Writers' Choice for the April 2019 OWC

Don's Edit: Sincere apologies for yet another cock-up.  In an attempt to random "the rest' some of the scripts got mis-attributed.  I've gone back and fixed the error, this is the final, correct standings.

Theme: Vehicular Suspense
Genre: Horror
Challenge: The majority of your screenplay must heavily feature some sort of vehicle AND have at least one sequence of prolonged suspense. But that's not all. This OWC has a twist. Gore is to be kept to a minimum. Put readers on the edge of their seat with suspense, don't shock them with disturbing gore.

---

Writers' Choice

3.68 The Stowaway by Al Lougher (Britman) writing as Nacho Poncharelo - Short, Horror - Making a routine delivery across the Mexican border, a loudmouthed trucker discovers something terrifying has hitched along for the ride. 12 pages - pdf format

Writers' Liked

3.29 The Libertine by Dustin Bowcott (Dustin) writing as Poe Lovecraft - Short, Horror - After purchasing some slaves, sailors begin disappearing on the journey home. Is it just plain, bad luck or is there something evil aboard? 8 pages - pdf format

3.18 Gondolier by Anthony Cawood (AnthonyCawood) writing as Gilbert Sullivan - Short, Horror - A power engineer must fight for his life to get the job done. 10 pages - pdf format

3.13 It's Coming by Joe Garza (SPQR) writing as László Görög - Short, Horror - The crew of a subway tunnel digging machine unearth something that was never meant to see the light of day again. 12 pages - pdf format

3.11 Ganglers by Mark Renshaw (MarkRenshaw) writing as Kruger Candy - Short, Horror - A jaded correction officer transporting a busload of restrained inmates must choose whether to defend the prisoners she despises when they are attacked by creatures with a twisted sense of justice. 12 pages - pdf format

3.00 Beyond the Sea by Matthew Layden (TheUsualSuspect) writing as Delta Weanmyth - Short, Horror - Howard ventures out to sea to look for his sister after he discovers a survivor from her boat's wreckage. What he finds out there is something far worse… 11 pages - pdf format

2.94 First Responders by Rene Claveau (ReneC) writing as George - Short, Horror - Emergency services always answer the call, but they aren't always prepared for what they encounter. 10 pages - pdf format

2.78 Protocol 25 by Dena McKinnon and Kevin Lenihan  (paleyellow) writing as Menhaden Ainn and Nick Linkoven - Short, Horror - An injured woman finds herself trapped in an ambulance with the guy she injured who's also a serial killer. 7 pages - pdf format

The rest in no particular order



The Furnace Of War by Steve McDonell (stevie) writing as A.N.Other - Short, Horror - A WW2 bomber crew face a new kind of enemy over the skies of Germany, 12 pages - pdf format

The Gathering by Jeff Bush (Dreamscale) writing as Dale Creams - Short, Horror - Something has arrived with a storm outside Santa Fe, New Mexico, and it brings a gift to mankind that will keep on giving.  11 pages - pdf format

Diversion Down Elder Tree Lane by Matthew Taylor (Matt) writing as *Insert Witty Name* - Short, Horror - A father and son with a strained relationship cross path with a malevolent tree on their way to a special visit. 11 pages - pdf format

Reap What You Sow by Warren Duncan (Warren) writing as A Simple Farmer - Short, Horror - Upon returning to her childhood home, a young woman recalls memories from her past. A past in which monsters were very real. 12 pages - pdf format

A Pinch by John Staats (JEStaats) writing as ---- - Short, Horror - Alcohol, tobacco and firearms. What could go wrong? 8 pages - pdf format

El Camino Infierno (Hell) by Christopher J Vecchio (ChrisV) writing as ? - Short, Horror - Two brothers must escape town as unknown forces destroy everything in site. 12 pages - pdf format

Gut Shot by Eric C Dickson (Dickson) writing as Dick Icecorns - Short, Horror - A man carjacked, shot and left for dead thirty years earlier takes possession of a man traveling the same desert road in the same make and model Corvette Stingray.  12 pages - pdf format

I Dream Of The Devil by Glenn Doyle (IAmGlenn) writing as D - Short, Horror - On a rainy night, two men meet to discuss a peculiar, recurring dream. 5 pages - pdf format

Tillinghaust 1944 by Darren Seeley (DarrenJamesSeeley) writing as William Dyer - Short, Horror - Five lost soldiers curious about an abandoned tank, investigate the surrounding desolate, remote village which does not exist on any map. 12 pages - pdf format

