As moderator of the script boards, I have in the past gathered input from the community on the questions such as "harsh" reviews, or reviews that consider only the first few pages.  I try to keep deletions in line with what "most" people here think.

I have another question for the active community.

Earlier this morning, I deleted a post in which the author made a short comment on just the logline.  Then, I deleted another.  Same guy.

Then, I came to discover this (new) member had commented (only) on six or so loglines -- some comments longish and perhaps helpful, others, not so much.

I began to wonder -- Since I had deleted two, did I then have to delete them all?  Was I wrong to delete the two I had?  Should I keep some of them and not others?

It occurred to me that this has become something of a new trend lately among "newbies" and "vets" alike -- commenting on the logline alone.

I contend that it is kind of useless to say "killer logline" if you have not read the script -- because if it did not draw you in to read the script, how killer can it be?

Similarly, if you have not read the script, it is also hard to call a logline terrible.  It might suit the script perfectly.  You are really just guessing.

And telling an author their logline is riddled with misspellings?  Is that really necessary?  We can see for ourselves, and such an author is unlikely to care anyway.

But then, sometimes these comments are clever or funny -- and they might even contain a grain of something useful.

So I am once again curious about what the general community thinks:

What about posted reviews of ONLY the logine and NOTHING about the script?  Should those stay or go?

Or should it be case-by-case, and then, what criteria should be used?

Personally I think commenting on just the logline is a bit slack. If I was gonna post I'd have to have at least a quick look at the script before I did.

However, I would say I'd prefer if these type of posts weren't deleted. I don't mind seeing "I'll read this tomorrow" posts going but any posts about the script, logline or even just the title should stay. The auithor should get a chance to read them and respond - they may learn something they wanna know.

Rendevous

I can't see how you can really "review" a logline - you may comment on it, say it is too long (as some are - one I saw recently was like a synopsis), or doesn't really suit the project, but I think it has to be within context as part of a review of the whole project - not instead of.

I don't know about deleting them - as Re says, leaving does give the author a chance to respond, but then again, what are they responding too? Commenting on a logline isn't all that useful unless it relates to the script as a whole.

I am crap at loglines and if all I got were reviews telling me this and ignoring the actual scripts, I wouldn't see much point hanging around SS!

I can't really see how they think they can help the writer by reviewing their logline if they haven't read everything in the script. Posts like that should go, in my opinion.

That's where we're going.

"I'll read this later" turns into a new thread about two months down the road about owing reads.

Maybe the specific people who can't seem to read features or only want to review loglines should stick to super shorts and save the eyesore of them posting and the writer not calling them on it.

I've always said don't delete something until people have a chance to see it first.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley I've always said don't delete something until people have a chance to see it first.

I'd say that's spot on. Unless it's a complete waste of space all posts should stay for a few hours at least

Re

To comment alone on just a logline is just slack.  A logline is not enough to grasp how good a script is and that's why I never ever read them.  

The reviewer is only letting themselves down if they are put off a script based on a logline when the script is great.

DELETE all reviews on loglines.  They are not the bases for improvement when it comes to script writing.

Quoted from rendevous The auithor should get a chance to read them and respond - they may learn something they wanna know.

So what about six "logline reviews" -- in six different threads -- for authors that are probably not even around?

The portal is then clogged with these non-reviews -- while your own scripts are driven down or entirely off the portal as a result.

"The author should get a chance to respond...?"

And how long, exactly, is that?

You can see how the decisions get kind of complicated.  It is not "censorship" so much as it is a courtesy to the scripts of active authors -- and not setting a poor example for newer members -- who then think, "Oh, so I can build up my post count by just commenting on a bunch of loglines!"

I see that some do not care for this at all, under any circumstances.

To them I would ask, "Never?  No exceptions?"

Loglines are essential in getting your script read by either a Studio Exec or an Investor . . . it is the first thing they hear/see before they decide whether or not they will read your script or Investment Packet . . . and isn't that the ultimate goal of everyone on this site, to sell or have your script(s) optioned?

