Screenwriting : Loglines/screenplays by Chanel Ashley

Personally, I have no problem letting anyone read my stuff, provided it's not currently doing the competition circuit or someone is looking at it with a view to producing it. But, everyone's different.

Hi Chanel. I did post a script on my profile. This one is a television pilot. I have a spec movie script also that I'm looking to re-write and add there as well. I very much would love feedback on my script, but I also understand that there are many who do not wish to make their work public.

After just finding out I've been stolen from for the fifth time, completely compromising my entire script and its original angle not done before...I don't want to post anything, honestly. It's hard to even post loglines without giving away the core reason to want to read what I have to entice and entertain you. It's getting ridiculous and makes it hard to trust anyone at all. Kudos to anyone who takes a chance doing any pitches outside of your trusted film making circle.

Put me in the "insufficient courage" camp. I'm not sure I understand the benefits -- to me or others -- of posting my scripts publicly for the consumption of anonymous readers. For the people who do do that... what's the impetus?

It is not for lack of courage to why people choose not to post their protected scripts online, but rather a personal preference. To write is to be courageous.

It was nice to wake this morning and find all your comments - thank you, much appreciated - I don't disagree with any sentiment expressed here, it's all about choice, but I would like to extend that choice to Loglines OR Screenplays - I am comfortable making my own scripts public, they are my calling cards, after all, isn't that one of the reasons we are on this site, to promote ourselves/work?

Self promotion is good, as long as it doesn't descend into self propaganda. :) I think a logline and/or screenplay section would be an idea, but that's up to the creators of the site. Do producers come here in search of screenplays? There are other sites, focused solely on hooking up producers and writers. The emphasis here seems to be networking and from that extending to the possibility of working.

... or maybe some prefer to send their scripts when requested. There are writers of different levels here at Stage 32. :)

You are correct, Beth, some writers prefer to send their scripts upon request, but I would still prefer we separate the two - it should be choice which camp one prefers - as Eoin said, the emphasis here is networking, a calling card/s can only assist that process.

Hey Chanel, log lines and scripts are already separated -- in a way. :) Log lines are listed on a writer's profile page. If you wish to see the possible posting of that log line's script, you click on "view." But... If you'd like to propose a site format change, then I suggest you post your request on the "Ask Stage 32" discussion board. Or, send RB a message. Best to you! :)

Chanel, why offer an entire screenplay without knowing if someone even likes the story.. Loglines offer and better yet a synopsis, offers a quick glimpse to the premise of the story. writers have to protect their work

Thanks, Beth, I will make the suggestion - Viquil, perhaps I should have been more specific, we should maintain a logline and synopsis with our screenplays, that's a given, but solely loglines I would prefer elsewhere.

There is a site that reads loglines and synopsis, only this way you can her and see with photos, how your idea looks and sounds , they offer a voice over artist for the reading.. www.wildsound.com

Avoid wildsound like the plague.

Laurie, you want to elaborate on that?

They are notorious for spamming and doing nothing to actually help the writer. Many industry peers and aspiring writers have complained to me about their experience and I know that I have been spammed constantly for years by them -- at the end of the day they are not helping writers breakthrough the clutter of crap advice out there, but they are happy to take the $.

Laurie, I'm sorry you had a bad experience with them. However, I found them helpful after sending one of my scripts to them. The feedback they gave me was very thorough and helpful. For example, I did have some pretty "out there" concepts and they let me know while also explaining exactly why those ideas didn't work, at least in the script that I sent to them. I'm very weary of sending my work into any contest and spending money for feedback, but for the money, it seemed that at least for me, they were pretty good.

I personally don't deal with them and never will just based on pure amount of spam and complaints from others. However, I'm glad you had a good experience -- it's the first I've heard of. As far as contests go, they should always be looked at with what they offer you personally toward your goal. Some just want feedback or to place, some want a particular prize and some want representation or to launch their career. Only a handful mean anything to industry decision makers and for good reason. If these guys gave you something helpful you are lucky.

Here's my advice and thoughts more clearly: If your logline and/or synopsis includes the full details to your plot device or plot twist, then you are just giving away the bulk of your original idea for free. Someone can read it "for free", and they can and will sometimes just make a new framework of a story around your great idea(s). It happens a lot. You need to be more general and/or cryptic because of this. It's tough learning the right balance, but it can be done. I'm not a new writer or even new to the industry. I'm certainly not new to the legal processes of having work stolen, and that is a big mess that results in a lot of sore, prideful, hateful folks that can then make things even harder for you than they already are (and that's even after proving they were the A-holes in the whole situation). I'm luckily at a point, now, where I don't have to pitch to scouts or interns that can't be asked to read past page five. It's because I have set, trusted production friends. It's also because I do special FX jobs as much as I do writing, and then because even being a working writer mostly means you will be writing or fixing mostly others' ideas instead of your own. The most important choice any of you will make is when you hear this question: "We really like your style (or the way you write), but we were wondering if you would help us write one of our current ideas (projects) for us, first?" Your whole career as a working writer will likely rest on how you answer that (similar) question. Aside from this, seriously, make nothing but friends in this industry. Make all of the friends that you can because that's a major key to you getting anywhere. In this internet age, making one enemy can turn into thousands of enemies in no time...because people, especially people who are prideful, they like to talk smack about anyone below them that challenges their thoughts or ways. Your best motto to live by will be, "kill 'em with kindness." Be good. Do good.

I agree wholeheartedly with Laurie on this one. I avoid WIldsound because of the stupid amount of spam and emails I was getting and still get jjust through LinkedIn. I had to unfollow on twitter. I'm not even sure what they do other than send emails about crap.

Laurie and Danny, even though I haven't yet had a bad experience with them, thanks for the warning still. That'll let me know that if things begin to cause issues, this is something others have dealt with also. I haven't received any spam e-mails yet, but that doesn't mean it can't still happen. I'll keep an eye on what happens with the re-write I just sent to them.

Yeah, wildsound, the amount of spam is incredibly. I have never signed up to their newsletter and every time I tried to unsubscribe, to no avail. The only option was to block and filter their emails.

I thank you Robert, as well for your service! I imagine that the discipline and opportunity for personal development in the Army will prove to be of value to you in your writing career. The more you write, the more confident you will become and confident people always attract the interest and curiosity of others. You know, whether you know it or not, most of us have been networking all our lives. Anytime you cried out from your crib as a baby – you were reaching out to others, in fact, you were pitching. Anytime you tried to get a date with someone – you were definitely pitching! Anytime you wanted to influence anyone about anything – you were pitching. So, my suggestion, is that you use and develop what has already worked for you so successfully in the past, and apply those skills to tell people about your stories. Your enthusiasm will be infectious!

I think the "posting a logline versus screenplay (or both!)", and the tendency toward loglines thing, is somewhat rooted in a deep fear most screenwriters have of being ripped off, especially first time screenwriters. The sheer effort of writing the first screenplay is the most daunting, having to learn a new form of writing, create something from scratch, countless hours editing, etc. usually based on an idea you felt was original/interesting/bad-ass/etc. enough that it needed to be put on the page in the vain hope that someone out there would agree and bring that vision to life. First time screenwriters may only ever have that one, good, solid idea, and are terrified that this one precious property might be stolen from them. Loss of investment of time doesn't help either. I've written a lot of stuff, some good, some less good, some mediocre I'm sure. I've got 10 features written, some others in progress, 27 shorts, all written over the the course of ~4-5 years, many long hours put into them. The sheer difficulties of getting into the industry, the hoops and hurdles, dealing with rejection after rejection, rewrites and edits, networking, reading, is a huge portion of your life taken up in the pursuit, and the IDEA that all that effort could be subverted or stolen is extremely disheartening. After all, if it was good enough to steal, it may have been good enough to sell, which would have been the 'in', and you may feel you are back to square one. Possibly complicating the issue is sending these scripts out to various venues for possible purchase (Inktip, etc.) while also having them publicly posted, though I am not industry involved enough to know thoughts on that. Anyone with inside insight care to comment?

Shane, I agree there may be fear on some level, and that's fine, but the writer should have a choice - only loglines/synopsis or loglines/synopsis/screenplay - writers should work on a level/environment that they are comfortable with - I am comfortable making my scripts available to public scrutiny, after all, don't we all ultimately want to be read, I do?

