I voted for my own because I enjoyed reading it the most and it tried to be original.

This was a very tough challenge - and the finished scripts were a tough bunch to read. I always read every script in an OWC I enter but this was too much of a chore for this one.

So I picked out a few randomly. Others I read but didn't post a review. I have no prob with Jeff stopping reads after one page - that's his choice!

OC was the best written script, have to agree with the general consensus on that. But there was none of the writers voice in it. It ticked all the Gothic boxes and that was it. A dew if the period pieces did that.

Anyway good efforts by all in a tough OWC.

Here's what I would say is the ideal way of determining a "winner"(yes, there is no winner, I know). It's pretty much the format used here. Use the sheet for everyone to vote on each script. Then get someone to pick their favorite script from whatever number they are comfortable with. I think in this case Iscripts is picking from the top 3 scorers. If the next one does not have a sponsor, if someone independent could be found to read, say, the top 5 and pick one, that would be cool.

Voting has its flaws, no need to go into them. Ideally, an agent or producer could be found, or even a screenplay professor, or even a coverage reader. That's pretty good practice to try to write with the goal of impressing someone with your script. Just an idea. But we have to accept that it's a lot of thankless work for someone(Don) so whatever works best for him is really best.

Quoted from Dreamscale I'm surprisingly going to have to agree with Janet for a change. Last Call/Stop definitely seemed to be a herd mentality kind of thang. Open Casket was the real deal. Still surprised how peeps question its superiority, and continually knock its story.  How anyone can vote for a poorly written script, or downright unreadable script is way beyond my comprehension. I made a point this OWC, which most of you didn't appreciate - if a script has numerous flaws out of the gate, poor or ridiculous dialogue, logic, or anything else of that nature, I shut it down immediately - just like any "real" reader would do. That only left a handful of scripts that actually were even worth reading. I'm still amazed that a vast number of scripts received a vote - have to wonder if the writers actually voted for tehmselves of their "buddies".  Hmmm...I wonder...

Writing doesn't make it to the screen...good or bad. Story, however, does.  It's as simple as that.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Writing doesn't make it to the screen...good or bad. Story, however, does.  It's as simple as that.

Are you Jessica Alba in disguise? Saying some of the great lines that are written don't make it to screen? I agree that only story makes it to screen, but, IMHO, bad writing just plain don't get read...

James

As a newbie I found it particularly difficult to decide. Mind you it's a good challenge.

I could have voted for mine, and I thought it had a chance, but to me it didn't feel right to do so.

I voted for the OC in the end but like every OWC feel it can be criticisied. To me it was weak on originality but well written and structured, with a good sense of mood.

I made an early case for the first stop and felt it has excellent visuals but is disjointed and needs a bit of work. Then again every script does.

Others scripts that resounded were Sweep (had a dark tone I enjoyed with a tough of mystery), Asylum (loved the idea of ghosts being lonely and wanting to play) but to be honest with 38 a lot of subtleness gets forgotten or lost.

All the best.

Dialogue may make it to the screen (although, as you say, not according to Ms Alba). Not a single other line will in its original form. It's just a camera shot.

I totally agree with you about it not being read...and would never say that good writing is to be frowned upon in a script...but from a certain perspective it's also completely irrelevant.

Pressing play on a camera instantly erases all bad slugs, punctuation, spelling mistakes, awkward phrasing...but the one thing it can't do is improve the premise or the story.

It just depends on what you're looking for, I suppose.

Are you looking for the script that you think has the potential to make the best film...or the script that is the best as the final product?

Maybe they're the same thing, but not necessarily so.

It just depends on the criteria that you are using to select the choice...and subjective opinion of course.

Rick, you are a film maker, and a good one at that. You see things a bit differently. I agree with what you've said, it all becomes irrelevant once the cameras roll. Most of us here are simply(no pun intended) writers. If they want their script to make a run at the gauntlet, it has to be very polished and well-written IMO.

If they know a film maker and are just writing a story for them, let the typos flow so long as the story is good. If you're sitting at your PC with no friends in the biz and trying to break into it with a screenplay, having it polished could only help their chances...

James

A script should be well written. I think it's this idea that if a script violates certain writing and format rules it is therefore poorly written that's the problem.

I just went back to a feature I recently completed and did something that would really piss off a lot of people here: I underlined. Not extensively, very selectively. But there are certain things in the action that I am afraid the fast reader will skip over, things that will cause him to misunderstand larger events. So I underline to help the reader out.

I am seeing this done in most spec scripts I am reading. Some use it too much, but it's not stopping these things from getting sold for large dollars. I seriously doubt that any reader that matters will reject a script because of some underlining.

If I were to send this script to a contest, I would get rid of the underlining. Because the judges in the early rounds, who are minimum wage workers, not industry people, might use something like underlining as an excuse to reject a script and shorten their pile.

Not conforming to some purist version of screenwriting rules is NOT necessarily the same as BAD writing. There were scripts in the OWC that were good writing, just not writing in compliance with the purity test.  

I'm not sure how I'm so routinely misunderstood or misquoted, but hey, what can ya do?

So, for the record, I have never said anything about stopping a read because there is a single orphan, or because there's a missing comma, an awkward line, poor Slugs, lazy writing, weak technical writing, etc.

What I said, and what I say all the time is that there's a certain line in which something is either acceptable or unacceptable, and if there are mistakes on literally every single line, that's obviously unacceptable, and if that script was presented to any actual reader, producer, director, or any other person of authority, it would be shut down very quickly.  Period.

