For me:

1. I can tell by the logline if I am going to read the script.
2. I can tell by the end of page 1 if I am going to read page 2.

Repeat step 2 until page 20.

3. Page 20 - I can tell if I am going to read the rest of the script.

4. End of script - I can tell if I have read a good story,

That is just for me

Quoted from Grandma Bear You seem mad at me for some reason. I'm just an old woman writing and reading as a hobby. If you think I'm being unfair, who does it hurt if I elect to not read someone's script? My time is limited, I'll give a script one page to make me feel anything/something. If I do, I'll read the second page. If I'm still interested, I go on until the script no longer interest me.

I'm not mad at you. Don't get me wrong. I just strongly disagree with your claim and I'm voicing my opinion. It has nothing to do with you as a person and I don't mean to come across harshly. This is not my desire, intent.

I understand that your and everyone else's time is limited and if you choose to stop reading at page 1 that is your business. However what I can't agree with is your claim that you or anyone else can tell if a writer can tell a story just by read 1% of his. This notion I find ridiculous and arrogant. It's an assumption that is presented as fact. I find it very judgmental. And, like you said, unfair. Again, whether you stop reading or not, that's your choice. But saying based on the one page that you know this or that about the writer in terms of his ability to tell a story is what I take exception too.

Let's take me for instance. I have always liked movies. I think I have, in my basement probably over... 5000 movies on VHS, Laser Disks, Video CD's, Bootlegs etc. Some I bought, some were given to me, some were recorded off of TV. Where I live you could buy 2 movies for a dollar, bootleg on the street. A 4 four VHS tape you could buy for 2 dollars.

I've probably seen thousands more movies on TV, the cinema or that I've rented back in the day. I've watched everything from the very first things put to film to hundreds of kung fu movies, samurai movies, Russian dramas etc. The other month I was sick and bed-bound, I watched 11 movies in one day. Just to catch up on some I haven't seen and see if they differed in structure etc. I've read books on film-making. Seen likely most documentaries about the process and the history of cinema. I've been to movie sets. I've worked as a video editor. I've written 8 features scripts. I may have not read thousands of screenplay, but I have probably read over 600-700 at least. If we don't count the ones I didn't read whole and dropped after a few pages.

So, I've invested a lot of time watching movies, figuring out how they are made and how they have evolved. I would say, it's safe to say that I know more about movies than the average moviegoer and that I have accumulated some knowledge of the topic.

However... I would not dare say I can tell how good a movie will be after watching 15 minutes of it in terms of story. Even after seeing thousands of movies and knowing a lot of the tropes, how the usual structures payout and so on.

It's my opinion that human beings should be humble. So it's the show of arrogance that someone can tell how good someone else is and if they can tell a story or not just by reading one page is what irks me. To dismiss someone just on the thought that you can evaluate correctly his storytelling ability and talent by that 1%. Especially when we are talking about a subjective field where there are different approaches, ways to tell a story, there are no guidelines to follow on how to do this and that in terms of story. Where innovation and originality should be praised. People might be great at pattern recognition but if a script is 100 pages and you only read the first one and stop, you don't know what pattern the script follows, you just assume that you do and here is where the arrogance lies.

People can believe to have this ability, I on the other hand believe that they don't. Some voice that they do, I voice my opinion that they don't. In the end it will not change anything as both sides will choose to believe what they want. That's how it is with most things when it comes to people. But I felt the need to get my opinion out there

So, I'm not mad at you Pia. I just don't agree with you on this matter. I've found you to be wonderful, polite and helpful on this forum and I wish you a ton of success.

Maybe I can mediate some here, as I can see both sides. From a novel reading perspective, I have read as much as Demento has watched... and every book I would give 100 pages, often 1 third, to tell if I like the story or not.

However, I could tell from the first few pages whether or not the writer's voice was one I could relate to. A good writer communicates on a subconscious level with their readers. This is true for novels and screenplays. Being able to tell/execute a story well is very important. Two writers could tell the exact same story, but one will always tell it better than the other, relatively speaking. It could be that two different readers will favour a different writer.

So, I think that when we say that we can know if they can tell a story or not from the first page, is more that we can tell whether that writer will be able to tell it in a way that we can relate to.

Quoted from DustinBowcot So, I think that when we say that we can know if they can tell a story or not from the first page, is more that we can tell whether that writer will be able to tell it in a way that we can relate to.

That's different. Now we're talking about personal preference and a matter of taste. So, maybe by reading a few pages I could tell if this is written in a style that's up my alley. If I like the tone. If the genre is my thing. If the writer has good grasp of language. If he has an interesting voice.

This is totally different than offering up a claim that someone can tell if a writer can tell a story just by going on the first page of a script. It's presented in such a way that someone has the ability to judge someone else very objectively just based on 1% or less of their story.

This is passing judgment on the talent of a person by your notions of how a story should be told without even having significant evidence, making such an assessment on the basis of only one page. Stories are build, developed.