I'm a little confused as to what you are trying to communicate ask in this topic now. Are you saying: 1) That those interested in hearing pitches/looking for scripts should be open to getting the whole package at once? 2) Writer's on Stage 32 specifically should be able to post things in a fashion suited to them (which I believe it already allows for)? 3) Something else? I see value in script/synopsis/logline individually by there merits, to better provide information to potential producers effectively to save time for them. Logline good? Looks at Synopsis. Synopsis good? Check the script. It seems far better than forcing them to read the first page of a drama and pitching it because they're looking for comedy, or not realizing that the five pages of 'day in the life' set up that starts the film are pretense for a bloodbath, quitting the script prematurely due to a misunderstanding.

Alle, I like your comment "what are you afraid off" and the advice re should someone steal your script...

Well, it's hard for me to post full screenplays because several of them are being actively shopped around by my manager. You can short circuit an option deal if a prospective production company knows the property's been posted in open forum.

Hello Chanel. I do not in the least have a problem with you reading my screenplay. I've only started to market it in the last month. How exactly could you help me in getting it produced? It's 99 pages, and tight. All I've received is positive feedback on it. All I need is for God to get the script into the right hands. If interested in reading it - I'd be honored.

William, perhaps you could assist God by uploading your script here on Stage 32, not to mention a logline and a synopsis - that way, it may also help you get produced - it also allows people like myself to glance at your work and if compelling, respond with a free critique - you're a new member, welcome.

Chanel, let me submit a screenplay and synopsis for comment. It would be of enormous help. Thanks. How do I submit a full screenplay? I'm new here, but the feedback is always priceless.

Hello Chanel, Thanks for getting back so quickly. Here's the log line for Blood Justice.: An eighteen year old must make a decision which will change his life forever. Does he kill the man who murdered his father; a Captain in the Gambino crime family. The synopsis will follow shortly.

Hi Chanel, It's Bill again. I have no problem PDFing the whole screenplay, but to where?

Hey Ed and William, my recollection is one navigates to Loglines where you will find a blue label re up-loading Loglines, synopsis, screenplays - try it.

if you're looking for God to get your script in the right hands, what do you need us for? I'm just not sure what's gained by uploading your script for other new writers around the world to read. there's plenty of places to get scripts if u wanna read some.

I don't know how much experience you have had with people taking others "script" or modifying it to make it their own - but loglines prevents this. I am with Danny there are plenty of sites out there that have full newbee script for the reading.

I seem to be repeating myself, I don't disagree with most sentiments, but why not allow CHOICE - if you are reluctant to upload, that's fine, regardless of your reticence, so advertise Loglines/synopsis - but some of us simply enjoy reading Loglines/synopsis/screenplays - why is this such a difficult concept for some people - yes, there are other sites, but I prefer this one - simple.

Chanel. I have no problem in the least with you reading my screenplay, but since I've already worked with a script consultant, and am not looking for notes; how exactly can we help each other. Say you read it, and like it. Is there anyway you, and I can both benefit to bring it to the next level of production?

@Alle, you "can write a totally new script at the drop of a hat"? Wow. I'd say this puts you in a very small minority of writers. For most of us, it's a little harder. :)

Alle, nice.

My dear William, careful what you wish for - I am known on another site for cruel, brutal script reviews where members joined forces to have me removed from the site, lol - I was honest, and still am, in my reviews, and perhaps could on occasions be deemed harsh - but the way you keep pushing your script forward, citing your work with a script consultant is placing you on dangerous ground, unless of course it turned out to be good - let me check something.

Mm, William, you still haven't uploaded your script on this site - may I suggest you do so, any benefits will derive from exposure there, and I probably would have read it by now without any prompting - while flattered, I'm not sure how I can help you, wish you well.

Hello Chanel, My dear young lady; I highly recommend you read The Artist Way by Julia Cameron. I think what you'll get out of it iss the fact that creativity is spiritual in nature, and that there's no room for cruelty towards your fellow artist. You seemed to be almost boasting that you were banned from a site for being so harsh, and cruel. No good, my dear; no good at all. Everyone should be respected as a child of God, and be dealt with love, kindness, and compassion. That doesn't mean you have to kiss butt, say nothing if you don't like a script, but search your very soul as to why this type of behavior is acceptable to you. Most of all: I don't want you to be harsh on yourself either. The only universal concept that every human being ab heeds to; is love. I will post my screenplay, and as soon as I receive even one harsh note from you - I will simply turn you off.

Except for the last bit, nicely put, Bill - I'm sorry if it appeared I was boasting, I was not, simply matter-of-fact, I shall not risk any potential criticism of your work, so I shall refrain from reading, it, I would hate you to turn me off - had I done a critique, it would have been private and not for public consumption - again, wish you well in all your endeavours.

"as soon as I receive even one harsh note from you - I will simply turn you off." Define 'harsh', in this context? A writer needs to separate his/her self from their work. If some makes a fair and valid piece of criticism, it should be welcomed and invited as a means to improve and grow. You need a thick skin for this business. If you want someone to lavish praise upon you, show your partner, siblings, parents, close friends etc

True, Eoin. I've since sent Chanel an apology. It'll be what it'll be. I just posted my first screenplay; Blood Justice on Stage 32. So I've taken my first step in putting my ass on the line You know, writing comes very easy to me, but man, oh man, the marketing part is what separates the boys from the men. I think I'm guilty of placing to much emphasis on my script consultants notes, and I simply want to move on, but the nature of the beast truly is; that a screenplay is never finished even after you sign a contract. Hey Eoin. Do you like to read plays? I'm going to post my play on Stage32 as soon as I can figure out exactly how to do it. I just put Blood Justice out there for you to read.

@William Zacchi - you got more courage then I do - I would love to read it. I get about 2 scripts a week from my sources and try to learn as much as I can from style and content - etc - But I never would use or rip someone off, but this is just me - I'd rather collaborate and learn. Looking forward to reading it.

Completed 29? I would take my hat off to you if I had, one, lol, well done, my eight feels a little lame - congratulations to all the writers that have uploaded their scripts, I believe it takes courage and a huge leap of faith, I remember when I uploaded my first script, it was daunting and I felt a measure of terror knowing my work was up for public scrutiny.

30 Scripts?? damn. I don't want to sound harsh but if you've written 30 and nothing major has happened with any of them, maybe its time to focus on quality instead of quantity. and by something major I don't mean a free option...

I think those who write so much need to focus on those scripts and polish them with craft.

Wow Emmett. I will pray for you. You seem to be a woman of integrity. I agree with what you wrote - TOTALLY!

It seems some people are afraid of being ripped off. Log lines are a way to put out your ideas without investing time in writing the whole script for nothing or less.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to protect yourself. You don't have to have the "next blockbuster" to want to protect your work. It's a good practice if you can absorb the cost each time ($35 for the copyright and $25 to register at WGA). It's better to have and not need than need and not have. To think that it's "silly" for a new writer to want to protect his or her work is the same as thinking it's "silly" for someone to want a security system just because they have a house and not a mansion. I don't know about other screenwriters, but I plan on making it. No one on here can say that that WON'T happen and I don't care about statistics. If you're doing this and plan on making a career out of it, you don't have to wait until you sell a script before you protect yourself. Doing it now is just fine. And as someone said above, posting the log line by itself should sell the script and if it doesn't, you may just have to tighten it up more. I understand that it takes some people a good while to finish a script and no one on here, no matter how good you THINK you are, can blame them for that. I can finish a script in a matter of weeks, but that doesn't mean everyone else out there can, and I can respect that people want to protect all the time it took them to finish. Even if you don't agree with that, I don't think it's necessary to put people down for wanting to do that.

Chanel, as for whether to post the entire script or just the log lines, I'm mixed on that. I don't mind my work getting out there, but then again, I also want to see if my log lines are strong enough to stand on their own and if not, then I need to work on them. This could be a good measure as well, since the log lines are a big part of things as well.

Robert, the logline is the bait to entice people to your synopsis, to entice people to read your script - whether one posts their entire script should be an individual choice - I would never enter a site solely based on Loglines and a synopsis, then contact the writer and ask he/she email me a copy, then pressure from the writer to provide a review/critique - reading scripts is a simple pleasure for me, if it's compelling, I will notify the writer, if it sucks, I'll keep it to myself - ah, for the simple life.

