Quoted from mcornetto http://www.oscars.org/awards/nicholl/fellows/25thscripts.html

Ehren Kruger won the Nicholls for "Arlington Road"
Now he writes for Transformers.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0472567/

Classic Hollywood.

E.D.

I believe loglines are an extremely important part of writing, especially if you're just starting out and have no contacts with directors or anything.  Writing only query letters to agents and producers to get your story out there is a cutthroat, suicide-driving process that doesn't really pan out all that much.  I think you need something killer for them to even respond to you.

Plus, not just that, I even find myself, as a consumer, that I only read books that have either an interesting cover, an interesting title, or an interesting description of the story.

Maybe it's shallow and I imagine I'm losing out on a lot of great stories, but I don't mind.  There'll always be another story I like right around the corner anyway.  (That is, if I'm not working on the shit that I'm writing that'll probably get ignored in the future by somebody with the same guidelines as me anyway, because honestly, I don't think I write very good loglines, either.)

And I've been told more than a few times my titles suck.  :-)

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films How many Nicholls scripts have been turned into films?

Proportionately, it’s not a huge percentage. But there have been some great scripts actually get produced as a result.

I haven’t received what I would call an exorbitant amount of requests as the result of being a quarterfinalist this year but I’ve definitely received more than usual. And not just from lower level people in the industry. I’m getting logline requests from people who have been involved with sales to major studios, people who can get me an agent at a major agency. And I’ve had some script requests as a result of the loglines.

Of course, nothing is guaranteed but I’ve gotten more attention through the Nicholl than ever before. I definitely feel it was worth it.


Breanne

Quoted from leitskev The thing about a contest is that all the scripts get read, so the log is less important.

Logs are in the eye of the beholder.
But "all the scripts get read"? Says who?
I've heard some readers giving up on stuff 20 pages in, others well before that.
Depends on the contest I 'spose.

We were talking about Nichols. It's my understanding the scripts get read. Certainly if something is dreadfully written or formatted, the reader my give up on it, but the point remains, Darren. These people are paid to read your script, so they will, regardless of the log. Different than if you're shopping your script or looking for an agent. A bad log there means your script does not even get to page one.

The discussion began with Brett point out some less than stellar logs in this years Nichol's finalists. I pointed out that logs are not so important for contests. I don't even know if they're looked at much by the judges. But outside of contests, they are critical. Do you disagree with that?

Quoted from leitskev We were talking about Nichols. It's my understanding the scripts get read. Certainly if something is dreadfully written or formatted, the reader my give up on it, but the point remains, Darren. These people are paid to read your script, so they will, regardless of the log. Different than if you're shopping your script or looking for an agent. A bad log there means your script does not even get to page one. The discussion began with Brett point out some less than stellar logs in this years Nichol's finalists. I pointed out that logs are not so important for contests. I don't even know if they're looked at much by the judges. But outside of contests, they are critical. Do you disagree with that?

If one is paid to read, you would think they are read-- in a perfect world. I certainly would. But do I believe it? No. I think that if you've read gazillions of scripts, there is going to come a point where you can eye them very quickly and what "I consider reading" and what "they consider reading" are totally different things. I just spent over an hour on ONE OWC script. Yes. Because I was scrutinizing every detail. In the real world, there is not time for such a scrutiny-- UNLESS YOUR GETTING PAID-- BUT BUT BUT...

If you're getting paid, you're also good enough that you've earned the right to GLANCE at a script, give it the five and dime, and your GLANCE will be as good as my HOUR-- so we're talking about different playing fields and also:

The Glance, might work with some scripts, but not with others. And so some people will be short changed in any case. Even here, and I try and do a good job, when I've been working really hard, sometimes I open a script that (if I was fresh) would get more of my attention, for the positive or negative, but it would get more insight in the critique.

I  feel that loglines are very important no matter what, contest or otherwise. I read them and I work hard for mine to be decent. They are very hard to do. But no, ultimately, I won't judge a script by its logline. I will judge it based upon what it achieves to do and how it accomplishes that end.  There's loads of stuff I look for in scripts. So many are very very dull. When I see a good one, I know it without doubt, even if some of the writing is shabby.

Sandra

Normally I read every OWC entry but this time couldn't really do it. I reviewed about 12 I think - I starting writing them down but gave up.

There was some tough reads not just amongst the ones written by newbies. But it was a tough challenge.

I didn't even review my own(!!) as normal. I dunno, there seemed to be missing this time.