Kármán Line by R.J. Howard (Howie365) writing as Ward Rhoj - Short, Horror, Space - On their way to service a broken satellite in geosynchronous orbit, four astronauts experience something they can’t explain and will never forget. 12 pages - pdf format

Driving The Relm by Roland S. Jefferson (RolandJ) writing as Leäf Sensnør Fjörd - Short, Horror - The new owner of the latest self-driving car gets the ride of his life. Literally! 12 pages - pdf format

Trebizond by Mark-Curtis Dunn (currentcmine) writing as Mac Dirkunturns - Short, Horror - A CEO on vacation with his family takes a trip in his RV to a ghost mining town in the Mojave Desert only to disturb the guardian spirit of the town and suffer the consequences. 12 pages - pdf format

Loaned Woes by Sean Elwood (thedeadwalk2nite) writing as Loaned Woes - Short, Horror - A man encounters something strange in the woods. 5 pages - pdf format

Belgian Spring by Dan Ball (DanBall) writing as Anonymous - Short, Horror - Escaping the invading German army during the Battle of the Bulge, a small infantry company must evacuate civilians to safety in the midst of snipers and V-1 buzz-bombs. 12 pages - pdf format

The Woodsman by James Jay (JamesJ) writing as James Jay - Short, Horror - When a cheating hubby needs a his wife to disappear he doesn't bank on her rescue of a small Woodsmans child.  - pdf format

Drank by NYA Angelique (Angiez) writing as Anonymous - Short, Horror - Kate who awaken tied up in a barn after drinking too much at a party, has no other choice but to play an evil game to save her three best friends. - pdf format

Sea-Level Threat by Ryan Beane (RyanBeane) writing as Terrence Parker - Short, Horror, Suspense - Two Navy seals trapped in a neutralized submarine at the bottom of the ocean must work together to reunite with the rest of the soldiers. 7 pages - pdf format

Remote Control by Paul Knauer (PKCardinal) writing as The Dog Down the Street Who Won't Stop Barking, OMG, Shut Up Already - Short, Horror - A mother gets a mysterious visit on her missing son's birthday. 5 pages - pdf format

Congrats Al!

And congrats to all that entered, was a fun challenge.

Congrats! The Stowaway did rise to the top after all.

I’m glad to see the top ones were all pretty close in scores. It kept the suspense up with no clear frontrunner. Coincidence?

Hi Don, I think I may have written Reap What You Sow :p

Actually it seems like a few might be incorrectly named, I believe Paul wrote Remote Control.

Ooh, just as I was going to bed! Congratulations Al!

Anyway... Congrats to The Stowaway, it was an really well written script.

Big congrats to Al!

And a big thanks to Don, for continuing to be awesome.

Quoted from Zack Big congrats to Al! And a big thanks to Don, for continuing to be awesome.

Are we sure Al wrote it? A lot of the names are mixed up.

Yep, I'll take credit for Remote Control.

Congrats Al and runner-ups. Nicely done, all.

Thanks all! Figured I’d write my own script for a change, instead of making everyone else’s.

Quoted from Warren ... A lot of the names are mixed up.

Sent a message to Don.
Stay tuned for fixes.

Quoted from Britman Thanks all! Figured I’d write my own script for a change, instead of making everyone else’s.

Written by Al
Directed by Al
Starring Al as Al
Theme tune written and performed by Al

Quoted from Warren Hi Don, I think I may have written Reap What You Sow :p

Warren,

Apologies.  In an attempt to randomize the rest I got things out of order and mis-attributed.  

Sorry,

Don

Quoted from Warren Actually it seems like a few might be incorrectly named, I believe Paul wrote Remote Control.

I have fixed this.  Again, apologies.

- Don

Quoted from Warren Glad mine still made the writer's like section

HUH?  Am I missing something here?

Quoted from Dreamscale HUH?  Am I missing something here?

That was written before I corrected the listings.  I made a mistake.  

Let me distract from that:

Did anyone notice some of the pseudonyms?  If the author didn't give a pseudonym, I took a cue from Sean Elwood - Loaned Woes and created anagram pseudonyms...

Matthew Layden (TheUsualSuspect) writing as Delta Weanmyth
Dena McKin and Kevin Lenihan  (paleyellow) writing as Menhaden Ainn and Nick Linkoven
Eric C Dickson (Dickson) writing as Dick Icecorns
Jeff Bush (Dreamscale) writing as Dale Creams (I am particularly proud of that one...)
Mark-Curtis Dunn (currentcmine) writing as Mac Dirkunturns

- Don

Dick Icecorns made me chuckle...

I looked up my given name thinking it was something.


It was nothing. Ha.

