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 often come across people brutally criticizing another artist's piece of work, without actually delving deep into the subject matter. The same thing happens here on these boards too, at times. Mostly those who are humble and always try to point out mistakes, faults, follies in another artist's works but do so with HUMILITY, go a LONG way, as opposed to those that wear a "False hat" of ego-based "Knowledge". On one hand constructive criticism of anybody's stories, ideas or even scripts is fine, but one needs to know one's own strengths and weaknesses as well.
In most of the above mentioned cases, the critic often is a "Wannabe" expert, who, based on the brutal criticisms received by themselves, carries on the energy to try and slap it across other writers and artists without realizing that "Things do change, things always change and people also change". So, before we say anything to others, we must constantly self-analyze what we are doing, are we in a position of strength or weakness in our own trade to cast aspersions on others' art or praise them as well? Being indifferent also is another stand, people often resort to. But that is more harmful than being brutally critical.
It happens...not a big deal in here. The majority though will give you good feedback that will help you and move your skills along IMO. I know I have learned a great deal here and appreciate every single person in here.
Who is to judge what is "brutally honest" or what is a "soft touch?"
You?
Me?
A SS mod?
Someone who has posted over 1,000 posts? 6,000 posts?
There are gives and takes on both sides.
The first give is a writer taking what comes their way, regardless of who gives it.
Sugar coating (which I'm sure is not your definition of of "soft touch") does a writer no good at all; I'm sure with which you agree.
The second give...well, there isn't one. But that's just me.
A writer gets free feedback from SS. For that (borrowing from Bill Whittle) the writer should be greatful.
In any venue there are conventions that should be followed. Would-be screenwriters that don't follow convention most likely think they have the next great blockbuster that if only read will make them tons of money so they don't take the time to read all that is posted on SS about format. Or pick up a how-to book for that matter and read before starting to write.
It's this blatent disregard that can be extremely irritating to read. Why whould any reader spend their time reading what they consider to be junk? Is it the readers job to write what they just read? Answer that question for me. Is it my job to write what I just read? At times I feel like it and I'll give an example of what I would rather see. But story? Won't do it. Well, maybe. We pick and choose, as readers, what we read, what we don't read, what we comment on, what we don't comment on. It's not up to you to decide which and when.
There are people who love President Obama and there are people who don't like Obama.
Likewise there are readers who won't think a particular script is funny and then another reader will be gut busting laughing over it.
Or an action script is lame to one where it's awesome to another.
It's all subjective as all art is and also reader reactions and reviews.
You ever read Rottentomatoe reviews? Do they explain why they think something is lame? No, they often shred the movie, looking for ways to be witty in doing so.
Sometimes saying keep your day job is appropriate, or your script is better than Ambien. If that is enough for the writer to stop writing then they aren't a writer in the first place. One because they don't believe in what they've written, two because they don't ask further as to why.
Again, we eat and sleep and work and there is only so much time in a day. So getting out "this is boring" sometimes works...for us me.
That is the dark side of commenting. The light side is when you feel really good about yourself and want to help the writer all you can, thinking that you can, when sometimes you really can't.
This is all in the realm of civility, or course...but then who is to decide what is civil?
...they often shred the movie, looking for ways to be witty in doing so.
Not to reawaken a long-resolved topic -- but for the recent members for whom this topic is new -- I like how Clorax sums up what we are trying to discourage of late.
This thread -- and a few others like it -- are part of an active and ongoing effort to improve the reputation of our little corner of the internet --
-- as someplace other than a slam-house where new writers can get their scripts chewed to shreds by "witty", pedantic reviewers out to please primarily themselves with clever adjectives.
Harsh, honest, derogotry, negative -- all of that was and is fair play.
But buttoning down on the outright mean and nasty -- and most members agree with that -- and you will most often know it when you see it. Arguing about judgement calls have not yet proven much of an issue.
It happens...not a big deal in here. JR: Yes, I am thick skinned however,
The majority though will give you good feedback that will help you and move your skills along IMO. JR: I find this to be true here too.
I know I have learned a great deal here and appreciate every single person in here. JR: That's very cool and promising, indeed.
I love your music BTW...where can I get a cd??
JR: There are a few CDs in the market, you can look for one in particular titled "Love Pass Filter", the lead Violinist in that is me, also you can hear my Violin on The Quantum Activist (Documentary feature, award winning, now streaming live on Netflix if you have a membership with them), also: http://spundana.org for a few links here and there. Plus the youtube, you can watch me plenty there, some are Live concerts of my performances. Please do enjoy and thanks for that.
Who is to judge what is "brutally honest" or what is a "soft touch?" JR: Well, there's nothing wrong in being brutally honest, but "Harsh" tones thrown at newbie writers or artists, actually can do a permanent damage at times. So, one needs to be careful with them, specially, is what I am humbly putting forth here. (Not for someone as seasoned as you and I here).
You? JR: I can't judge anyone, because I am still trying to do that with myself and can't seem to ever come anywhere close to fully comprehending.
Me? JR: If you are qualified, sure.
A SS mod? JR: I respect their views too. Why not?
Someone who has posted over 1,000 posts? 6,000 posts? JR; Quality would matter more than quantity to me, it has always been like that.
There are gives and takes on both sides. JR: Yes, I am aware of that too.
The first give is a writer taking what comes their way, regardless of who gives it. JR: I would disagree with the "Whoever gives it". That's why in a way that particular article by someone about the various levels of writers / screenwriters was very enlightening, although many won't agree about such "Qualification methods" for anyone's creative works.