@Chanel your post brought to mind something that everyone should hear - A lot or most screenwriters will not share the script unless you have a very large vested interest in it. In other words if you have a track record and they feel you will further the script. I understand that since I am the same way. 'To give you a perfect example - I read a log line and then the synopsis - I asked the writer if she would send me 8-10 pages because the idea was not clear on the logline and synopsis. She was very suspicious , and told me I had no tract record on IMDB. Which is all true since I do not keep an IMDB membership. I did not get mad or blame her for anything - I just hope she understood that they could use some work .

@Alle - nice post a little long in the tooth but nice ! I don't care to be on IMDB but dealing with a lot of LA "farther" I see a lot of them do but they are long term experienced many years in the business and know what to look for and can spot a fake a mile away LOL

@Chanel Well maybe I will write something so you can trash it. let's see - A long long time ago in a galaxy far far away not much like ours there live a great man LOL

@ Kerry Douglas Dye -- I do know one writer who can do this name withheld to protect me. since I just saw him do it

@ Alle - That is a lot of powerful stuff there. Think I will find an English scholar to translate for me. Well I am a ONE OFF WONDER and my scripts are so good that I have to write myself a NDA. ROFLMAO

Monserrate, you should never presume I will trash anything, a review takes me between 4-6 hours, I may be critical if I perceive there may be flaws, but ultimately, it is only an opinion, and I have read some excellent scripts which I graded accordingly - writers are human, nobody likes to be told their work may be flawed or fell short, I understand this, but in the end better to be honest and one needs to acquire a very thick skin.

Also, in regards to "a galaxy far far away" - I prefer Star Trek, the world is a much better place with Mr. Spock, lol.

My dear Chanel. Have you forgiven your Grandpa yet for being a preachy son of a bitch? Because of you I posted my screenplay; Blood Justice. I would be more than curious as to your opinion.

Bill, so impatient, you have uploaded two and a proper reading takes time - I've glanced over both and will do so again and get back to you in private.

Well, Bill, you wanted to know my thoughts, you have them, I read both works and I've sent you my appraisal - remember, it's only an opinion.

Thanks, Chanel. I'm glad you've forgiven your Grandpa. I'm very eager to hear your comments; especially on the play; Shepsel An' the Barracuda. Tell me; I don't even know am I allowed to post plays on that forum?

I don't like posting my work public. Neither a logline. Unless it is someone really interested in reading my work.

Chanel Sorry about the network request hit the wrong button

And not to mention the intellectual theft in the industry.

Fernando, I'm curious, if you don't post your screenplay, don't post your logline, have nothing in the public domain, on what basis would anyone express an interest in reading your work?

Here comes the frankness and apprehension. Anybody that actually writes a good screenplay should have apprehension of posting publicly. Many including myself don't think that if you cannot view the essence through a logline or even brief synopsis then forget it. Once a screenplay is produced that is a totally different animal altogether. Here's the thing, how many pitches or screenplays that you can view the polished product online before they get produced are actually available? Once a good screenwriter gets to that point they don't care about the public. Again if you think you have to expose it to the public you have no business in the biz. This is not an aspect of courage or lack thereof but more about getting to the point of professionalism and lack of need for the validation of the general public that most likely can't understand anyway. So if you really want to know why, that is why. I know it sounds brutal but think about it.

@Mitchell your right once you get that good you do not post it on public forum - and yes your a little harsh - but on the flip side some great writers have been found on public forum and have gotten the needed guidance and help they sort. There are other reasons established writers do not post but all of you can figure that out

On the other other flipside once you post it on here you have proof of copyright.

Maybe he is like me - I have never posted anything on the internet and only submit my work to "organizations" that I either know or they know me. I recently submitted a short called "Femme Fatal" to someone who was looking for that type of story. He told me I came in second because the charter was good but did not express her true "evilness?" or strength of this type of woman. I purposely held back on her character -deadly but with compassion - it was the wrong choice - o well -

@Chanel - Sorry "Trash" is just an expression some people from my side of the house use - it basically means "critical assessment

Then some of my work has been "critically assessed."

Mitchell, you hit it right on the head, and I'm glad someone else sees it that way. PROFESSIONALISM. It's just like the whole deal with protecting your work Again, you don't need to have a "blockbuster" script in order to protect it. Get in the practice now. It doesn't make sense to half-ass it the whole time and then when someone finally shows interest, now you have to be taught what all goes with it. Get in that mindset now. I can't speak for other writers, but I KNOW my work is not the best right now. When I sit down to write each day, I don't daydream about making millions of dollars in Hollywood. I write. I research to make sure my work is up to and exceeds standards. I pay attention to detail. I ask questions. I get feedback. I really don't think anyone expects to knock it out of the park on their first try or even their fifth try. But that doesn't mean everything else should go out of the window because of that. Professionalism is NOT a bad practice to get into now. If the work isn't good enough, that's fine, but that doesn't mean the need for professionalism or even wanting to protect your work shouldn't exist. Good habits don't come out of nowhere; they need to be developed. Whether you believe a "blockbuster" screenplay exists now or not, it certainly does not hurt to start developing those good habits now. Not to mention, some screenwriting contests and other sites won't even accept your submission without it being protected. I just submitted to InkTip yesterday and I had to leave my registration number from either WGA or the Copyright office. I did have those, but just because the odds may be against many of us new writers doesn't mean we have to walk every step along the journey as though we're doomed.

Would you like to do a feedback exchange? rosytone@mac.com

And copyright protection means they can't steal your screenplay, not that they can't steal your idea or concept and tweak it just enough that you will have a hard time proving it originated from your work. You should always register your work with the SWG before showing it to ANYONE.

While it is indeed true that professionally employed screenwriters don't post their scripts publicly, I find the suggestion that it's unprofessional behaviour for an aspiring amateur to do otherwise highly unreasonable.

i agree, cj, i find some of the comments are bit over the top.

Most of the screenplays I have seen here and I dare say most of the screenplays on this site could do with some feedback - there are many here that perhaps deceive themselves re the quality of their work - I will say this kindly, as good as they think their script is, it can be improved, it can be better, much better, but this will fall on some deaf ears and fair enough, each to their own.

How many screenplays have you read Chanel?

Probably read over 400 and reviewed about 150 - the reviews are not easy because they take between 4-6 hours and I have time constraints, not to mention I read about 20 books a year and somewhere in-between I write screenplays and need to make enough to put food on the table.

Chanel, you might want to check out Amazon Studios if you haven't already. The site encourages people to join and review scripts. Plus you can go through storyboards and give feedback. If enough writers find your reviews helpful, you can get a Top Reviewer designation and be feature on their home page. You may also want to check out scriptnoted, it's in beta stage at the moment but looks very promising. Reviewers who actually read entire scripts and take time to construct thorough reviews are a rare commodity. Reviewers who can find the good in scripts and can help a writer take it to the next level even rarer.

CJ, that's kind of you to suggest, that, but I suspect my reviewing days may be over - too many writers profess they want honesty in a review and are less than enamoured if you dare suggest it may be flawed and require further work - you have no comprehension of the hostility generated on occasions when one dared criticise their perceived masterpiece - thank you for the thought, though.

I've witnessed enough blow ups on forums to have a degree of insight into that. Although I respect what's exchanged privately will be more extreme. There's sadly very little incentive for people to peer review and a lot a sound reasons not to. Personally I don't agree with the 'thick skin' caveat some abuse to be just plain rude to people. But I do believe it's essential for us, as writers, to develop an indifference to other peoples opinions and appreciate any feedback provided. Particularly that which is free and isn't in any way self serving. I hope you have a change of heart and a better experience. The industry needs those who love to read to share. And those who want to build a potential career out of it need avenues to progress.

Karma is an interesting animal, the aggrieved members on that site returned the favour and gave my screenplay, The Protector, the most hostile, vitriolic, horrific and appalling reviews possible and my rating plummeted to almost rock bottom - ironically, I entered that screenplay in the Scriptapaloosa International screenplay competition in LA and made the quarter-finals - perhaps there is a God after all, lol.

