As far as I'm concerned if the writer likes your review, who are you to judge what a review should consist of?

To start making guidelines, the reviewing on this site will go down even further in the gutter. Fact is, half the people who review are only doing it to get reads and that's the wrong reason to do it.

If you're not reading scripts for entertainment, to learn or just to read something than you're on the wrong site.

These kinds of people are leaving me with a headache because deleting what I affectionately call "cute reviews" is getting on my nerves and they usually lead to fights or shameless self promotion which means more work for me.

While there shouldn't be any enforceable rules regarding what goes into a review, a review has to consist of more than a few words.  And it should consist of more than  listing all the typos, misspellings and grammatical errors.  It should also consist of more than

Looks like everything I was going to say about your script was already said by others, so I'm just going to say that it was cool.

No scripts here are perfect.  Even if you can't find a problem with one, you can always go into detail with your compliments.

Since George mentioned this thread in another thread, I thought I would bounce it up the list.


Phil

I am pretty harsh in my reviews.  Every so often, I'll read a gem of a script and say some good things.

But I do have a suggestion for reviews.  Can we start discussing the story more?  A lot of reviews point out page by page formating issues, typos, and very rarely touch on story issues.

On the other side, some writers take extreme ownership and are inflexible with trying new things out.  I suggest trying new things.  If someone suggests writing a scene a certain way, try it out.  If you find it doesn't work, then just revert back to your prior revision.

I submitted a short I wrote that should show up here soon.  It's called Afternoon.  I hope to just discuss the story, so I'll put myself out on the chopping block.  I want to thoroughly discuss the main character.  I think, I'm holding back, and I want to hear suggestions.

tweak

I used to try to point out typos and stuff, but I worry much less about that nowadays. As long as the story is easy to follow I don't worry about those things. I don't really think pros worry that much about it either to be honest with you. I've read some winners at competitions where the formatting was WAY OFF, but the script still won or placed and I've also read features where producers want rewrites of a script and I've wondered how they ended up reading the script in the first place because it's so off regarding formatting. Sure, it's always better to look as perfect as you can, but my feelings nowdays is that the story trumps everything else.

Also, typos are not that important until you're working on the final final final draft of your script.  Characterization, plot, pacing are more important.


Phil

Eh...I'm on the fence with this one.

I proof my stuff pretty well, and appreciate people pointing out typos.  I won't post a new version for it, but they'll be fixed on my personal copy.

But if you read a script littered with typos, the author probably doesn't care and you are wasting your time giving them a laundry list -- so yeah, point taken there.

Glaring format errors should be pointed out to the novice.  You can tell who breaks the rules on purpose and who needs some pointers.

Typos have their place and I think pretty much any comments are valid.  Except those where the reviewer tries to rewrite the story. I don't like those.

I think if you are reviewing a script on a site like this then you should try to help the writer achieve their vision of the story, not yours.  If you can't help the writer achieve their vision then you might as well just post the typos.

I'm new and I'm here to learn.

Knowing (typos, grammar, etc...) won't help me much. I would want to know if my story is sound.

Where are my real problems. The stuff that will kill my script if I send it out.

Good luck all

Quoted from dogglebe Spelling and grammar are important later on.  When your first draft of a script is up, story, characterization and formatting are more important.  After you've done two or three drafts and are looking to do something with it, then spelling and grammar count. This doesn't mean that one's reviews should consist of pointing out such problems. Phil

I'm sorry, but I disagree with you.  Spelling and grammar are an integral part of a writer's tool bag.

What you are saying is like saying to a builder: "Don't worry about bringing a screwdriver along-- all you need is a hammer.  Heck, don't even worry about a saw."

I agree with you, that we shouldn't overload our critiques with these issues.  Absolutely, I agree with that.  Line by line edits don't necessarily help the critiquer or the critiqee because there are too many levels; the critiquer needs to develop a sense about where the writer is in their developmental path.  As a critiquer, we have to discern what we feel is important at any given time.

Some writers are excellent writers, but all they need to learn is spelling and grammar.  I've seen it before; so we shouldn't make blanket statements telling people how to critique.  Instead, we pay attention to guidelines and learn and incorporate what we find is helpful to others.  This will be different of course for everyone.  The important thing to remember is that we stir the recognition within the young apprentice so that they can recognize that there is no "Single Right Way."

