before especially from American scripts.
I’m glad Adam’s mother is made into a more sympathetic and realistic person in the film and that Rachael is disposed of earlier. Did think using the photo and the texts was overkill, but I spent much of the read mentally shouting at Adam to wake up and get rid of her so was grateful she went, though she probably didn’t deserve to be the villain of the piece.
For me the way her character was used pushes the comedy button a little aggressively, and sets the tone of the piece in an slightly pantomime comic direction. I’m reminded of Tom Bidwell’s brilliant Oscar nominated Wish 123 – a young, terminal cancer patient’s last wish is to lose his virginity – which has a more realistic (and British) tone.
On another note I actually liked the scenes with the Rabbi and wonder if there was an opportunity to show Adam’s inability to access something spiritual through that avenue was lost.
Ultimately I really enjoyed this script especially the dialogue, and the moment Adam realises Seth cares is super, but having lost a close friend (of thirty years) last year to lung cancer I have to admit to tearing up quite a bit throughout the read.
It’s been a long time since I watched Wit. Yes, Emma Thompson stars in it and she was what prompted me to pick up and rent the DVD. I was so sure of everything I mentioned about the movie that I didn’t check anything up. According to IMDB it was made for TV and the protagonist was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, not leukemia. Oh, and it was called “Wit” not “Witty”, but I swear, even now, I clearly remember the title on my computer screen reading “Witty”!
I’ll take this opportunity to thank you for the script club, Dave. I had stumbled upon it a while ago but hadn’t participated in any way. Once I found out you were running it again and that I would be able to participate from the very first script I jumped at the opportunity and I’m glad I did. Hopefully, I’ll be able to keep up.
I never read critically and from even having done this only two times I’ve learned a lot. Most surprising realization for me was how many “issues” I can find in a script and yet still like it. Also, writing reviews is tough. I’m definitely learning a lot and I owe it to you, so thanks for that.
Also, I can’t resist. Since everyone else mentioned the book by the toilet scene as one of the good ones—one that worked as is, unlike how I presented it in my review—I’ve been catching myself trying to think of at least one scene where Seth’s “struggle” about his friend’s condition could be shown prior to the book discovery. I think the bookstore scene would have been a good one for that. Seth could have easily tried to pick up the clerk by, without Adam knowing, asking for a book such as the one Adam found in Seth’s apartment. Of course, I’m only trying to justify my opinion…
Thanks Rachel for your comments. I think you make a really good point about the importance of tone for a screenplay especially when tackling a tough subject matter such as this. Like you said it can be subjective – to some people it might still come across as flippant – but the writer of this script, Will Reiser, based it loosely on his own experiences when he was diagnosed with cancer so it probably felt true to him when he wrote it. (I believe he also wrote it as a response to The Bucket List which he thought didn’t portray suffering from cancer in a realistic way) Regardless of the subject matter or/and genre I think making your script feel “true” is so important to it’s overall success.
Thanks for the kind words Georgevine and it’s a pleasure to have you aboard this year.