Quoted from Colkurtz8 I realise you have to be careful not over sell or make it too convenient to  namedrop stuff there as everyone will start using it if its only one click away which would cheapen the whole idea of it but as its stands it might not be a bad thing to give it some more exposure.

I think it should be used rarely for scripts that blow you away and not just any script you liked. I have enjoyed a lot of scripts but the ones that I'd recommend can be counted on one hand.

Just an opinion.

The script I always recommend is by a guy who isn't here but I recommend it anyway. I am also one of the only people who read the sequel haha unless I missed him posting it.

I posted some recommends earlier - there are plenty of good scripts on SS that I am more than willing to mention in such a thread.

My main concern was that some good scripts don't get a lot of replies, for whatever reason, and gradually sink down the boards and into oblivion, while a bad script might get a big discussion going (especially if the author gets involved) and thus get lots of replies, thus staying high up the board.

I recognise that a ratings system is open to abuse and so is probably not as good an idea as it might at first appear. I notice that some people will include a rating within their own reviews, so it's just a question of personal preference.

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Not a bad suggestion. Mr. Blond's pro arguements had me halfway towards entertaining the notion but Johnnyboy has put me firmly in the "nay" corner again. And the fact that it was tried before with disasterous results ahould be enough to leave things be. Would things be any different now if reintroduced? I can't say for sure but I seriously doubt it. I had no idea about the recommended thread either, a fantastic idea but yeah, maybe it could do with being advertised/promoted more. Even have it as one of the main threads on the discussion board page itself or provide links to it from other areas on he site. I realise you have to be careful not over sell or make it too convenient to  namedrop stuff there as everyone will start using it if its only one click away which would cheapen the whole idea of it but as its stands it might not be a bad thing to give it some more exposure.

Interesting how you said, if it's easy and just a click away, it cheapens it.

Sounds to me like you know exactly what you're talking about.

Sandra

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Not a bad suggestion. Mr. Blond's pro arguements had me halfway towards entertaining the notion but Johnnyboy has put me firmly in the "nay" corner again. And the fact that it was tried before with disasterous results ahould be enough to leave things be. Would things be any different now if reintroduced? I can't say for sure but I seriously doubt it.

I believe you misunderstood. I'm not for rating scripts in any way. I was just explaining the methods that would make it work if others wanted it done.

Personally, I think it would be an absolute waste of time when most any review would tell a person more than a star rating would.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde I believe you misunderstood. I'm not for rating scripts in any way. I was just explaining the methods that would make it work if others wanted it done. Personally, I think it would be an absolute waste of time when most any review would tell a person more than a star rating would.

I'm not sure, but I don't think colkurtz8 was misunderstanding you. I think he was touching upon a deeper level where the aspects of reviewing "considered to be top notch scripts" are reviewed and placed in a bit of a "limelight". At least that's how I read it.

Now this can be both good and bad, because in doing so, we kind of do create a rating system as if, by default I think, even if not explicitly with those purple crowns or five stars or whatever you want to call them.

The aspect of freedom exists in this. Whenever you rate something, I think you rate according to the rules of "the game" or "the genre" or "whatever" so it gets interesting to say the least.

A perfect example for me, is the last OWC from August - 09. I personally selected scripts that actually fell out of "my perceived" boundaries of theme and expression through comedy/drama thus dramedy or whateverthehellitwasafterall.

In the end, to me, it didn't amount to anything and I had to choose based upon my individual stupid perception or glorious perception or whateverthehellitwasafterall.

The thing is, that I think on some mysterious deep and cosmic level and heavy and freak you out and in your face at the level of everything and nothing,

My personal choice is for freedom. That's why I have trouble with structure. That's why I have trouble with rules. That's why if you read my shit, you'll see it completely lacks in that department.

So, what am I trying to say?

This: Who cares? Do you care that you have a million star rating? OK, yeah. It's very attractive. Ah!!! Massage me make me feel good. Yuh! Good. All good!

But something has to come out of all that. Something.

What is beyond the five stars? What happens after we get them and we are still empty? That's what we need to figure out.

Stars themselves are irrelevant.

Sandra

Quoted from Mr. Blonde I'm not for rating scripts in any way.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Didn't drag, didn't move too fast. A nice, even pace throughout. 9.1/10.

Considering the above, (and no offence meant) but you've confused me here Mr B.  Each to their own, though.

My last 2c. to the 'powers that be' -  If it aint broke, don't fix it.

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. I'm not sure, but I don't think colkurtz8 was misunderstanding you. I think he was touching upon a deeper level where the aspects of reviewing "considered to be top notch scripts" are reviewed and placed in a bit of a "limelight". At least that's how I read it. Now this can be both good and bad, because in doing so, we kind of do create a rating system as if, by default I think, even if not explicitly with those purple crowns or five stars or whatever you want to call them. The aspect of freedom exists in this. Whenever you rate something, I think you rate according to the rules of "the game" or "the genre" or "whatever" so it gets interesting to say the least. A perfect example for me, is the last OWC from August - 09. I personally selected scripts that actually fell out of "my perceived" boundaries of theme and expression through comedy/drama thus dramedy or whateverthehellitwasafterall. In the end, to me, it didn't amount to anything and I had to choose based upon my individual stupid perception or glorious perception or whateverthehellitwasafterall. The thing is, that I think on some mysterious deep and cosmic level and heavy and freak you out and in your face at the level of everything and nothing, My personal choice is for freedom. That's why I have trouble with structure. That's why I have trouble with rules. That's why if you read my shit, you'll see it completely lacks in that department. So, what am I trying to say? This: Who cares? Do you care that you have a million star rating? OK, yeah. It's very attractive. Ah!!! Massage me make me feel good. Yuh! Good. All good! But something has to come out of all that. Something. What is beyond the five stars? What happens after we get them and we are still empty? That's what we need to figure out. Stars themselves are irrelevant. Sandra

Right. Star ratings by themselves are just that. Ratings. It would be like the MPAA saying this movie is rated R and then nothing after that. You'd know that it's not for kids but you don't know why.

