Is there going to be an OWC starting Friday?  If so, don't you think we need a thread letting us know?  You know, kind of getting people fired up for it?

Hope so!

Yes Jeff!!!

I'm fired up!!!!

I need the distraction!  ;)

Agreed on the page min and max for sure!

Can we get an official thread started so we'll get a good turnout?

PURE UNADULTERATED HORROR!!!!

Quoted from Dreamscale PURE UNADULTERATED HORROR!!!!

What makes you think it won't be

DRAMA/MOTHERS DAY
ROMCOM/MOTHERS DAY
MUSICAL/MOTHERS DAY
COMEDY/MOTHERS DAY

The last one was extremely limited horror...EXTREMELY LIMITED!!!!!

Maybe Mother's Day horror?

Quoted from screenrider Excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but wasn't the last OWC horror?  Getting a little redundant aren't ya?  What about something uplifting and inspirational?

OK

HORROR/MOTHERS DAY INSPIRATIONAL

Anything involving a mother who slices and dices during the day.

sounds like a biography...of me!  ;)

Fifteen page maximum.  No minimum.  I'll be making the announcement about 10:00pm EST.

You shouldn't be expecting any particular genre/theme.  You'll most likely end up disappointed.


Phil

I'm going to enter 6 scripts...

1 will be 15 pages, and the other 5 will be way less than 1 page.

Oops... I recently uploaded a script... great timing.  :-/

So then it will be

SIMPLY/MOTHERS DAY

Quoted from Mr.Z Oops... I recently uploaded a script... great timing.  :-/

So did I...

I bet you'll beat my comments!  I HATE you!!!





;)

15 pages...cool. A few more pages of real estate.

Don't forget the ever popular Family Friendly, Rated-G Mothers Day, provided it has mermen, red-neck pain worshipping zombies, werewolves and whatever else the Cryptozoology Department can wrangle up for the occasion.

And as many cliches as you can pack into 15 pages!

I'm not against the horror aspect. It's a polar opposite that is necessary if we are to ever laugh. Damn it all anyways, but that's the way it is.

Do I want to go about stoning people and mutilating their bodies? No. But...

Some people do. And I believe that those people that do, don't have a choice in their "make-up". I really do believe that.

I believe that the most gruesome criminals cannot help who they are. Hey guys, that lets you completely off the hook for enjoying writing horror for the sake of itself. But that's not my intention either. My desire is not to give anyone an easy "scapegoat". That's like the Christians that say, "Jesus died for me and now I can feel safe and secure in that knowledge... My sins are purified through his blood."

Rather than get into that cycle that our beloved Screenrider will understand completely, I want to encourage the middle line, whereby we all acknowledge that we are between "the poles". And, just like in The Matrix, we cannot exist without the opposites that construct our reality.

I don't ask anyone to take my word for  it, but challenge that within yourselves. Test it. Experiment. Never stop asking questions. Don't just go with "stupid faith". Go with experience. (Qualifier: part of "stupid faith" is experience) but that's another story.

Gonna be good to see this OWC unfold. I'll be here, very excited to see what happens.

I'd love to see Jeff branch out. He's a character here that I always (can't express words) have this gravitational force for.  ;D A cool strong guy with an unbelievably soft heart that you'd never know by his posts.

Go to it everyone!

Sandra

I'm always amazed at people that hate horror and wonder about the sanity of people that love it. I have said this many times, I'm a very content and happy person, but I'm fascinated by the dark side of the human mind and what we are capable of.

IMHO, fluffy happy, feel good stuff is boring. Comedies and feel good dramas are not interesting to me. That doesn't mean, those people who like that are wrong. Nor does it mean people with interest in the occult, horror or absurd are bad.

Whatever you chose Phil...please challenge us.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I'm a very content and happy person, but I'm fascinated by the dark side of the human mind and what we are capable of.

I'm not so content and happy. (Despite certain SS'ers witnessing a twenty minute Laugh Attack  ;D)

This dark side though is what drives me and I don't believe there is a person on this planet without the mix of which we speak.

There is no horror without comedy. There is no comedy without horror.

Yu know whut? We've got snow here suddenly in May! I'm not a happy camper. Talk about horror!

Sandra

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. There is no horror without comedy. There is no comedy without horror.

The Exorcist/American Pie

I'm going to be branching out actually, rather soon...something totally different that you all will be very surprised with...I think.

We'll see...but I sure would love a little pure horror for this OWC.

PS  Thanks, Sandra.  I'm not all that dark, actually...as you said.

Quoted from screenrider So, did Michael Cornetto officially announce the theme as being simply Mother's Day? Or is Phil announcing it at 10:00 est.

I am not involved in this OWC in an official capacity.  Look to Phil for answers - look to me for comic relief.  

Quoted from Sandra Elstree. (Despite certain SS'ers witnessing a twenty minute Laugh Attack  ;D)

It was 28 minutes!

Love you Sandra and we miss you too.   :K)

Quoted from mcornetto look to me for comic relief.

ha ha

Dear Screenrider,

How am I supposed to drink a cat? Oh. I geddit. Naughty boy. Still, the ladies do like that. I didn't think you that way inclined.

Den now,

Can we have one where all three British party leaders have a barefisted knuckle fight then go on a manhunt with machetes to finally finish off the rascists? Oh go on.

If I have to write another fecking song they'll be trouble. And it won't be tuneful. Again.

Love and sweets,

R

Here's a hint:  don't expect Mother's Day as a theme.  The scripts won't be up until way after Mother's Day.  Might as well make it Easter or Ground Hog Day.


