Pat's Review of "A Crowded Room"

(Hey guys, this one comes to us from Pat (GimmeABreak). Thanks so much. Great job. -MM)

Sybil is the movie against which all other MPD (multiple personality disorder)/DID (dissociative identity disorder) stories are compared. A Crowded Room didn't fare well in the comparison IMHO.

SETUP and FIRST ACT: the hook should have stopped at the identification of William Milligan as the suspect. That it continued through his arrest gave away the rest of the story. It was like reading the last page of the book first. Between the end of the hook and the end of the first act, many of the secondary characters come across as caricatures – mostly brutal law enforcement officers or inept psychiatrists. One of the public defenders, Gary, has some funny lines and shows some individuality but he's gone in the blink of an eye (and doesn't reappear until the last twenty pages). Some of Billy's personalities are introduced, one of which transforms into an Incredible Hulk-like character in an unintentionally comical way. Virtually all the dialog between Billy, Gary and Judy is exposition and not very interesting exposition at that. There are a number of smaller scenes that don't advance the story (examples – the guards' threat to tattoo numbers on Billy arm and the exchange with Natalie Wood in the day room). The scene in the hearing room is unsatisfying and unrealistic (not sure if it was truncated intentionally but there would have been a trial and Billy would have been confined to a mental hospital rather than being sent away a free man).

SECOND ACT: since we already know the outcome of the story, the second act functions as a history lesson explaining why Billy dissociated and what happened when he did. Unfortunately, it doesn't do it very well. All of the childhood traumas were encapsulated in a single scene of rape by Billy's step-father. While this certainly is a traumatic event, it isn't enough to cause the psychiatric disorder. Neither does it provide justification for the violent nature of the alternate personalities. The timeline is confusing because it switches back and forth between two young Billys, teen-aged Billys, a young adult Billy and an adult Billy. Some of the personalities manifest themselves for the first time when the traumas appear to have stopped so the continued dissociation doesn't make sense. We see Billy as a violent drug dealer and body guard – an thoroughly unlikable character. The action sequences are very well-written but feel completely out-of-place. There are many other scenes showing the various Billy personalities in a variety of locations interacting with a variety of other people and fantasizing about taking revenge against the step-father (or was the Chalmer sequence real – I couldn't tell) but they all feel disconnected – individual sequences rather than part of a cohesive whole. Everything that occurs in the first act is repeated in greater detail on the second half of the second act. Feels like the second act ends on page 111 – twenty pages from the end.

THIRD ACT: the beginning is implausible to the degree that I almost got angry. It's not clear how old Billy was when he was committed but to expect the audience to believe that he was "cured" in less than a year is unreasonable. We see nothing of his treatment but, instead, are presented with a variety of intercuts showing Billy see his other "selves" on video tape with Dr. Caul. The very first opportunity I have to sympathize with Billy is during Gary's summation. Instead of having him speak of the torment the young man experienced, I would like to have seen it in some way much earlier so that I didn't spend the entire read not caring about the main character.

CONCEPT: I'm not sure I can categorize this. It starts out as a crime/courtroom drama but turns into an action flick in the second act then reverts back to the crime/courtroom drama in the third.

CHARACTERS: Billy is never really seen as a sympathetic character (until the end of the third act) inasmuch as his childhood traumas are compressed in this SP to a single incident which, in its presentation, seems hardly enough to cause MPD/DID. He's involved in unsavory activities and comes across as a violent brute rather than as someone we should like or even feel sorry for. Gary, the public defender, was an interesting character but was present in the first act for only a few pages and then again briefly in the third.

DIALOG: most of it was on-the-nose and expository.