Some authors can write an amazing script and have a poor logline and their work will never get read, not even on this site and that sucks! But on the flipside, poor script, stellar logline, and then they get slammed on how poor their script was. You choose, would you rather get slammed on a script that you spent months writing or a logline that you thought up as you were trying to submit? (Okay, yes, if your script isn't great it will get slammed anyway, but that's not the point of this thread)

Some authors will admit that they are not so hot on writing loglines. (kudos Niles for being honest) If that's the case, ask for help once your script gets posted. There is so much knowledge and talent on this board . . . share the wealth, for karma sake alone.

Anyways, that is my 2 cents and it is worth exactly that much!

Comment on the logline and maybe it'll be helpful.  

You gotta remember the guy can always resubmit his script with a new logline that will be more attention-grabbing because someone told him how to spice it up -- and in that regard, the writer actually might pull in some readers.

But I can see like 6 posts (in one thread) on just loglines would be a no-no.

Quoted from skylightlynch Loglines are essential in getting your script read by either a Studio Exec or an Investor . . . it is the first thing they hear/see before they decide whether or not they will read your script or Investment Packet . . . and isn't that the ultimate goal of everyone on this site, to sell or have your script(s) optioned? Some authors can write an amazing script and have a poor logline and their work will never get read, not even on this site and that sucks! But on the flipside, poor script, stellar logline, and then they get slammed on how poor their script was. You choose, would you rather get slammed on a script that you spent months writing or a logline that you thought up as you were trying to submit?

How can anyone expect to help improve the logline if they haven't bothered to read the script? I have no problem with people helping with the logline after they read what the actual script is about but writing so many posts with advice on loglines alone doesn't really help anyone if they haven't read the script.

Bert,

Hit the delete key hard!

Three points:

Loglines are like advertising. Some work better than others. And who buys solely on ads without doing a little reading first?

The process of submitting a script asks for a logline and they often are filled in on the fly, so I don't think loglines should be criticized too closley, UNLESS it's part of a review of the script.

I'd hate to see a review "Hey great logline! Read scripts and prosper!" or "Worst logline ever. I'll read your story if you can come up with a go-getter!" That doe not help me with writing my script.

Gary

Quoted from bert As moderator of the script boards, I have in the past gathered input from the community on the questions such as "harsh" reviews, or reviews that consider only the first few pages.  I try to keep deletions in line with what "most" people here think. I have another question for the active community. Earlier this morning, I deleted a post in which the author made a short comment on just the logline.  Then, I deleted another.  Same guy. Then, I came to discover this (new) member had commented (only) on six or so loglines -- some comments longish and perhaps helpful, others, not so much. I began to wonder -- Since I had deleted two, did I then have to delete them all?  Was I wrong to delete the two I had?  Should I keep some of them and not others? It occurred to me that this has become something of a new trend lately among "newbies" and "vets" alike -- commenting on the logline alone. I contend that it is kind of useless to say "killer logline" if you have not read the script -- because if it did not draw you in to read the script, how killer can it be? Similarly, if you have not read the script, it is also hard to call a logline terrible.  It might suit the script perfectly.  You are really just guessing. And telling an author their logline is riddled with misspellings?  Is that really necessary?  We can see for ourselves, and such an author is unlikely to care anyway. But then, sometimes these comments are clever or funny -- and they might even contain a grain of something useful. So I am once again curious about what the general community thinks: What about posted reviews of ONLY the logine and NOTHING about the script?  Should those stay or go? Or should it be case-by-case, and then, what criteria should be used?

I think that it should be weighed on a case-by-case basis for these reasons.

There might be reviewers out there that don't really care that much and will slap anything down be it with regards to logline or not and it just so happens that it's up first and so it's an easy target. These kinds of posts probably ooze negativity without really serving anybody. So, delete those ones.

There might be some very strong reviewers that sincerely believe that a really bad logline is extremely suspect with regards to it being a kind of mirror to the quality of the script as a whole. This reviewer, might feel that the writer has not bothered enough or just doesn't know enough yet and so thus, they point out the logline after reading an equally poor first page, and thus move on.

The long and short of it is this:

Make the call based upon how you feel the review comes across. Even if the reviewer is solely writing on the logline alone it's a relevant point if the logline makes them want to hit close.