C.J.: "Personally I don't agree with the 'thick skin' caveat some abuse to be just plain rude to people." VERY true. Some simply don't know the difference between constructive criticism and flat-out negativity. Saying that my script is "bad, bad, bad" (which thankfully, no one has yet) doesn't help me AT ALL. Now if you say something like, "This concept doesn't work in this scene" or "It wouldn't make sense for this to happen here" and something with some substance, I can take that all day. This may be hard for some to believe, but I WANT that. I've been told that certain concepts in my scripts are plain "ridiculous," and when looking back at them, I realize the reviewers were absolutely right. They had a little insight into the topic that I didn't consider. Now "thick skin" in THAT sense makes perfect sense. You DO need to have thick skin to the extent that you can't get bent out of a shape for every piece of constructive criticism you get. Now "thick skin" for just getting beaten down with reviews that don't contain any kind of substance, now I can't get with that. That's not helpful.

Chanel, I'm sorry that this was the reaction you've gotten from people who you've given reviews to. People like that make it very hard for me to convince anyone that I am looking for reviews and would never react in that manner to constructive criticism, but then again, you said that the other folks said the same to you and turned around and reacted in the manner they did by trashing your screenplay. I think it's a wonderful thing you're doing by giving reviews and to people like me, I would greatly appreciate them. I know that probably means nothing on here after the responses you've received, but I started this thinking I would NEVER be able to get a review, which meant that I was afraid of making mistakes and never knowing what they were. Now I've received a ton of feedback from my work and couldn't have been happier. I've learned a lot with it also.

I value feedback. I have one sold screenplay and a "recommend" on another that I am preparing for market. I've just uploaded a new revision of a script I am planing to send in for coverage, but welcome other writers to read and critique.

Robert, I have a sort of mental checklist when I get a review. First thing I'm looking for is an invested interest in the scripts progression. Second thing I'm looking for is an invested interest in myself. There's other stuff but if those first two aren't met I'm not going to take their feedback as seriously.

C.J. now that's good. I look for that also, but what stands out to me is whether the feedback is specific or direct enough. Knowing that they've read the whole thing and didn't skim through it is a big plus. Usually, with the coverage I receive, they break down what the script is about and then they go into the feedback. Something else that's big with me is constructive feedback vs. opinion, if that makes sense. I do value opinions, but what I need more (depending on who I'm asking) is the feedback. A lot of times I'll get opinions, which is fine, but please don't say that something "doesn't work" simply because you don't like the concept, because that will lead me to think that something is wrong, which will in turn, make me consider changing it. I don't mind them saying, "This works fine, but let me suggest trying it this way..." that way I know that I'm not "wrong" in how I have a scene written or whatever else is going on, but there may be a better way to go about it. I don't mind that. Now if the scene is a complete mess or if I have continuity errors, I need to know those things as well. That's the "wrong" stuff that I want to hear about. Sometimes, it seems that some approach it with the mindset of "Well I don't like this concept, so I'm going to tell him that it's wrong," and that could be confusing if I didn't make any mistakes at those parts of the script.

Yep, those are certainly on my checklist too.

@Robert People - "doesn't work" this statement is confusing to a lot of writers - when one reads someones else work the reader (and this happens when I read scripts) you get to a part in the story that makes you think "how did this happen sine there is no reference in the other part of the story or the time line is off" so instead of telling you how to fix it we say "it doesn't work" You as the writer need to determine how this affect the reader - if one reader does not understand the flow then you will find others that don't either. It has nothing to do with concept but making sure the reader or viewers don't have a "WTF' moment. You can still do this but somewhere in the ending of the story you need to show or explain what happen

I'm agreeing with a lot on this thread. When reviewing you need to be exacting in your critique. No vagueness please. And constant negativity is tedious and makes me not respect the reviewer. A good review should be balanced and helpful. Helpful can be telling someone what they got right as well or if they on at least on the right path. And i dont' want to know that you didn't like it on a personal level. I never expect that. I expect an unbiased look at my script. I will attempt to see what you see in your script and I expect the same courtesy in return. Basicially it comes down to being professional even if you ain't a professional.

Here's the way I see it, if you put your work on PEER review sites, such as Triggerstreet, Talentville, and the public section of Amazon (they have a private upload option, where your material will only be seen by their reviewers), you are far more likely to run into the equivalent of rude internet trolls, than people who want to help you make your story the best it can be. The term peer in this instance is not the comfortable definition of someone on your level, because you don't have the choice of your peer so these sites, and even if you did wouldn't you want someone at a more experienced level, judging your material? Understandably, not everyone is ready for, or can afford enough coverage service, to get their script submission ready. My suggestion is if you fall into this category, find a writing group, where you do have some input as to the quality of your members-- they can be invaluable when it comes to constructive criticism that will help you get your script in shape before sending it to a coverage service. If you feel it is there now, then do some homework and find a professional who is experienced in not being biased to genre or premise and most importantly getting script where it needs to be to be read by someone who can get it made. Which is the goal right?

I'm intrigued by some of the comments I have just read, and must confess I mostly disagree with their sentiments, the subtext suggests they will have a HUGE reaction to a perceived unkind review - your expectations are too high - think about this, a reviewer is giving up 4-6 hours of their own time for FREE to give your script a critique - that in itself is worth some RESPECT - don't believe me? Then give ten honest reviews of your own and gauge the reaction and realise how much work/effort has gone into it on your part - often, your only reward is abuse - do not fear criticism, embrace an alternate point of view, the review may be poor but you will almost always glean something constructive - you want a nice, sweet, professional critique? Easy, you simply PAY for one.

The most common flaws were as follows, grammar, spelling often atrocious, structure, pacing (beats), not understanding the 3 act play structure, lack of dramatic tension or in the wrong place - YES, I was particularly MEAN to university students and professional journalists who would submit work littered with errors in grammar and spelling, come on, to me that was unforgivable, unnecessary and unprofessional - they were not appreciative when I brought their attention to these basic errors.

Most scripts need to be diluted, too much dialogue, too much description in their paragraphs, too much exposition - my 3 Golden Rules are as follows: "show not tell" - "economy of words" - "less is more" - in other words, keep it simple, it's only a spec script, an early draft, not a shooting script, development comes much later should you be so lucky - again, do not FEAR criticism, it is only someone else's opinion that you may/may not agree with.

Man, do I agree with that essay. Chanel, my dear you wasted your time, and my time by reading my screenplay, and my play. I mean, c'mon, really; you start off by telling me I'm a good writer, then you rip both the screenplay, and play apart; especially the play I found to be a total waste of time considering that in 83it won the Tennessee Williams playwrights award beating out 2000 other playwrights. The producer at the ATA theater is under negotiation to put it up, laughed his ass when I read him your notes, but the winner was your harsh criticism about Blood Justice; not having one single word good to say about it, and also not given me any ideas that could truly help; even though I trust in my script consultant way more than I will most anybody because the guy has incredible credentials. I will NEVER post another screenplay, or play on Stage 32

William, don't let one person ruin your potential and interaction on this or any site. I'm glad you've had good response and even though I haven't read you stuff one person's opinion is just that and this is a site where people should and do feel safe and encouraged to talk about their work. Best of luck to you and your stage play!

William, I've been a part of this thread. Chanel has said over and over that whatever her opinion is, it's just one person's opinion. If you had success with your play, congratulations. That should be a grand high point in your efforts to get it on the boards. Everybody doesn't have to share the same enthusiasm. I've had reviews of material, and some I felt were awful, but there was always something in them that sparked a new idea and made me consider something I hadn't considered before. I'd thank Chanel for taking the time to give you her take on what she read. If she delivered what you expected, it wouldn't have been much help would it. I don't know the material or the review, but it's an outsider's view, from someone who sounds to me as though she knows something about our business. To Chanel, I have to say, shouldn't you be writing, dear? Stage 32 comments take up a lot of time.

This is a perfect example of what I have been trying to explain, most writers cannot accept any constructive criticism of their work - William above, asked me, I didn't offer, to review his work - at no stage did I "rip both screenplays apart" - I told him he can write well and the play I particularly enjoyed - in his screenplay he killed off the villain on page 57, I suggested he do so near the end to maintain the dramatic tension - I gave him many compliments, yet, somehow, I get the above, an excellent illustration of people only see what they want to see - contrary to the above, I said many positive things re his work, but he chose not to hear them, obviously disappointed I didn't shower him with praise like the producer at the ATA theatre.

I bet I don't get too many more review requests, lol.

