Quoted from Grandma Bear Rick, there was another gothic horror OWC once where Phil wrote Dog Run, so it definitely does not have to be set in the old days or anything which it seems from the ones I've read so far.

Don't mind me, I'm just getting bitch-slapped about genre!  

Sometimes, with a good story, you need a little distance from it to evaluate it effectively. I think the same applies to the OWC as well.

While you're doing the reads, it's a bit overwhelming and frustrating. But when you sit back with a little more perspective, it can look a little different. It did challenge a lot of people to think outside they're usual process. There was actually a decent amount of variety all things considered.

Gothic is a pretty wide range of things, as was discussed before the challenge. And it will continue to evolve. The only entry that I can think of that I didn't find Gothic was the phone apps one, Dances. Not a bad story, but not Gothic. But I was happy to review it.

Misunderstood ghosts is a little more specific. If a story didn't have something we commonly recognize as a ghost, or the ghost was barely involved, I don't think it met the challenge.

There's wiggle room. Far as I know, no one did this, but to me, a Scooby Do ending would have been acceptable. In other words, we encounter a threatening ghost throughout the story, and it turns out to be someone in a costume. That would have counted as a misunderstood ghost for me.

Another thing to consider: when we're reading a whole bunch of stories, some written by very inexperienced people, and then all of a sudden we encounter a complicated story, it's not always welcome. It might be a good story, but we don't have the energy to figure it out. Especially if there any flaws in its writing, and there are likely to be in a Challenge.

I read a story that I still have to go back and finish because I feel it might have been a good story that I could not do justice to. I just could not absorb the info.

Just been thinking that I bet there's a fabulous story to be made by combining a few of these...grab Poe out of Open Casket, The Executioner, pick the best setting, a handful of Monks etc...

Ha. Could be a proper all time classic in amongst them all somewhere.

Warning: Breanne’s Rant begins in 3... 2...  

There’s no reason for any writer to get upset about what a reviewer says. In many ways, writers are the worst reviewers. They see things they think are obvious without realizing that they’re obvious to them because they’re writers. They look for any little thing wrong without realizing that a viewer may not care or notice.

The average screenwriter is clueless about what works or doesn’t in a script. This is why I don’t put too much stock in what reviewers say, or even coverage for that matter.

I’ve had readers knock a script, only to have a filmmaker think it was wonderful. I think a lot of writers here could say the same thing. Screenwriters are nitpicky people who are often way too close to a story technically.

I seldom see a film that surprises me in any way. I often watch a murder mystery and announce the killer immediately. When asked how I know, I’ll go off about how this character did this or that and therefore is or isn’t likely to be the killer. I’m not talking about typical viewers pointing out similarities between movies. I’m talking about writers nitpicking every detail. I think anyone who writes for any length of time is going to have their enjoyment of movies (or reading scripts) undermined by the craft.

Regarding “paint by numbers,” I hate to tell you this but that’s what works with the general public. People don’t like to accept it but the reality is that human emotion is easily manipulated. People respond to counterfeit emotion just as easily as if it’s genuine. You really can “save the cat” or “kick the dog” and people really will genuinely respond.

People often like to think they’re somehow enlightened or above that sort of thing but in reality you’re not. Your emotions are easily manipulated, whether you like it or not. And every writer does it. Whether they realize it or not. It works. It sells tickets. People’s emotions aren’t as ethereal as they think. It’s a beautiful thing when it all works out and creates a genuine experience. But people are fooling themselves if they think they’re above “paint by numbers” storytelling.

Rant over.


Breanne

Quoted from Breanne Mattson I’ve had readers knock a script, only to have a filmmaker think it was wonderful. I think a lot of writers here could say the same thing. Screenwriters are nitpicky people who are often way too close to a story technically. People often like to think they’re somehow enlightened or above that sort of thing but in reality you’re not. Your emotions are easily manipulated, whether you like it or not. And every writer does it. Whether they realize it or not. It works. It sells tickets. People’s emotions aren’t as ethereal as they think. It’s a beautiful thing when it all works out and creates a genuine experience. But people are fooling themselves if they think they’re above “paint by numbers” storytelling. Rant over. Breanne

I've had producers tell me to my face...
Unless that writer can help get your script produced, who cares what they think?
They're the competition. Get it into the hands of actual filmmakers.
Writers won't tell you what your script needs to get made.