Quoted from Don Jeff Bush (Dreamscale) writing as Dale Creams (I am particularly proud of that one...)

This will be how I address Jeff from this moment forward.

Quoted from Don Warren, Apologies.  In an attempt to randomize the rest I got things out of order and mis-attributed.   Sorry, Don

I definitely liked it better when my script was in the Writer's Liked section, we can go back to that if you like :p

Quoted from Warren I definitely liked it better when my script was in the Writer's Liked section, we can go back to that if you like :p

I know YOU liked your script... and sometimes that's enough.

It is for me in this round. I started off hating my script (too linear), and, after adding a few layers,  ended up liking it.

Now, despite my abysmal results, I feel good about this OWC. As should you!

Congrats on everyone who participated. These are usually picked up by filmmakers.

Not sure if you gents/ladies need any more reviews but, I’ll see if I can read a couple. No guarantees.

Gabe

Congrats to Al and to all the "writer's liked" scripts - so very nice work here.

One of my favorite's didn't make the list - glad to see Libertine there - it was top notch - good one, Dustin

Congrats Al!!!

Interesting observation here. We are screenwriters here. The winning script is written by a writer, director and producer. I'm wondering if we could all learn to become better writers by thinking more like directors and filmmakers. I know I'm trying.  

Congrats to all the "winners", but all who entered and read, and gave feedback are the real winners.

To those who entered, got reads and feedback, and gave no feedback, you should be ashamed.  Serioulsy.

Britman - CONGRATS!  Great script!  Congrats.  Hope we see more of you, as you're a great writer.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Congrats Al!!! Interesting observation here. We are screenwriters here. The winning script is written by a writer, director and producer. I'm wondering if we could all learn to become better writers by thinking more like directors and filmmakers. I know I'm trying.

I do.
Does me no favors.

Much congrats Britman!

And to the others at the top - well done! And to all who read and reviewed.

My top 4 are in writers choice and writers also liked.
My personal favourite was Gondolier

Well done to all who entered.

To those who entered but contributed nothing - sort it out! There are no prizes for this challenge, so what's the point entering without getting involved?

This is a community of writers helping writers - taking without giving is not cool and not in the spirit of the challenge.

Quoted from PKCardinal I know YOU liked your script... and sometimes that's enough.

For sure, I'm very happy with it, but I knew it was going to be an issue. I will stay in the lines for the next OWC

Quoted from Dreamscale Congrats to all the "winners", but all who entered and read, and gave feedback are the real winners. To those who entered, got reads and feedback, and gave no feedback, you should be ashamed.  Serioulsy.

This (peeps not reading) use to not bother me - kind of a, oh well - but I have to admit it's pissing me off more and more. Like - heh, I'm going to bring nothing to the potluck dinner - the food better be good.

There was an entrant in this one that claimed they couldn't read scripts from the last OWC because of illness (a very long one I guess) and sure as shit they did the same thing this time. WTF? When I see all the folks who didn't enter read and comment it makes me even crankier to see ones that did enter and not comment.

Dave Lambertson, I sent you a PM.  Totally inapplicable to this conversation.  Just a question about a filmmaker you worked with.  

Eric D.  

The next Purge movie will be about a 24 hour period when writers of the OWC can hunt down those who entered but did not leave any reviews.

Quoted from ericdickson Dave Lambertson, I sent you a PM.  Totally inapplicable to this conversation.  Just a question about a filmmaker you worked with.   Eric D.

Hit you back

It's just me or there are a lot of brits up there?

Congrats to Al and all the runner-ups!

Well done to all who entered!

Great challenge, Zack.

Quoted from eldave1 This (peeps not reading) use to not bother me - kind of a, oh well - but I have to admit it's pissing me off more and more. Like - heh, I'm going to bring nothing to the potluck dinner - the food better be good. There was an entrant in this one that claimed they couldn't read scripts from the last OWC because of illness (a very long one I guess) and sure as shit they did the same thing this time. WTF? When I see all the folks who didn't enter read and comment it makes me even crankier to see ones that did enter and not comment.

I agree with you Dave. When I saw that writers name pop up I was annoyed - what’s more annoying is that they also cheated (EDIT: I suspect anyway, thought I should clarify). The script they submitted is a version of one that already existed - I knew I had read the title and logline somewhere, but wasn’t until the name was revealed that I remembered.

Writer, if your reading, the point of the challenge is to to come up with a new story in a week, not submit one you already had.

Congrats to you, Al! I'm looking forward to reading yours.

And of course congrats to everyone who entered.  