I don't have any real favorites but I'll guess i'll pick something out. I might read a few more, have been busy with work for a change.

Quoted from stevie Normally I read every OWC entry but this time couldn't really do it. I reviewed about 12 I think - I starting writing them down but gave up. There was some tough reads not just amongst the ones written by newbies. But it was a tough challenge. I didn't even review my own(!!) as normal. I dunno, there seemed to be missing this time. I don't have any real favorites but I'll guess i'll pick something out. I might read a few more, have been busy with work for a change.

It happens, Stevie. I've read 21 so far and I wanted to be further ahead, but some of the scripts have intrigued me from the perspective of asking:

"Why did the writer write that?" "Why did they say it that way?" For me, it's not just about the story. I'm finding some very lovely little curiosities in the scripts and because of that, it's taking me a good chunk of time.

So far, I'm very impressed with all of the scripts and the variety. Hopefully I can read them all. I'm going to try, before Friday.

Sandra

Hey stevie,

I would love you to read my script, I just can't tell you which one it is. Hope you keep going.

What I do realise with 38 scripts is that it is difficult to separate the good, the bad, the promising but flawed, the ugly and the simply weird.

When I look at the list it amazes me to see decent scripts fall off the portal along with others, I suppose that's the nature of this beast.

By now the previous reviews should give people an idea of what's before them so that's could be a useful tool in deciding.

It may drive you mad but this OWC thing is cool.

All the best.

I’ve heard quite a few people say the scripts aren’t as good this go around but, personally, I don’t think they’re as bad as a lot of people seem to think. I think there’s a lot of good material in the scripts I’ve read.

A lot of them need work, that’s true. I’m seeing a lot of grammar issues, a lot of on the nose dialogue and a lot of description that needs to be trimmed. Story structure is also an issue but it’s a problem for a lot of writers who’ve been writing for years.

Aside from all that, I’m seeing some good concepts, some intriguing dialogue, some interesting description and some promising writing.


Breanne

I agree with Breanne.

A script is only as good as it's weakest link. One flaw can ruin it. So when you're reading it, at the time you encounter that flaw, it can really taint your evaluation. But flaws can be fixed! So when you sit back and evaluate more coolly, you can feel a little differently about the scripts than at the time you read them. I see a lot of scripts that will look better fixed up.

Anyone hiring Acorn to rig the election? They're busy, but not as busy as they will be a year from now!

I'll toss in there that the generally depressing nature of many of these stories, as opposed to the weak adrenaline inciting theme of attempted straight horror or action, may be sandbagging many of our reads.

I've gone through 11 of 'em so far and sheeeeeeit. Whatta sad sack mope-fest!


Last week I was noodling suggesting an unlimited 2012 rated R or worse! OCT OWC, but... I'm thinking that that's a pretty bad idea based on the depressing nature of this batch of fine stories.

Ray, you made me think of something. Not the first time! These are dark because the genre is Gothic. And I thought the Gothic resulted in another problem.

Everyone felt that the Gothic setting had to be established. That resulted in a lot of scripts that really brought out all the bells and whistles to describe the setting, and we ended up with scripts that were really descriptive. Too descriptive, and it cluttered the read, really made it more work to envision scenes.

Quoted from leitskev But flaws can be fixed! So when you sit back and evaluate more coolly, you can feel a little differently about the scripts than at the time you read them. I see a lot of scripts that will look better fixed up.

Exactly! I just read a script that was weak in many ways, but had some way too cool explanation on the various types of ghosts. That, in itself is a lovely nugget that the writer can run with in the future.

Remember everyone, we're not talking about one script: We're talking about the craft itself.

Sandra

Quoted from leitskev Ray, you made me think of something. Not the first time! These are dark because the genre is Gothic. And I thought the Gothic resulted in another problem. Everyone felt that the Gothic setting had to be established. That resulted in a lot of scripts that really brought out all the bells and whistles to describe the setting, and we ended up with scripts that were really descriptive. Too descriptive, and it cluttered the read, really made it more work to envision scenes.

I disagree. I read one script that had a huge block (wrong formatting I know) of black business, but it was amazing! I could see a director filming "all that".

I guess it all depends upon how you look at it. I don't mind if the writer draws my attention (for example of the script I'm referring) to: MR. DANIEL'S. (another way to cool remembrance) because I remember THAT PLATE OF UNEATEN FISH!!!

That means the writer did a good job at creating an image that I remember and glossing over that table from above.

Sandra