As to the paint by numbers debate...
I have no illusions that Zombie Playground is a unique property.
I wanted to create a fresh spin on some familiar tropes with a good theme. Period.
Does that mean I "settled" for a so-so story? Not in my mind.
Just trying my best to entertain and spread some good ideas around.

"A good movie must not only be entertaining, but easy to understand."

-Akira Kurosawa

I fully agree with the rant above.

Quoted from Breanne Mattson I’ve had readers knock a script, only to have a filmmaker think it was wonderful. I think a lot of writers here could say the same thing. Screenwriters are nitpicky people who are often way too close to a story technically.

Sure Breanne. Most of my scripts here were knocked down by reviewers, mostly because my Englsih was bad (typos, grammar mistakes, weird sentences, etc....) but I'm proud to say I had 6 shorts to be filmed.

SS concept is excellent. The first goal, I think, is to help each other to improve the style, the writing.... I learnt a lot here. That's why I've always been here. Some family events (some people know what I'm talking about) moved me away, but I do my best to be active. That's why I run that OWC.

Like I said in a previous post, I'm not fond criticizing writers. I do read the scripts, but when I can give my two cents, I do it.

The problem is that most of the reviewers tend to think when they read "I wouldn't have done like this.... " and are influenced by their own works. No one can be in someone's head when he wrote something. Many cristicisms are not constructive.

Just remember that the scripts have been written in ONE week. They cannot be perfect!!!

Furthermore, they have been written for FUN. Do not take them TOO seriously....

Interesting post Bre,

Wth a foot in each camp I think that it ultimately always comes down to subjective opinion whether something is good or not...it's just the way it is. I've watched films that I thought were superb..amazingly written, original, intense...and then you go on IMDB and you see people saying it was totaly stupid, made no sense and "was like the worst film I've ever seen!".

And I've watched films been bored by them and others just absolutey rave about it.

I will say though that I find the nitpicking things very helpful. As a filmmaker those things don't bother me so much when I read others scripts as I know they will never be seen...you can't mispell a photograph....but as a writer I find it helps me improve.

I think the standard of reviews on here are high, even if you choose to ignore certain things that you disagree with or don't really care about.

I do think writers will see things differently from filmmakers and audiences though. Audiences haven't gone through a long process of reading screenwriting books that tell you exactly how films are "supposed" to be. As long as there is stuff that keeps them entertained in some way on the screen, they just aren't going to care about certain things.

Filmmakers have their own concerns.

Scriptwriting is a strange game..as is filmmaking. There's no real standard. We all seek to improve, but it's not necessarily the quality that gets you somewhere. There are very low quality projects that people pay some money for, there are very high quality films that no-one ever sees.

I agree about the paint by numbers thing...I think stories are essentially built out of fairly simple building blocks. It's just that you have to find a way of arranging them to tell stories in ways people (at least feel) they haven't seen before.

I started the 'paint by numbers' thing, so I better explain exactly what I meant.

The script that got me on about it was 'The Open Casket'.

Meticulously written - at a guess by one of our more experienced writers here at SS - researched to the max, all the period detail and Gothic stuff down to the last thumbscrew.

BUT...despite a couple of nice injections, like Poe, etc, there wasn't a degree of fresh story in it. It went through the motions, fulfilling the challenge requirements.

Is this a bad thing? No, of course!! The writer chose this way to do it, as did a few others. I reckon we all Wiki'ed Gothic Horror a minute after the challenge was set. I know I did!!

I couldn't see myself doing the similair thing and using all the trad(cliched?) ingredients. Well, I could've but would have had no chance in hell of coming up with a STORY to tell amongst it.