Quoted from Matthew Taylor I agree with you Dave. When I saw that writers name pop up I was annoyed - what’s more annoying is that they also cheated. The script they submitted is a version of one that already existed - I knew I had read the title and logline somewhere, but wasn’t until the name was revealed that I remembered. Writer, if your reading, the point of the challenge is to to come up with a new story in a week, not submit one you already had.

I hope no one actually just re-purposed an old script for this challenge, that's pretty low. Can anyone confirm this as fact?

Quoted from eldave1 This (peeps not reading) use to not bother me - kind of a, oh well - but I have to admit it's pissing me off more and more. Like - heh, I'm going to bring nothing to the potluck dinner - the food better be good. There was an entrant in this one that claimed they couldn't read scripts from the last OWC because of illness (a very long one I guess) and sure as shit they did the same thing this time. WTF? When I see all the folks who didn't enter read and comment it makes me even crankier to see ones that did enter and not comment.

I agree it's poor form.

If it annoys you (and it obviously does) follow Bert's advice and remove your feedback from the script in question.

Can we just out this script? Which one is it?

Quoted from Zack I hope no one actually just re-purposed an old script for this challenge, that's pretty low. Can anyone confirm this as fact?

If that did occur it would only be an issue imho, if that particular script rose to the top of the pack of Writer's Choice, and that's unlikely to happen.

It's usually pretty transparent when a script has been re-edited to fit the parameters of an OWC, or if it has been posted before keen eyes are going to suss it out.  

The writer would certainly not be doing themselves any favours by posting a rehashed version of something previously written, or daring to incur the wrath of you lot.  

My advice is let it go.
This particular OWC is done and dusted.

Alternatively, you can PM Don your concerns.

P.S. Oh, and as above. If you feel the writer doesn't deserve your feedback (for their lack of participation) delete it from the thread in question.

If that's the case, I would suggest a one year ban from entering any OWC.  

Quoted from Grandma Bear If that's the case, I would suggest a one year ban from entering any OWC.

I agree. Not cool.

Further to what was said above, Matthew: Do you see that 'Report' button, right hand side of the script thread? You can always use that to notify Don, for any shenanigans eg. if you thought you'd already read a script prior to the OWC.

Quoted from Zack I hope no one actually just re-purposed an old script for this challenge, that's pretty low. Can anyone confirm this as fact?

I'm kind of curious now, too.
I also wonder if,in the previous OWC this script was from they had the same errors as they had in this OWC...if that was the case,it tells you something about that scribe.

Even if that person is new to screenwriting.  If so, they may not know of what to look for, technical issues, an soon, so they fear commenting because "they don't know what to say"
I've heard that excuse before- it's BS.  Subjective opinion can also cover story an characters, what you like or don't like.

Quoted from DarrenJamesSeeley I'm kind of curious now, too. I also wonder if,in the previous OWC this script was from they had the same errors as they had in this OWC...if that was the case,it tells you something about that scribe. Even if that person is new to screenwriting.  If so, they may not know of what to look for, technical issues, an soon, so they fear commenting because "they don't know what to say" I've heard that excuse before- it's BS.  Subjective opinion can also cover story an characters, what you like or don't like.

Agree!

Quoted from LC Further to what was said above, Matthew: Do you see that 'Report' button, right hand side of the script thread? You can always use that to notify Don, for any shenanigans eg. if you thought you'd already read a script prior to the OWC.

Thanks, will do.

Sorry, I didn't mean to turn this thread negative lol Time to turn it back to positive...

Thanks, Zack for this challenge Have never written horror before and I think I have developed a taste for it now lol

No problemo, Matt. Just an FYI.
Btw, I agree with Warren about your Disclaimer not being needed.  

Hi folks,

I've removed the script in question.

With regard to folks not commenting on scripts. I'm willing to entertain ideas on how we can get better participation.  

- Don

Just to clarify: the first draft of 'It's Garbage Day!' was written in under an hour the first Wednesday (or Thursday, I forget) after the competition began. I submitted a second (much better) 11 page draft to the websites Stage32 and Scriptrevolution two days before the contest ended.

Here's a link to the final draft of 'It's Garbage Day!' for anyone interested in reading it (re-titled 'Garbage Day!'): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxFcl2Xq4H7iNW1Ocll3NWZ3TDFrVkpkQnQzaENrbEVZVzU4/view?usp=sharing

I am very grateful for this OWC because I will be using the short written loosely following the criteria to create a second sci-fi anthology titled 'Psychocycle', a sequel to my script 'Psychosystem'.

Quoted from Don I'm willing to entertain ideas on how we can get better participation.   - Don

When people submit, in the confirmation email, state that entrants are required to read a minimum of 50% of the entries or your script will be removed.