STRUCTURE: as mentioned earlier, I believe the hook exposed too much and there was no where to go after that. The second act really dragged for me – it felt like it belonged in a different story. The third act returned to the tone set up in the first act. Billy (and his alter egos) is clearly the main character but is he a protag? I'm not sure. I don't know what he wants and I can't see what he's doing to get it. He's generally passive in the sense that Billy always awakens to discover what someone else (one of the other personalities) has done to him or on his behalf. I guess Billy's other selves are the antags but in order to give substance to the internal battle, the other selves had to be shown as individual people. When all of these selves popped in and out, it was confusing and almost dizzying. I'm not sure what the theme is, either. What kind of message did this story tell? What am I supposed to be thinking about as I leave the theatre?

STORY: seemed like two different writers. Acts one and three told one story and act two was a different story – an action/crime picture. The parts didn't fit well for me and the transitions from first to second to third were jarring and distracting.

GENERAL: I had problems with this because it doesn't ring true based on what I know of MPD/DID. Usually, the other personalities aren't aware of each other so I had a really tough time with all the sequences where the various incarnations of Billy engaged in conversation with each other (and that's what it was – expository conversation).

If I were rewriting this, I'd probably start it out in the Lima facility. Immediately establish sympathy for the main character by showing the torture he was subjected to under the guise of treatment. Then reveal his past – the horrors to which he was exposed and those to which he subjected others – in bits and pieces during the "successful" treatment. Caveat – since Billy Milligan has continued to demonstrate violent behavior (in real life) since his "cure," the ending cannot be a "happily ever after" sort of thing and I don't know how satisfying that will be.

Back to James Cameron's A Crowded Room.

Nena's Review of "A Crowded Room"

(This review comes to us from Nena Eskridge, a wonderful writer. The photo above is another shot of the Athens Lunatic Asylum. -MM)

All of the elements are there in A Crowded Room to make for a taut and tantalizing tale about the very important topic of dissociative identity disorder (DID/MPD). It's very difficult to write about mental illness without it coming off as poorly written melodrama. I think one of the reasons it's hard to write well-drawn "emotionally challenged" characters is because their struggle is an internal one while screenplays (films) are about external/visual experiences. It's not so much about good dialogue as it is about how that dialogue is delivered. And because so little is understood about MPD, it takes an amazingly talented director and actor, to create a realistic portrait of one.

A Crowded Room starts out beautifully with swirling, disorienting images -- very intense, very effective. And while the script hits the mark time and time again, giving a brief glimpse of what it might feel like seeing the world through the eyes of someone with MPD, I think the effectiveness of the many powerful scenes almost gets lost in the long blocks of expository dialogue and the smattering of cliched situations. But with a bit of editing - mostly cutting and pasting - shifting a few scenes around -- this screenplay could really shine.

We see a lot these days about MPD, mostly on TV cop dramas. So I was a bit disappointed when A Crowded Room turned into one with all of the interrogation scenes. Are they really necessary? Wouldn't it be more interesting to see Billy roaming free and unfettered, out and about in society -- rather than locked up safe and sound, no longer a threat to anyone? And having him change from one part to the next for the interviewers, on cue, isn't very realistic -- or as much fun. I'd rather meet them in real time. I'd like to see the mystery as it unfolds. Take Psycho for instance. Imagine opening that movie with a police interrogation where we meet Bates before we actually see him in action. The scene in which he is ranting in his mother's bedroom -- shot from a distance so we don't actually SEE him switch from one part to another -- we simply hear the different voices as he switches. Chilling. So much more so than the regimented switching from one to the other, on command -- within the confines and safety of a jail.

I'd like to see the script begin as is then continue without the interrogation scenes. Let us meet each of his parts out in the real world, not behind bars. Rather than his telling us he loses time it's fascinating to watch him freak out about it -- who is that guy banging on his door? Finding the hidden drugs, the empty wallet. Yikes. And rather than doing the rapes in flashback in the first act, let us experience them in the last, as written. Do you really need both? (BTW, these scenes are terrific -- horrifying without being exploitive).

The most important thing is that all of the necessary scenes are there. It just doesn't feel like they happen in the correct order. I really think one afternoon of cutting and pasting is all it would take to finish this "nearly there," extremely important piece of work. I have a sibling with MPD, so I thank you for writing it.