Phil

What's with the waffling on the page count? The first one was 15 pages, and then a later one I thought we had 15 pages, and I discovered you'd hacked it down to 12, so I had to cut some pages. If it's 15 again, can we make it stay 15, so we can read the rules once and never worry about it again? Or is that part of the "fun"?

I never said twelve pages, George.  I think that may have been Don.... Though changing the page count is one way to mix things up.  What if I gave a specific page number?


Phil

The OWC genre/theme will be announcements on Friday 10:00pm, EST.

Phil

Phil, I suggest that you do give an actual page count, or at least a parameter that does not allow 1, 2, 3, and 4 page scripts.  It's been a problem in the past, why not nip it in the bud now?

Just a suggestion...

I kind of like that. After all, you're going to have people who want a specific length come out of the woodwork, so it might be a good idea to specify a length just to add another layer to the challenge. A lot of us (okay, I) struggle to keep it under the length, so why not turn the tables and grab at the people who tend to be a little short? Perhaps not a specific count, but a range, like Dreamscale suggested. Make it 10 (or 12) to 15 pages or something like that.

Quoted from Dreamscale Phil, I suggest that you do give an actual page count, or at least a parameter that does not allow 1, 2, 3, and 4 page scripts.  It's been a problem in teh past, why not nip it in the bud now? Just a suggestion...

Why is it a problem if someone writes a 1 page script?

There are numerous competitons that require films of such length...Depict, Virgin Media etc...not to mention the potential revenue from viral videos.

I think it's nice to see a variety.

Rick, the problem with 1 page scripts in this challenge" is that the majority of those 1 pagers are joke scripts, not taken seriously, not meant to be taken seriously.

Also, writing a 12-15 page script in a week is quite a bit different than writing a 1-3 page script, in terms of time.

I realize that there are numerous comps that look for 1 page scripts, or whatever number of page scripts.  That's fine and that's cool, and it's a level playing field, because all the entries are 1 page, or whatever.  That's not the case here at all, and IMO, it's a problem when the vast majority of writers push themselves to churn out a 12 page script, and a few throw together a 1 page joke at the last minute and get more reads then those that really tried.

True, Jeff, but there have also been 15-page joke-scripts submitted so I don't think a minimum page count will weed out those unwanted scripts. In terms of the actual challenge, I would consider it a much greater challenge to tell a complete three-act story in 1 or 2 pages than 15 pages. 15 is easy. Anybody can do that. Of course it takes less time to write 1 page but I think the planning takes longer than with a 15-pager.

there's always going to be people that can't help but make a joke out of it. personally, I rather read a 1 page joke than a 15 page one.

Rob, although I agree with you in principle, I do not agree overall.

I can't remember reading a 1, 2, 3, or 4 page OWC that remotely compared to a solid 12-15 page entry.

Well, Pia, if there's no minimum page count, you're going to read about 5 or 6 from me then.

I think the key word here is "solid", Jeff. Like you, I'm yet to read a solid 1, 2, 3, or 4-page OWC entry. But then again, I haven't read that many solid 15-pagers either.

Good point, Rob.

There have been some for sure, though.  Cam has come through with 2 very solid entries the last 2 OWC's.  I think my Halloween entry was also pretty good.

The point, I'm trying to make here is that it is difficult to write a script on an unknown topic and make it fit into 12 or 15 pages in a weeks time.  It really is.  That's why so many entries are piss poor.

It's a great challenge and a great writing exercise.  Rob, you should definitely enter this time around.  Seriously!  Good stuff, brother.

I wrote two for the last one. I think they were both pretty good as were a lot of entries that time.  :)

I suppose it just comes down to subjective opinion.

I think you make a fair point about the amount of work people put in...but I honestly don't think people will read more of the longer scripts if there are less short ones. I think the longer ones will still get the same amount of reads and you'll just lose any "extra" reads, if you will, on the shorter ones.

As far as I'm aware none of the shorter stuff has ever "won" so to speak, so I'm not sure what the problem is really.

Plus, I'd much rather read or watch a very good 2 minute short than an average 15 minute one tbh...and 99% of readers/viewers would as welll.

But anyway...like I say, it's all subjective...so as long as we know up front it's all good IMO.

I just really like super shorts, some of my favourite ever short films have been as little as 90 seconds long.

Definitely subjective opinion, Rick.

I, on the other hand, basically despise super shorts.  I think they're a waste the vast amount of time.

I like scripts that have some meat to them, lots of long, meandering unimportant banter, gratuitous sex, nudity, violence, drinking, drugging, goofy cameos, name dropping, brand placement...did I already mention gratuitous sex and nudity...oh yeah, I did...sorry.

I LOVE short films too. I watch a lot more of those than I do features.

Atom Films used to be my favorite site until they decided to only do comedy. One of the best shorts I've seen was a Canadian horror/thriller where this guy drives home and all the people he sees are all mannequins. He ends up killing some of them in his house. Not one single word was spoken in it either.

There you go...you don't like them because you don't like them...regardless of how much effort someone has put into them.

Borrowing Alexander Mccendrick's line: I think most people's scripts come in three categories; Too long, much too long and very much too long.

Here's one of my favourite short films by the way: Just 89 seconds long, including credits.

http://loopy-films.blogspot.com/2008/05/geoff-world-destroyer.html

Quoted from Grandma Bear I LOVE short films too. I watch a lot more of those than I do features. Atom Films used to be my favorite site until they decided to only do comedy. One of the best shorts I've seen was a Canadian horror/thriller where this guy drives home and all the people he sees are all mannequins. He ends up killing some of them in his house. Not one single word was spoken in it either.

