Felt I had to post this, to provide the information for anyone else considering using the coverage group Screenplayreaders.com

A few details about my past experience with them.  I have used them three times now.  The first two resulted in one pass, and one consider with revisions.  (While I emphatically don't agree with the reasons for the pass, I respect the reader's difference in opinion and didn't question it on a general quality level.)  

After the consider, I revised the script in question per the recommendations and resubmitted.  (Unfortunately, I was told that the original reader was no longer with the company, and it was therefore necessary to use a different reader for the follow-up review.)

I do wish to *also* point out that my dealings with Brian - the owner of Screenplayreaders - has up until now been 100% positive.  In our correspondence, he always seemed extremely nice, and cheerful.

Then I got the last review.  First, the script went from consider to pass.  (After having made the suggested recommendations.)  Obviously, there's a lack of consistency within the agency there.  While this *could* partially be due to a simple difference in opinion and/or taste between two individual readers, the QUALITY of the coverage was absolutely horrific, including:

* Actual errors in the script summation
* Extremely disjointed writing and a typo
* Complete omission of discussion of the script's theme, and the last several scenes

I received this coverage this past weekend (at least one day after the 72 hour deadline that they guarantee.)

Even more distressing, I wrote an understanding, thoughtful email to Brian about this when I received the coverage, and asked that he review this reader's output in the interest of quality service.  I waited several days before posting this, in case someone was reviewing the script prior to responding.  I did not receive a response or even a confirmation that I had written.  

Make of this what one will.  If anyone's interested in obtaining a copy of the coverage so they can judge for themselves, let me know.  

Cheers,

--J

I would use Script Savvy. Their mid-level package is very affordable and the coverage is quite detailed and introspective, plus you get the extra added bonus of being entered into their contest...

Quoted from wonkavite Then I got the last review.  First, the script went from consider to pass.  (After having made the suggested recommendations.)  Obviously, there's a lack of consistency within the agency there.  While this *could* partially be due to a simple difference in opinion and/or taste between two individual readers

Janet,

I've used Screenplay Readers in the past with mixed to good results.
And I've been in the same CONSIDER back to PASS scenario.
It's a slippery slope to claim a lack of consistency based upon your "grade".
There's no "company standard" coverage readers use.
It is purely suggestive and the "rules" are different with each reader.

I found myself dangerously close to the "the fault is with them" thinking.
But, I realized, I was being foolish. This is how it is, get used to it.
It's the same when a producer has one of his readers go over your script.
The only difference here is that the AUTHOR is paying for the service.
There are no textbook guidelines readers use to base their opinions and ratings.

Coverage is a hurdle with no set rules, it's a necessary evil in many cases.
So, why fight the hurdle? Learn what you can from it, then jump it.
Jeff can personally attest that I got "rude coverage" once.
But, once I settled, there was plenty to learn from the snarkyness.
And snot nosed interns looking for a leg up will trash your script if it helps their career.
Best get used to the game now, when it doesn't cost you anything but a little cash.

Quoted from wonkavite the QUALITY of the coverage was absolutely horrific, including: * Actual errors in the script summation * Extremely disjointed writing and a typo * Complete omission of discussion of the script's theme, and the last several scenes

I've gotten errors in the synopsis many times.
My first reaction was to put the blame on the readers, too.
However, after marinating in my brain for a few days, an idea occurred to me.
"What if part of the errors were due to me not telling a concise story?"
Once I approached the dreaded synop with that attitude, my scripts got better.

As to disjointed writing and lack of theme mention, that sounds lame.
You should be able to glean some useful criticisms, disjointed writing makes it harder.

Quoted from wonkavite I received this coverage this past weekend (at least one day after the 72 hour deadline that they guarantee.)

The 72 hours thing is "three working days", not including weekends.
I have submitted scripts on Friday afternoon and gotten them on Monday morning.
But, their official work schedule is Mon - Fri, 9 to 4.

Quoted from wonkavite Even more distressing, I wrote an understanding, thoughtful email to Brian about this when I received the coverage, and asked that he review this reader's output in the interest of quality service.  I waited several days before posting this, in case someone was reviewing the script prior to responding.  I did not receive a response or even a confirmation that I had written.

That sounds very unlike the Brian I've had personal dealings with.
He's been very cooperative and courteous when I've had issues to address.
Even gave me free coverage due to a delay on their end over a long holiday weekend.

Quoted from wonkavite Make of this what one will.  If anyone's interested in obtaining a copy of the coverage so they can judge for themselves, let me know. Cheers, --J

Sure, e-mail me the coverage, I'll take a gander.

Regards,
E.D.

I'm going to jump in on Wonkavite's side here simply because I received, for my first GA coverage, a fairly illiterate, error-filled piece of coverage as well. I think we can all be dispassionate enough about our work and step back far enough to judge when the "judger" is someone who's capable of judging and when they are not..

I used Screenplayreaders once. My opinion is mixed, the experience interesting. They gave my script a "consider" and used mostly positive language. The overall analysis, for the price, was probably fairly good. They did identify the main weakness in the script, as well as its strengths.