Quoted from Hank Just to clarify: the first draft of 'It's Garbage Day!' was written in under an hour the first Wednesday (or Thursday, I forget) after the competition began. I submitted a second (much better) 11 page draft to the websites Stage32 and Scriptrevolution two days before the contest ended. Here's a link to the final draft of 'It's Garbage Day!' for anyone interested in reading it (re-titled 'Garbage Day!'): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxFcl2Xq4H7iNW1Ocll3NWZ3TDFrVkpkQnQzaENrbEVZVzU4/view?usp=sharing I am very grateful for this OWC because I will be using the short written loosely following the criteria to create a second sci-fi anthology titled 'Psychocycle', a sequel to my script 'Psychosystem'.

Hank:

You received some critical comments in the previous OWC because of your lack of reads or comments. You responded that you were sick and that you would read and comment on those post contest - you didn't.

This OWC you did not comment on any scripts despite receiving many on yours.

The OWCs operate under a good faith paradigm - that is, in exchange for peeps reading and commenting on your script, you will do the same for others. By not doing so you are exploiting the time, energy and good faith of other writers on the site. My advice is - do not participate in OWCs unless you are committed to truly participating (reading and commenting on other scripts) in the OWCs. Absent that, you will just piss people off and eventually all of your work, including non-OWC postings will be ignored.

I will read and comment on other people's scripts eventually. Since taking my time with it bothers so many people, next OWC I will instead wait until the contest is over to submit my criteria-based script to whichever board its genre falls under.

Quoted from Don Hi folks, I've removed the script in question. With regard to folks not commenting on scripts. I'm willing to entertain ideas on how we can get better participation.   - Don

That is a toughie.

Just spit balling - incorporate reviews into the scoring system. e.g., tabulate the script scores and the resultant average.

- Add zero points for writers who read less than 25% of the scripts.
- Add .25 points for writers who read  25% to 50% of the scripts.
- Add .5 points for writers who read more than 50% of the scripts.

For example, if a script gets a rated score of 3.2 - and that writer read 50% or more of the scripts, their final score would be 3.7 (i.e., 3.2 rating plus .5 bonus for reading).

I'm just making up the above numbers for illustrative purposes. They can be anything. The premise is that this is not a contest - it's a challenge - and that challenge includes both writing a script and reading those written by others.

Work wise - someone who have to responsible for counting the reads/comments by writers and tabulating the result (Volunteer basis). I did not submit for this OWC but read 20 scripts - I would have been willing to be the reader score tabulator instead.

Just spit balling.

Quoted from Don Hi folks, I've removed the script in question. With regard to folks not commenting on scripts. I'm willing to entertain ideas on how we can get better participation.   - Don

I'm willing to keep a running count on reviewers and non-reviewers. I mean, for the most part (with the exception of people getting involved on the site for the first time and learning the ropes), we know the people who are going to do the decent thing and review when they submit and we know who won't.

But, a few possibilities:

Bar them from participating in future challenges until they review all the entries in a challenge (without participating in said challenge).

Put an asterisk next to their script title, if they have a history of not reviewing, so people know that they read it at their own risk.

Basic three strikes rule: First offense, banned from the next challenge. Second offense: banned from the next two challenges. Third offense: banned from all challenges.

The hard part is that you don't want to be mean-spirited with these things, but you still want to get the point across. You want it to be seen as positive (review scripts so everyone benefits, including yourself) rather than negative (review so you won't be barred from participating).

Quoted from Hank I will read and comment on other people's scripts eventually. Since taking my time with it bothers so many people, next OWC I will instead wait until the contest is over to submit my criteria-based script to whichever board its genre falls under.

You probably won't read and comment on them since you didn't last time. You're in arrears on two of them now. We'll see I guess.

Regardless, you're solution - not submitting to the challenge will work. No one will be upset that you did not comment on scripts in a challenge that you were not part of.

Thanks for the boost of confidence. I will follow through with your summation of what I previously stated.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde I'm willing to keep a running count on reviewers and non-reviewers. I mean, for the most part (with the exception of people getting involved on the site for the first time and learning the ropes), we know the people who are going to do the decent thing and review when they submit and we know who won't. But, a few possibilities: Bar them from participating in future challenges until they review all the entries in a challenge (without participating in said challenge). Put an asterisk next to their script title, if they have a history of not reviewing, so people know that they read it at their own risk. Basic three strikes rule: First offense, banned from the next challenge. Second offense: banned from the next two challenges. Third offense: banned from all challenges. The hard part is that you don't want to be mean-spirited with these things, but you still want to get the point across. You want it to be seen as positive (review scripts so everyone benefits, including yourself) rather than negative (review so you won't be barred from participating).