Back to James Cameron's A Crowded Room.

Create a Character Weekend!

Who is this little girl and what did she grow up to become?

(This is, in fact, a photo of our very own - Miriam Paschal.)

Bob's Review of "A Crowded Room"

(This review comes to us from good friend and writer, Bob Thielke. The photo above is another shot of the Athens hospital. -MM)

Okay, here are my thoughts on this story. I felt there were three specific stories in this script:

1) a 40-page story to show that Billy Milligan (or one of his personalities) is a serial rapist and gets sentenced to a mental hospital;

2) a story showing how his condition progressed from an abusive childhood;

3) a trial and his subsequent hospitalization into a maximum security facility.

These three stories essentially served as the three acts. However, I thought this was problematic because I never felt that the three separate stories fed off each other properly. I was interested in the first act. Hmm, was Billy really ill or was he faking it? Was he going to gain his freedom?

Then, to me, the second act took me out of the first story completely. I guess I wasn’t concerned about HOW he became mentally ill, but I wanted to see if justice would be served. This story about how Billy got to the point where he raped the three women went to page 124 or so. We finally get to the story you were telling in the first act, in which he was now going to have to go on trial.

Now, if you told the story in terms of Act I- he is committed to the hospital. Act II- Use flashback interspersed with current time to reveal the different personalities and how each one contributes to his crimes. For example, when it’s time to reveal why Billy forced the women to disrobe, reveal the anarchist Kevin. When he raped them show them that it was the sensitive Aldana that was only looking for love. This way, you show twists and turns in the story, showing us which personality was responsible for each twist and turn. Then at the end of Act II, Billy makes the decision that he wants to stand trial for his sanity and pressures Gary or whomever to force the issue on that. This makes Billy a proactive person as well. Then Act III can consist of the trial.

Character- You give us little reason to like Billy at page 40, then you spend 80 pages telling us why we should give the poor guy a break. However, these multiple personalities also cause a problem because only the bad ones are proactive in any way. Arthur and Ragen talk many times about banishing Kevin, but never do it. Billy is completely subrogated to oblivion. And then when he finally comes back at the end, he’s completely passive because he relies on the whims of the doctors and the prosecutors to decide his fate. My understanding is that you want us to have sympathy for Billy and his plight. Then you must show the dominant personalities taking hold in Billy, show how Arthur forced the destructive personalities to go away, show Billy re-emerging and taking control of his own sanity. I like how you used the “Spot” to delineate personalities and to show internal discussion amongst the various sides of Billy. Another issue at play here is defining who or what the antagonistic force is in this script. In the first 40 pages, Billy is the antagonist(or Kevin I guess). Chalmer is an antagonist, but it’s always like we see him through a filter, and in the third act the prosecuters are the antagonist. I’d like to see a more consistent antagonism and I think the most logical choice is to make this a battle between Billy’s good personalities and his bad personalities. He fights from the depths to over come Kevin, and then has the courage to ask Arthur and Ragen to leave, because he’s now strong enough to stand on his own. Then use the trial to seek vindication for his efforts. Have him show some compassion and reconciliation with his victims.

Dialogue- I noticed nothing out of line with the dialogue, although I occasionally felt that things said in the “spot” were said for my benefit and not necessarily organic to the situation at hand.

Structure- I think the three separate stories that essentially serve as the acts do not help this script. I’d personally like to see more continuity. I think his arrest and commitment to Athens should happen fairly quickly together, so that his being committed is the end of act I, then Act II can be his battle to become whole again, then Act III is where Billy redeems himself through the trial. Also I noted a couple places where the scenes went on a long time 5 or 6 minutes.

Thanks for letting me participate in this little exercise.

Notes below as I was reading:

Scene 1- Adequate to create curiosity, the voice over transition to scene 2 is effective.

