Quoted from ReneC I only leave a review on my own script if I also leave a review on every other script, and then I use my own review to echo some of the more constructive notes I already received on it, good and bad. I don't try to influence the readers or defend the script, I try to play a zero sum game.

solid approach

Quoted from eldave1 What I don't care for is defense (different than correction).

Yes, I know what you mean. That's something I couldn't do.

Quoted from Dreamscale Yeah, I'm with Alex. Obviously, I have alot to say...and alot more I want to say, but I'm beating my head against a brick wall and no matter what I say or how I say it, everyone jumps in to disagree. If you guys and gals are cool with how this is playing out, then God Bless you all, and keep enjoying it.  I won't bother anyone here again with my ramblings. Peace out.

For what it's worth, I enjoy your ramblings, Dude.

Comments make absolutely no difference. If they did Jeff would have been number one as he gave himself a very extensive review and gave himself top marks in all criteria.

Noone cares what other people think.

Did my gushing review of Anthony's Sherlock Holmes story that was the first post ensure he got top place? Did my explaining the jokes in Gary's script help him?

Did saying that Jeff's world building was near enough pro level get him more votes?

Noone gives a fuck. They've got their own opinions.

Oh, I strongly disagree Rick. Some people don't care...but MANY readers are STRONGLY influenced by the first 2 or 3 comments. If I was inclined to game this, and I never have been, I would get a friend to leave the first comment...and make sure the first sentence is very positive.

There's no question a reader's perception is much influenced by their expectation. No question. If a screenplay wins an OWC, and then someone reads it after the challenge knowing it won, it very much can color the perception. Not always, but it can.  

Especially if the script is challenging. For example, if you read a Sorkin script, they often are laborious to read in the early going, but you're willing to plow ahead because you trust the writer. But if you're plowing through contest scripts, and one is difficult or complicated, you'll be quicker to conclude the writer is not competent and the story stinks.

Quoted from leitskev Especially if the script is challenging. For example, if you read a Sorkin script, they often are laborious to read in the early going, but you're willing to plow ahead because you trust the writer. But if you're plowing through contest scripts, and one is difficult or complicated, you'll be quicker to conclude the writer is not competent and the story stinks.

Hey, everyone is supposed to shit on “Image Problem.” Leave poor “Crappy Job” alone

Here’s a little story that will only interest a few people (but this is true of my scripts so why should this be any different?).

Many moons ago, in a far off land and internet, there existed a site called MoviePoet which several of us on this site were members and contributors (Pia, Kham, Rick, maybe even you as well?). Here’s how that site operated. On the first day of each month, you had a new contest with new parameters. There was never more than 5 pages allowed except on the feature contest.

Once the deadline for entries passed, you could go in and start reviewing, but here was the part that I thought worked well. You were randomly assigned a script and you had to write a review with a minimum number of characters (I think maybe it was 500?). Once that review was submitted you would then be required to vote on it then and there. One to five just like now. Once the vote was submitted, you were assigned another, and so on, until you ran out of scripts in that contest to review. You couldn’t see any reviews from other people until the contest was complete, and then all reviews would be revealed.  I think you had winners and runners up, and honorable mentions went to any script with an average score above 3.0.

What I like about it was that you couldn’t see other reviews so no one could be swayed by any previous reviews and you couldn’t puff up your own script. It also made you come up with more than a one sentence review.  I just felt like it was a very natural manner of having the contest reviewed and scored. The site no longer exists, as the guy who ran it (Chris Messineo) is basically teaching a film school now and it takes up all his time.

Don’t get me wrong, I still love this site and recommend it to all my fellow writers. Just were things about that site which I found to be pretty cool.

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. People want it both ways: That some comments are influential, but somehow others, equally as positive, somehow aren't. It makes no sense.


Anyway, I'm out. I'm tired of all this.

Quoted from PKCardinal But, you've got at least one really cool script (from taking a chance on trying something completely different) That ain't nothin'. Sometimes you gotta take the win, even if it looks like a loss.

I second that - taking chances and experimenting with different things to improve your writing is what it's all about

I think it works here. No system is perfect. If you want truly objective notes, you have to pay for them. Here, it's the writers. The arguing back and forth can get tiresome, but it also works to a degree. It tends to pull people toward some middle ground over time.

