Quoted from Scar Tissue Films He reckoned you could even tell what the script was going to be like from the name of the writer and the postal code.

I find that statement to be absolutely fascinating.

As far as this review thing goes, I think honesty is the best policy, but I think feedback is far more beneficial when a little tact is used.  Rather than "Your script blows" you might want to say "I didn't really care for this script, and here's why".  

Even if you only get 6 pages in, you can lay out a reason why you stopped reading, and be done with it.  No need to use colorful words or try to increase someone's vocabulary, because it really offers nothing in that regard except to sound sarcastic or condescending, and start new debate threads.  

Reviewers just need to be sure they're attacking the script, if they're attacking anything at all.

Reviewers should also pay attention to WHOSE script they're looking at as well.  Whether or not they do it on purpose, some people have an excellent knack of reading scripts by people who are nowhere in sight.

My take on "morally indefensible" is in regards to the supposed protagonists motives, and how they make him a nearly impossible character to sympathize with.  I didn't see it as being a jab at the writer at all....and to go back to my last comment, he probably won't either.

Okay, I understand how you would read the first ten pages and decide whether it's a turd or not, because that's your way of dealing with screenplays you don't like. I don't disagree with your methods, personally I wouldn't do that, but I respect your opinion.

There is one question though, Dogglebe...

If those racist scripts were such garbage, why did you spend the time reading them, and putting a whole lot of effort into a decent review?

Quoted from Phil Balt!

He would have loved this thread, wouldn't he?

Balt was a colorful but troubled member of the boards who actually reviewed quite a bit, and frequently peppered his criticisms with phraseology like, "This script porks chickens in the butt!!"

Now, not exactly helpful, but certainly amusing at first, if repetitive later.  He had both his fans and his detractors.

But the point is, many of those scripts DID pork chickens in the butt.  And it was nice to have somebody with enough (goat) balls to say it.

I seldom deleted him because, for all his faults, he was honest.

I sometimes sense alot of pixie dust getting fluffed onto scripts in hopes of earning a return read -- look in the mirror and see if you recognize yourself -- but I can guarantee you that Balt was never guilty of that.

If anybody is wondering what I look for in a potential deletion, one of the main things is, "Did they read the script?"

And if it is clear they have -- not just the logline, mind you -- then they have earned the right to critique it as they see fit.  And if you have not read the script, you have not earned the right to question their review.

Does that make sense?

I delete a lot of chatter, but I delete very, very few reviews.  Not even the mean ones.

That's just how I feel about it.  But I see a lot of good points here, too.

Quoted from Stigmata There is one question though, Dogglebe... If those racist scripts were such garbage, why did you spend the time reading them, and putting a whole lot of effort into a decent review?

Stig,

Quoted from dogglebe In the case of these scripts, they're so bad that they're enjoyable to read.  And it's such a learning experience on how not to write a script.  Read five pages of it.  G'wan.  I dare ya!  If it means anything, Clipping the Wings of our White Masters was so bad that even Balt was offended.

Okay, well said.  I can accept that.  I still don't think it's worth putting all the time into with a red marker(figurative or literal), but whatever.

Quoted Text I delete a lot of chatter, but I delete very, very few reviews.  Not even the mean ones.

I agree that even the mean reviews should stay because, as I said earlier, they're still opinions.  I think in cases like the very first review that you showed at the beginning of the thread, it's a case of character over content.  You can say "what is this shit" about their script but you'll look like a jerk and a poor reviewer in the process(especially if that's the only thing you say, which was the case here).  

Quoted from Death Monkey …But is it stands right now, it's pretty worthless, IMO. "Note to self: make script less morally indefensible", you know...

I disagree. I see ways the writer can use this criticism to improve both creatively as well as commercially. You don’t. I’ll leave it at that.


Breanne

Thank you, Greg. My mistake Dogglebe.

Sometimes I get over-excited with these debates and forget what the other person has said, lol. Apologies.

I think it's sad when people use threads like this to make stupid jokes. (A time and place for everything and I don't think this is the place)

Like my post that was deleted about all the childish posts on the forums by adults who act like children. (Can't delete this one bert because I have some more to say haha)

On this topic I was seriously thinking about deleting a few of the guys reviews myself because they call out one simple part and that's usually it.

How about this one.

Quoted Text I started to read your script and realized that you don't have any idea what marines are about. If a marine pointed thier gun and another there would at least be a lot of cussing and maybe some ass kicking.  sorry, but you lost credibility from the get go.  Write what you know.

Where is the review here? Where does he exactly go wrong? When I read that review I felt like saying something.

If you do not read the entire script you should not write a review. Especially something as short as the script above. It's like 22 pages long and quite entertaining given the chance. Audiences in general do not care if it is inaccurate as long as he doesn't say based on a true story.

Do you think movies about famous adventurers and figures like Jesus are as accurate as they should/could be? I don't.

Quoted from Another review to look at I started to read your script and realized that you don't have any idea what marines are about. If a marine pointed thier gun and another there would at least be a lot of cussing and maybe some ass kicking.  sorry, but you lost credibility from the get go.  Write what you know.

I paused at this one also, Wes.  Too short?  Too bitchy?  Too vague?

Yeah, sure.  All of that.  But look again.

I like nixon, and I like his story, but this guy is telling nixon, "Hey -- you gotta scene in this where you lose credibility.  You need to fix that, or you will lose readers, too."

This guy had to dig to find "Expect No Mercy".  He was interested in that script, out of all the series.  And nixon lost him.  

I consider this good feedback, poorly delivered.  That's why I left it.