Scene 2- as Donna is describing her capture, how did he handcuff her to the car? And how was she able to “study” her book if her hands were cuffed? Minor details, but most car doors wouldn’t be amenable to attaching a handcuff. I’m torn on Billy’s statement that the brotherhood will get her if she calls the police. On one hand it seems expositional, on the other hand, if he’s delusional maybe it’s okay.

Scene 2 is six pages long in courier 10 point font. That ‘s 7 ½ pages in 12 point. My concern is that we have this long scene that establishes the fact that 3 women have been raped, and they know his name is William Mulligan. I still don’t know much else after essentially 8 or 9 minutes of the film. I thought the cutting back and forth of victims was well done, but I’m wondering how critical it is to reveal all three victims right now?

Scene 3- Would a policeman really use him as a human shield, not standard police procedures. Also with this scene, the police never confirm that there’s no one else in the apartment. I think that has to happen in this scene to establish the fact that either he’s crazy or his accomplices/friends got away.

Scene 4- Unless he has some kind of supernatural power, I’m finding it difficult to believe that he has the strength to tear a toilet off it’s anchor and heave it at the guards. I do like the reveal about how angry he gets when his art is messed with.

Pg 17- I’m wondering if it is worthwhile to reveal his split personalities so early in the story. I’m at page 17 and now I feel confident that Billy could have done this. Unless there is a big reveal or reversal later on I feel like this is going to be predictable. Also at page 17, I’m not real confident about what the inciting event for this story is.

Pg 23 – Gary’s question about where Billy learned to dislocate his shoulder is a big hint that we’re going to find abuse in Billy’s past?

Pg 27- of course there’s kids in there, Judy. They just told you about the little boy a minute ago.

Pg 29- Once again, unless there is some supernatural things going on, how can a brain that’s never been exposed to serbo-croatian or Swahili become fluent at those languages? I remember that story John Travolta was in which he had that tumor that allowed him to instantly retain anything he was exposed to, but he didn’t know it before he read it or heard it, correct.

Pg 31- It’s dramatically convenient that his parole statute of limitations runs out today! Why should it matter, the key is whether he goes to the hospital or not. This time constraint seems contrived.

Pg 33. I’m sorry, but the zucchini logic just couldn’t work in a court. Of course it’s a gun. A more viable argument would be to argue that they are non-working models.
Pg 35- Would they let him in a day room. I mean he has shown tremendous and unexpected violent urges.

Pg 52- Thinking of the busboy is an unfilmable unless you flash to him quickly.

Pg 72- How does the viewer know Allen has occupied billy if he doesn’t do anything allen-like.

Pg 92- This is the 3rd or 4th time Arthur says they have to reorder yet they do nothing about it.

Pg 96- I’m curious what this England sequence is for.

Pg. 98- You’d have to be careful to identify what age billy is in each scene because you switch freely from the nine year old to the 20 something Billy.

Pg 105- How will the viewer know which personality is in charge? Only the reader knows this.

Pg 131- A long speech from Billy.

Pg 138- hot water would not make his flesh boil away. Skin blistering? Maybe.

Back to James Cameron's A Crowded Room.

Miriam's Review of "A Crowded Room"

(As we continue our discussion this week of James Cameron's A Crowded Room, this review comes to us from Miriam Paschal. By the way, today is her birthday! HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MIRIAM!)

Sybil was the original story of MPD and the drama and interest in that made-for-TV movie lay in the discovery of the disorder itself, as well as its cause. Because it was done so well in Sybil, relying on revealing the disease is no longer enough to sustain a sense of drama, and that is what I feel is the weakness of this story. In Identity the drama is generated by setting up the mind and imagination of the MPD as a hotel where the guests are stranded by the rainstorm. The reveal that all of this has been taking place within the mind of the MPD is done near the end of the second act. In A Crowded Room, I think too much time is spent detailing how Billy becomes an MPD and then how the doctors discover it. The story of how the system let him down gets put on the back burner because of it, yet that is where the real drama lies.