In my personal experience, ( and I've been through the whole: check list critiquing methods) the best way to work is by pointing out what especially strikes you (the critiquer) as the reader; and focus on a few aspects.  I mean what strikes you as both good and bad.  It doesn't mean that you are right.  It's just a tool that you use to help the writer to get a feel for potential; and also to be aware of the deficits and that's all.

Sandra

I go back and forth on my method for typos/grammar.  If there's a few typos here and there, chances are I won't point them out.  If, however, the story has tons of typos/grammatical/punctuational errors to the point where it makes the story hard to read, then I do bring that up.  If it's actually interrupting how you read the story, then that's the biggest problem IMO.  

And punctuation! Ahhh!  Some people continuously misuse it!  It drives me insane!

I have to agree with Sandra E's simile about a writer posting a script with bad spelling and bad grammar is like a construction worker not bringing a screwdriver or saw to a job.  It's kind of like a chef with only a microwave in his restaurant.

When I first started reviewing scripts, I pretty much made it a point not to mention typo's or even formatting issues and focused only on story and characterization.

But, as I'm sure a lot of people have noticed, :-), I'm now mentioning a lot, if not all of the typos I am seeing in the short screenplays.  One, because I got very sick of a lot of the laziness on the stories that people were posting, so I'm hoping they get sick of hearing about typo's and when they post  something else, they'll pay a little more attention.  Two, because I started thinking it wasn't just laziness, but that the writer just didn't know better, or, in a lot of instances, was still a little bit new to the English language, and I might help them realize what mistakes they have been making.  And three, because myself, the obsessive-compulsive side of me screams when I see an error in my work and I'd like every typo to be pointed out so I could fix it.  True, I won't repost a story just for a few misspelled words or misplaced commas, but I'll still fix it before I send it out to any competitions, directors looking for scripts, or agents.

But I still feel that the story and characterization are the most important aspects, also.  They're the driving force in the script and I try to comment as much on that as I can, also.

Does anyone use writing software that doesn't have spellchecking on it?  Word has it.  So does Final Draft.  Any misspelled words are highlighted for me fix.

While story and characterization are more important than spelling and grammar, reading a script filled with such mistakes can make it a painful experience.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe Does anyone use writing software that doesn't have spellchecking on it?

Actually, I use Cinergy's Script Editor Software, the free version.  There is a version you could buy that has spellchecking along with numerous other great little extras, like page-to-storyboard, but the free version I have doesn't allow spellcheck.  Which, I think, is kind of a blessing because, for me, it makes me pay all that more attention as I'm typing, which ultimately helps in the long run with how the grammar is worded.  Yet, after I'm done writing, I still copy it as a .doc file and run the spellcheck through my Word.

Cinergy does have a couple problems still, though, like how it automatically paginates every single page, which sucks if you want to have a title page, and then how the first page of the script isn't supposed to be numbered.

I've heard good things about Celtx, but haven't checked it out, yet.

I just don't see the point into dropping how much ever money it costs, I've heard and found different prices, for Final Draft when there's other programs I can use just as easily and get the same effect, except for the damn Page #1.  At least not until I start making a good deal of money explicitly from screenwriting, anyway.

Also, I was just thinking about it, spellchecking would help a great deal in most scripts, but I've noticed a lot of misspellings that spellcheck wouldn't catch.  For instance, a lot of people switching 'there' and 'their' and examples such as that..  Or 'where' and 'we're', believe it or not.  Your and you're is another popular one.  Now, ultimately, those aren't very significant, and I usually won't mention those unless I see the author do it over and over again in a script.

- Mark

When a PDF is generated from Celtx it doesn't put a number on page 1.  From my experience with it and FD, I actually prefer Celtx.  Granted, my version of FD is older (version 5 or whatever), but the features are almost identical and I can export to pdf with it.  I hear the latest version of FD allows you to do this, but I'm not ready to drop the cash on it just yet, especially since I only use FD when I need to send an actual FDR file to someone.

Celtx also has a spell check feature that's pretty in depth, and if you're like me and use a lot of in' endings instead of the standard ing in your dialogue, they can be added to the dictionary with no problem.