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.
I have to apply an industrial strength review approach to all submissions, be it fifteen or fifty. The process I use is what I imagine any producer would utilize some variation of.
You wanna make a film product for market X.
You put out a call for content submissions.
They got what they got.
You get what you get.
Doesn't matter b'cause it' gonna get changed from script to screen according to the resources I have, not the resources the writer can imagine.
However, once a basic premise and construct can be selected then writer and producer can collaborate on matching story details to resources.
Then I gotta get busy making something.
How do you guys think a producer's shop is run? What do you think happens when you hit the send button?
Down to 1 script left to read tonight then I'm done with all of them. The only one I didn't read was Gary's. Nothing against the guy but I noticed he's not reviewing any one else's so....
I've read them all. I've made notes. I think I might have 4 reviews left. So if I haven't got to you yet, I apologize, but it's coming.
Overall, I'm really impressed. A great variety in focus and premise. Some were really out there in X-Files land.
Some, surprisingly, broke the guidelines/parameters. And some even managed to avoid shark attacks.
That said, this was great fun writing, reading, and reviewing. There's a lot of exciting talent here.
Thanks to all those reviewers. I've learned tons from previous OWC, and this is one was no different.
For 1st time entries, shying away due to harsh criticism, I'd say take it for what is... and impress us next time. There are few spots out there to get honest and thoughtful anonymous feedback.
Yeah Kev...there are def some writers with their own preconceptions. Instead of accepting someone's vision and storyline and making a suggestion on how they might make it better, they put their own spin on what they think your story should be. Yuck.
Some of the board members are incredibly intuitive at pulling out the good and bad aspects of a script in just one read, and that shows a serious talent. I myself, have to read the entire piece, unplug, take the dog for a walk, have a smoke (a real one, not an e-cig) and really think about the underlying message the writer tried to convey. Unfortunately, this can take me way out in left field with an obtuse analogy of the unconscious story and, when that ends up as feedback, can easily be misconstrued as 'negative' feedback.
Reviewing another writer's work is not only extremely challenging, it can very easily be taken out of context and convey a completely different message than what one might have initially intended, and with a point of no return once the post goes live. As time goes on, however, I believe writers not only become better writers; they find better ways to convey ideas, without conveying their own ideology.
... Reviewing another writer's work is not only extremely challenging, it can very easily be taken out of context and convey a completely different message than what one might have initially intended, and with a point of no return once the post goes live. ...
Hmm, some things can't be undone... (how philosophical is that?) but some things can! Remember, you can always edit your posts and/or delete them and try again if you have any regrets, or thought you could have better phrased feedback etc.
I commented on all of them. Only the new guy's I left without a read. As has been said, he wasn't contributing. If I have left anyone else's out then let me know.
I gave four considers this time and there would have been a few more had the writers stuck to the theme. Some really excellent stories... but it's unfair to the writers that stick rigidly to the theme to vote for a script that doesn't include a rogue shark, so... no matter how good the story, I've had to give them a pass. But still, there are some very inventive shark-themed scripts... and even one excellent script with a new stylisation that I also loved, but the shark didn't belong in it. That story should definitely have some work done on it. Not sure of the cost of such a film, even if it would ever be filmed, but it was a great read, even inspirational.
I think the quality of entries has been better than the time travel OWC over all... aside form mine, which I've already admitted is the worst thing I've ever written. I don't like shark attack films, or piranha's... any water creature.... but upon saying that, I suppose as a shark attack story it isn't bad. It could do with a rewrite but I can't be arsed as I have so much other stuff to write. I just enjoyed the challenge. Thanks to all involved in setting it up.
Just voted. There were a few I didn't read. Sorry about that.
There were several that did not meet the requirements, but which were strong efforts, so I gave them a 'consider'.
There were several that had stories that felt incomplete, but which the writing was so strong they deserved a consider, and got one.
No script got a recommend. And really, considering how tough it should be to get a recommend, it's no surprise that people couldn't achieve it in a week.
For me, a recommend meant the story: a) more or less met the criteria, and b) was a compelling story that felt close to fully realized.
The OWC was above average for the 3 years I've been drinking in this joint, in terms of writing anyway. It was a hard topic, and no one hit it out of the park. I almost reached first on an error but tripped over a slug on the way. I learned a lot from the scripts and the comments I read, so it was worth the experience. Thanks!
I can also say, probably for the first time, that I did not know the authorship of a single one of the scripts when I wrote my reviews. And no one knew mine.
No script got a recommend. And really, considering how tough it should be to get a recommend, it's no surprise that people couldn't achieve it in a week.
Wow. Harsh.
Pass: 14 Consider: 6 Rec: 3
...but this is from a writers perspective - I might not feel the same should I be asked to put either hard cash or time behind them.
I agree there's been some real quality this time round, better than a few of the previous ones. Congrats to everyone who entered, (expect the skivers who never read a thing...)
I would add a catefoty c) to my list of what would get a recommend. The first two were to meet the criteria and to have a compelling and mostly complete story. But I would say that if a concept was blow me away compelling, even if it didn't meet the first two conditions, I would give it a recommend. But hard to glow someone away with the Jaws thing. Which I'm not knocking...it was indeed a challenge!
...but this is from a writers perspective - I might not feel the same should I be asked to put either hard cash or time behind them.
Which is exactly the vantage point that I've read OWC submissions from for the last few years, and am only now able and willing to self-commit some serious time + multiple favor call ins + festival submission fees to pursue.
I acknowledge the almost exclusive POV here is toward prodco readers and contest winning/placement, so I always feel both frustrated and bemused by the prevalent items of corrective concern.
IMHO, there's frequently little regard for actually making a film from what's been submitted and often they are a showcase for the writer's ability to put a novel into screenay format.
Voting for the best short novel in screenplay format is like voting for the best looking fake breasts. It completely disregards consideration for what the screenplay/breasts are actually for!
"Well, they're very nice looking breasts in that evening gown, Ray." Oh, f#ck me!
If/when I vote for what I see as the most producible screenplays I feel like I'm kinda just wasting votes.
And then there's consideration of the story's fundamental construct vs. execution which with a little rewriting effort renders a wholly satisfactory product. So, voting for "as is" submissions also seems kinda goofy.
B!tch, b!tch, b!tch.
F#ckit.
Obviously I'm bewildered. I'm over thinking it or am just ignorant. Will someone please just tell me what lens to look at these gems at so that I can at least feel like I'm not wasting votes?
A) Exclude consideration for those submissions that didn't have a rogue shark (the letter of the law) or those that presented a good story inspired by the given criteria (the spirit of the law.) Anal? Not anal?
B) Best looking ugly girl in her Sunday best (as is) or natural babe in sweats and a T-shirt (with a little effort)?
C) And pretty much accept that we all know none of these will ever be filmed, so just toss budget concerns out the window? We do? Yes/no?
Pages: 
Author
Jaws OWC What's Next?
Logged
The only one I didn't read was Gary's. Nothing against the guy but I noticed he's not reviewing any one else's so....
but some things can! Remember, you can always edit your posts and/or delete them and try again if you have any regrets, or thought you could have better phrased feedback etc. 
Locked Board