How many mistakes are acceptable?  I guess the answer differs for each individual, and the big problem is that most individuals don't even realize where mistakes are.

Rick, Kevin, and anyone else who cares to listen...if you recieved 1,000 scripts to film, do you really think you'd continue reading any of them if they were obviously poorly written and amateur hour 101?  You think you have time to read 100,000 pages to find which script is really the very best "story"?  No, you won't.  And if you did, and chose a crapfest written script, please understand, it would have to completely be rewritten, pretty much from scratch, meaning, yuo'd pay the original "writer", and give him credit for story, and then hire another screenwriter to rewrite the script, and pay him and give him credit for "written by".

Kevin, I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about in these Spec scripts you're reading, but I bet ya they're not "poorly written" in the big picture.  Sure, I may take issue with certain things they do, but in terms of this OWC, what I was talking about, was very poorly written stuff when I threw in teh towel before page 2.  If I stopped after that, something else wasn't working for me and I didn't want to invest the time it would take to read the next whatever amount of pages.  My pesonal choice.

People think I'm so picky or whatever, but c'mon, peeps, just elarn how to frickin' write and we'll have no problems.  It ain't rocket science...

Quoted from jwent6688 Rick, you are a film maker, and a good one at that. You see things a bit differently.

I'm currently doing script coverage for a local production company.  I consider it part of the job to stop the company from spending X dollars on a script that will, ultimately, suck.  And I've written 'pass' on most of the scripts I've read.

I haven't said that a script should be tossed out for misspellings or for formatting errors.  At the same time, seeing a lot of these mistakes in the first few pages puts me in a bad mood.  This, of course, doesn't help the script.


Phil

Quoted from Dreamscale If I stopped after that, something else wasn't working for me and I didn't want to invest the time it would take to read the next whatever amount of pages.  My personal choice. People think I'm so picky or whatever, but c'mon, peeps, just learn how to frickin' write and we'll have no problems.  It ain't rocket science...

But it is Rocket Science, Jeff. If it were so easy, some of our best minds would certainly be raking it all in as we speak, but... after all...

Nobody is. Nor will they ever be. Why? Because they/you/me are always challenging The Bar.

Can you imagine the bore it would be if we all of a sudden hit "Your Standard"?!

Seriously Jeff. Not just your standard, but my standard?!

Everything would come to some kind of ludicrous grinding halt. There would be no need for any such (what we deem as) necessary communication on the boards. No. We need to fight. We need to have variations in opinion-- That's:

What makes this a home!!!  

Sandra

Quoted from dogglebe I'm currently doing script coverage for a local production company.  I consider it part of the job to stop the company from spending X dollars on a script that will, ultimately, suck.  And I've written 'pass' on most of the scripts I've read. I haven't said that a script should be tossed out for misspellings or for formatting errors.  At the same time, seeing a lot of these mistakes in the first few pages puts me in a bad mood.  This, of course, doesn't help the script. Phil

Hi Phil! Can you take a loke at one of mine? Tanks

Let me clarify in case it was not clear for some reason: I am not suggesting scripts should be poorly written with spelling and grammar mistakes, or formatting that suggests the person has never written a script. What I'm saying is that scripts should not be called "bad writing" because they have a few asides or orphans, or have bold slugs or some other format variation. And in the case of OWC's, I think a little latitude should be given in terms of polishing.

The spec scripts I was referring to, yes, were all reasonably well written as far as I could tell.  But all of them had things right on page one that would drive people here crazy and cause many to stop reading. Not bad writing, but writing choices and styles that conflict with the purist philosophy in vogue here.

One more thing: if someone is reviewing scripts here, and they disagree with a scripts writing or formatting, and mention that in review...great! It helps the writer and everyone else. I'm just saying things like that should not be what stops a script from being read. Bad writing...yes, that can stop a read. But we're not grading scripts like grade school papers. We're looking at scripts that would make good film.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Pressing play on a camera instantly erases all bad slugs, punctuation, spelling mistakes, awkward phrasing...but the one thing it can't do is improve the premise or the story.

After yesterday's pitch event, I couldn't agree more with this thinking.
I shopped around my new feature at Sherwood Oaks.
I got a very favorable response to the premise from producers and managers.
The twenty somethings, not so much. But the older crowd was on board.
Of course they want to look over the script too. But that was an after thought.

I got the distinct impression they're looking more for "bulletproof" premises.
That thing that puts a new spin on a classic structure/scenario.
They're searching for that thing that makes the "game" feel new again.
It was such a rush being in the room with folks like that.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted from dogglebe I'm currently doing script coverage for a local production company.  I consider it part of the job to stop the company from spending X dollars on a script that will, ultimately, suck.  And I've written 'pass' on most of the scripts I've read. Phil

Phil,

I'm doing a similar deal out here, and developing some producer's material too.
And you've touched upon a critical thing most don't.
When I provide notes on a script, I act like it's my money being spent.
It's a simple, but universal sentiment folks really respond to.
Treat everything like the cash was coming out of your pocket.
Especially on scripts being sent out to agencies after you vetted them.

I've never put down a script with sloppy format/grammar from the company.
However, it does make it harder for the writer to win me over.
And I make sure the producer knows that.
That agent over at CAA is going to be much less tolerant than me.
That reason alone is why you can't have those kind of mistakes.
No agency is going to shop around something like that.

Regards,
E.D.