I leave the reviews because people can see how poor the review is and never have any use for that person in exchanges or in writing. That's why when writers get mad about negative reviews they should be left up so people know how they are.

Most of them leave for a few months and come back as if nothing happened. Sometimes with new names which is a sign of guilt or hiding.

The way I view reviews is if they help you, they are good and if they offer nothing to help then they aren't. It's all about the writer and what he/she is looking for.

Maybe Nixon knew people would enjoy that though. Writing is not about being accurate, it is entertainment.

Was Stoned Patriots accurate to how a talking bong would talk? I mean you can't review like that.

Quoted from Stigmata Okay, I understand how you would read the first ten pages and decide whether it's a turd or not, because that's your way of dealing with screenplays you don't like. I don't disagree with your methods, personally I wouldn't do that, but I respect your opinion.

Three things you need for a good script are strong characters, realistic dialogue and a good story.  If I don't see these things by page ten (or fifteen), you won't have it.  I don't want to read a story that doesn't have these things.

I've read scripts where the only thing I know about the characters are their names.  A lot of teen stories introduce the main characters as the nerd, the athlete and the druggie.  Despite these labels, they act and talk identically to each each other.  Dull stories are told unrealistically.

How am I supposed to read these?

Quoted from Stigmata There is one question though, Dogglebe... If those racist scripts were such garbage, why did you spend the time reading them, and putting a whole lot of effort into a decent review?

It's like watching Plan Nine from Outer Space.  That script is so bad that it's actually enjoyable to read.  I wrote the review as much as a warning to others not to read as much as an invitation to read it.  Reading a bad script can be a great learning experience.  Seeing how bad a script is teaches you not to make the same mistakes when you write.


Phil

Quoted Text I started to read your script and realized that you don't have any idea what marines are about. If a marine pointed thier gun and another there would at least be a lot of cussing and maybe some ass kicking.  sorry, but you lost credibility from the get go.  Write what you know.

Regarding the review in question, I wasn’t really sure how to interpret it. I appreciate all criticism, as long as it’s constructive. His review was so vague; I could really get anything out of it. I asked him to be more specific and he couldn’t deliver.

If the review weren’t on my series’ thread, I would have deleted it.    

Quoted from Old Time Wesley The way I view reviews is if they help you, they are good and if they offer nothing to help then they aren't. It's all about the writer and what he/she is looking for.

This pretty much defines how I judge reviews.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley If you do not read the entire script you should not write a review.

You're dead wrong here, Wes.  I don't need to read an entire script to know that the characters and dialog are unrealistic.  I've seen scripts that have such ridiculous premises that it is painfully obvious that the writer has no idea what he's talking about.  And then there's always the truly, truly ridiculous premises that some people write.  I remember years and years ago, I started reading someone's story about the government creating cybernetic vampires.  The only problem he had with his story was figuring out what happened to the cybernetic parts when the vampires turned to mist.

WTF?????????????????????????????????????

I'm not going to force myself to read a problem-ridden script.  I simply don't have the time or desire to do so.  If I review a script that I partially read, I will point the problems that stopped me from completing it.


Phil

You are in a small class of people I exclude from that argument. You try to help in your reviews after you quit. A lot of people leave a review just to say they left a review and to get brownie points on this "read or you don't get read" thinking.

I do however think it is funny that people take "read or you don't get read" to the point where all they read are shorts. If Don ever locked the shorts board for a week the review boards would be nearly dead. Not totally but pretty close.

That's the same with a lot of other things that happen where they read bits and parts and when they review it they come off as if they didn't because they skimmed it. That's the problem with the review exchange. (When people read a script in return that they know from the get go they will hate but do it anyway because they are desperate for reads.)

When I read something, I really put effort into reading it. If I know the writer and if they want to discuss any specifics they could always ask and like that I can recall it as long as it's still fresh.

Could be helpful if they wanted to know about a specific scene or storyline.

Like I said, reviews are in the eye of the writer it is written for. So if someone says your review was bad and it was his or her script. It was bad no matter how much you put into it.

The thing is, some people are spiteful in their reviews for the sake of being mean.  People write a few scripts, maybe get a few good reviews themselves and they get the big head.  It has happened to me and it has happened to a lot of others.  In fact, I've had to bring myself down with my own reviews and make sure I follow the age-old "positive-negative-positive" formula.

There are plenty of people who use hateful words to tear down new writers or scripts that are lacking in some areas.  We were all new writers at one point.  Go back and read your very first script.  I have, and it wasn't pretty.  Now, think if someone had given you an unnecessary hate-filled review just for the heck of it.  They can be traumatizing to a young writer.  Tell them their mistakes but build them up positively.

If you feel that a script is so bad that you can't bare to read it, either say some constructive to the individual or simply move on.  There have been times when I have passed on reviewing a script just because I knew that I wouldn't have anything positive to say about it.

To be honest, there are several posters on this board whose scripts I refuse to read because of their attitude.  The way you respond says a lot about you.  If your reviews make you out to be a pompous jerk, then I could care less about what you write.

My two cents....

Jonathan

I'll write a harsh review if a script calls for it. I rarely do it as I tend to avoid the bad scripts that most seem to gang up on but if a script is absolutely horrendous, the writer needs to know. Otherwise, they'll continue writing bad scripts thinking they're great. Still, my goal when writing a review is to help the writer get their script to where they want it to be. After tearing a script to pieces, I think it's important to give someone the advice needed to rebuild. With the exception of a few (e.g. The Cabin and those anti-white scripts Phil slams), most scripts aren't completely unsalvagable even if they are really bad.