Like the stories, you'd know people liked them but you wouldn't know what people liked about them.

Oh, and I didn't mean he misunderstood the whole post. Just the part when he believed that I was for the star ratings and he went along.

Quoted from LC Considering the above, (and no offence meant) but you've confused me here Mr B.  Each to their own, though. My last 2c. to the 'powers that be' -  If it aint broke, don't fix it.

That's what I'm talking about. Whenever I finish reading something or watching a movie, I score it. But, I don't just give a score. I tell why it's good and end it with the score.

Mr. Blonde, I know we're on the same side here, but I want to just refer back to the very first point I made on this thread.

Quoted from JonnyBoy What would rating scripts achieve? Nothing posted on here is 'finished', in my eyes. Everything, even scripts on their third or fourth draft, are works in progress. My comments are usually intended to flag up issues and help the writer improve their script - so what's the point of rating them?

There is a fundamental difference between scoring a book or a movie, and scoring a script you read on here. A FUNDAMENTAL difference, which is this: the first two are finished products, but the latter isn't. A book, or a movie, has reached the end of its journey. It's as good as it's going to be, and therefore a score is applicable. But the scripts here aren't finished until they've been sold or made. They're works in progress. Until they've been committed to film, they're subject to change.

And THAT'S where our comments can help: to show the writer their script's flaws, and to point him/her in the direction of improvements. Therefore, any kind of score is meaningless, no matter how good the script is; until it's something more than words on the page, it can always get better. Your score will become irrelevant once changes have been made.

That's the difference, for me. One is a finished product, and so its success can be reviewed. But the other is a work in progress, and so advice is key, not a rating, no matter how well backed-up.

Quoted from LC Considering the above, (and no offence meant) but you've confused me here Mr B.  Each to their own, though. My last 2c. to the 'powers that be' -  If it aint broke, don't fix it.

LC, can you clarify? I'm confused on how you are both in an apparent disagreement.

Sandra

Quoted from JonnyBoy Mr. Blonde, I know we're on the same side here, but I want to just refer back to the very first point I made on this thread. There is a fundamental difference between scoring a book or a movie, and scoring a script you read on here. A FUNDAMENTAL difference, which is this: the first two are finished products, but the latter isn't. A book, or a movie, has reached the end of its journey. It's as good as it's going to be, and therefore a score is applicable. But the scripts here aren't finished until they've been sold or made. They're works in progress. Until they've been committed to film, they're subject to change. And THAT'S where our comments can help: to show the writer their script's flaws, and to point him/her in the direction of improvements. Therefore, any kind of score is meaningless, no matter how good the script is; until it's something more than words on the page, it can always get better. Your score will become irrelevant once changes have been made. That's the difference, for me. One is a finished product, and so its success can be reviewed. But the other is a work in progress, and so advice is key, not a rating, no matter how well backed-up.

Ooh, that's good. You know, I absolutely forgot about that angle? Lol.

Yeah, perpetual works in progress.

But, we also agree that a review is so much more helpful than just a rating.

Like you said, same side. =)

Sorry Mr. Blonde, I hear what you are saying. You gave some interesting criteria and detailed how it maybe could be done but ultimately don't endorse its introduction. My thoughts are, in essence, much the same. Apologies for the misinterpretation.

I’ve always felt the rating system was a terrible idea. The one OWC that I participated in that had the ratings enabled had people anonymously knocking down the ratings to the highest rated scripts.

There are some writers who don’t want to see other writers succeed where they might be failing. One of the reasons I don’t participate in OWCs anymore is because of the ratings system. As long as jealousy is alive, and as long as members can rate anonymously, the system will never be fair and therefore pointless.

A look at a logline and a cursory look at a script should tell a reader about all you need to know with regard to whether you want to read a script or not. There’s nothing good a ratings system can offer that can’t be achieved easily without it. About all it can do is contribute to hard feelings between members.

I would also point out that I write for producers, directors, audiences, etc., not other writers. Most producers do not really care what other writers think about a script. If I was looking for a script to produce, no offence, but I wouldn’t really care what other writers thought about it. I’ve never met a producer who cares what other writers think about something unless they want you to revise the script.

Reviews from other writers here at the site are used primarily for improvement. I don’t see how ratings can really contribute toward that goal.


Breanne


Addendum: Yes, producers use readers, often writers, to cover scripts but those are writers they employ, not writers they don’t know from an internet site.

I agree with you, Brea. In the first place we the writers have to write for the producers and here and there for an actor or actress in special.

When I started here I wrote first for my pleasure and second for my SS colleagues here. Why? Because I thought:  Helio my dear, you can write in English to this people, man! You can, doesn’t matter how you will write, but you can! I confess that most of my short scripts were to empress you, Phil, Wilson, Shelton, Newcomer, Pia, Kevan etc and just for fun. Rating scripts? I never cared about it, indeed. What I wanted was to be happy and who knows make someone laugh with my writings.

I'm another one who thinks that we don't need to illicit the star system.

We do have a couple threads around here about what people's favorite scripts on the site.

I think it is best left at that.

I'm not sure if you meant something like maybe a system so that a producer could look at the scripts with the most stars or something like that, but if that is what you meant, then they can just as easily find those threads.

Cindy