Anyway, i just wanted to clear that up a bit.

Good post, Breanne.

To everyone else - I've been really busy the past few days so haven't been able to read as much as I'd like (I think I've got 5 down so far).  I'm hoping to get in 6 scripts a day or so until I have them done, so hopefully before the submission for the Writer's Choice I'll have them all read.

Greg

It's been a general theme in most OWC's I think...you tend to get the highly polished scripts that tread a well beaten path, or you get ones that try something different but end up a little unfocused or in need of a spruce.

In general readers will respond more favourably to the former, filmmakers more to the latter...which sort of ties in with what Bre is saying.

I think Chris Keaton in the Feb OWC said something similar. To paparphrase: Writers teach writers to write for writers.


Writers being people who spend long hours on the craft appreciate skilful and correct writing. But filmmakers know that all the great turns of phrase (dialogue aside) will all disappear...the only thing you will have left is the visuals and the overall story....as much as they want to keep anyway.

Learning in life is not linear and neither is screenwriting. The suggestion of "paint by numbers" to me, suggests the idea of linear which can work, but I don't think it's requisite. I think a better way of understanding it is through paradigm and context.

Today I was working E.S.L. and my student said she really liked what we did today because I took her right out of the workbook and we started talking about stative verbs and abstract concepts that it is hard to understand in one's native language let alone across an ocean of culture to China. I discussed the word make versus create for example. You might create a work of art, but you make your bed. You might make or bake a cake, but if you're a wedding cake decorator, you're more in the realm of creating works of art.

I'm one to believe in learning through context and that to me means "live your life". Then... deedly-deedly dee... run and go read and write. I think that "paint by numbers" can give people a good place to start. It's like kids and coloring. But later on, if they so desire, they begin to draw their own lines.

Sandra

Breanne,

Love the rant. I agree, as a simple script reviewer, I am too nit-picky on things. Almost feel as its my job to find something wrong about a script. It's usually easy to do. Felt a few of my faves have been raped for no good reason. I just want to grab those people and say "If you saw this, well done on film, that thought would've never crossed your fucking mind."

Gonna disagree with you "Paint by numbers" assesment though. Are you suggesting we should all read that Fucktard's book? In which he spends half the time bashing Christopher Nolan? And what did he write?

Save The Cat? Save My ass... Just bought a second copy because I ran out of toilet paper. And my ass is hurting, those pages could use some aloe..

James

Lol.  You crack me up, James.  I've never read 'Save the Cat', but have heard some of the laws to abide by.  Makes my stomach turn.  But I am going to try and get a copy of it just to compare it with my own work, just to see if I'm involuntary adhering to any of his structure.

I have never had any single review of any of my work here that I found to be completely on the money. But, for me, the "system" really works. If I can get 10 to 15 earnest reviews, cumulatively, a pattern starts to emerge from the noise which tends to reveal the things I most need to address. Does that make sense?

So I absorb all of the reviews, and then draw insights. It's kind of like putting a whole bunch of transparencies together, and the picture shows up at the end and points me in the right direction. I might get frustrated with a particular review at the time I read it, but in the end the all help form the picture and I am immensely grateful for them.

Even a review that says someone stopped on a certain page is a helpful clue. It's all a process.

Stevie mentioned Open Casket. I have no idea who wrote it. And it is cliche. But as things stand, and I will go back and look at my top contenders, this one would still get my vote. Not because it's well written and formatted, though it is. But because it does things a story is supposed to do to keep you reading from the first to the last. I'm not sure how many other scripts did that. Most had hiccups where you wanted to stop reading. Mine included, so I'm not throwing stones.

It's like playing a musical instrument, or composing music. There are certain formulas that work. Best to learn those languages, and then learn how to experiment with them to create something new.

One question on paint by the numbers: I know some of the formulas for features, such as STC, but what are the formulas for shorts? If anyone knows of any, I'd love to know!