Like you Dustin with books I usually give a movie at least 45 minutes before I start fast-forwarding to the end. But still, I make a point to finish most things I start in order to give them a fair shake and try not to pass judgement without first trying to get what they were trying to do. If I don't finish it, I make it a point to mention that I didn't finish it. Just so everything is fair. This is how I hope to be treated and this is how I treat others.

It's like me watching a football game and turning it off after the first minute and saying - "These people don't know how to play football. Did you see those two passes they did? They suck."

I'm not talking about movies. I'm talking about screenplays. It's like studying the blueprints to a house by an architect vs checking out the finished building. Did the builder use skilled craftsmen that took pride in their work, use quality materials and so on. Or did he do a shoddy low quality job? None of which has to do with the drawings of the architect.

You can continue to call me arrogant, but I continue to base my opinion on my own experience which comes from having read thousands of scripts. I believe many full time readers, people that read scripts for a living will say the same thing. You can usually tell a lot from the first page of a script. Again, if there's nothing on the first page that tells us anything of interest of any kind, the writer is wasting space and most likely, the story that follows will be more of the same. It's a pattern that I continue to see.

I'm out of this discussion, because you continue to misread/misunderstand what I'm trying to say and I hate arguments in text. I do better in person than typing.

Quoted from Grandma Bear It's like studying the blueprints to a house by an architect vs checking out the finished building. Did the builder use skilled craftsmen that took pride in their work, use quality materials and so on. Or did he do a shoddy low quality job? None of which has to do with the drawings of the architect.

But if we see only 1% of the drawing how can we tell what the architect's vision is?

If I just see a corner of a drawing of a house, can I make an assessment that the plans for the house are lousy? That the design sucks?

Quoted from Grandma Bear I believe many full time readers, people that read scripts for a living will say the same thing

I believe they are all wrong. They have the right to believe what they choose to believe, but I have the right to believe that their approach is wrong.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Again, if there's nothing on the first page that tells us anything of interest of any kind, the writer is wasting space and most likely, the story that follows will be more of the same. It's a pattern that I continue to see.

So you choose to prejudge one person's work in a subjective field based on what you perceived as mistakes in other people's work? I'd say that's unfair and unreasonable. Plus, if you started off seeing these mistakes in writing and start writing off other future writer's going by this, you are limiting yourself and cheating yourself to experiencing new writing approaches and will likely get stuck in a reading pattern yourself.

Quoted from Grandma Bear You can continue to call me arrogant, but I continue to base my opinion on my own experience which comes from having read thousands of scripts.

That's fine. I'm just pointing it out as I think it's a limiting mentality for people to have. Everyone chooses their own way.

Pia is correct, as usual.

Demento is incorrect as usual.

It's very, very easy to tell if a writer is any good, based on the first page.  SIMPLE!

End of discussion.  Thank you, all.

Quoted Text Pia is correct, as usual.

I disagree with Pia's premise other than as it personally applies to Pia (i.e., what may be true for Pia could not be true for 99% of other readers - who knows). I generally think there is no way to tell if a script contains a good story based on one page. I have read bad page ones that yield good stories and great page ones that yield bad stories. However, I have no argument with a premise that says if I don't like the first page I am not going to bother to find out. It is the writer's obligation to draw in.  

Quoted Text Demento is incorrect as usual.

I believe that, in general, Demento is correct. I do take objection to linking Pia's view as something born from arrogance or any other personality trait - it is just an honest difference of opinion. It's like saying you would have to be an idiot to think - blah, blah - it ends the conversation and is not needed. SO Demento - with you on thesis - not crazy about the manner in which it is delivered.

Quoted Text It's very, very easy to tell if a writer is any good, based on the first page.  SIMPLE!

All due respect but without the words - "sometimes" inserted at the beginning of your sentence - I couldn't disagree more.

I agree with CJ.

Think of storytelling on the most basic level, one person sitting across from another telling a story. What techniques do good storytellers universally employ in that situation? They inflect, they make eye contact, they use their hands and general body language to convey emotion, they speak clearly and fluently.

What do bad storytellers do? They stutter, they mumble, they look down at their feet, they talk in a bored, monotone voice.

These things are true irrespective of what story is being told. One storyteller could be telling a simple revenge tale. The other a brilliant, complex drama spanning eons filled with irony and metaphors and clever messages about the ills of society or whatever. Doesn't matter. The one who mumbles and talks without inflection is a worse storyteller. He may have a better story. But he can't tell it as well.

On page 1 of a script there's usually action descriptions, character descriptions, and dialogue. If the dialogue is flat, on the nose, etc... that is bad storytelling. If the action descriptions are over-written in big blocks of text and entirely passive... that is bad storytelling. It's the equivalent of someone mumbling, talking without inflection, not engaging the listener.