Sugar coating (which I'm sure is not your definition of of "soft touch") does a writer no good at all; I'm sure with which you agree. JR: Yes Sugar coating does more harm than help. I agree.
The second give...well, there isn't one. But that's just me. JR: There are plenty of "Gives" and very few of "Takes" actually. But that's just me too.
A writer gets free feedback from SS. For that (borrowing from Bill Whittle) the writer should be greatful. (<--- Grateful, yes). JR: Actually, nothing is free, we all pay for this Internet, so we are actually paying always for each minute we spend on the net, whether on a paid Message board or a Free for all Forum like this one. Don't they say, "Even freedom comes for a price?" Nothing comes free.
In any venue there are conventions that should be followed. Would-be screenwriters that don't follow convention most likely think they have the next great blockbuster that if only read will make them tons of money so they don't take the time to read all that is posted on SS about format. JR: Yeah, that happens quite a lot here and everywhere else too.
Or pick up a how-to book for that matter and read before starting to write. JR: I think, for those who haven't taken writing as a "Profession" and want to become a professional, these "How to" books are big hindrances. Even the computer could be a big hurdle at times for such writers. That is my humble opinion.
It's this blatant disregard that can be extremely irritating to read. JR: It's alright for us to be irritated and it is fine for them to be a bit naive too. "Patience" is a very powerful virtue and anger can weaken us in our knees.
Why would any reader spend their time reading what they consider to be junk? JR: Here, I have a different view. A reader reads anything because he/she is free and is not writing at that moment. The choice is made, simply the same way as we go out of our house any particular time or day. If you feel that someone's work is "Junk" just move on and don't read it. But, I would continue to read whatever makes me feel "There's something in there, maybe it isn't properly flushed out yet, but it is worth a read, so I can look beyond all these FORMAT issues".
Is it the readers job to write what they just read? Answer that question for me. JR: There's always a choice and the so called "Readers" are also not always up to the mark. They are as much into seeking "Approvals" for their skills as the wannabe writers do.
Is it my job to write what I just read? At times I feel like it and I'll give an example of what I would rather see. JR: In healing principles I have learned over and over, for years from great masters, mentors that "The REAL healer is always the recipient". Unless we allow, lovingly, any change in us, how can we expect anyone else to change because of our actions?
But story? Won't do it. JR: Storytelling is the real beef, and that is where the heart of the writer and reader usually focuses on. If that is wayward or missing, definitely the readers would put it away.
Well, maybe. We pick and choose, as readers, what we read, what we don't read, what we comment on, what we don't comment on. It's not up to you to decide which and when. JR: Again, the choices are always there for each of us to make but we can't always get away being "Disdainful, belittling others, in the name of honesty, when we ourselves aren't yet completely sure about -- what is actually right or wrong?"
There are people who love President Obama and there are people who don't like Obama. JR: Comparing mangoes and oranges here. People and Art are different elements. Writing is an art, Obama is a human being. He is full of flaws as any human is. so not liking him is by far the easiest for folks, but liking him is tough, eh? Because he is neither "Completely Black, as an Afro-American, nor completely White as a Caucasian". And the middle name adds more to the disliking part, isn't it?
Likewise there are readers who won't think a particular script is funny and then another reader will be gut busting laughing over it. JR: Sometimes it might be the vernacular too. Dialects, languages. I speak nine different dialects from India, so, at times that ability might hinder my ability to write in an American form of English. Even British styles are different. But they work for that genre of stories. Don't they?
Or an action script is lame to one where it's awesome to another. JR: If you ask me, most Hollywood scripts are either "Repetitive" or are "Formula" based. Pop-Corn. One of my very good friends, who is into Rotoscopy and has been involved in almost 50 movies so far, told me "There aren't plenty of new ideas written in Hollywood, it is usually once or twice in TEN years that a completely FRESH idea gets properly written and made into a movie".
It's all subjective as all art is and also reader reactions and reviews. JR: There's still something called "Compassion".
You ever read Rottentomatoe reviews? Do they explain why they think something is lame? No, they often shred the movie, looking for ways to be witty in doing so. JR: Most review writers do that because they had a major fight with at home that morning or evening, with their better halves and then jump on the message boards, WSJ pages, or Rolling Stones headlines, that "Avatar was a bad movie"! No it wasn't, you stupid. It was a great flick, period. If you didn't like it, then say it that way. But, don't tell me "Why it was such a bad movie".
Sometimes saying keep your day job is appropriate, or your script is better than Ambien. If that is enough for the writer so stop writing then they aren't a writer in the first place. One because they don't believe in what they've written, two because they don't ask further as to why.
Again, we eat and sleep and work and there is only so much time in a day. So getting out "this is boring" sometimes works...for us me.
That is the dark side of commenting. The light side is when you feel really good about yourself and want to help the writer all you can, thinking that you can, when sometimes you really can't. JR: Being critical about writing is not bad at all, but one has to be careful, because the writers' hearts are very, very tender. Same as those of the poets.
This is all in the realm of civility, or course...but then who is to decide what is civil?
JR: Well, I must accede to the fact that so far no one here has been "Uncivilized" to me at least. Not directly ever. Well, thank you for that. I really appreciate the way SS is run and people here are indeed very talented and are SPOT ON most of the times.
I don't find the comment inappropriate to be taken down. My approach to review a script whether I think it's decent, terrible, good or great is to be encouraging because I want to keep people coming here and putting out material. If there is something I don't like I can easily give legit reasons why. Jus be consistent.
BLB
Commodus: But the Emperor Claudius knew that they were up to something. He knew they were busy little bees. And one night he sat down with one of them and he looked at her and he said, "Tell me what you have been doing, busy little bee..."