Sandra

I think comments on the logline are valid criticism of the author's writing.  They should stay.  And since, more often than not, loglines are used to determine whether or not one should read a script then commenting on them before you've read the script is also valid.  Like any criticism the author should determine whether or not the comments are useful.

Don't know if it's directed at me or not, but I did recently make a comment or two about log lines. The first after a poster extracted information from the writer about the log stating that the story is loosely based on the writer's life. I felt it pertinent, after reading the writer's answer, to make the comment to remove "based upon" from the logline because, in my opinion, the story could not even loosely be based upon the writer's life. I could write a story about trauma-center doctors and say it's based upon my life because I was gurnied into a trauma-center. Not.

The other was about a play, which was in the logline, but I did read some of it before mentioning that it truly was a stage play.

In general, there are loglines I read that get me to read the script and there are loglines that do not. Sometimes I want to comment on page count...like why in the heck would I want to read a 148 page script? But I keep my keyboard-trap for the most part. Should I say why I will or will not read a script based upon the logline? Maybe that is what you're getting at.

Quoted from cloroxmartini Don't know if it's directed at me or not.

No -- not this time.  And you've gotten better about keeping your acerbic side in check, actually -- unless it is genuinely warranted.

Quoted from skylightlynch Loglines are essential in getting your script read by either a Studio Exec or an Investor...

Heh...it was you, actually.  But not that you technically did anything wrong, mind you, though you did have quite a few in a row, back-to-back.  I raise the question because lots of people have been doing it lately.

But I will use one of yours as an example:

For the script about anti-religion activist "Madalyn Murray-O'Hair", your review of the logline was (and I parapharse) "What a silly name.  Why use that name?"

It's a bio pic, about a real person, and that was her name.  It was not meaningful advice, so I gave it the boot.

Quoted from mcornetto I think comments on the logline are valid criticism of the author's writing.  They should stay.

What about the above example, Cornetto?  Would you argue against the deletion of that one?  (Not argumentative...just checking where you stand).  

Quoted from bert What about the above example, Cornetto?  Would you argue against the deletion of that one?  (Not argumentative...just checking where you stand).

ANY indication of why someone has passed on reading my script is helpful, even if I choose to deem it an anomaly later.

EDIT:  I would draw the line when one does not really include information.  Like it says great logline - in which case they should be reading the script - or if it says something like this logline sucks.   The O Hare example was a good one.  This person didn't know who the subject of the script was.  That's important.

It is a standard practice that, just like our moronic political figure heads, the writer gets another writer to write their log lines for them.  Why? Cos' they're hard to write.  You'd be surprised at how many screenwriters, who write kick ass scripts, can't write log lines.  They opt out of them and have other people write them.  

Just like Obama's moronic ass... When's the last time you think he wrote his own speech or said a word out of turn?  Any president, ecluding George W, for that matter.  He said enough stupid shit to warrant a free ride.

But, yeah... Log Lines are a hard sell.  I am ardently not that good at them myself.  I try to use the 6 rules of what goes into a log line and adhere to them, though. So, I scrape by.  But keeping with the theme of the thread -- Axe those post.  If this were "Simplyloglines" it might be different... But it's not.  It's "Simplyscripts" for a reason.  Read the scripts, comment on the bulk of what the writer is offering and not a sum.  Simple and clean.  

Hey Bert,
Hot topic this has become. As far as the "Madalyn Murray-O'Hair" post goes. Okay fair enough. But when I said "what a silly name" I was thinking it was a made up character name. . . then i clicked on it . . . read the logline and commented that the script sounded really interesting. I just recommended a possible title change

And if anyone is interested, the script covers an interesting subject and is worth checking out

Quoted from skylightlynch Hot topic this has become.

Yeah, that happens sometimes when I ask for ideas about the actual maintenance of the boards. And some topics have been much hotter -- everybody has a little moderator in them, I suppose.
  
Thing is, most members really do want the board to be a useful resource, and some have very strong opinions about what that entails.  

Glad to know you do not feel singled out -- at least, you do not seem to -- that was not my intent.

Whether or not reviews of loglines in and of themselves are appropriate or useful has not really been discussed before, as far as I can recall.