I agree...and research shows how people have very little patience on the internet. It's very difficult to get people to watch something over 6 minutes...over ten...almost impossible. Even sites like BBC Films (where people go to specifically watch films) say that anything over ten minutes will not get views.

One of the most moving films I ever saw was 2:30 long...about the realtionship between a man and his mother who was becoming senile and a backstory that was about the woman losing his daughter on the beach.

Moved me to tears in that time...an amazing piece of work. Packed more in than thousands of feature films I've seen over the years.

Rick, that's funny...too long, much to long, and very much too long...I'm seriously laughing out loud and can't stop.  Very humorous!

Quoted from Dreamscale Rick, that's funny...too long, much to long, and very much too long...I'm seriously laughing out loud and can't stop.  Very humorous!

It's from Alexander Mccendrick's book:

"On Filmmaking".


The best book on writing/directing there is in my opinion.

Quoted from Dreamscale Phil, I suggest that you do give an actual page count, or at least a parameter that does not allow 1, 2, 3, and 4 page scripts.  It's been a problem in the past, why not nip it in the bud now? Just a suggestion...

I agree with Jeff, not to mention I wouldn't want to read five of his one page jokes in an OWC. No offense...

I thought the OWC was an excercize to put us under the gun as if we were commissioned writers. If a production company wants a 30 minute sitcom, you need to crank out 20-22 pages of script. (I think that's accurate, but not sure)

If they want a feature 90-120 pages...

I always looked at this as a director/producer coming to one of us and saying I need to make a 10-15 minute film about this... Blah, blah, blah.

Got nothing against one-pagers. But time limits are realistic in the biz if you're asked to write someone elses ideas...

All the shorts we write now are up to us as far as length 1 page, 17 pages... But, to me, this is a short we're asked to write.

I think the page limitations are a good added challenge.

Totally agree, James and you backed up your argument very well...much better than I had.

I think it is exactly that.

However a director/producer is as likely to ask for a super short as he is for a ten minute film.

I'm all for making it as close to the real thing as possible, if that's the point, though.

I'm actually wondering if we couldn't actively look at festivals/competitons...and  aiming them towards that.

EG if one time we did a OWC for 90 sec. films aimed at this competition:

http://www.depict.org/competition/

The site would then have a whole ream of scripts ready made for potential filmmakers looking to enter that comp...

Couple of messages on filmmaking sites and there could be a nice little production opening for a whole load of simply writers.

That's just an idea...I'm not trying to "butt" in on the OWC or whatever, and maybe it's best left the way it is...but I think there's more than a kernel of an idea there.

You make a fair point for the super shorts. I'll have to give you that. I'll have to write a couple for myself off this one... My big issue is that while I can see them working ok in competitions, shorts don't tend to be marketable...or are they? If I have an awesome short, what do I do with it?

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films EG if one time we did a OWC for 90 sec. films aimed at this competition:

I'd be all for that. A different type of challenge with a budget in mind. I'm no where near the point of making film though, as I'm sure alot of us are...

Damn, if we only knew an accomplished director to take the helm on that one. Ahem..

Quoted from George Willson You make a fair point for the super shorts. I'll have to give you that. I'll have to write a couple for myself off this one... My big issue is that while I can see them working ok in competitions, shorts don't tend to be marketable...or are they? If I have an awesome short, what do I do with it?

They are good for websites like Youtube or Atom Films...sites where they start to give you advertising revenue after a certain number of views. There are others as well.

On Youtube I believe it's about 40,000 views...that's an educated guess based on the fact a friend of mine was offered partnership once his upload had reached that level (he couldn't take it up because it was a clip from a BBC show).

1,000,000 views on Atom Films will net you around $30,000, I believe. They have to grant you a "Pro Licence" first. Not sure how that works. Mine and Pia's short "Unprotected Sex" was on there and I got contacted by the acquisitions team, then never heard anything again...so I'm not sure how you get it...probably just a matter of numbers though.

A friend of mine recently made this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKFjWR7X5dU

It exploded overnight and has ended up on TV, in national press..so there is the point that they can become viral and not only make money in themselves...but also act as advertising for your other stuff or your website where you sell stuff...or just yourself.

Frankly...a 60 sec. skit could be a damn site more valuable than a well-produced 20 minute short..which no-one will watch outside of festivals.

Now, obviously there are limits to all this...I believe there are only two people who make an actual living off Youtube (Michael Buckley is one)...but it's becoming more possible and it surely is going to become more and more so in the future.

This is the case for Super Shorts by the way...I'm thinking of little skits more than anything. If you mean longer, mroe serious shorts, that's a bit of a different issue...but I'm happy to let you know what I know...for whatever that's worth.

I'm entertaining the idea of a page limit.  It may be ten pages maximum. It may be between six and eight pages.

Since you asked, Mike.  The theme is romance.  The genre is buying a pony.

I usually come up with the genre and theme at the last minute.  Giving you a hint any earlier takes away from the pressure of a time constraint.


Phil

Buying pony that you are romantically involved with...sounds like horror, actually...as long as the pony is then sacrificed in a bloody ritual involving lots of gratuitous sex and nudity.

Phil, I thought we were going 15 pages?  How'd we get down to 10 pages max, now?  Between 6 and 8 pages?  Huh?

What's going on here?  I'm really confused...

Quoted from dogglebe I usually come up with the genre and theme at the last minute.  Giving you a hint any earlier takes away from the pressure of a time constraint. Phil

What about just giving us the genre early?   C'mon, Phil, throw us a bone.