Ultimately, when it comes to scripts, the only thing that matters is getting producers that want to buy them or get them made.

Quoted from Gary in Houston Here’s a little story that will only interest a few people (but this is true of my scripts so why should this be any different?). Many moons ago, in a far off land and internet, there existed a site called MoviePoet which several of us on this site were members and contributors (Pia, Kham, Rick, maybe even you as well?). Here’s how that site operated. On the first day of each month, you had a new contest with new parameters. There was never more than 5 pages allowed except on the feature contest. Once the deadline for entries passed, you could go in and start reviewing, but here was the part that I thought worked well. You were randomly assigned a script and you had to write a review with a minimum number of characters (I think maybe it was 500?). Once that review was submitted you would then be required to vote on it then and there. One to five just like now. Once the vote was submitted, you were assigned another, and so on, until you ran out of scripts in that contest to review. You couldn’t see any reviews from other people until the contest was complete, and then all reviews would be revealed.  I think you had winners and runners up, and honorable mentions went to any script with an average score above 3.0. What I like about it was that you couldn’t see other reviews so no one could be swayed by any previous reviews and you couldn’t puff up your own script. It also made you come up with more than a one sentence review.  I just felt like it was a very natural manner of having the contest reviewed and scored. The site no longer exists, as the guy who ran it (Chris Messineo) is basically teaching a film school now and it takes up all his time. Don’t get me wrong, I still love this site and recommend it to all my fellow writers. Just were things about that site which I found to be pretty cool.

This sounds awesome. I wonder how difficult it'd be to implement a system like that here?

Ah, Moviepoet... I only found it right at the end... because I was just starting out... good site and good people on there.

Here, equally good people but there's an unfortunate toxicity to it sometimes... maybe it's just competitive human nature, maybe, don't know.

What I do know is that other writers are not actually our target audience, Producer and Directors are, so keep comments and criticsms on here in perspective.

Quoted from Gary in Houston Here’s a little story that will only interest a few people (but this is true of my scripts so why should this be any different?). Many moons ago, in a far off land and internet, there existed a site called MoviePoet which several of us on this site were members and contributors (Pia, Kham, Rick, maybe even you as well?). Here’s how that site operated. On the first day of each month, you had a new contest with new parameters. There was never more than 5 pages allowed except on the feature contest. Once the deadline for entries passed, you could go in and start reviewing, but here was the part that I thought worked well. You were randomly assigned a script and you had to write a review with a minimum number of characters (I think maybe it was 500?). Once that review was submitted you would then be required to vote on it then and there. One to five just like now. Once the vote was submitted, you were assigned another, and so on, until you ran out of scripts in that contest to review. You couldn’t see any reviews from other people until the contest was complete, and then all reviews would be revealed.  I think you had winners and runners up, and honorable mentions went to any script with an average score above 3.0. What I like about it was that you couldn’t see other reviews so no one could be swayed by any previous reviews and you couldn’t puff up your own script. It also made you come up with more than a one sentence review.  I just felt like it was a very natural manner of having the contest reviewed and scored. The site no longer exists, as the guy who ran it (Chris Messineo) is basically teaching a film school now and it takes up all his time. Don’t get me wrong, I still love this site and recommend it to all my fellow writers. Just were things about that site which I found to be pretty cool.

Gary, Chris had an amazing system set up. We even looked into using the code he wrote to be used here. Chris was onboard with that and so was Don. Turns out the code was very archaic and not compatible with the website Don runs. I even went as far as looking for someone to write a new program so we could continue a MP style thing here, but at that time, everyone told me it would be 1-2 weeks and those coders aren't cheap. Perhaps nowadays finding someone in a country where the dollars goes further it wouldn't be as expensive, but it would still be asking Don to spend money. Therefore, that idea has never gone further.

In an OWC, the writers are our target audience. Producers and directors aren't scoring the scripts.

Quoted from DustinBowcot In an OWC, the writers are our target audience. Producers and directors aren't scoring the scripts.

Absolutely true. Though there are different motives one can have for participating. For me it's an exercise, something that I hope might force a different way of thinking about story. I also hope to gain something new from reading the scripts. I really could care less about the scoring...but I do value the comments.