I like these ideas.

We have to be careful... because once we start putting in tougher rules this has a knock on effect down the chain. Some members might not participate because they feel pressured even though had they participated they would have reached whatever threshhold anyway - a better safe than sorry attitude.

Quoted from DustinBowcot We have to be careful... because once we start putting in tougher rules this has a knock on effect down the chain. Some members might not participate because they feel pressured even though had they participated they would have reached whatever threshhold anyway - a better safe than sorry attitude.

I take your point, but I think we can work something out that meets both adjectives (I think the point added thing for reviewers I mentioned earlier is an inducement rather than a punishment).

I've become progressively angry regarding the non-reviewers the more and more OWCs I have participated in. Not sure why - maybe because I think they're stealing reviews of their script. When I look at regular scripts to comment on: - if it is a newbie - I might read/comment.  Same if it is a regular peep who I know to be a commenter/reviewer of other scripts. If it is someone who never comments, I shine them on.

Can't shine them on in a OWC because it's anonymous. Not sure why that irks me so - but it does.

Quoted from eldave1 I've become progressively angry regarding the non-reviewers the more and more OWCs I have participated in.

I agree, and I used to constantly beat that drum myself.

But fact is, any "system" that might be implemented means one more thing Don has to keep track of, and these OWCs are already kind of pain, so he is a saint to even run them at all.

In the end I think it is just a flaw inherent in the system that we must live with.  Still cool to call out the parasites when you see 'em, tho.  But beyond that I think additional levels of complexity are kind of counterproductive.  

Isn't 20 reviews enough? We have to look at the value of those reviews too. Every single writer (mostly) that reviews other scripts have entered one themselves and therefore have a vested interest in winning. It's a little like a game of poker. Most of us are in it for the mug.

We don't really care about the reviews other than whether the reader liked it or not. Those that do it for reviews are pretty desperate writers and likely need the help. What value a review from them anyway?

Quoted from bert I agree, and I used to constantly beat that drum myself. But fact is, any "system" that might be implemented means one more thing Don has to keep track of, and these OWCs are already kind of pain, so he is a saint to even run them at all. In the end I think it is just a flaw inherent in the system that we must live with.  Still cool to call out the parasites when you see 'em, tho.  But beyond that I think additional levels of complexity are kind of counterproductive.

Yeah..could be.

I confess I didn't do my fair share. I think I read about 15 and commented on about 10. I don't comment on scripts if I can't find something constructive to say.

Which leads me to another point you guys should consider. Should a read count if the comment is useless? This comment appeared on ours: "No idea what this one is about. They're all killers? Really strange."

That's the whole comment. Now you might argue that we could learn that the reader didn't like the script and didn't understand it. In theory that is helpful. But almost everyone else that read it seemed to understand there was a body-jumping thing going on. This reader was the only one who didn't. Which tells me he didn't really put any effort into it.

Which is fine. Life is short. If a script doesn't grab you, why bother reading it? Our script was not very well done, so I don't expect a reader to push through an unhappy experience.

But at the same time, it also feels like some readers are racing through the scripts so they can check them off. I mean how easy would it be to comment on every script if the comment is utterly useless? I could read Stowaway up til the spider appears, and my comment could be "Ah, spiders, not a fan, I'm out." Then move on to the next script.

I had a really hard time getting through the slave script. It made me stop reading scripts for a few days. But I tried to make a helpful comment.

I would not make any rules about required reading.

I have another suggestion.

Dena and I have become very good friends who work together all year. Last year we sold a screenplay for a $1800. Maybe someday we'll do better. And we met here. During an OWC. This  was how it happened.

Dena had submitted a script but had not commented. I had been a member here for less than a year. Dena, who I didn't know, shyly commented in the general OWC thread that she was nervous about commenting because she didn't feel qualified. I told her writers just want feedback, and everyone's opinion helps. Just comment on what you like and don't like about the story. She did, and became an active regular here and made numerous friends.

the idea

So rather than punish people who don't comment...make it positive. Seek them out and encourage them to comment. If they stay invisible, this will require Don's help. Maybe some OWC ambassadors could be made, people who could contact silent writers and try to draw them out nicely. Pia, Jeff...whoever. Just send them an email, maybe through Don, saying: we're grateful you submitted, please help us out by giving your opinion. No technical knowledge of screenwriting required. Just read and comment on what you like and don't.

Just a crazy idea.