Quoted from jwent6688 I'd be all for that. A different type of challenge with a budget in mind. I'm no where near the point of making film though, as I'm sure alot of us are... Damn, if we only knew an accomplished director to take the helm on that one. Ahem..

Wasn't thinking that we make them ourselves. I was thinking we write them then go onto filmmaking websites (dvxuser.com, for instance) and mention the competition (EG Depict) and the fact that there are a whole heap of ready made scripts on simply scripts for people who would like to enter the competition.

Bascially creates a little market for everybodies scripts and creates potential avenues for production for everybody.


As for the second point...I have "intentions" for something in the near future...but I'm keeping it under my hat until Michael has taken the glory with his Dark series. ;)

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Wasn't thinking that we make them ourselves. I was thinking we write them then go onto filmmaking websites (dvxuser.com, for instance) and mention the competition (EG Depict) and the fact that there are a whole heap of ready made scripts on simply scripts for people who would like to enter the competition.

That's a great idea to drum up interest in this site IMO. Wonder if Don's listening??? Of course he is, he's God...

Here comes Screen to nail me for my blasphemy... Wait for it...

"dvxusers" use a LOT of scripts from MoviePoet. Those scripts are 5 pages max.

Quoted from Grandma Bear "dvxusers" use a LOT of scripts from MoviePoet. Those scripts are 5 pages max.

There are lots of reasons why filmmakers like really short films...some are mentioned above.

Another is the logistics of festivals. The main criticism festivals have is that they are expensive to enter (the entry fees are high, you have to send your video by courirer, posters etc) and very few of the people that enter get their films shown. Thousands of people have to waste hundreds of pounds for nothing.

Some festivals wold rather therefore put three 5 minute films in, than one 15 minute film...and obviously the longer the film, the more shorter films you can fit in.

So if you make a long film...say 30 mins...your film is going to have to be really good, because it needs to be better than six 5 minute ones put together.

From a film-making standpoint, it's better to write short short scripts than long short scripts.  It's much easier and cheaper if you are an amateur or a student to make a five minute film than it is to make a twenty minute one.  And if you've done the film-making thing for a while you're more likely to film your own scripts.   Plus in the coming age of the webisode, the market will be for shorter scripts.  I've already seen paid calls for one page scripts from a couple of different sponsors.  So, it's good to be ready.  

And Rick you don't need to wait - give these guys a real assignment.  It would be good if we could do that every OWC.

Just because the maximum is fifteen pages, doesn't mean that people should should for this.


Phil

But Phil, seriously...in theory, when a challenge calls for a 15 page script (or whatever length we're talking about), then it's assumed we're looking for a 15 page script.

In the past, I think there was a minimum of something like 8 pages, but recently, that hasn't been followed, the scripts still get included and posted, and of course read and commented on.

As we all know (and has been talked to death in here recently), it's much easier to read and review a very short script, than a longer one...meaning that writing a crappy 1 pager or so almost guarantees you more reads and reviews.  And that's not fair.  That's not what we should be after.  And that's not what this challenge is about.

I just don't understand why people seem to be having trouble understanding this very simple truth.

If the challenge was to write a 1 page script, then we write 1 page scripts.  But, if the challenge is to write a script that is no more than 12 pages and no less than 8 pages, than any script that exceeds 12 pages or is less than 8 pages, should not qualify and be included in the final posted scripts.  Simple, IMO.

It's very obvious to me, at least in terms of history, since I've been involved with the OWC, that the vast majority of scripts that come in under the maximum page length, do so because the writer ran out of time or energy, and it shows in the finished product.

Am I speaking in some kind of foreign language here?  What am I possibly missing?

What you seem to be missing is that it's a challenge and not a contest.

Why do you want your fellow writers barred from the OWC if they did their best? I don't get it.

If the challenge for you is about writing exactly a 15 page script, then do that.

My challenge in these things is to try and get a script out in a single week that I think could have potential as a film...I've failed in the past to even get one in in time.

INT.TORTURE CHAMBER - NIGHT

STEVIE is tied to a chair. Blood and sweat pour off him. He stares painfully at the camera.

                           STEVIE
      Ok, I give in. I hearby promise to my fellow SSer's that my OWC entry WON'T be a
      comical pisstake of the theme and genre.
                           (looks O.S)
       Was that alright?

JEFF, dressed in medieval jailer's gear, wanders in.

                           JEFF
      Yeah, that'll do, you Aussie prick. And no more spelling 'ass' as 'arse' either.
                           (beat)
      Now, fuck off. I've got a bus load of nudie girl tourists to eviscerate...

FADE TO WHITE


But seriously, i agree with all Jeff is saying. Set the page length and adhere to it. Cheers stevie

Stevie...NICE!  We need to do a colab, brother!  Let's get it going!

Quoted from Dreamscale In the past, I think there was a minimum of something like 8 pages,

I've been here for five years...I know, very sad... there has never been a minimum that I can remember.

There used to be a lot fewer entries however. Like 12 or so and they were all by boardmembers. Not by people that just happened to hear about the owc on some other site.

I personally liked it better when it was a smaller more intimate group.

As long as Kiko's spirit lives on in the happy frog, it's all good.

Hmmm...I seem to remember a minimum page length being specified before, but maybe I'm wrong...I'm usually wrong, so I guess I'm not surprised.

Anyone else remember that as well, or is it me making shit up again?

I don't recall any minimums, if nothing else going over seems to be more common.  It's also tougher to hit in general, as it requires a tighter story and stricter editing.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films My challenge in these things is to try and get a script out in a single week that I think could have potential as a film...I've failed in the past to even get one in in time.