They are kind of along the same lines as reviewers who have nothing to say but, "I could not read this because of the horrible format."

Those sorts of reviews are kind of discouraged, too.

But the author should know that, so I will let one or two of those stay -- though there is no reason a script needs a dozen similar posts.

And reviewers who only focus on scripts with poor format -- script after script -- do become kind of tedious.

Quoted from Baltis. It is a standard practice that, just like our moronic political figure heads, the writer gets another writer to write their log lines for them.  Why? Cos' they're hard to write.  You'd be surprised at how many screenwriters, who write kick ass scripts, can't write log lines.  They opt out of them and have other people write them.

It's true, loglines are extremely hard to write, but it's worthwhile for a writer to at least try to understand and write them as well as they can.

My reasoning here, is that if you can place your whole script neatly within the confines of a quality logline, you probably know your script and its essence very well. That fact, and even through the process of generating many loglines that seem inadequate, you will gain insight into the work.

On the other hand, even if you come up with something completely brilliant and acceptable, someone else, who's not so close to the work, might even be able to nail it even more and to a point where you say, "Why the hell didn't I think of that?"

The reason there is that we often can't see the forest through the trees.

My answer is then that the writer should try individually, but also offer it for consultation with people you know the quality of their work and insight and respect for their opinion. It's always grey/gray isn't it?

Sandra

I think logline comments should be treated just like script comments. If someone says "this logline sucks" delete it, but if someone says "this logline sucks, it tells me absolutely nothing about your script, has numerous typos and grammatical errors" and things like that then it should stay.

I can honestly say I've never read or not read a script onsite because of the logline.
Sure I'll look at it but it doesn't influence me at all.
Maybe because I struggle to write decent ones myself.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I think logline comments should be treated just like script comments. If someone says "this logline sucks" delete it, but if someone says "this logline sucks, it tells me absolutely nothing about your script, has numerous typos and grammatical errors" and things like that then it should stay.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

It would be a huge mistake to delete helpful reviews of loglines.

I say delete them, but notify the poster.

If the newbies continue to post short and useless reviews, then the newer newbies will see that as "how shit runs down" and they'll continue these types of reviews.

Isn't there something in the rules about useless reviews anyways?

Quoted from Lightfoot I say delete them, but notify the poster. If the newbies continue to post short and useless reviews, then the newer newbies will see that as "how shit runs down" and they'll continue these types of reviews. Isn't there something in the rules about useless reviews anyways?

Fuck!!! This post is NOT DIRECTED AT NEWBIES!!!  Fuck me!!!!

Sandra

My bad... no one mind the dumbass here.

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. Fuck me!!!!

Since you're twisting my arm here, Sandra, okay then. When? Where?

Quoted from Tommyp Couldn't have said it better myself. It would be a huge mistake to delete helpful reviews of loglines.

I'd say in most cases it's up to the writer. Your script, your choice.

If someone asked me to delete a review/comment, in most cases I would do it.

Again this is supposed to be a helpful resource for unproduced writers and you cannot help with a logline without reading the script. In that case the person will actually be able to do something with the review/comments.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley Again this is supposed to be a helpful resource for unproduced writers and you cannot help with a logline without reading the script.

The following is an excellent example of why the above isn't true.

Quoted from bert For the script about anti-religion activist "Madalyn Murray-O'Hair", your review of the logline was (and I parapharse) "What a silly name.  Why use that name?"

The very fact that this reader had no clue about O'Hare  gives the author of this script precious information - even though the reader has not read the script.

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. It's true, loglines are extremely hard to write, but it's worthwhile for a writer to at least try to understand and write them as well as they can. My reasoning here, is that if you can place your whole script neatly within the confines of a quality logline, you probably know your script and its essence very well. That fact, and even through the process of generating many loglines that seem inadequate, you will gain insight into the work. On the other hand, even if you come up with something completely brilliant and acceptable, someone else, who's not so close to the work, might even be able to nail it even more and to a point where you say, "Why the hell didn't I think of that?" The reason there is that we often can't see the forest through the trees. My answer is then that the writer should try individually, but also offer it for consultation with people you know the quality of their work and insight and respect for their opinion. It's always grey/gray isn't it? Sandra

I think this is a good post.