Quoted from DustinBowcot Isn't 20 reviews enough? We have to look at the value of those reviews too. Every single writer (mostly) that reviews other scripts have entered one themselves and therefore have a vested interest in winning. It's a little like a game of poker. Most of us are in it for the mug. We don't really care about the reviews other than whether the reader liked it or not. Those that do it for reviews are pretty desperate writers and likely need the help. What value a review from them anyway?

Not sure what enough is. To me is is more of an equity thing - i.e., do your part.

In this OWC, it looks like around 9 of the most frequent commenters didn't enter a script. So had the non-participants not stepped up, probably would have averaged around ten reviews per script.  I just think that is pretty sad representation for a 26 script challenge.

Either that or I'm just feeling pissy.

For me, it's not the fact that I am getting fewer reviews than I give out - As Dustin points out we get enough reviews to help with any rewrites. (Although good point made above by Dave - Non participants have held up the reviews this time around)

It's more the principle of it - The downright cheek of taking with no intention of giving.

More red tape is never good in my opinion though - we don't want to take anything away from the OWC.

Sometimes newbies are scared to comment, sometimes a reg has the intention of reading and reviewing but life gets in the way - we don't want to punish them. We only really want to target repeat offenders - Those who just selfishly refuse to participate but are happy to receive 20+ reviews in one week.

I like the idea of just putting a * next to an OWC entrant who has entered at least 1 OWC beforehand but has contributed ZERO - Regs can then decide for themselves whether to give detailed feedback on that entrant or not.

BTW if Don or anyone needs/wants any help in the running of these OWC, or anything on the website in general - I'm more than happy to offer my services

Quoted from DustinBowcot We don't really care about the reviews other than whether the reader liked it or not. Those that do it for reviews are pretty desperate writers and likely need the help. What value a review from them anyway?

I disagree, to a point.

Yes, the mug is great. Everyone likes kudos. (The main thing for me is the challenge. I've never written any horror before the OWCs. Probably never would have. But, now I have 2 horror shorts. I like them both.)

But, to your point, I find the reviews very helpful. On one hand, I'm getting technically more precise. It's an aspect of screenwriting I didn't know I would like so much. But, the reviews have helped me recognize the importance of precision. The more precise your writing, the less it distracts from the story.

Beyond that, reviews help you see problems that you can't/didn't see. If you're ignoring reviews because you're only concerned about whether someone likes the script or not, you're depriving yourself of a great tool to improve your writing.

I do get what you're saying: in the end, it's about you and your script. But, I wanted to push back on the "desperate writers" portion of your comment. It's not desperate to pursue feedback. It's smart.

I definitely didn't read your script properly and it was because of the former, Kev. If a script is good, as you said somehwere else, has voice, then I'll process the story far better than somebody who writes events like a boring shopping list.

Perhaps that is where our styles clash. I like to entertain with my writing, you prefer to bore people to death.

Quoted from PKCardinal If you're ignoring reviews because you're only concerned about whether someone likes the script or not, you're depriving yourself of a great tool to improve your writing.

Improve my writing how?

Quoted from leitskev the idea So rather than punish people who don't comment...make it positive. Seek them out and encourage them to comment. If they stay invisible, this will require Don's help. Maybe some OWC ambassadors could be made, people who could contact silent writers and try to draw them out nicely. Pia, Jeff...whoever. Just send them an email, maybe through Don, saying: we're grateful you submitted, please help us out by giving your opinion. No technical knowledge of screenwriting required. Just read and comment on what you like and don't.

This is a very good idea, but I cannot be that person, as everyone hates me and what I have to say.

Something does need to be done for sure.  Like others, it pisses me off to no end to see peeps not adhere to what this is all about - giving out as much or more than you get back.

Quoted from Matthew Taylor It's more the principle of it - The downright cheek of taking with no intention of giving.

Sums up my feelings perfectly.

Dustin, I've already admitted our script was a disaster. Although if you claim to like to entertain people, Libertine is not a good example. I had no idea it was yours. In fact, it was suggested I read it because it was supposedly Bert's. So I tried damn hard to like that script, and it bored me so profoundly that getting through was worse than some of the medical treatments I've been through. It was the reason I stopped reading scripts in the OWC(I eventually pushged myself to come back) But I didn't trash it. I tried to provide constructive comments. I think you did a good job on the dialog. With a few changes in storytelling technique you could do decent work. Providing one line comments feels more like checking a list.

Jeff...actually, you would be perfect. You trash scripts, but you never trash comments, and you always encourage participation and feedback. You've done that for more than a decade. I can't think of anyone more suited to that job.

Quoted from leitskev Jeff...actually, you would be perfect. You trash scripts, but you never trash comments, and you always encourage participation and feedback. You've done that for more than a decade. I can't think of anyone more suited to that job.

