Layla, I don't take anything personal unless someone is blatantly attacking me.  I understand you are not, so that's not an issue.

The only thing I take offense to is that you're not doing your part here, on SS.  This place works on 1 very simple principle - Quid Pro Quo - you get, you ive back.  You're not doing that and IMO, there's no excuse for that.

You posted a script here for this OWC.  You'll probably get fedback from at least 20, if not more, peps.  You need to return those favors.  And why wouldn't you?  You're an accomplished writer with multiple awards and competition success.

You know what I'm saying?  You want to play the game, you need to play the game.

Give back to the peeps.   Cool?  Hope so.  I never mean offense to anyone, again, unless they literally ask for it.

Hope to see some RadioShea89 reviews popping up.

Peace out.

52 entries and about 12, maybe 15 readers at the moment and some of them haven't entered!


So, if you entered and feel worried about submitting what you think, DONT WORRY, take a chance and say what you think.

Honest opinions are always welcome....just ask Dreampants  


Ps - anybody else get a kick out of someone spelling dreamscale wrong when they are having a spat with him. Seems to happen a few times a year.

Pps - that's not having a go at anybody, hope to see you around Radio, the more the better.

As I wrote, reviews are in the queue in my Word doc (7 so far). Posted one already.

20 scripts down...35 to go!

I spend the first couple of days reading from the bottom of the deck. As we get further into the week, I have to narrow it more to the ones that have been filtered and seem to be decent. I'm probably going to do 3 or 4 a day, so I might not get them all read before the reveal.

I've read the discussion above. As far as grading, I'm with LC: it's pretentious and serves little purpose. I'd rather people just leave constructive thoughts on the story. That kind of feedback is useful.

As far as the obligation to read a story to the end, I agree with Jeff that there is none...though I have read every story to the end so far. None of the stories blew me away, but they all were easy enough to read and follow.

I do think that if you only read one page and stop, it's unfair and nonconstructive to post that fact. Especially if it's the first review. Because that kind of thing makes it unlikely the script will get a lot of reads, as people seeing that will be turned away from reading. I think it's especially egregious to do this kind of thing simply because the script violates one's inflexible notion of "correct" screenwriting. The screenwriting world is rapidly moving past these arbitrary "rules", and is moving in the direction of emphasizing a more common sense approach. Take a gander at blacklist scripts if you don't believe me.

Good OWC so far! Stories are all clear and easy to follow.

Quoted from KevinLenihan I do think that if you only read one page and stop, it's unfair and nonconstructive to post that fact.

I disagree.

I think it's tremendously useful from a writer's POV to know if a "pro" reader puts down their screenplay X-pages into it.

A non-reply provides no actionable information to the writer.

A "I determined your story was unsuitable for my production company's criteria" or "I have fifty of these to read this week, your formatting is atrocious and your disregard for the craft are so disruptive I cannot get past page X. Please come back to ride this ride when you grow up." will provide an emotionally mature writer more than... nothing.

Wouldn't you want to know why agents won't represent your work?
Wouldn't you want to know why beginning director/producers pass over your submissions?

I wanna know why.
I respect a difference of taste. Fine. Cool. No one makes everyone happy.
But if a pattern emerges then... you at least know you gotta work on something.

Quoted Text Especially if it's the first review. Because that kind of thing makes it unlikely the script will get a lot of reads, as people seeing that will be turned away from reading. I think it's especially egregious to do this kind of thing simply because the script violates one's inflexible notion of "correct" screenwriting.

Ah, and this is where we separate the enthusiasts from the workers.

As I suggested above, if a "pro" reader has to burn through twenty submissions during a 8hr workday then each and every writer had better keep within generally accepted industry format and construct norms.

Because tomorrow that reader has to read another twenty.

And the next day another twenty.

And the next day another twenty.

Every [expletive] day that film producer's college lit major intern has gotta determine which of these agent submitted screenplay's are gonna pass/fail.

And they do this week after week after week after week for months.

We need to read these screenplays as such and in this mindset.

"That's not fair! My story idea REALLY IS fantastic! You can't disqualify me over petty format issues!"
Uh... Yes I can. Watch me.

We can't slow 'em down. We can't.
We gotta help them maintain their pace.

SOMEONE ELSE'S REVIEW IS PROFESSIONALLY IRRELEVANT.

Gotta disregard that. Largely.
You may wanna consider it because maybe they see something you didn't, but after reading a few thousand of these you develop your own sense of A) what the producer wants to see, B) what the producer's budget will support, and C) what I wanna see.

A screenwriting enthusiast has the love of craft to read every submission to the last FADE OUT, left or right justified.

A "pro" minded reader log-jams at the first couple typos, a non-engaging page one or two, and has zero problem with passing on a submission by page ten, easy peazy. He/she's go too d@mn many of these to read.

Same thing at film festivals: I promise the reviewers can tell in the first five minutes that the whole rest of the feature film is gonna be sh!t. Punch it @ the ten minute mark. Next.

Applies to screenplays, too!:

And I agree, you anxious nubes gotta quit outting yourselves a few days into this.
Good Lord.

Pre-mature divulge-ation.

Ray, all of that would be true...if...these were features.

And if...these were pro readers. Neither applies.

If someone stops reading my feature, I ALWAYS want to know what page. I've asked that question many times. I thank the reader for getting to where he did, and I ask where he stopped and why.

But this is the OWC thread. We are talking about OWCs being reviewed by amateurs, not features being sifted through for possible production material. Apples to oranges, sir.

A script written in 7 days is not expected to be perfect....a feature sent to a studio IS expected to be highly polished.

