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 a suggestion, though I doubt anyone will take it. Let's stop making it so the object required needs to be essential to the story. I've been thinking this for two weeks. Frankly, it's the object requirement that is leading to pissers. I'm not saying there shouldn't be an object. But to compare it to the NYC Midnight contests, the objects in those are not required to be "essential" to the story. I think if I writer manages to do this that should be bonus points, but I'd rather just read decent stories where there object is there. Decent stories are really what we want most I think.
After seeing how much everyone seems to be suffering from this one, I'm very seriously considering changing week 4's object and location. I really did think this week's choice was going to be, in general, the easiest for everyone, out of the five weeks. Finding out that that's not the case if forcing me to reconsider.
I wouldn't change anything, Dude. Stick to your guns and keep the challenge tough as nails.
An example of my writing...
FOR SATAN - short, horror, 14 pgs (revised draft) - A group of thrill-seekers explore a creepy old house on Halloween night. Think you know this story? Think again.
Lol and Im literally laughing out loud. Oh, Sean, poor Sean. You'rs in a pickle aren't you? And I thank you for all the challenges here on the board. The tournaments... who would have thought anything like that is possible. It's a great job you're doing.
I think if I writer manages to do this that should be bonus points, but I'd rather just read decent stories where there object is there.
That's the trouble with the scoring here. There is no way to differentiate between a writer that utilises the object well and one where the object is merely there. The only way to differentiate is with a yes or no. Giving both writers a 'yes' would be unfair to the writer that tried harder.
Criteria is just 4 points for meeting it. Even if you don't find a way to make the prop part of the plot, just include it somewhere and roll the dice with reviewers. That is where the scoring system works. Put story ahead of shoehorning.
Sean, don't waffle. This is a good exercise. We'll see if we can satisfy the crazy producer note for product integration.
FOR SATAN - short, horror, 14 pgs (revised draft) - A group of thrill-seekers explore a creepy old house on Halloween night. Think you know this story? Think again.
Criteria is just 4 points for meeting it. Even if you don't find a way to make the prop part of the plot, just include it somewhere and roll the dice with reviewers. That is where the scoring system works. Put story ahead of shoehorning.
Sean, don't waffle. This is a good exercise. We'll see if we can satisfy the crazy producer note for product integration.
Agreed on all. I'm not so much asking any rules to be changed as for readers to lighten up a little. I'm asking more as a reader than a writer. I just want to read good stories. If writers are determined to make hand sanitizer "essential" to the story we're going to end up reading a lot of crap. If a story has a pilot who's obsessed with germs so he uses the sanitizer...bang. Good enough for me. Not essential to the story, but relevant as a character-building device...good enough. Just make the story worth reading. Otherwise we're going to get exploding sanitizers and maybe a sanitizer stuck up some character's sphincter. I don't want to keep reading those. People should lighten up, but that's up to each reviewer.
Pages: 
Author
Round 3 Topic & Discussion Thread.
Logged
Locked Board