In all honesty, as soon as that idea was posed, Jeff was the first person I thought of, too. Even though you (Jeff) have a very direct style, it's not inherently negative. You want people to do better, you want more participation. All the things you'd like from people would result in something positive.

Quoted from leitskev Dustin, I've already admitted our script was a disaster. Although if you claim to like to entertain people, Libertine is not a good example. I had no idea it was yours. In fact, it was suggested I read it because it was supposedly Bert's. So I tried damn hard to like that script, and it bored me so profoundly that getting through was worse than some of the medical treatments I've been through. It was the reason I stopped reading scripts in the OWC(I eventually pushged myself to come back) But I didn't trash it. I tried to provide constructive comments. I think you did a good job on the dialog. With a few changes in storytelling technique you could do decent work. Providing one line comments feels more like checking a list.

But, Kevin, all of this is based on the assumption that I respect your opinion on storytelling. Guess what?

Quoted from leitskev Jeff...actually, you would be perfect.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Jeff was the first person I thought of, too.

Haha you guys must be high.

If somebody doesn't want to read they're not going to read.

Not trying to be a wet blanket, but honestly, this has always been a problem, and no fix you can propose will capture people acting like jerks in their first OWC which is (often) the problem and then they (sometimes) get better next time after people bitch at them.

Quoted from bert Haha you guys must be high. If somebody doesn't want to read they're not going to read. Not trying to be a wet blanket, but honestly, this has always been a problem, and no fix you can propose will capture people acting like jerks in their first OWC which is (often) the problem and then they (sometimes) get better next time after people bitch at them.

Maybe you're right. But, could this possibly be the time to do away with the anonymity thing, then? One would figure, at this point in the site's history, people can be trusted to leave objective reviews, regardless of whether or not they know who's writing a script?

You could always take into consideration the fact that if you know the writer is a veteran of the site, they may not need help in regards to structure, but a more specific targeting of their actual weaknesses, whereas a completely new writer might still be struggling with the basics before people move on to commenting on more advanced things. Maybe?

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Maybe you're right. But, could this possibly be the time to do away with the anonymity thing, then? One would figure, at this point in the site's history, people can be trusted to leave objective reviews, regardless of whether or not they know who's writing a script? You could always take into consideration the fact that if you know the writer is a veteran of the site, they may not need help in regards to structure, but a more specific targeting of their actual weaknesses, whereas a completely new writer might still be struggling with the basics before people move on to commenting on more advanced things. Maybe?

NO!!!!  No one would even read mine if they knew it was mine before they opened it up.

This is not really my business, I'm not a regular anymore. But I think newbs stay quiet because they are shy and think they don't know enough. You can draw some of them out just be reassuring them that their opinions are just as useful as an old veteran writer.

Quoted from DustinBowcot Improve my writing how?

By learning from people who know something you don't. And, I don't just mean the technicalities of writing, I mean: people know stuff about your own script/story that you don't know.

Like, for example, if you're too close to a script and you can't see that one of your characters is acting inconsistently. The same note from several reviewers might alert you to the fact that you're blind to a problem.

Every single writer gets too close to their script. Every single one. And, I'd argue it happens on almost every single script.

Why ignore such a valuable tool as audience feedback? (Unless, of course, you don't care if anyone else reacts well to your work. If you're goal is to only write for yourself, then by all means, ignore the audience. Which is, of course, your right to do.)

Quoted from leitskev Jeff...You trash scripts, but you never trash comments...

I dunno - Jeff wasn't pleased with my comment on El Camino Infierno lol

Quoted from Dreamscale NO!!!!  No one would even read mine if they knew it was mine before they opened it up.

I would. After all, I've only hated one of your scripts in all my time here. =)

Quoted from Matthew Taylor I dunno - Jeff wasn't pleased with my comment on El Camino Infierno lol

HA!!!!  

I was actually shocked.

INT FRONT DOOR

INT FRONT WINDOW

INT MY ARSE    

Quoted from leitskev This is not really my business, I'm not a regular anymore. But I think newbs stay quiet because they are shy and think they don't know enough. You can draw some of them out just be reassuring them that their opinions are just as useful as an old veteran writer.

I've tried leaving comments in the general threads to convince newbs to comment/get involved - The problem is, we don't know who these newbs are until the names are released - by then, it's too late.

I don't think people have a problem with the newbs anyway - Afterward, we can reach out to them and be like "Look, if you enter the next OWC, get involved" - It's more the names that pop up more than once, who are perfectly capable of leaving comments, but refuse to do so.