And the OWC is a prid quo affair. You read others and expect others to read yours. If the very first review says "stopped after page 1", it discourages other readers from reading. Why should that writer read others scripts then?

And these are NOT pro readers here, though there is really no such thing. I've seen people put down scripts because the Fade In was on the "wrong" side. I've seen people stop because they don't like bold slugs or because they don't believe in flashbacks or wrylies or orphans. Paid studio readers DO NOT put down scripts for those reasons.

Ray, your comments are perfectly relevant for a feature posted here. They are perfectly irrelevant for an OWC script. And I have seen some of the scripts where this has happened, and they are written and formatted fine...they just don't happen to match up with the pet peeves of the reviewer. Someone shouldn't bring pet peeves to this, especially in matters that have nothing to do with story or competence, but rather were the choice of the writer. Pro readers don't bring peeves like that. They do their job.

Quoted from KevinLenihan I have seen some of the scripts where this has happened, and they are written and formatted fine...

Ditto.

There are 50+ scripts.  There is little need for a "check in" post on every single script if 50% of your comments are to let everyone know you opened the file, spent 30 seconds, and shut it down.  Why?

If you intend to read alot, let your silence on some scripts serve as its own message.

My thoughts.

Fair enough, Kevin.  

God almighty that's a lot to read.

Got the flu at the moment, suuuuucks.  Will try to cure myself with some OWC scripts this week.  No deadline on the reviews?  If not, good, gives me some time.

Oh, Thank God.
There's only 49 to read and evaluate.

Code 1 The Tent 2 The Neighbor 3 The Elixir of Youth 4 And He Spoke A Darkened Heart 5 New Salem 6 Magick In The Machine 7 Blackwood 8 The P.R. Meeting 9 Where The Lost Souls Thrive 10 Aleister Crowley vs Heinrich Himmler 11 Willow's Bewitchment 12 Wicca 13 ACT IV, SCENE 1 14 Guilty of Blood 15 A Bill To Pay 16 Heed The Slighted 17 The Time I Don't Exist 18 Times Are Changing 19 The Good Neighbor 20 What Comes Around 21 The Doorway To Hell 22 Evocation 23 Familiar 24 The Grieving Spell 25 Samhain, Romanian Style 26 Chariots in the Cyanide 27 Be Careful What You Wish For 28 Mountain Hexer 29 Where The Wild Thyme Blows 30 The Trial 31 The Addicts of Eastwick 32 Forward Then Backward 33 The Rift 34 History Lesson 35 Immersion 36 Test Trial 37 Harm None Do As Ye Will 38 Caesarean Fiction 39 Descent of the Maiden 40 One Evil Man 41 Blind Casting 42 Heart Attacks 43 Good Girl 44 Small Town Lies 45 Red Hook 46 The Clearing 47 Witches Can't Fly 48 The Withered 49 Hex

55 entries, though.  
6 pissers?

Quoted from Don 5 did not meet the requirements (too long, too late, no witches or warlocks, not horror) 1 submitted without an email address

Unfortunate, but understood. Waaaa...  

Unfortunately I didn't have the time to enter the OWC but I'm gonna make an effort to read as many scripts as I can.

Best of luck too everyone who entered!

Quoted from RayW Oh, Thank God. There's only 49 to read and evaluate. Code 1 The Tent 2 The Neighbor 3 The Elixir of Youth 4 And He Spoke A Darkened Heart 5 New Salem 6 Magick In The Machine 7 Blackwood 8 The P.R. Meeting 9 Where The Lost Souls Thrive 10 Aleister Crowley vs Heinrich Himmler 11 Willow's Bewitchment 12 Wicca 13 ACT IV, SCENE 1 14 Guilty of Blood 15 A Bill To Pay 16 Heed The Slighted 17 The Time I Don't Exist 18 Times Are Changing 19 The Good Neighbor 20 What Comes Around 21 The Doorway To Hell 22 Evocation 23 Familiar 24 The Grieving Spell 25 Samhain, Romanian Style 26 Chariots in the Cyanide 27 Be Careful What You Wish For 28 Mountain Hexer 29 Where The Wild Thyme Blows 30 The Trial 31 The Addicts of Eastwick 32 Forward Then Backward 33 The Rift 34 History Lesson 35 Immersion 36 Test Trial 37 Harm None Do As Ye Will 38 Caesarean Fiction 39 Descent of the Maiden 40 One Evil Man 41 Blind Casting 42 Heart Attacks 43 Good Girl 44 Small Town Lies 45 Red Hook 46 The Clearing 47 Witches Can't Fly 48 The Withered 49 Hex 55 entries, though.   6 pissers?

5 did not meet the requirements (too long, too late, no witches or warlocks, not horror)
1 submitted without an email address

Don

One other point that hasn't been made yet...and even though I haven't been here long I have seen this at work even with the few things I've posted:

If there's criticism that may be too harsh or unwarrented, this community ends up balancing it out. Either someone responds to harsh criticism and there's a debate with those that disagree...or there's positives left by someone else that appreciated the script more without engaging earlier comments.

I've learned not to underestimate this community's ability to disagree each other (all things considered, I think everyone gets along here pretty well...or maybe we just have the best moderators on the internet).

Regardless, things tend to balance themselves out.

If something is universally panned here, then it likely got what it deserved and the author needs to figure out why it didn't work.

Anyway, I learned to trust the feedback I received here and take everything in, good and bad.

On a lot of the scripts I've been reading or glancing at, I've seen a few reviewers talk about "orphans" consistently.

Can someone please give me an example of what one is, and maybe show how to correct it? I would like to avoid doing this myself in future writing.