Ultimately, I will often not read a script if the logline is dull or poorly written. Just being honest here, but if a writer who knows his story inside and out can't make his story interesting for three sentences, then I'm automatically thinking that there's no way he's going to be able to keep my interest over 90-120 minutes.

I would say that the logline is imperative to getting reads, so if it comes across as dull then it's in the best interests of the author that they know.

Wesley, you can help a lot with a logline if you haven't read the script...

There are aspects which make good loglines and bad loglines. It's your script in a sentence or two, and is extremely important, and CAN be critiqued individually, without reading the script.

Quoted from Sandra Elstree Fuck me!!!!

Quoted from Rob 'the Tart' Sniper Since you're twisting my arm here, Sandra, okay then. When? Where?

Oh dear. You could at least buy the girl dinner finst. I mean, if was it was me, I'd let her have fries with it as well.

Quoted from RV at bar Pint of lager please fella. Sandra, what do you want a half of then luv?

Stop flirting you two! That's my job.

RV

Quoted from rendevous Oh dear. You could at least buy the girl dinner finst. I mean, if was it was me, I'd let her have fries with it as well.

I was gonna offer her cream for the coffee but if you think fries work better...

On topic:

Imo a logline is basically a written teaser-trailer - a good one will get even a bad script reads and vice versa. I therefore feel that critiquing the logline is just as important as critiquing the script BUT, like with the script, keep it constructive or bite your tongue.

Quoted from sniper I was gonna offer her cream for the coffee but if you think fries work better...

Ooohh. For her coffee? Are you sure that's where it goes?

Quoted from sniper On topic: Imo a logline is basically a written teaser-trailer - a good one will get even a bad script reads and vice versa. I therefore feel that critiquing the logline is just as important as critiquing the script BUT, like with the script, keep it constructive or bite your tongue.

This is true. A good one can pull a reader in. Truth is it's poor form to just comment on a logline, as it is to just comment on a the first few pages. Give the writer 10 pages to impress. Any less is a bit slack.

RV  

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. Fuck!!! This post is NOT DIRECTED AT NEWBIES!!!  Fuck me!!!! Sandra

Quoted from sniper Since you're twisting my arm here, Sandra, okay then. When? Where?

Quoted from rendevous Oh dear. You could at least buy the girl dinner finst. I mean, if was it was me, I'd let her have fries with it as well. Stop flirting you two! That's my job. RV

Quoted from sniper I was gonna offer her cream for the coffee but if you think fries work better...

Quoted from rendevous Ooohh. For her coffee? Are you sure that's where it goes? RV

Alls I waz going to try and do is write me a nice lilly Christmas script that waz innocent and sweet, and all I can think about now is how bad I am, the depths that my mind can sink to, how bad I am, and how am I ever going to redeem myself.

And God help me because I think this would be a good logline,

A woman seeking spiritual ecstasy, reveals her darkest passions while believing an inverse numerical operation will be the means she requires.

***

*** Something to do with this:

10
01

100
010
001


1000
0100
0010
0001

...An inverse matrix operation kind of idea.

But somehow, mathematics aside, I think it all boils down to sexuality.

So perhaps the secret to a good logline is some kind of inversion method that could be mathematically calculated. (I'm serious).

And the secret to good sex, must therefore be the same.

And the cream? Well, that's easy...

That's one of a series of big bangs which is what this gentleman proposes. Well, he doesn't go into the sexual aspect, that was me, but I believe it's key in the whole universal theory aspect.





Sandra

Well, to bring it back around and deliver my thought on Bert's original post here, even though it's yesterday.

The logline is probably as essential as the script itself, and in some cases even more so. Some may recall that I did a few threads here and there critiquing query letters. Those were helpful, especially if the person did not know anything about the script.

The logline should draw a reader into reading the script, and if it doesn't do that, then the writer needs to work on it. A killer script will never be read if it doesn't have an equally good, or better, logline.

Let us remember the line that sells even mediocre scripts: "It had a premise that thrilled us!"

Let us also keep in mind that while Hostel as a movie wasn't too good, it sold on its premise.