This is a good point.  People have commented that they weren't challenged by the genre/theme; many times these scripts were very mediocre.  Those participating shouldn't just be cranking out a script. They should be writing it as if it might be produced.  

Quoted from Grandma Bear There used to be a lot fewer entries however. Like 12 or so and they were all by boardmembers. Not by people that just happened to hear about the owc on some other site. I personally liked it better when it was a smaller more intimate group.

Me to.


Phil

I think when there were fewer entries, not only was it more fun. Like guessing who wrote what, but readers also cared more about their comments and everyone tried to be very helpful to each other. Not just speed reading in order to get through all 38...

I promise not to speed read this time around. I also promise to try and be nicer with my comments.

Quoted from Dreamscale I also promise to try and be nicer with my comments.

I don't want you to be nice. I want you to be honest.

Ok. I won't mass invite every screenwriter in the known universe to join in on the OWC this time.  We'll see if that even makes a difference.

Quoted from mcornetto Ok. I won't mass invite every screenwriter in the known universe to join in on the OWC this time.  We'll see if that even makes a difference.

You used to do that?...

'Course I did. This isn't a private challenge.  The more the merrier.  But apparently a few of you don't think so.

Pia, you know I'll be honest.  I always am.  I'll just go about it in a nicer way...at least I'll try.

I've already got seven 1 page scripts done...I'm going to start on the 3 pagers next.

Normally, I'm all for "the more the merrier", but we've also had a lot of people who just submit, but don't read anything in return. However, last time Don did a good job on letting people know who was not reading. That helped a lot.

I think, what I meant was that when there were fewer entries and they were all by active board members, there seemed to be more care in the comments.

IMHO, having 40 entries and a lot of them being total strangers who don't read or never show up here again, does not help this site. Well, at least not the forums. Maybe that's just me though...

The best scripts in the OWC are almost always from the active board members. The worst of the bunch tend to be from people who don't post on here and don't make the effort to comment on other scripts, or even respond to the comments about their own. The challenge would hardly suffer from losing a few of these leeches.

For me, I try to make the effort to read all of the entries if I enter the challenge. When there's only a week or two to read 30 to 40 scripts it can be tough to get them all read in that time and leave constructive feedback. Especially when you know some of the scripts you are reading are by people who will not even bother to contribute. So some of the comments and reads get rushed to cram them all in. I think that's why Pia is saying the feedback was given more care when the entries were fewer, because you knew the feedback would be appreciated and responded to.

Having some of the crappier entries definitely detracts some time that could be better spent writing constructive criticism for the serious entries. Don's system of letting us know which scripts are by active members seems to help, but there is still a fair bit of clutter in the end. Is it possible to remove scripts from the forum if the authors don't comment on a given number of entries? Even reading and commenting on 3 other scripts would seem feasible for everyone IMO, and that is really not making much of an effort at that. For people who don't participate at all, can't we just take their entries down? Just a thought.

Tim.

Sounds good :)

so have you decided what the challenge is going to be yet, Phil?

I believe I have, Pia, and will reveal it tomorrow.

Just kidding. I'll reveal it in about an hour.  I have to get up early tomorrow to catch a flight.


Phil

Where are you going?

Turks and Caicos. Gonna do a little scuba diving....

I'm awesome!


Phil

Scuba Diving? Beware the zombie dolphins. They're fierce this time of year. Course, the zombie guppies's are also runnin', but they have such tiny little mouths...

Look out for Gary and the mad snail disease....

Oh, I'm so sorry, I kind of massinvited for you:((( Accidentally really.
In my defense - I never speed read and I try to read many. I kind of had an idea but seeing that you want to keep it to true members...

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films My challenge in these things is to try and get a script out in a single week that I think could have potential as a film...I've failed in the past to even get one in in time.

Sorry I'm slow to catch up on this thread. My feeling is that probably what needs to happen in the future is a tier system.

--First tier: Beginners or people who rate themselves as beginners.

--Second tier: Those with some experience, but just hacking it out. These folks would probably be most of us. Some times we have strokes of brilliance, but mostly, we're just struggling to keep our heads above the water.

--Third tier: The writers that have it down. They can sit down in a four hour session and have a story so well crafted that it would make most of us want to curl up and die because we know we are way far off that mark.

For myself, it's a challenge just to get through one of these events. I don't find them easy at all. Come to think of it, I'm scared of participating in another one.

Sandra

I hate to be whiney...but I really dislike the slow posting of the scripts.

I know you have a life Don, but...I'd hate for a bunch of them to be posted right when people quit reading and start guessing who wrote what.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I hate to be whiney...

And while we are being whiney...

Another oddity surrounding this particular iteration of the OWC that I submit for your consideration is the propagation of the curious word "pisstake".

Not a word I generally use myself, but its adoption here has certainly been unusual.

A search of the May 2010 board for the word "piss" reveals 40 instances of the word in its various forms in 32 posts -- mostly in the form of "pisstake".

I was kind of disappointed this particular go-round, as I generally do look forward to these.

I know that a certain amount of bitching and groaning always accompanies the announcement of the OWC genre and theme -- and I realize they are meant to be challenging -- but in the future, I would hope they are also a bit more conventional.

I would also point out (to somebody...who could it be?) that one of the most successful "star" scripts around here -- a good, filmable script as opposed to a pisstake -- arose from a nice, straight-up horror challenge back in the day.

Just something to consider.

Quoted from bert that one of the most successful "star" scripts around here -- a good, filmable script as opposed to a pisstake -- arose from a nice, straight-up horror challenge back in the day.

Blame Phil, I do. Fucker. I didn't write one. Give cred to those who actually wrote a serious entry. Was a tough challenge. Hate not entering. Feel like the bus left for school and i didn't make it in time.