O.k. some interesting comments. Here is how to get a true peer review. I will say classes, seminars, etc. can be useful tools no doubt about it but in my opinion the true review of weight and not "Craft Classes" comes from sending your spec., original work, whatever into an agent or producer and then getting their request for the item and then their feedback. I'm not going to tell you everything else is useless or a waste of money and time because we all can learn the simplest to most the most complex idea's from various avenues. What I am saying is that the review of weight comes from those that have the true or real need for materials you are trying to create. Bottom line that is the review that counts. If you really want to see how good a true script consultant is. Ask them how many of their consulting projects have they sent on to connect to those that matters especially if their suggestions can make the screenplay so golden so to speak. Everybody needs different help at different levels and I myself do too but knowing where your at, what you want and where you want to go is also very, very important. As far as the brutality of reviews whoopee, how many successful writers with really good stuff still do the same thing weekly to each other as staff writers probably all who are worth a damn. I bet if you look around you can find stories of quitting 3 times and getting fired 4 times in the same day with staff writers. The difference is the pro's know how to take it and when done damn what is created is beautiful. I myself am evolving but I know what I'm evolving to. I hope this encourages and inspires and does not discourage anyone. If there is a tool or "Craft Class" anywhere that you think can truly help you where you are at and is what you want by all means take it.

I'll bite cause I want to see for myself. Chanel, would you feel comfortable reviewing my tv pilot? Pretty please. ;)

William I am sorry that you take such a negative view of one person's opinion. You say "ATA theater is under negotiation to put it up" I hope the ticket sales and results justify how good it is.

Haha, I've already had a look, I was about to make a suggestion last night, but became distracted and ran out of time - I think it may be wise for me to retire my pen, so to speak - I may have to take Ed's advice, writing more, commenting less.

You do what you have to Chanel. ;) I'm sure your critiquing was fair.

Chanel - it has been mentioned on this threat "thick skin" quitting etc - regardless YOU should just keep doing what your doing - and let the chips fall. Professionals in all walks of life at some point are told by their customers "you do not know what your doing" it has happen to me. Regardless whether you work for free or not. They come asking for the service and do not get the results they expected. My response to those who feel this way is "too bad so sad" It is amazing how both you and this guy say that your work was appraised by two different "people" and got totally different opinions - so what does that say to you? Believe in your work ? Who cares what others say? etc -

There are many positives here, we should shed more light on those rather than the opposite - it gives me great joy to discover what I perceive as good work - may I suggest people read Ed Tasca's Vinegar and Brown paper synopsis, lot e the premise, and have a look at Daniel Kim, wonderful animation work - there is much to admire and appreciate at Stage 32, let's not concern ourselves with whom may be leaving.

... that should be "love the premise" - not lot e the premise, sorry about that.

HERE IS SOMETHING THAT APPLIES TO SCREENWRITING AS WELL NOT JUST COMEDY WRITING it was said by Jerry Seinfeld He replied, "You have to be able to write funny lines, and the best way to write funny lines is to write every day." Seinfeld has a large calendar on his wall and every time he completes his daily writing he puts a big red X on that day. Seinfeld went on to say, "After a few days you'll have a chain. Just keep at it and the chain will grow longer every day. You'll like seeing that chain, especially when you get a few weeks under your belt. Your only job is to not break the chain." Human behaviour expert Professor BJ Fogg says that the consistent completion of small, manageable tasks is the best way to create a new habit that ultimately leads to mastery. This "don't break the chain strategy" has been successfully deployed by many masters of their art: - every year from 15th June to 15th September, the designer Philippe Starck goes into seclusion and works 12 hours a day every day. - after training, England rugby hero Jonny Wilkinson would keep practicing goal kicks until he successfully kicked 50 goals. If he missed on the 49th kick out of 50, he would start again at 1. - Picasso would only see visitors after he had fulfilled his work schedule on six consecutive days. In his book Unthink, Erik Wahl says that the paradox of creativity is that structure creates freedom. When it comes to doing the work that you were born to do, the discipline of consistent routines, rituals and schedules allows the space and focus for creativity to flourish. And as we know, it's only the focused who flourish. NUFF SAID dONT LEAVE US cHANNELLLLLLL

I agree. and if you want to get a job as a writer whether on tV or Film you have to sit down and WRITE.

You do your fair share for sure!

William, if you have a script consultant with incredible credentials and a stage play that's won a reputable award, it's kinda not cool to hound an amateur writer on a forum for free reviews. You say she's wasted your time, it reads more like you've wasted hers. Which is a shame because there's likely many writers who need it more. It's even more uncool to publicly chastise her for her views. I understand you are upset and feel bad for you but, even if she showed you no courtesy at all in her feedback, the decent thing to do is take it, thank her, and move on. Your reaction does not reflect well on you, and to apply your feelings onto Stage 32 itself is an attitude that should quite frankly be beneath you at this stage of your career. I hope you can see through your feelings and perhaps apologise to Chanel. I wish you all the best with your writing.

I saw Laurie's comment and have to agree about many peer reviewed sites, but the reason for such savage troll behavior is that scores are used to generate an aggregate. The aggregate score pushes the script higher up the charts and eventually is skimmed off to be read by the site runners, etc. This pit fighter mentality won't really affect the elite scripts, as they will likely garner enough honest feedback to make it up the charts. It could, however, undermine or outright kill a "good" script, one on the threshold of being strong with just a little push - one that could use a little pro TLC to shepherd it to production. Gems are lost in these environments. Back in the day, one of my old scripts suffered this fate in Project: Greenlight (remember that?) - and was eliminated in the 1st or 2nd round. It got optioned (a PAID option) a year later.

Perhaps what's needed is a "gentlewriter's agreement" or script exchange forum here on Stage32. We could start a script exchange group, with the understanding that what we're trading will NOT be polished work, but stuff that needs work and could use a new set of eyes. We don't need our egos stroked, we want help to make our scripts better.

It's the risk one must take for artistic freedom. But a sample of one's work gives the public insight of who you are.

That's a great example Edward. The sites have all good intention especially for beginners, but there's just not enough mediation, which in most writer's groups there is some sort of accountability and guidelines to keep 'notes' constructive. Great job on the option!

Indeed Edward. Average scores are a very poor way of ranking scripts, in fact scoring them in the first place is a somewhat pointless exercise. Average scores are harmful because they give equal weight to negativity as they do positivity. But scripts are all about subjective alignment, they are about finding champions not pleasing a committee. That's why, in my opinion, the Pass, Consider, Recommend system works so much better. Negative opinions should do no harm. A lot of writers, especially those in their early stages or soliciting feedback on first drafts, are looking for what's being coined in the business world as '30% feedback'. This is feedback where the person giving it is fully aware their role isn't to pick at every fault but to instead give an overview. I've seen so many first time writers ask for feedback, and it's obvious they want this, yet writers go over their first three pages with a fine toothed comb and berate them for pedantic spelling, grammar, formatting, and rule errors. It would be great if Stage 32 could be a place that newer writers feel they can ask for feedback and get a positive considered response that encourages them to keep writing and keep honing. Laurie is very correct in pointing out peer is an ambiguous term and you should always be considering where it's coming from.

Allie, in my opinion all writers want considered feedback and simply to be treated with respect. If you want to know what considered feedback is compared to blunt/critical/harsh feedback, and why the latter is very old fashioned and ineffective, then check out the book Lean In by Sheryl Sandberg. Most of us are simply scared, the prospect of selling our writing is a terrifying prospect in terms of statistics alone. What we're looking for is some validation that our hopes aren't completely deluded before we set off on what is a very long path. And with that we want to feel the courtesy that we are being advised by someone who not only respects us as a fellow writer but also as a fellow human being. I appreciate this is a radically different view to how feedback is typically given. But there is a certain attempt at grandeur by people giving feedback based in the delusion that great leaders operate by constantly knocking others down. There's lots of "I'm doing you a favor" "You should be thanking me for my honesty." "You need to grow a thick skin." etc thrown back at people who aren't so much offended by the criticism but the demeaning and thoughtless way it's been delivered. What's the most concerning is this tone seems to be most common with the very type of reviewer who should be seeking advice and not giving it. I was very lucky. In my early days of feedback I got some firm professional validation that fuelled my writing and learning. Since honing my craft a great deal, I now look back and realise how much they oversaw to give me the boost I needed.

