In The Dog House by Paul Knauer - Series - Edward, an aspiring politician, has a secret: His backyard is now home to an unauthorized underground survival bunker built and occupied by his paranoid and fiercely anti-government brother. 27 pages - pdf format

Writer interested in feedback on this work

Trying to polish this up as a writing sample for an upcoming fellowship pitch. I�ll take anything ya got, even if you only have time to read the first line!

It�s not the project I�m pitching. I just need to include a sample in a similar style and tone, and this is pretty close.

(I�m pitching a multi-camera sitcom, like this one, though not quite as over the top.)

Thanks all!

PK, just letting you know I'm reading this.

Quoted from LC PK, just letting you know I'm reading this.

Big thanks!

Hey mate, notes as I read...

Would have liked a bit more of a character intro for Edward and Leah.

Quoted Text Your every opponent will have a flag pin

Is this correct?

Three pages in and I've definitely had a few chuckles.

Quoted Text With Amos approaching, Edward snaps the blinds shut, clearly not wanting Leah to see Amos.

Maybe just "Leah to see him".

Quoted Text slumped, in Danny’s very

I think you should intro him in caps straight away to avoid any confusion. It was minor but it was there.

It seems every other character is getting some sort of intro, why not Edward and Leah?

Quoted Text With his mouth full...

I personally think this would be better as a wrylie, reads a bit awkwardly like this. There was another one earlier as well... dammit I cant find it, but you used the action to setup how a line was delivered, I think it's better in a wrylie as well.

Quoted Text He’s got a pitch to make.

No particular need for this as it is exactly what he does next.

Bobble-head? Hand sanitizer? You still stuck in the WT?

And done...

First off, very well written as always. A few things I'd personally change, but if you didn't change any of them it really wouldn't matter.

Story wise, I found it a bit hard to really understand the tone. A lot of it feels slapstick and cheesy and parts you could really milk for drama/tension aren't handled to their full potential IMO, eg. Leah meeting Amos and Edward finding Amos and Leah in the bunker.

I can't really see what the ongoing story would be and how you'd maintain the central premise moving forward.

I did say in the beginning that I had a few chuckles and this did continue throughout but there was also a lot that I just though was a bit cringy and I think that goes back to me not quite getting the tone.

Comparing this to Bad Fish, which I know I shouldn't do, but with BF I got the world and tone almost immediately and I was along for the ride, this just didn't stick the same way.

Sorry, but this one wasn't for me, I hate to say that because you know I love almost everything you do. Really interested to hear what others think and I'm hoping it's just me.

Paul, I agree with a lot of what Warren had to say on this one.

It's pretty witty in parts and I too had a few chuckles but it also came across as a bit old fashioned in its humour and I wasn't finding it easy to invest in the story. Granted, a lot of this would come alive if cast well but I was left with a distinct feeling that I don't think this particular piece accurately reflects your talent.  It's competently written but I didn't quite get the flow or ease of comedy, or your distinct voice for that matter, as I did with Bad Fish or many of the other things you've written in a style that seems more effortless and consistently impressive.

I did make one note of an example that dates its style. Jmho, of course.

Think  of  the  good  I  could  do  for  the  every man.
Leah should at lesst pull him up and counter with 'every woman' too. If he wants to get elected in the #metoo era, I think she'd tell him he'd better wise up.

I could do a further line by line but I'm not sure that would benefit you considering you're using this primarily as a sample piece and I'm not convinced this is the best choice.

I hope you'll forgive my candour.
You're a talented writer. I just don't think this is the right sample.

Glad to get the honest feedback. That's exactly what I'm going for.

I'm definitely trying for a different tone than Bad Fish. (I wanted it to be a little ridiculous and very jokey -- which is the way I see multi-camera vs. single camera.)

I do think it's interesting that both of you think it's not as strong overall. I wrote this several years ago and I've definitely advanced as a writer (thanks to this site and people like you!).

I also thinks its interesting that I consider myself a comedy writer at heart... but, everyone likes my non-comedic material far better. Not sure what to do with that particular piece of information.

I'll let the thoughts percolate for a bit, then decide what to do. I'm committed to pitching a sitcom, so I need a sitcom sample. They've seen my strongest sitcom script already. I only have two others besides this one. One nobody has ever seen. Not sure its even as good as this one. Though, it's set in a radio station like the project I'm pitching.

The other went through development. It had a lot of eyes on it and professional input. But, I never quite liked the changes made by the production company. The original is the first script I ever wrote, so it's pretty rough....

Dangit. I really want to get this right.

Very appreciative of the feedback! Exceedingly helpful.

Paul

Quick bit of info regarding different sitcom styles... as an explanation, not a defense.

(I've already decided to find something else for my writing sample, based on the very helpful feedback!)