So reviewing only a logline shouldn't be the end all of a script review, but those would be worthwhile...provided they're constructive of course. Same rules would apply as to regular script reviews. Be nice. Be constructive.

Quoted from Sandra 'Love and peace yeah' Elstree And the cream? Well, that's easy...

I dunno. Chocolates and champagne are usually my minimum. And only then if you're very nice to me....

Back on topic, despite myself....

Quoted from George W The logline should draw a reader into reading the script, and if it doesn't do that, then the writer needs to work on it. A killer script will never be read if it doesn't have an equally good, or better, logline.

And if you listen carefully you can hear a nail being hit squarely on the head.

Quoted from George Willson Well, to bring it back around and deliver my thought on Bert's original post here, even though it's yesterday.

Taw... taw... Topic! Yes oh yes oh yes.

Quoted from George Willson The logline is probably as essential as the script itself, and in some cases even more so. Some may recall that I did a few threads here and there critiquing query letters. Those were helpful, especially if the person did not know anything about the script. The logline should draw a reader into reading the script, and if it doesn't do that, then the writer needs to work on it. A killer script will never be read if it doesn't have an equally good, or better, logline. Let us remember the line that sells even mediocre scripts: "It had a premise that thrilled us!" So reviewing only a logline shouldn't be the end all of a script review, but those would be worthwhile...provided they're constructive of course. Same rules would apply as to regular script reviews. Be nice. Be constructive.

Day me say day-oh! Daylight come and me wan go home!  

Be nice. Be constructive!!!

Sandra

Quoted from Tommyp Wesley, you can help a lot with a logline if you haven't read the script... There are aspects which make good loglines and bad loglines. It's your script in a sentence or two, and is extremely important, and CAN be critiqued individually, without reading the script.

Like you said "It's your script" and "In a sentence or two" and yes you can tell a person it isn't good but you can't HELP by saying it is not good. You just leave them wondering what to do.

I've been trying to come up with a logline for my feature for like three years and still have not settled on one I like so I know it's not easy but I also haven't got any help by people who read it as to how to make it any better and I usually ask.

Quoted from mcornetto The very fact that this reader had no clue about O'Hare  gives the author of this script precious information - even though the reader has not read the script.

How does it HELP write a better one?

Like I said, we're supposed to be helping each other. Is it really a lot of extra work to open the script and help the person improve.

This thread wouldn't exist if the person was more helpful.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley Like you said "It's your script" and "In a sentence or two" and yes you can tell a person it isn't good but you can't HELP by saying it is not good. You just leave them wondering what to do. I've been trying to come up with a logline for my feature for like three years and still have not settled on one I like so I know it's not easy but I also haven't got any help by people who read it as to how to make it any better and I usually ask.

Please, (Bevakasha) call on me. If I could work on this, it would make me very happy.

Sincerely I believe, that other people can help us rise above what we currently are perceiving.

If a few of us can "chip in" and give our expressions in your regard, we might really have something that is, at worst:

...non marketable due to its undefinability...

...or at its best:

Controversial

AS... USAKING PROCLAIMS:

Most important:

At the heart of any piece,

Must be:

The Emotive.

Sandra

I completely disagree with deleting a post simply because it's based on the logline alone.

I've made a number of posts based only on the logline.  I give examples of what's terrible about it, and I musually say something like, "no one's going to read this script, when the logline alone has 7 typos in it."

And I personally pretty much know up fornt when a script is going to be piss poor...if someone can't string 2 or 3 sentences together correctly in a logline, what do you think 120 pages are going to look like.

Now, if someone merely says, "you're logline sucks goat nips" or the like, I don't find that very helpful, because as we all know, loglines are tough...probably tougher than writing a full fledged feature script!

That's my 11 cents worth.

Quoted from Dreamscale I completely disagree with deleting a post simply because it's based on the logline alone. I've made a number of posts based only on the logline.  I give examples of what's terrible about it, and I musually say something like, "no one's going to read this script, when the logline alone has 7 typos in it." And I personally pretty much know up fornt when a script is going to be piss poor...if someone can't string 2 or 3 sentences together correctly in a logline, what do you think 120 pages are going to look like. Now, if someone merely says, "you're logline sucks goat nips" or the like, I don't find that very helpful, because as we all know, loglines are tough...probably tougher than writing a full fledged feature script! That's my 11 cents worth.