Matter of fact, that's reminescent of me childhood. No wonder I'm so stupid.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I hate to be whiney...but I really dislike the slow posting of the scripts. I know you have a life Don, but...I'd hate for a bunch of them to be posted right when people quit reading and start guessing who wrote what.

Pia, I'll keep that in mind in the future.  Oddly enough, this go around, I felt that I was posting them too quickly and was worried that each batch wasn't getting enough exposure.  

Perhaps next go around I'll post them all in one fell swoop.  

The OWC is always a work in progress.

Quoted from bert I know that a certain amount of bitching and groaning always accompanies the announcement of the OWC genre and theme -- and I realize they are meant to be challenging -- but in the future, I would hope they are also a bit more conventional.

Bert, yes, there is always complaining about the genre and theme.  A couple of things I was surprised about was that I thought the genre and theme this time would elicit a very strong, vocal reaction.  This was a tough theme.  I was gobsmacked when I read it.  I came up with nothing.  I wasn't expecting a lot of scripts.  Just the opposite happened.  There were over 40 submissions of which around 35 have/will get posted.  

While there was a certain disappointment in this genre and theme, I didn't get any "Fuck you, Don and fuck your stupid one week challenge," emails from anyone on the release of the theme and genre.  So, in my mind, a success.  

Maybe in the future we can throw in a more conventional theme and genre and see what happens.  

Don

I'm still waiting for my script to be posted and not really expecting too many reads. I think the main problem with this OWC isn't the theme/genre but the people who have posted numerous 'joke' scripts. 40 is a lot to get through, especially when quite a few of them are deliberately badly written.

Ste

I hate to be the one to advocate 'more rules', but I didn't take part in this OWC and from an observer's point of view there does seem to be quite a few bad vibes about this one. It's also completely clogging up the portal... :)

Two rules to consider imposing from now on (stop me when you disagree):

- A limit on submissions by each member: personally I'd argue that one entry per member is quite enough - if you try and write a bunch in a week they're all bound to receive less care than they should. I know a lot of people write multiple submissions, though, so I'd argue that a limit of two each would be sufficient. Fewer entries = more reads, few entries each = more equal attention for everyone who entered, and probably fewer entries each = better scripts.

- Some requirement that an entry has to fit the theme - I know some people like the piss-take scripts, and say that just reading serious entries, particularly with a theme as tough and abstract as this, would be tough-going. But what's the proportion of joke-to-serious entries this time? I haven't read any of the scripts, but I'd guess it's pretty high. I R-E-A-L-L-Y don't want to tell Don how to run his own website - he does a fantastic job anyway - but I do think when it comes to the OWC submissions rules should be a bit stricter. Format rules, a page length-band, some serious attempt to actually meet the challenge...I don't know whether "pisstake" (to use Bert's favourite word) entries should be blocked, but I thought I'd raise it for consideration.

---------

As I say, I didn't take part this time. But I have in the past and I see how this particular edition is unfolding, and those are two issues I thought I'd flag up.

Both of those sound good to me, Jonny.

Jon,

While I agree with both of your suggestions, I think the last one will require a lot of work on Don's part. He would have to read through all of them to weed out all of the pissers. And who's to say what's a pisstake and what's not (it could just be a badly written script).

I know Don likes to keep Simply Scripts open to basically everyone - which is what is so fucking great about this place - but I do agree that the rules could be a little tighter when it comes to the OWCs.

First, in my opinon, the OWC should only be open to board members.

Second, while we shouldn't take the fun out of the OWC, I think that if Don or Phil ask the participants to keep their entries straight then people should definitely repect that. And fucking ban them if they don't.

The people who participates obviously feel a responsibility to read as many entries as possible and it would be a real shame if those reads are "wasted" on joke scripts. Nothing wrong with a good joke but why not wait until after the OWC is over?

My .02

Rob

For what it's worth, people's opinions are always going to be their opinions, even when they're wrong. I did write something this time, and while I cannot admit to a great amount of time devoted to it, I did try to follow the theme, be a little creative, and not make a joke of it. Mine has been accused of not following the theme, not being serious, and being a joke I must have heard that I wrote down. So how do you deal with scripts that people think are jokes, when they actually weren't written as a joke?

I also found that people like bandwaggoning. Once one error is found, then there are multiple errors and the script sucks. Then everyone finds said error, and suddenly it's not an error, it's errorSSS. My script contains a single typo. One. Uno. I've doublechecked, and it only has one. And yet, for some reason, people have posted that it has "multiple typos" and apparently "multiple formatting errors." When the names are revealed, I'm going to challenge those who posted said comment to point out the other errors. I know they don't exist.

We are a site of writers, and while we adore exaggeration, we also have to write accurately. If we can't write an accurate review, how can we expect anyone to take us seriously? You can't write multiple typos when the script contains only one typo. It's inaccurate. It makes you look like an idiot. Apologies if I just called you an idiot. You'll know who you are in a few days. There's more than one of you. But honestly, pay attention to what you're writing down, people. If you're a writer, then words are your life.

In the end, it apparently doesn't matter what you write. There is little hope of doing anything that will be accepted.

Oh yeah... The number of formatting "errors" (and I use the term error very loosely here, since it's somewhat arguable). One.

Who's going to decide if they're a joke or an honest attempt?  Is mob mentality what rules?  Would you like a mob to decide if you were trying to meet the challenge or not?  Would you trust their decision?

Honestly, you can't make subjective rules about these sorts of things.

