All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
To suggest that all writers or all film makers see and review in a certain way is ludicrous, and downright foolish.
To think that all reviewers and reviews are equal is also quite silly.
The power of criticism is in what is brought up. Most don' see simple story/plot/setup/premise flaws, but that doesn't mean they're not there.
I always have to laugh when I hear/read someone saying something to the effect, "well, no one else has brought that up, so IMO, it doesn't matter." Noy quite accurate.
Don't even get me started on that arsenine Save the Cat shit...
Are you suggesting we should all read that Fucktard's book?
Not at all. What I’m saying is that a lot of what you see in scripts or movies is emotionally counterfeit. No one really experienced it. Yet it works because people’s emotions really are easily manipulated. You can really just use some arbitrary event to get a genuine emotional reaction from the audience. You really can just throw in a kid with cancer if you want to make the audience cry. You really can just throw in a puppy and people will smile and say, “Aw.”
It may not be a side of human nature we like about ourselves but it’s a real side.
Writers are fooling themselves if they think their work is somehow better or of greater artistic integrity because they refuse to conform to a three act structure or whatever.
To be honest, I'm pretty disappointed in the way some of you "vets" have acted for this owc. You've been apart of several of these. You know how they go. You know none are indicative of the writer's true strengths given the restrictions placed upon them and here a great many of you are, bashing these scripts left and right. No one asked you to attempt to open them, let alone read them... I got an email from a member here a few weeks back asking me if I was gonna enter this challenge - "I've been away for so long, I said, I might pop back in and give it a shot. but i'll read them reguardless..."
Not to bash them, but to enjoy them. I see the pressure flaws in every script I've read and that's what makes them so unique, you can see where the authors got behind the 8 ball and then tried to pull it all together. These are great challenges. Reguardless of the quality... Don allows these events to go on time and time again in an attempt to bridge newcomers over to the fold. To broaden the spectrum, so to speak. And time and time again a great many of you jump to keep this board as close knit as humanly possible. A pack of animals.
I've been here for 10 years off and on when Don has allowed it and its becoming a pool of mediocrity not because people can't write, but simply because they're too affraid to post anything out of fear it won't meet the skewed, unprofessional standard set by so many of the regulars.
I use to be on the same road... I use to be on the prick road. I use to be on the, my work work is better than anyones road. I use to be on the very delusional road many here are on now... It all leads to the same place - denial.
The last 6 months I've entered 3 contest... Been in near constant contact with a script consultant and spent lots doing it. I know what the problems with myself as a writer are now. And being an invariant prick shank for the sake of message board fame isn't the way to go about helping anyone. But that's what separates me from others -- I don't need to succeed in screenwritting to feel good about myself. I do well without it. I simply have to help someone who does have that desire but might not know how.
A good post Balt, until you started talking about banning people. Anyone who is serious about learning will accept all of their reviews, including the negative ones. These reviews are not the final word on your script, you have that. Take the advice and use what you think has currency.
Just wanted to say major props on your above rant, Breanne. It's important to remember that writers have a specific perspective when reviewing scripts. I generally try my best to review as a filmmaker, but then that's another perspective that doesn't match with a general audience's either. In the end, one has to put rather a lot of faith in oneself.
One need only examine Spielberg to see true mastery of the creation and manipulation of artificial emotion. The standard stuff works when the right people do it, and that can't be denied.
Quoted from Baltis.
...not because people can't write, but simply because they're too afraid to post anything out of fear it won't meet the skewed, unprofessional standard set by so many of the regulars.
I know an arm wrestling trick taught to me by one of my old bouncers who use to compete in it. You can use it to beat someone twice your nice. It doesn't involve smashing him with a bottle. It's easy, too.
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!
I haven't ever found anyone mentioning a formula for shorts. However, there seems to be a general consensus that a short is a simple story with a twist at the end. Most good shorts you read will follow this pattern -- though they don't have to they usually won't feel satisfying if they don't.
Some people also believe that a short is a condensed formula of a feature, three acts and all that. I'm not too sure about this -- I think that shorts and features are different animals.
I think no matter what the most important thing to do with a short is to connect with the reader. That means picking a subject that will affect an audience. You have to do this in order to make your short stand out.
Not at all. What I’m saying is that a lot of what you see in scripts or movies is emotionally counterfeit. No one really experienced it. Yet it works because people’s emotions really are easily manipulated. You can really just use some arbitrary event to get a genuine emotional reaction from the audience. You really can just throw in a kid with cancer if you want to make the audience cry. You really can just throw in a puppy and people will smile and say, “Aw.”
It may not be a side of human nature we like about ourselves but it’s a real side.
Writers are fooling themselves if they think their work is somehow better or of greater artistic integrity because they refuse to conform to a three act structure or whatever.
Breanne
Breanne, it's not that I don't agree with everything you've said. It is true for the most part. It's just that sometimes, "magic" happens when everything clicks-- where it wasn't just kind of cut out and stamped together. I think when writers really do take characters and situations from real life and build them into scripts, people can relate to them.
Sometimes, I've seen maybe some goofy type of movie and it's over the top, but certain crazy things happen and I go, "I can see that happening". But it's not just the writers. It's everyone. I like the idea of creating something and then just letting it go out into the world like a child, and grow. I don't need to hold onto every little thing. Who knows if what I mean is coming across, but when art converges with real life in that perfect little stew, I don't care how it was created, then I can feel it.
By the way, I wouldn't ban anyone. I might send them to the Lavaltory. But I wouldn't ban them.
Niners looking good. Harbaugh is the man. I don't think they can get by Green Bay, but who knows, Green Bay's defense has been suspect this year. Pats/Niners superbowl works for me! I'm worried about Balt...not that Balt, the Ravens. They're looking pretty dominant with that defense again,