That's pretty much 100% how it should work although maybe give some ways to improve since you admit they are tough.

I think people should recheck a logline before sending it to Don and reread it after the script goes up. Mods can edit a script thread and fix or change the logline for you. No excuses.

Quoted from Dreamscale I completely disagree with deleting a post simply because it's based on the logline alone. I've made a number of posts based only on the logline.  I give examples of what's terrible about it, and I musually say something like, "no one's going to read this script, when the logline alone has 7 typos in it." And I personally pretty much know up fornt when a script is going to be piss poor...if someone can't string 2 or 3 sentences together correctly in a logline, what do you think 120 pages are going to look like. Now, if someone merely says, "you're logline sucks goat nips" or the like, I don't find that very helpful, because as we all know, loglines are tough...probably tougher than writing a full fledged feature script! That's my 11 cents worth.

It's true, Jeff has been known to do that.  His review for my only feature length attempt at a script:

Quoted from Dreamscale Hey Steven, I haven't read your script, but you need to fix the typos in your synopsis first. Horrible pet peeve o' mine when I read a synopsis and there are multiple mistakes.  You know things are going to be "bad" when the slug is so poorly written.

So I went back and looked at my logline and looked and looked and looked and could not see typos.  I had one, where there was no apostrophe before an S, but the troubles were not typos . . . I had actually mis-used grammar, and I hadn't realized it, because I did not know.  It's very hard to correct those things, if you do not know of it, so you do not know where to look.  That's why I suggested to Jeff that it's always best to expound upon this sort of statement so the person truly understands what they are looking for when they go to correct something.  Hence, his long point by point reviews you see now.  VERY helpful to the writer.  VERY helpful!!

Ah, yes, Steven, my friend, I do remember that.  I defintely did not do a very good job with actual examples, did I?  Piss poor, actually.

Very good point, but at least my point got through, although it should have been much clearer.  I was probably in a crappy mood and didn't want to the spend the extra 4 1/2 minutes it would have taken.  My bad!

anecdote: My first script, awesome, of course. So I'm figuring out who to send it to. So I send some letters, get dear John replies. Then I get some phone numbers. So I call Miramax. Lady answers the phone,

I ask for the director of development...

hold please,

and then hello, this is so and so.

I say I have a script.

She says, nice, what's it about...

What's it about? It's an action story.

Yeah, but what is it about?

I stumbled every which way to Sunday because I could not, in a very few words, explain what my story was was about.

After a minute of stumbling, she said, very politely, when you know what it's about, call me back. I never did call back and I'll never forget that phone call.

So, you should be able to say what your story is about, in very few words.

Clorox, what year did this happen?  I bet it was quite awhile ago...right????

Great story, though for sure...

1997

Yeah, I figured.  It doesn't work like that anymore...not even close.  Those were the days...

That was the first time I got close. Only one other time, but never since. And even then, that was a total fluke to get in on that call, or, as Donald Trump put it, it was a failure to be prepared when opportunity presented itself.

Quoted from Dreamscale Ah, yes, Steven, my friend, I do remember that.  I defintely did not do a very good job with actual examples, did I?  Piss poor, actually. Very good point, but at least my point got through, although it should have been much clearer.  I was probably in a crappy mood and didn't want to the spend the extra 4 1/2 minutes it would have taken.  My bad!

Actually, if a person takes the time to become a writer of any kind, they really should take the time to learn such basics as grammar.  I should have known what was wrong, or better yet, not made the errors in the first place.  

Quoted from cloroxmartini anecdote: My first script, awesome, of course. So I'm figuring out who to send it to. So I send some letters, get dear John replies. Then I get some phone numbers. So I call Miramax. Lady answers the phone, I ask for the director of development... hold please, and then hello, this is so and so. I say I have a script. She says, nice, what's it about... What's it about? It's an action story. Yeah, but what is it about? I stumbled every which way to Sunday because I could not, in a very few words, explain what my story was was about. After a minute of stumbling, she said, very politely, when you know what it's about, call me back. I never did call back and I'll never forget that phone call. So, you should be able to say what your story is about, in very few words.