It's only recently that people have been submitting more than one entry.  There was always an unspoken rule, called the Helio rule, which said you can only enter one script.  I say we just continue the unspoken rule - people coming into the site during an OWC are unlikely to write more than one so you don't really have to make it this formal thing.  

And as far as closing this to just board members.  How do you expect the site to grow if you don't allow an influx of screenwriters during one of the most important and attractive events on the site?  When countries do things like that they call it isolationism and it's really bad for the economy.  Much better to allow multiculturalism to flourish.  The more and different input we get the better writers we can be.

  

If it's closed to just board members then people can come to the site and enter - they would just have to sign-up for an account. Also, if there were less entries I think it would be possible for moderators or volunteers to read through them to check if they fit the genre/theme (similar to how they do it on moviepoet).

The main point I agree with that Jonny brought up though is the limit on entries per member. Unspoken rules are fine, as long as people stick to them.

Ste

Hmm...feel like I might have started something here.

For the record, I was not advocating the institution of new rules.

I was simply pointing out something weird that happened when the topic/genre were really weird -- and suggested that we keep such a possibility in mind moving forward -- lest it happen again.

Also for the record, Don rocks, and my comments were in no way directed at the way he runs things 'round here.

It was just an observation.

The trouble with unspoken rules, however, is when you miss the unspoken conversation that establishes them.

Quoted from mcornetto And as far as closing this to just board members.  How do you expect the site to grow if you don't allow an influx of screenwriters during one of the most important and attractive events on the site?

If the OWC is such an important and attractive event on the site, then closing it to members is exactly how to make the site grow. You're assuming that people won't join up, I'm say it's going to have the opposite effect.

Quoted from mcornetto Much better to allow multiculturalism to flourish.  The more and different input we get the better writers we can be.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Michael, but don't you have to be a member to provide input?

I'm not understanding your argument for keeping the OWC open to anyone. Some of the folks that enter the OWC do it through the main site and they're probably not even aware that the discussion board exists. This also means that a lot of reviews are wasted on writers that are not around - and are not giving any feedback themselves.

Movie Poet doesn't specify genre.  The last time it did was the horror contest and if you remember there were plenty of arguments and disagreements about what horror was.  As far as I know a decision was never made except individually by the readers.

So, do all these entries meet the theme?  I suspect most of them do, therefore none of them would be disqualified.

As far as the board member thing goes.  It would be silly to enter the contest and not be a board member.  I don't think we really have a problem with that.  Why make rules if they aren't even an issue?  If you're talking about active board member then how do you define that?  How many posts does someone have to have in order to be active?  Do they have to have logged on in the past year?  What qualifies them?

Quoted from mcornetto Who's going to decide if they're a joke or an honest attempt?  Is mob mentality what rules?  Would you like a mob to decide if you were trying to meet the challenge or not?  Would you trust their decision? Honestly, you can't make subjective rules about these sorts of things.

Again, this is just a suggestion, but I think it could quite easily work the same way you used in the last OWC.

Have a panel of people - maybe the moderators - who divvy up the scripts between them and read a few each. With the majority there won't be a problem. But if you come across one that you think isn't in the 'spirit' of the challenge, then you flag it up and get everyone else's opinion on the panel. If a simple majority (say 3 out of 5) think it isn't actually within the bounds of the challenge, then it doesn't get posted, and the person who submitted it gets a quick message explaining why. That way it's not one person's opinion, but the collective judgement of trusted individuals on the site.

I'm not saying we should try and choke the OWC under new rules, I'm just saying that there are a couple of things that could be raised for discussion. And Don did say it's a continual work in progress...

Quoted from sniper If the OWC is such an important and attractive event on the site, then closing it to members is exactly how to make the site grow. You're assuming that people won't join up, I'm say it's going to have the opposite effect. Correct me if I'm wrong, Michael, but don't you have to be a member to provide input? I'm not understanding your argument for keeping the OWC open to anyone. Some of the folks that enter the OWC do it through the main site and they're probably not even aware that the discussion board exists. This also means that a lot of reviews are wasted on writers that are not around - and are not giving any feedback themselves.

You are assuming the site is the boards.  The site is not the boards.  The site is http://www.simplyscripts.com.  That's what pays the bills - not the boards.  Excuse me Don for stating that so plainly.

Quoted from mcornetto You are assuming the site is the boards.  The site is not the boards.  The site is http://www.simplyscripts.com.

Right. Right. So what happened to "The more and different input we get the better writers we can be"?

Quoted from sniper Right. Right. So what happened to "The more and different input we get the better writers we can be"?

Well, we do get an influx of people in the process on the boards.  It's not a one way street.

Quoted from mcornetto Movie Poet doesn't specify genre.  The last time it did was the horror contest and if you remember there were plenty of arguments and disagreements about what horror was.  As far as I know a decision was never made except individually by the readers.

Fair point, but at the same time there weren't any out and out comedies during that month.

Agreed with Bert, these aren't complaints about how Don or any of the mods run things. If everyone abided by the unspoken rules then there would be no problem. When people don't abide by them, I think you need to make them a little more formal.

Ste

Quoted from stebrown Fair point, but at the same time there weren't any out and out comedies during that month.

Comedies can be unintentional.

They can, but if you're asked to write a horror and unintentionally write a comedy then you've failed the challenge.

As I said before, the main point I agreed with from Jonny is to limit the number of entries per member - I think that would sort all of these issues out as people wouldn't want to waste their only entry.

Every genre should contain some comedy, just like every genre should be dramatic. A genre only indicates what you should expect from the story. If I tell you drama, then you pretty well know you're going to get a dialogue heavy script where the story is primarily character driven.