Typically, multi-camera sitcoms are more "old school" joke telling. The humor is more "set 'em up, knock 'em down" style. It generally lends itself to more outrageous storylines. Silly people doing silly things. (Most older sitcoms are multi-cam: All in The Family, Cheers, King of Queens, Everybody Loves Raymond.)

They are shot in front of a studio audience... presented almost like a play. Which also means limited sets. Most of the action takes place in one or two central locations. (I cheated a bit on this one.)

Single camera is shot like a feature. The humor is generally less on the nose... resulting more from character and action than from jokes. (Multi-cams are coming back, but many recent sitcoms are single camera. The settings are the biggest giveaway. Single cameras can go anywhere.)

They're two completely different forms, requiring completely different writing styles.

Both are fun to write.

I should say, ALL comedy (like all writing) should come from character and action. It's just, sitcoms lend themselves to more traditional joke telling.

Just wanted to clarify my above post.

Paul:

You definitely need more setting and character description in the open.  These are your two main characters and all I know is their age.  I also know very little about the setting – e.g., is it a nice house – a piece of crap?
Because of the lack of clarity – some of the lines don’t land as well as they should – maybe a s

SUPER early on: e.g.,
SUPER: ENID OKLAHOMA, SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTION – YEAR

"Time" is an issue for me as well – cabbie rather than UBER, no smartphones, no computers, no tweets, texts, etc. – is this set years ago?? (if so, you need to let us know). If it is present day, it strikes me that it is missing some of the common modern signposts.  It feels like the 50s.
As an example, when the RED PREPPERS  group is brought to Leah's attention - not a single Google search?  Long winded way of saying none of this sounded present day to me.

This:

Quoted Text EDWARD What’s the story? She grabs a dinner roll off her plate and takes it with her. As she runs out of the kitchen... LEAH I don’t know. They just gave me an address. I hope it’s big!

Wasn’t believable – they’d tell her what the assignment was.

As I am reading, seems that Edward knows next to nothing about the people in Enid – almost as if he were a foreigner.

All that being said - I generally loved the dialogue - my kind of thing. I found it clever - amusing and in all cases natural.

Hope this helps.

Quoted from eldave1 Paul: You definitely need more setting and character description in the open.  These are your two main characters and all I know is their age.  I also know very little about the setting – e.g., is it a nice house – a piece of crap? Because of the lack of clarity – some of the lines don’t land as well as they should – maybe a s SUPER early on: e.g., SUPER: ENID OKLAHOMA, SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTION – YEAR "Time" is an issue for me as well – cabbie rather than UBER, no smartphones, no computers, no tweets, texts, etc. – is this set years ago?? (if so, you need to let us know). If it is present day, it strikes me that it is missing some of the common modern signposts.  It feels like the 50s. As an example, when the RED PREPPERS  group is brought to Leah's attention - not a single Google search?  Long winded way of saying none of this sounded present day to me. This: Wasn’t believable – they’d tell her what the assignment was. As I am reading, seems that Edward knows next to nothing about the people in Enid – almost as if he were a foreigner. All that being said - I generally loved the dialogue - my kind of thing. I found it clever - amusing and in all cases natural. Hope this helps.

Every bit of it helps, yes.

I'm real bad about incorporating tech, etc. into my scripts. I need to get better about that. I think I'm a bit stunted in my societal development. I'm thinking about upgrading my Betamax to VHS next week. Hopefully that helps me get up to speed with everyone else.

Regarding Edward and his place in Oklahoma... I lived with the script for several years... checked on it once in a while... never once struck me that he felt like a foreigner. After polishing it a bit last week and posting it this week... I was thinking about the script and BAM. It hit me like a ton of bricks. I intend for this to be the house he grew up in, but why would he be surprised about the god and guns nature of Oklahoma. Ugh. BIG miss on my part. And that's my long way of saying... you are 100% correct.

Thanks for great notes!

You're more than welcome - look forward to see what you do with this.

I'm pretty new to the Simply Scripts Universe, and a rank amateur, But for what it's worth, I thought this script was nearly flawless. I loved the dialog, and the characters. I was so into the story that I didn't notice the anachronisms (no Uber, smart phones, no Google, etc.). Had I watched it on TV, I would definitely have tuned in for the next episode. I will look forward to reading some of your other stories.

Quoted from JohnMcCarthy I'm pretty new to the Simply Scripts Universe, and a rank amateur, But for what it's worth, I thought this script was nearly flawless. I loved the dialog, and the characters. I was so into the story that I didn't notice the anachronisms (no Uber, smart phones, no Google, etc.). Had I watched it on TV, I would definitely have tuned in for the next episode. I will look forward to reading some of your other stories.

Thanks for reading! Appreciate the comments.

Hope to see you around SS. We've got a fresh One Week Challenge coming up. (At least, I'm seeing hints of one.) If you've never jumped into one before, it's a great way to meet people on the site. They are hard work and you need thick skin... but, well worth the effort and the risk.