One thing disturbed me though. The reader seemed to think, based his remark, that a town mayor works for the federal government. I can't picture any American thinking that, no matter how ignorant of American government. So I believe the reading is outsourced. Which is fine, but they should be up front about that, if it's the case.

I sent Brian a very polite message, thanking them for the work, but questioning the outsourcing issue. The result he was so angry he banned me from their company! And I mean my email was extremely polite, and not at all accusatory. Makes me think I hit a nerve.

You get what you pay for, and they probably do a pretty good job for the price. How much that coverage is worth when you're trying to market your script I have no idea.

Quoted from ajr I'm going to jump in on Wonkavite's side here simply because I received, for my first GA coverage, a fairly illiterate, error-filled piece of coverage as well. I think we can all be dispassionate enough about our work and step back far enough to judge when the "judger" is someone who's capable of judging and when they are not..

I agree with you, Anthony, in principle.
However, I maintain that there were still good things to be gleaned, in my cases.
To me, it's not a black and white issue. I don't subscribe to that thinking.
I learn what I can, apply it, then chalk it up to experience, and move on.

I'm not against Janet in the slightest on this issue.
I've been in similar situations and was upset at first.
I'm recommending a circumspect approach to get what you can out of it.

I'd be shocked if there was nothing to take away from the coverage, zero.
But who knows, could be the case with this one, hopefully, I'll see for myself.

Screenplay Readers is fast and cheap, comparatively in the marketplace.
It can be a trade off, more expensive services may be better.
Script Savvy looks good, but takes a while to return the feedback.

I'm surprised that Brian hasn't gotten back to Janet over her concerns.
He was very good about that in my case.

It's frustrating when you feel you've been judged by some snot nose, agreed.
But, I hear stories like that all the time for folks in the industry.
I say, get used to it now when it only costs a few bucks and not valuable contacts, IMO.

Regards,
E.D.

Script Savvy gets it back to you in no more than 30 days if I recall - they have to because you are part of the contest. It's probably a lot faster than that in reality. And believe me, their coverage is phenomenal - very detailed. And rather than giving a "consider" or "pass", they rate in 6 different categories from 1 to 10, which I find more helpful than a generic "pass/fail" rating...

Quoted from ajr Script Savvy gets it back to you in no more than 30 days if I recall - they have to because you are part of the contest. It's probably a lot faster than that in reality. And believe me, their coverage is phenomenal - very detailed. And rather than giving a "consider" or "pass", they rate in 6 different categories from 1 to 10, which I find more helpful than a generic "pass/fail" rating...

I did look over their rating system, looks solid, agreed.
When I'm not in a time crunch prepping for a pitch, I'll try them.
Thanks for the info!

E.D.

I got a CONSIDER for Finders Keepers from them. Did a rewrite with the suggestions that were offered and sent it in again and got a PASS. It left me a little confused to be honest.

I have used them 5 times by now for various scripts (no, I don't post everything I write here) and think they are pretty decent over all for the money.

Absolute best and valuable comments come from the members here though. Here you get to hear everyone's thoughts. Everything from I hated it to just my kinda film!!  

Hey Brett -

Will definitely send you the coverage - I think you'll see what I mean when you read it.  

Like I mentioned before - my first "pass" with them I don't fault them for.  (Don't agree with the reason, but wouldn't critique it as shoddy work per-se.)

I made a concerted point to ensure that the quality was actually bad, vs. my writer's ego getting in the way.  This coverage?  Significantly poor quality.  Regarding the omissions.  At least three pivotal scenes at the end, completely erased in the summary.

Re: the deadline: took the weekend timeframe into account.  It was still late.

I had a wonderful time corresponding with Brian, too.  But received no response this time...not even a confirmation that he had received the email.  And I waited several days for a response, prior to posting this.

It's a shame.   I had hoped for better, considering that even for $59, one should get fair value.

Brett - PM me your email?  I'll send it along.

Script Savvy's mid-level coverage is also $60 - so it appears the only difference is that you have to wait for it a bit longer.

And as they say, some things are worth waiting for... (0:

Here's someone else I've used:

http://www.hollywoodscript.com/

Much more expensive, however he's an industry insider, and you get notes plus a phone conversation with him...

I think we have to keep in mind that it takes, I would say, at least 2 to 3 hours to thoroughly read a script and then write useful notes. In fact, if someone can do that in 3 hours that's pretty good, I think. So the reader is getting, what, $10 to $15 per hour?

I agree with Pia, the reviews are better here...but the coverage reviews, even the cheap ones, do a good job of staying focused on what's most important.

Here's another tip - you don't always have to pay a coverage service for coverage quotes. IF you were able to get a favorable remark, in writing, from an industry professional of some note, ask them if they would mind if you used it in your queries and press kit.

And though I've never used them, this is one of the sites I hear is well respected in the industry (I forget the other site now!):

http://www.scriptshark.com/

Only for the daring, and those who have a bit of money to spend...