Bang on! We can all agree to that! Logan, or no Logan.  

Sandra

Great story Cloroxmartini . . . and thanks for backing up my main point. Much appreciated!

question, do we have a thread where we actually post loglines and review them?

There should not be one.

In the context of a posted script, I think it appropriate to comment on the logline. But just posting loglines for review, no.

Why not?  People would be able to discuss if its interesting or not, and try to help improve it.  What's wrong with it, what would work, how to make it short and sweet, etc all that stuff.

Quoted from Slab-meister Do we have a thread where we actually post loglines and review them?

Quoted from cloroxmartini There should not be one.

Good Lord -- now I am quoting clorox haha.

My main concern, Slabby, is opening the floodgates on that.

I mean, look at the Work in Progress board, where (many) people post the first random thought that pops into their head -- as if a script is actually forthcoming.

It is just posting to see yourself post, if that makes any sense.

If one person starts a "How's my logline?" thread, I shudder to think how many more will soon clutter the boards.

If you got a script, a logline goes with it -- and then it is time to discuss the quality of that particular logline.

Otherwise, you are waaaay into cart-before-horse territory.

A poor Ex-Budweiser Clydesdale finds himself in a real fix after the cart of his new owner somehow gets ahead of him.

I hate it when that happens.

We could always have one thread that's devoted to posting your log line for feedback.  Any one who wants to post a log line can post it there.  Sound good?  

yes. I suck at those and could use all the help I can get.

Quoted from mcornetto We could always have one thread that's devoted to posting your log line for feedback.  Any one who wants to post a log line can post it there.  Sound good?

Not to shoot down my pal Pia (or Cornetto, for that matter), but I predict that within 3 days the thread will be full of trash and smart-ass comments and will become essentially useless.

I am pretty sure I am right.

I like the idea, myself.

Oops, I posted while others were being shot down too. . . .

RAT-A-TAT-TAT-TAT!  Got ya!

I think the thread would be ok.   Probably, like most other threads here, before it gets out of hand people will have moved on.

Well I guess Bert would have to start a new thread and make it boldly clear that it's the Official Review My Logline Thread, or something like that.  Lay down heavy rules, tho, like no goofing off with nonsense loglines just for laughs -- only serious posts and serious advice.  Anything else is deleted.  I could see a logline thread going south real fast with jokes and stuff but maybe if its kept maintained it could be useful.  

You have a logline you want done?

Quoted from slabstaa Well I guess Bert would have to start a new thread and make it boldly clear that it's the Official Review My Logline Thread, or something like that.  Lay down heavy rules, tho, like no goofing off with nonsense loglines just for laughs -- only serious posts and serious advice.  Anything else is deleted.

Hell, Cornetto's trigger-finger is as fast as anybody's on the delete key.

Give it a shot if you want -- but keep it off the WIP board, please -- as a logline thread is little more than an "I've got an idea" thread.

If you want it, C, put it on the Collaboration board and you keep it swept up haha.

So if anyone has a logline they would like to start with. I'll start the thread.

Quoted from mcornetto So if anyone has a logline they would like to start with. I'll start the thread.

...I don't have one...that's why I need help!  

I've got one.  I'll PM it to you, if you'd rather do it that way.

Ok the logline thread is here

http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-collaborate/m-1260421988/

and it's ready for its first victim

Cool, I hope it works out.

Quoted from bert I mean, look at the Work in Progress board, where (many) people post the first random thought that pops into their head -- as if a script is actually forthcoming.

Guidelines which we have supplied and brains should be enough to fix this. Obviously not so we take shit for deleting stuff by people who put no thought into the "idea" in progress.

The logline thread will easily clutter because many people will reply to comments made rating the new logline which means you will have to clean it out on a regular basis (Probably after every one logline is to the writers liking) and I don't think you should actually write it for someone but instead give them the ideas to do it themselves.

Also it will clutter with multiple loglines at the same time and some will not get the help they seek.