Just my opinion, and it will piss him off, but those are very helpful notes by Jeff. That's why it's worth putting up with all his nonsense! Ok, begin Jeff-rant...now.

Although I'm going to disagree with Jeff on one point... Only because I got marked down for it in an exam once and it pissed me off lol

You can use they and their as a singular if the gender is unknown (i.e instead of he/she)

Yes, that is true, and it's become very useful to me.

And I certainly don't agree with Jeff on MANY things. I could write a script on that. Oh, wait, Dave already did.

Check this out.  Note which words it works with, and why...


https://www.lexico.com/en/grammar/using-they-and-them-in-the-singular

The key thing, Jeff, is gender unknown. Because English doesn't have a proper word.

Quoted from leitskev The key thing, Jeff, is gender unknown. Because English doesn't have a proper word.

We're not told the gender, but it's not supposed to be a secret, nor is it because the character has a gender issue.

In fact, by writing it the way this writer chose to, no one knows the gender...and if the Snitch is onscreen, the gender should be quite obvious, right?

Oh, ok. I was thinking in general terms. I supposed that's true in a movie we'd know.

But is it not to leave the gender open? Rather than keep it a secret

As in, a throw away characters gender is unimportant so making them gender neutral leaves it open for casting of the role to be of either sex

Quoted from Matthew Taylor But is it not to leave the gender open? Rather than keep it a secret As in, a throw away characters gender is unimportant so making them gender neutral leaves it open for casting of the role to be of either sex

They will do that anyway. For reading purposes, it is better to be more specific as the reader needs visuals to continue reading. Having them stumble like this isn't good. I looked over it because of the time issue. I like the idea more than the actual execution... but for 72 hours, I can't really complain.

Quoted from DustinBowcot They will do that anyway. For reading purposes, it is better to be more specific as the reader needs visuals to continue reading. Having them stumble like this isn't good. I looked over it because of the time issue. I like the idea more than the actual execution... but for 72 hours, I can't really complain.

Agreed.

And, for what it's worth, I think the story is quite good, but the execution and complete lack of comedy drag it way down.

This really evoked a great tone and the had the sort of Victorian Penny Dreadful feel to it, great job there.

Rhyming dialogue, I'm not the worlds biggest fan but this didn't feel overly forced and flowed pretty well.

So I really enjoyed it... but I didn't see any real comedy, or attempt at it.

Quoted from DustinBowcot They will do that anyway. For reading purposes, it is better to be more specific as the reader needs visuals to continue reading. Having them stumble like this isn't good. I looked over it because of the time issue. I like the idea more than the actual execution... but for 72 hours, I can't really complain.

Well noted. Apologies Jeff, I take it back. Thank you both. At the risk of sounding like an SS cheerleader, this is why I love this place, really helping me to learn.

Apologies writer for slightly hijacking your thread

Quoted from Matthew Taylor Well noted. Apologies Jeff, I take it back. Thank you both. At the risk of sounding like an SS cheerleader, this is why I love this place, really helping me to learn. Apologies writer for slightly hijacking your thread

No apology required.

Hi Writer,

Rhymed dialogue. Interesting choice.

Petty errors aside, the writing is good and you did a great job with the tone and the atmosphere of Victorian London, well done.

The comedy is thin, but there's some, mostly ironic moments and lines, so I'm going to say that it fits the parameters. But you put me in a difficult position.

Overall, I think it worked for me. The story flowed nicely and I liked Henry as a character.

Good job!
David

This is basically the origin story for a legend, sewer covered, whistle covered... though there's nothing inherent in the subject matter that makes this a comedy.

But you have this Narrator. It's some super serious newscaster or NFL Films-style voice saying silly stuff, reminiscent of the original The Grinch Who Stole Christmas or the famous BBC news story about Spaghetti Trees that aired one fateful April Fool's Day.

My concern for this script is the story arc. Either it's a setup and we didn't get to the inciting incident yet, or the story was finished half-way through and we had a really long denouement. Coupled with the long intro before getting to the sewer, that leaves hardly any story at all. A tunnel-full of atmosphere, but only two things actually happened.

There's a logic hole, but that's par for the course in a 72-hour dash to write... if a snitch can summon the police to arrest a tosher, why can't a snitch summon the police to chase/capture/confront a monster? Toshing is the more serious offense? Londoners are just used to The Doctor handling the weird stuff? I kept waiting for someone to come after the whistling pig man, but it never happened.