I agree with CJ. Alle, whether you believe this or not, I don't at all think any of my scripts are "worth $250m and will blow the box office out of history and the universe," nor do I consider myself a wannabe writer. I am a WRITER. Now I'm not where I need to be and have no problem acknowledging that and that's why I ask for the feedback. I'm with CJ on the fact that there's a difference between constructive feedback and downright beatdowns. For people like me (again, not concerned if you or anyone here believes this or not), constructive feedback that isn't the most positive is NOT considered negative as far as I'm concerned. It's EXTREMELY helpful. I've received coverage MANY times and I'm so thankful that people haven't held back. I've received one "consider," but at no time have I received that my work was the greatest work out there, simply because I know it isn't. Not many people approach it the way I do in knowing that my work isn't the best and that I'm looking for feedback to let me know. One reason I don't let my friends read it is because many of them are so proud that I'm attempting this that they would probably tell me my work is better than it is and that's not helpful to me at all. So again, I can't speak for everyone else and I don't need to "convince" anyone of anything here...but I have no problem admitting that my work isn't the best. It can't get there if I'm delusional and pretend it's the best at this very moment when I know it isn't. I'm one of those people who looks to improve, not get my work sold TOMORROW. At the same time, I'm still going to work toward being the best. There's no sense in even trying this if I'm going to be stagnant and feel like I'm a "wannabe writer" just because someone who doesn't know me says I am. The whole point is to keep driving on to get there and for me, getting knocked down a few times (with constructive feedback) is just fine. I don't want every comment to be "positive" and I wouldn't believe it if it was. I want to make it and STAY, not get there by luck, so I'd rather get all the "passes" right now, graduate to "consider" and then maybe better later on. I can handle that just fine.

CJ, again, I forgot this one: "There's lots of "I'm doing you a favor" "You should be thanking me for my honesty." "You need to grow a thick skin." etc thrown back at people who aren't so much offended by the criticism but the demeaning and thoughtless way it's been delivered." That's a big one for me. I'm all for criticism because after 17 years in the Army, that's how I've made it where I am; getting knocked down to learn my mistakes. Sometimes, that's just the only way to learn and I'm thankful for it. But there's a big difference between knocking someone and leaving them, and knocking them down to help them up. I can handle, "Robert, you really f**ked this up, but here's a way you can fix it or improve it." It's that last part that is the equivalent to allowing myself to dust off and try again. Sometimes it's frustrating because it seems so many people out there don't understand that. I get that many writers write ONE screenplay and just WILL NOT accept that it's less than perfect, which can be frustrating for reviewers also. I completely understand that. I'm just not one of them.

Chanel, I haven't asked you to review any of my work, but let me thank you for being willing to help. I know that often people have to actually DO before they're thanked for it, but I can appreciate you offering for free and the time it takes you to do it. No matter what reviews you've given it's still a ton of time you're sparing to do this for those you've helped and for what it's worth, I find that very admirable. I know it may not mean much coming from me because you haven't reviewed my work, but knowing that you've been there to help others means a lot as far as I'm concerned. So thank you, very much.

CJ, you carry your dagger in a velvet sheath.

Kerry, that's not my dagger, I'm just pleased to see you. You dapper mofo.

CJ. That was one of the most practical essays I've read so far on Stage 32, and I personally thank you for it. We are all children of God, and should be treated as so. Thank you, bro. You read my mind.

I'm a bit torn here. Because Chanel is right - most writers cant take criticism well. And just because ONE person or ONE contest thinks you're awesome, doesn't mean you actually are. At the same time, the reverse is true. Writers need to be open to criticism of all kinds, even the most brutal. That being said, it feels like Chanel takes some delight in being brutal especially when she's OFFERING to do these notes. Chanel, I don't mean to attack you at all, but I want to go back to a comment you made in this thread.. that the most common flaws are spelling, grammar, structure, and dramatic tension. This ISN'T really correct but it IS the reason why amateur writers don't need to post their scripts to get feedback from other amateur writers. Because those 4 things, along with "characters aren't likeable enough" are what most new writers KNOW to look for and always comment on, but they are almost NEVER the MAJOR issues with a project. They are the superficial ones. And to get feedback on them is somewhat pointless unless someone who KNOWS is making suggestions on HOW to fix that. I'm not knocking you. I love the fact that you want to help and trade scripts. But you've read 400 scripts. That's great. I read about 400 a year and have been doing this for 12 years now. And I can honestly say that it wasn't until year 4 or 5 when I really learned what a script was lacking and how to fix it above and beyond those 5-10 obvious things. So, if you all want real feedback on your projects and you think they are READY for feedback, then I still suggest using a professional.

Well stated, Danny

loved CJs post as well. great stuff.

Ouch. Ada just punched Chanel so hard my laptop screen cracked.

I think you've touched on a preciousness that young untested writers experience. Perhaps an unfounded fear that they willget ripped off. If it's good enough to get ripped off its good enough to sell - get it out there, share with other writers, improve the work. I find that the vast many scripts being produced are actually friggin log lines with no character or meat. Well, thats not actually true. Some wonderful miraculous films are being made outside the studio system. Do you have a script to share?

My dear, Ada, you don't know me yet so quick to judge me, too much prairie dust, perhaps - for the record, those three questions are never asked - when I review a newbie with their precious first screenplay, I am generally very kind, it's not my job to destroy their confidence, and I'm gentle - when reviewing, there is a starting point, GRAMMAR and SPELLING is important when I review, structure, story follows, but I'm tired of excuses being made for lazy writing when there should be NO excuse for presenting a work littered with errors - if you choose to overlook that aspect, fine, up to you, but it is a strong starting point for me - when writers announce themselves as "experienced" and have won awards of note, had a measure of success, then there is an expectation of quality work by the reviewer - usually, the work falls short and littered with newbie mistakes, then, rightly or wrongly, my critique tends to be "harsh" - if the writer raises the bar of expectation, then within reason they should deliver considering their "experience" - every reviewer has their own style and way of doing things, get 20 reviews of your work and a pattern will form, a balance will unfold - stop wasting time criticising on review not to your liking, it is only an OPINION.

Kerry, relax, I ducked, it was her punch that cracked your laptop screen.

Gracefully parried, Chanel.

nice input Alex - Three questions Chanel must hear often: Three answers 1. Since she isn't a producer, what's her motive for seeking screenplays to review in "brutal harshness"? Most scripts need a certain amount of grammar work and spelling - not to mention the "WTF" moments (writers like anyone else some times think of something and forget to write it down and move on with the story) 2. What qualifies her to justify applying sadistic "help" to someone's work? We all decide what is acceptable and what the industry requires the more you read the more you learn (when I first started writing I paid a "reviewer" 100 dollars - The first thing he asked me for was a logline - I had no clue what it was. After he learned this he wrote me an email : You need to read some basic book on screen writing - so it cost me 100 to learn what a logline is - get the point? 3. If she's the voice from The Burning Bush, why waste excessive time reviewing others, rather than use it in her own writing? That is exactly what she is doing - I have learned a lot just by reading other people's script - not to mention all the insider stuff it takes years to learn

As an evil out of hell's black gate, I take offense at this negative connotation towards hellspawn. ;) That being said, it can be very, very, very dififcult to be nice if a script is really, really, really bad. If you read something wherein the story, structure, grammar, spelling, and basic idea are all immensely flawed, it can be very difficult to say much about it that sounds kind. And if I'm Kind to the point of avoiding those truths and do not let them know the weaknesses and flaws of their screenplay, have I really done a good thing by allowing them to go on blissfully unaware of it and begin spending money on professional reviewers who will give notes, KNOWING full well that it isn't salvageable, yet attempting it anyway in hopes of repeat business? I almost always have something nice to say about every script I read, and I try to be positive when something really works, but, being Nice is not always Kind, and being Mean is not always Cruelty. Just thought it worth saying.

Coincidentally, "Evil Out of Hell's Back Gate" was my high school nickname.

i think the real issue here is diplomacy and communicating effectively.

Rather than jump to a conclusion, Ada, why simply not message me, we could have discussed the matter in private and then come to whatever conclusion you desire - I often write in a matter-of- fact manner and can see how this may be perceived as boasting or arrogance, but it doesn't make it so - I believe you cast an aspersion in an earlier comment questioning my motives for prowling the site reading screenplays - I find that totally inappropriate and out of order, again, you know NOTHING about me, my work nor experience - your two cents has been noted.