In a horror, you know you're going to get something that typically contains death and revulsion along with a fair amount of applicable imagery. However, that script is going to have drama between the character dealing with the situation and there's going to be some comedy to break up the atmosphere a little bit so you don't keel over halfway through.

A genre is a guideline for expectations, not a repellent for other elements.

Let's be honest here, this OWC has been a let down. Which is a shame because normally they are a lot of fun and you get some quality scripts arise out of it. I think the way to avoid another disappointment like this one is to be less stringent with the actual theme. If the theme is too narrow it limits the direction and approach you can take with the story. People who want to enter but don't like the narrow guidelines rebel against the restriction imposed on them and write pisstakes and joke entries as we have seen here. How many have been serious entries, and furthermore, how many of those have actually been good? Less than five I would say.

IMO a theme should never impose itself upon a story, it should be subtly woven into it. So the people who have tried to weave a story around this month's theme have been met with comments like 'Doesn't fit the theme/Not enough debate between vegan and carnivore'. While the ones that do focus more on this aspect are being labelled as boring, generic, lacking a story or conflict. It seems like a lose/lose situation. If you try too hard to nail the theme perfectly you are sacrificing your own creativity and the opportunity for the characters to dictate where the story may lead.

That's why the last OWC was a bigger success. The theme was simply 'The Dark' and the rest was open to each individual's interpretation. If the theme is looser it gives people the chance to write the stories they want to write and be able to fit the theme into it. Which will produce better entries than writing about a theme they have no interest in and trying to fit the story into it. If people can have more freedom in what they can write about then there won't be so many joke entries as they'll be spending their time writing stories they care about and are invested in.

There'll also be a wider variety of stories which will make reading all the entries more of a pleasure. This month's have been too similar and therefore gets quite monotonous reading and commenting on them all. To me an example of a theme could be things such as:
-new beginnings
-a deadly desire
-self sacrifice
-redemption
-last resort
-for the love of money
-second chances
-against the odds

Just a few off the top of my head. I think even though there were 40 submissions this month they probably only came from about 20 or so authors. Which means less reads and debate on each script. There are some still in single figure comments that have been up for awhile. If the challenge is a bit more open you'll get more people enter and people focus on one really good script insrtead of several half-assed ones and it will be better for everyone.

Tim.

Damn...I go to sleep at night and look what I miss!

Lots of good points from everyone here.

I sure hope I'm not the one George is calling out.

I agree with Tim's last post here...pretty much completely.

I also want to point out that there have been complaints about multiple pisstake entries in the past and nothing was done about it.  There have been complaints about scripts that go over the page limit in the past, yet once again, we have at least 1 script that clearly is over the 15 page max that got included.

If we want this thing to run a certain way, it has to be enforced.  When something happens that shouldn't, it needs to be addressed immediately.

In the past, I've been one of those that has complained about certain issues, to the point where I said I wasn't going to participate again, as the integrity of the OWC had been lost.  Maybe that's why I didn't take this OWC seriously and entered nothing but pisstakes...very funny pisstakes!

Quoted from bert I know that a certain amount of bitching and groaning always accompanies the announcement of the OWC genre and theme -- and I realize they are meant to be challenging -- but in the future, I would hope they are also a bit more conventional.

I thought this was a pretty conventional theme.  From the scripts I've read, there was plenty of room to play with it and some can be shot on a student filmmaker's budget.  There were complaints about how some were selected in the past (sci-fi/popcorn comes to mind).

I think, in the future, non-SSers shouldn't be invited.  And I think that people should be limited to only one submission.  If you have time to crank out two or three scripts, then you're probably better off working on one really good script and tweaking it..

Quoted from mcornetto And as far as closing this to just board members.  How do you expect the site to grow if you don't allow an influx of screenwriters during one of the most important and attractive events on the site?

These 'outsiders' post a OWC script and then they disappear on us until the next OWC.  If they're not members, then they can't even post feedback.  And it's the feedback and active participants that help the site grow.


Phil

Quoted from Dreamscale I sure hope I'm not the one George is calling out.

Had to go back and look to see, and sure enough, Jeff commented on several typos. But it is Jeff's nature to exaggerate. He was one of a few to say it though.

So, looking at what people have said, I reccommend a couple of things that should hopefully ensure a few issues are avoided next time:

- enforcing the 'Helio rule' - one entry each. If you want to use your entry for a piss-take, then that's up to you. But it should mean more entries that honestly try to get to grips with the challenge.

- a minimum, as well as a maximum, page limit - it is, after all, supposed to be a challenge. If part of that challenge is keeping your script UNDER a certain amount of pages, then shouldn't it be OVER a certain number of pages, too?

That wouldn't require much more than the briefest of flick-throughs from whoever was checking, and for people to be honest when uploading their scripts. As for the 'tackling the theme' thing - well, that is more subjective, although I do think that with one entry each people will try to use that one shot as best they can.

Quoted from Dreamscale Maybe that's why I didn't take this OWC seriously and entered nothing but pisstakes...very funny pisstakes!

...

Seriously?  Please tell me that's a pisstake of a post.

Quoted from JonnyBoy - a minimum, as well as a maximum, page limit - it is, after all, supposed to be a challenge. If part of that challenge is keeping your script UNDER a certain amount of pages, then shouldn't it be OVER a certain number of pages, too?

We discussed a minimum page limit, but since it is possible to write a very short, quality script, we didn't want to rule those out. There are actually contests out there for these ultra-shorts, and we also reasoned that people are more likely to sit through a 2 minute short than a 15 minute one. Hence, no minimum.

EDIT: Every time someone says "pisstake" you have to scream.