I looked up Lima Hospital (pictured above, now a prison) and found the book about Billy Milligan, so I know this is based on real events. However, some of these events play as too melodramatic to be believable by a modern audience. The guards at the jail, the cops who arrest him, and the doctors who treat him at Lima are too evil and too abusive to be seen as real people. My suggestion is to tone it down for the modern audience. The people will seem more evil and the events more frightening if they are subtly presented. As it is now, they seem to come at the audience like a sledgehammer. Perhaps they really did try to exorcise Billy in Lima, but it comes across as unbelievable.

I read "Sybil" the book after I saw the made-for-TV movie. I also read a book called, "When Rabbit Howls," which was written by "The Troops For Trudy Chase." Trudy Chase no longer exists. During therapy her various personalities (over 50 of them) decided not to integrate, but rather to live in harmony. Through therapy, all of them are awake and aware at all times and work together to present a united front to the world. They make committee decisions about how to use the body in which they exist. I've also read a few medical papers I found online. Most experts agree that MPD occurs when the child is exposed to what can only be described as torture during its very early years, usually before age five. The fact that Billy's mind was more fully formed before the period of torture in his life (eight years old instead of the usual six months to three years), makes his MPD break seem less realistic. Until his mother met Chalmer Milligan, Billy had a more "normal" dysfunctional life, not the kind of life that would create an MPD.

But too much time was spent detailing how he became an MPD, and too much was spent detailing how it affected his life after that. The long section that takes up much of the second act should be compressed into short flashbacks. The bulk of the story should focus on the struggle to place Billy in a facility that will treat him rather than re-expose him to more torture (albeit of a different type).

Billy should be both the main character and protagonist, but he emerges as neither. The story starts with the three victims in a rather clever intercut interview and doesn't get to Billy until he is arrested. You should start with Billy and focus on him. Or, if you want an active protagonist, start with Gary Schweickart and make it his story as he discovers the truth about Billy's secret life and battles to see justice done.

I like the imagery of the spotlight that recalls a happier time in his life, but I think you could make more of that if you use it less frequently. As it is, you use it the same way each time. If you use it less often, and expand on it as a symbol by using it differently (very vague, I know, but it's just a feeling), I think it will have more impact.

In Terminator the dramatic impact was the reveal that one of the men chasing Sarah Connor was a machine. But the drama kept building as details were revealed at key points. He's a machine. He's from the future. In the future machines will destroy humans. Your son sent me. I'm in love with you. And finally we discover, almost along with Sarah, that the son sent his own father, knowing that in order to exist he had to sacrifice this man who would give him life. It's this whole Oedipal thing wrapped up in a time travel twist.

In Titanic the dramatic impact was how Jack saved Rose at the cost of his own life. At the beginning nobody loved life more than him, and nobody hated it more than her. By the end he realizes that in order for her to live her life to the fullest, his must end.

So now you must find the dramatic impact of this story. Will it be a tense courtroom fight between rivals as Gary goes toe to toe with Banks? If so, you'll have to set up a history between the two men. Or will it be the human drama of Gary and Judy discovering the life of Billy Milligan and trying to save him? Whatever it is, most of it must take place within the present of Billy's arrest and trial, not in his past, and most of it must focus on what he is now, not how he got that way.

Chalmer's role could be expanded in the present. I didn't make any notes, but I found his speech to the reporters too easy. Break his presence up into shorter moments, and let his evil nature seep slowly into the story as the conversations with Billy slowly reveal what he did. But always keep him and his history with Billy in the background. The larger story is the current fight for justice.

I hope these notes have been helpful. Your work is among some of my favorite. But I'd trade Jack's impassioned speech to Rose for Virgil smacking Lindsey and yelling, "Come on, you bitch. You've never backed down from a fight in your life." It's those short pieces of dialogue that have more dramatic impact.

Thanks for the opportunity.

Mim.

Back to James Cameron's A Crowded Room.