I struggle terribly with spelling and grammar. I'm so bad at spelling standard software spellchecks don't know WTF I'm trying to write sometimes, and I end up having to use Google. When it comes to grammar, I may as well be trying to write in Mandarin or machine-code. It's alien to me. And that's not even going into the dropped words or similar phonetic words that litter my prose. It's not unusual for there to be at least one significant typo on every page of my screenplays and a grammar error in nearly every paragraph. And that's after I've polished it over and over. I know it can be like nails on a chalkboard to a reader. I appreciate it pulls people out of the story. I realise it looks amateurish. But it's not a result of laziness. Some of us who struggle with this do just that, we struggle. It's just as frustrating for us as writers as it is for those of you reading. We can spend day after day re-reading our work, reading it backwards, and re-reading it out-loud until our eyes hurt. But we don't see all the errors. It's part blindness and part ignorance. There's proofreaders but that can get expensive, especially if you write and re-write a lot. So I'm always indebted to those reviewers who forgive my failings in that area and don't penalise me for them. It has cost me dearly with some readers though.

I was truly impressed by your above comment, CJ, re spelling and grammar, the fact you have the courage to make it public and how much you have accomplished with that handicap, kudos to you - if I was reviewing your work and made aware of the above, I would have taken that into consideration and not deem your work as lazy writing - but that has never been brought to my attention in the past, and you are correct, it's like nails on a chalkboard - I believe most reviewers would"forgive those failings" if made aware, especially if they were presented good work, and you do good work.

Same here. I only passed first year of highschool and have had to educate myself. I think I've done a bloody good job of it, but I don't have a high school certificate or a university diploma. The occasional typo or incorrectly spelt word shouldn't be a problem, BUT some of the posts we get on here or facebook are definitely a problem. I actually did a course in english when I decided I wanted to be a writer. I knew i wasn't up to scratch and did something about it. I'm still not perfect, but by far much better than before. I also read widely. Too many aspiring writers don't even read or read widely.

Chanel, I find most people see past it. It seems some readers review scripts, and some proof them. Cherie, I don't read. I haven't read a fiction book in something like twenty years. Kudos to you taking an English course :)

Cj, this is not a criticism, but a script goes beyond just being a story - font, format, spelling, grammar, structure, etc. should all be taken into consideration - much can be forgiven if it's a good script, sadly, I don't come across that many good scripts - this is why I suggest people have at least 20 reviews, they experience a wide spectrum of opinions, prerequisites and expectations from the reviewer - in case anyone wondered, I have read some stunning screenplays and praised many writers on some wonderful work, I know quality when I see, it.

I'm not trying in any way to invalidate those considerations, Chanel. My beef is with the focus, tone and subjectivity that sometimes comes with addressing them. I'm sure all of us want to feel proud of how well our scripts come across in terms of polish.

CJ, have you had a look at Daniel Kim's work?

No I haven't. Should I be?

Have a look, tell me what you think, animation from NZ.

More fool me, I have seen his GTR intro before. Really good stuff, reminds me of Blue Toad Murder Files.

The fact is that grammar and spelling do affect you when it comes to studio readers. Those people have to read through dozens of submissions per week and they WILL kick out a script that isn't up to snuff in terms of spelling and grammar basics. Why? Because of the assumption that if the writer "didn't care" enough to make it polished, that the submission is likely sloppy in other areas and reading the rest of it is a waste of time. It's the same thinking that drives rejecting scripts with too much description (dense blocks of text - "I'm not reading that.") too much dialogue (all that white space implies "Nothing's happening"), too long of a script (writer doesn't know what they're doing), or badly formatted (ditto). It's hard enough out there to get something read by producers or studio people, so if someone's willing to point out the tripwires, that's nothing to sniff at. That said, story, structure, character development and dialogue are king, so feedback on those fronts are far more valuable than the technical side. If a system of cordial feedback exchange were to develop here on Stage32, it could be very useful. An emphasis on the cordiality. Anyone who's been read out there knows that 1 bad set of feedback trumps 10 kudos when it comes to the ego.

Edward let's start a new thread about, If a system of cordial feedback exchange were to develop here on Stage 32, it could be very useful. An emphasis on the cordiality. so we must define the limits of cordiality. maintain the need to rip a script apart by pointing out all of its weaknesses. Place a high regard for spirit of the human being who wrote it. I was thinking too that it shouldn't be a one direction process on the amateur level where we are. The review process should be a long term feedback. Where the writer tells the reviewer what kinds of changes he/she isi going to make based on the review. And no crying!

Edward Case is right about how readers react to messy presentations of a work. Yes, there was something rascally about Chanel's opening statement on this thread about reviewing materials. Just a personality issue I suspect. But newbies to this business often don't understand how much creative work goes into writing a superb screenplay and how many things can get overlooked, misguided, lost or simply manhandled. To become a fine screenwriter, one must master many disciplines. So that any critique by people who have even a beginner's knowledge of the process is worthwhile, if you can objectively find the elements in that critique you understand and can use to improve the script. Those who have been working and learning from mistakes for years have a lot to offer. They are usually generous with their sharing and want to help. So for me as much as it hurts I pay attention to every comment I get, good or bad. In short, every outside perception of your concept is worth consideration. You may dismiss it or find something helpful, as your attitude toward and understanding of the critique allows. You also find out where you are in terms of your understanding of great screenwriting when you get a review. All this said, reviewers can be newbies in one or more of the disciplines I've talked about, and haven't a clue what they're talking about: the disciplines are proper presentation that makes the work glide along withiout hitches or glitches of grammar and presentation getting in the way, story structure and pacing, depending on genre, the fundamentals of the 3-act structure, character development and possible change in outlook, a great climactic moment, tying up all the plot threads, a logical progression of action and events, and a great first ten pages. My point here is that we should continue to be learning every day, no matter how good we think we are, and not bickering over how people react to criticism. It's worth a note and nothing more. So, everybody, get back to your writing.

This is how I value reader feedback. A reader is equivalent to someone in the darkened theater watching your film on screen. If they go "Huh?!" and are taken out of the experience for any reason, that is a valid reaction. What they may feel is the SOLUTION to the problem may be bonkers, but the reaction is valid. To quote Neil Gaiman: “Remember: when people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.”

And Dillion, why not? We should create the group ourselves. Lay out ground rules and feedback format. Start a script exchange. Personally, what I'd like help with isn't my best stuff (the stuff being shopped around) but the stuff that doesn't work but one knows deep inside is a strong premise or start. Get some insight toward shepherding those projects to greatness.

Edward, great quote from Neil Gaiman. Love that.

Quite the thread this has turned out to be! @Edward, you couldn't be more spot on as far as 'errors' that take us out of the story. There was a similar discussion a while back about screenplay software that got off on formatting etc. What I said there holds true for spelling and typos. (Grammar is 'mostly' different because some screenwriters write in a very specific voice that at times means a sentence can just be one or two words that move us down the page -- and this is actually ideal though often not grammatically correct.) As I stated on the software thread, professional readers and decision makers read a massive amount of scripts and anything that takes them out of that rhythm is jarring. I know I read on average 3 scripts a day, depending on my workload and time of year for competitions it can be up to 40 a week. Our eyes are trained, so the nitpicking listed in many comments is valid. HOWEVER if a story is absolutely doing it's job at moving us from one page to the next, a typo here and there can be forgiven, but I guarantee you it will be mentioned in the notes even if the script is fantastic. I will offer three parting pet peeves that derails my reading: 1) single spaces between scenes. And here's why: that double space not only helps our eyes travel down the page it is necessary to break down the script into 1/8th's for production pages (if it ever gets that far) so if a producer has a script that is single spaced between scenes -- it's going to add to your production page count and you may have to lose some scenes on-set, never an ideal situation. 2) Excessive exclamation points. The writing and conflict should be clear enough that you don't have to tell the reader with exclamation points. I see scripts where every other line is an exclamation point, because it's so damn exciting! Can't you feel it!? 3) Abuse of parentheticals. I can't tell you how many scripts I read where entire action lines are stuck in parenthesis and also the parentheticals are buried in the blocks of dialogue instead of being broken out (usually this goes back to the improper software issue). Those are my top three and that is without broaching the story, characters, dialogue and act structures -- but they do take me out of the read, which isn't ideal.

Yeah, Edward. Brilliant idea! Count me in if you start that group. I believe artist only flourish when they feel safe, and secure to be themselves.