The successful patterns and techniques that give action descriptions their potency apply from page 1 onward. If he's not doing it on page 1, he's not gonna suddenly start writing vivid, efficient action descriptions on page 50. They will be bad throughout. Same with the dialogue and everything else.

He will remain a bad storyteller. May turn out he has a good story. But his telling of that story is greatly flawed.

For many people, the execution of the story is the most important thing. Least for me it is. I'd rather listen to a good storyteller tell an unoriginal, plain story than have someone mumble out a wholly unique yarn while slouched in his chair staring at his feet the whole time.

I assume Pia feels the same way. Even from the first page she can tell if someone is a bad storyteller. Hence she stops reading. That's not arrogance. That's common sense.  

What we need as new site functionality is Voting Buttons to 'settle' discussion like this

More seriously... Pia gave her view of what she has learnt through experience, she openly admits that this may mean she has missed some good scripts to read, but the key here is that it is HER opinion and HER approach... and if that works for Pia then that's fine... for Pia.

Stating that you have formulated an opinion based on extensive experience isn't arrogant imho... it's just a personal insight that you've come to and others can agree with it, or not.

Which sums up this thread, more or less

Actually, Pia's conclusion was:

Quoted Text ....but if the story has done nothing to peak my interest after that first page, I'm out. Sounds unfair? Of course.

So, it wasn't so much about story telling as it was about piquing interest. Nothing really to do with format or errors - I'll make the same decision on log-lines. If a log line doesn't pique my interest - I'm not reading. Because - it didn't pique MY interest. It does not mean it is not interesting. So I viewed Pia's conclusion not as some ultimate script review paradigm - but rather a simple statement of her personal experience. My personal experience does not align with hers, hence I have reached a different conclusion.  I think there is virtually nothing you can tell about a "story" from page 1. But that is just me.

Quoted Text It's entirely reasonable to not be entertained on page one or feel the content at hand could have clearly been written in a more entertaining fashion. It's fair to jump to assumptions based on that in the same way it's fair to question a singer who misses a note in the opening bar of a song.

Slightly different view - I think it is more akin to forecasting the quality of an entire concert based on the first note in the first song. Just don't think the first nite is a good barometer. But again - that's for me.

Quoted Text This is something that's entirely different than aborting because of bold slug lines, an adverb, five lines of dialogue, or whatever shit people are freaking out over these days. It's also something that stems deeper than it seems many writers and readers are prepared to tread.

Could not agree and disagree more (what??.  I have reached the point where I believe that commenting on someone's overall writing ability or the potential quality of a script based on rules or guidelines (many of which I no longer even deem valid) to be just plain silly.  That being said - I would add the one page test to that list. But again - that's just me.

Quoted Text What we need as new site functionality is Voting Buttons to 'settle' discussion like this

Except it wouldn't settle it

Plenty of people are going to chuck a script after one page. I've seen it discussed here many a time. No one's ever changed their mind on the subject. In that sense, the onus is on the writer to put their best foot forward or not. The reader's gonna do what they're gonna do.

Personally, I prefer to give every script what I believe to be a fair shake. I'm not a professional reader, so I don't feel the need to act like one. I've generally got some time to dig in and not so defiantly precious with my time that I can't read at least a few pages (not that I don't bail on scripts early on myself). I wouldn't say bailing after one page is inherently unhelpful in the case of writers doing it, but given that we're not professional readers (or at least not reading in a professional capacity here), I think it defeats the purpose of having a forum like this. The only real differentiator is that writers probably aren't riding on as many hopes and can afford to sink a read without losing a significant opportunity.

On the subject of arrogance, specifically Pia's arrogance, I'd propose she is nothing from the sort. This I know from personal experience (as is currently a forefront of this conversation). One of the least arrogant people I've met here. Writers can be as fucked up as anyone else, especially where arrogance is concerned, so I think that's saying something.

Quoted from James McClung Plenty of people are going to chuck a script after one page. I've seen it discussed here many a time. No one's ever changed their mind on the subject. In that sense, the onus is on the writer to put their best foot forward or not. The reader's gonna do what they're gonna do. Personally, I prefer to give every script what I believe to be a fair shake. I'm not a professional reader, so I don't feel the need to act like one. I've generally got some time to dig in and not so defiantly precious with my time that I can't read at least a few pages (not that I don't bail on scripts early on myself). I wouldn't say bailing after one page is inherently unhelpful in the case of writers doing it, but given that we're not professional readers (or at least not reading in a professional capacity here), I think it defeats the purpose of having a forum like this. The only real differentiator is that writers probably aren't riding on as many hopes and can afford to sink a read without losing a significant opportunity. On the subject of arrogance, specifically Pia's arrogance, I'd propose she is nothing from the sort. This I know from personal experience (as is currently a forefront of this conversation). One of the least arrogant people I've met here. Writers can be as fucked up as anyone else, especially where arrogance is concerned, so I think that's saying something.

well said

You can most certainly tell/predict what you're in for on page one.