the groundhog day project

I cannot decide if it’s weird that the first thing I wanted to check in the third revision of the Groundhog Day screenplay was O’Reilly’s name—the paramedic Bud refers to him as ol’ Reilly (recall, there was a weird typo in the second revision that made the name semi-unreadable). And, in the deleted scene, the paramedic calls him ol’ Jedson . See: I haven’t read the third revision yet. I may do so tomorrow. And, I figure that it will take me at least three entries to pick it apart. As it was with Rubin’s original: Day 49 – it’s groundhog time Day 50 – see, i knew you were gonna say that Day 51 – i really feel weird And, Ramis’ second revision: Day 36 – i’ve already done it… twice Day 37 – watch out for that first step Day 38 – sounds like a lot of fun Or the three days I spent breaking down the structure of the “screenplay” of the final film: Day 114 – catch you tomorrow Day 115 – what if there is no tomorrow? Day 116 – there wasn’t one today For now, having only g...

I had in fact conceived this draft of the screenplay in seven acts. It seemed to me that breaking it up into smaller parts would make it easier to write quickly, and besides, it conformed to the way I was thinking about Phil and his predicament. I knew that Phil’s life would proceed in stages, that there was a natural order to how his life would progress. The stages would be as distinct and definable as those laid out by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross in her stages of death and dying (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance). I have been quoted, by the way, as saying that Phil’s stages were the same as those defined by Kubler-Ross, but that wasn’t my intention. (Rubin, 2012, p. 84) Rubin had Kubler-Ross in his mind, even if he didn't mean to ape them specifically. I think we all assume stuff happens in stages; we probably even did before Kubler-Ross published On Death and Dying more than forty years ago. It's the kind of thing we all know but when someone spells it out for...