We seem to segued into a studio readers somehow. This is going to become a R.U.L.E.S thread if we aren't careful. In fact, fck it, I'm putting my crash helmet on right now just in case. The points I made earlier were in regard to new writers dipping their toes into the acid waters that are feedback. Anyone submitting to studios should be more than aware of the basics and, if not yet well networked, seeking out the kind of feedback that most likely comes at a price. We really don't need a thread regurgitating the usual *if you use an adverb three times readers will burn your script and your family type fears. We need to take onboard what Danny posted recently. We need to talk craft, actual cinematic writing craft. We need to find the love in people's work and help them build on it. Because when we're motivated to do that, our flaws seem insignificant. That said. I always appreciate actual real world insight into the world of being reader, so I do very much appreciate Laurie's post.

I would suggest mailing: mailbag@stage32.com and see if they want to be involved in setting up a separate section on the site for 'peer' reviews. It may that RB would rather keep it organic but you never know. Either way, I suggest have two sections, one for story/character/theme and one for more of a proofing and formatting side. that way the people reading know what to be offering opinion on.

Laurie, I loved what you wrote. I wonder gravely if I am guilty of making all the mistakes you've suggested. I would be honored if you read my screenplay, Blood Justice to please let me know if I formatted it wrong/

Cj. I love what you posted. I'd be very interested in what you think of Blood Justice? As for Chanel Ashley; I owe her a sincere apology. All my life the one major character defect I have is being overly impulsive, and not thinking before I react. I sent Chanel a blistering note; almost hoping to hurt her feelings because she simply didn't find any merit in my play, or screenplay. I'm new to this, so I need to understand more clearly that everyone is entitled to their opinion. And yet, Chanel made a valid point about my screenplay, Blood Justice. The villain is killed on page 67, and the suspense kind of falters. I called up my script consultant about the idea, and he reminded that in the draft before the current one posted on Stage 32; the villain isn't kill till the end. I changed simply because I fely I was being compelled by my spiritual beliefs to spend time on the lead characters inner anguish of taking a life. Chanel gave m,e food for thought; I could easily make it more suspenseful by prolonging the kill. I would be greatly honored if you read it, and let me know what you think. My biggest problem is my ego. I think I know it all about screenwriting, and looking in the mirror the other day; I realized I've never taken a writing course in my life, so what the hell do I know I know?? I sincerely don't think I need to take a writing class because I think I need therapy more because I am haunted by seeing my father murdered in front of me on my tenth year birthday. But what renders me the most fill of self hatred is the fact I backed out of killing the man who killed my father, and was called a punk by every wiseguy in East Harlem. Also, Chanel, honey, if you're reading this email; I want you to know there will be no more attacking you whatsoever. I may be nuts, but I kind of like your spunkyness. One more thing, Chanel, and CJ if you could go back to the play; please give me both of your opinions on the ending. Do you think I shouldn't have the Barracuda be shot at the end of the play, or should I go for a more uplifting ending? Again, love ya kiddo. I pray you can forgive your stupid, impulsive grandpa. As far as saying a Producer laughed at your notes is total bullshit, no one laughed. In fact my script consultant went as far as to say, " I didn't like Periera being killed on page 67, but you insisted you wanted to focus more Nicky's spiritual decay. Help! Help! Help!

William... this isn't a comment on Blood Justice, which I haven't read. I just wanted to point out that that other story you mention: NOT killing the man who killed your father, and having to live with the torment of that? That's a helluva dramatic tale also. (Maybe you've already written that one, or it's baked into Blood Justice. But in case you were too close to it to realize the dramatic potential, I'm weighing in.)

William - thanks for your kind words. As far as reading your script and offering constructive criticism that will improve it's chances of one day getting made -- I do it as part of my living and that is a 16 hour a day working schedule. Right now I am reading for two competitions, have 2 feature ghostwriting assignments, weekly coverage assignments for Amazon, coverage/consultation for writers who come to me individually, plus 3 of my own projects in various stages of development so a free read is going to be about 4 months out.

I feel absolutely stoked after reading the comments posted overnight (overnight where I reside) - they were constructive, insightful and brilliant observations made and said - I would love peer feedback to be initiated on this site, it's long overdue - there are quality people with quality expertise here that can be of enormous benefit to others - I hope Laurie will come good and initiate that conversation with management - I think we all agree there is a dire need of such a section - while I have had the occasional roasting on this post, I feel flattered to have made some wonderful contacts here - prior to anyone asking, no, I will not be part of the feedback process, RELAX, no one will have to endure my reviews, LOL.

No Chanel, I won't join unless you're part of the feed back process because I know if I were to write a play, or screenplay that you find merit in - I've hit a home run!

Busy and came back to 50 email threads from this one discussion. Sheesh. That said, I found the quote by Neil Gaiman the best advice here.

Thanks Edward case for sharing Neil's salient wisdom.

You could work to home your craft or luck out and write the Killer first script. Regardless you have to be flexible, easy to work with, handle criticism, have a sense of humor and be able to say no yes and maybe . You have to be able to allow the criticism to teach you, you must be able to walk away from the money and walk toward it. If you're not a joy to work with especially in the beginning of your career who would want to work with you? Thin skims don't work in this business and yet the human factor of respect and kindness should never be thrown out the window. Write little miss sunshine but if you're little mr sensitive when it comes to development - there are many many other writers they will choose b4 u. So stay flexi and fly!

Chanel my point is not to encourage or discourage but may I say if you want to be taken seriously in addition what Danny Manus added there is no such thing as following a three act structure. Honestly and not trying to be in any way insulting if you are going to look at things in such a closed minded aspect as that you are missing the true nuts and bolts of a lot of stories. Perhaps what you say you do is more from an editorial aspect of reading but I suggest if you want to critique screenplays and screenwriting perhaps you should increase your parameters of what is considered normal. This is not a personal attack Chanel but from reading what aspects you say you critique you would not get many professional or semi-professional responses from your review advertisement. You may in fact be very talented in review and critique and offering any feedback is a good thing for any up and comer and I admire you for that. I don't know you or your goals and if you advertise reviews for up and comers that is great, just be mindful and careful in what you advertise your critique to entail. There is no science per say to screenwriting and much artistic expression involved just be careful of parameters you have for review and make sure those parameters are on target. Don't take this as cutting you down personally in any respect and even my personal opinion of what you offer is just that. A personal opinion. Good luck to you and you may indeed have the calling of "Script Consultant" just think about how what you want to convey comes across.

As I've calmed down from having my play, and screenplay not receive favorable reviews; I have to accept that at 61 years old with no writing education whatsoever: I have to learn to accept any notes that come my way; whether good, or bad as part of a growing process. I'm guilty of relying too much on my script consultants notes forgetting that he is human, and prone to mistakes as we all are. Yes. I would have loved to have Chanel praise me, but the simple truth of it is; I simply don't know what the hell I'm doing, and need more direction than even a script consultant can give me. I often wonder why am I trying to revive a writing career that ended thirty years ago. The current play I'm working on; The Monkey, Moma, and Me is the only piece of literature that I would want to see produced. It's my life story with my battle with addiction, and co dependency that truly means any thing for me. I wrote that I would never post a any project on Stage 32 again, but that was just my impulsive nature. When this play, which is the most piece of literature I've ever written is completed; I WILL post it on Stage 32 because this play is play hits a nerve that goes right to the core of my soul, and will I welcome Chanel Asley's comments - YES!!! I will graciously accept any feed back I can can get because I'm thinking of not going this time to my script consultant first, but rather my fellow brother's, and sister's on Stage 32. I have read comments after comments that have opened my eyes to nothing, but people who have more wisdom than I will ever have - AND THAT INCLUDES YOU CHANEL ASHLEY!!

Mitchell, love the name, and certainly no offence taken - interesting you should cite Danny Manus, he saw himself as a Simon Cowell, which is ironic because I was called the same on another site - I suspect you have taken Danny out of context, he would have suggested there are other options to the three act structure, and of course, there are - again, I give a small example, a portion of what I look for and I'm tarred with a "closed minded" - no, my friend I do not "miss the the true nuts and bolts of a lot of stories" - you cannot judge a book from one chapter, let's get real here - I make comments on this thread, try to keep it short and sweet, hence why I offer limited information, it's not my role to impose what I have/have not done in great detail - again, get real, you want a deep and meaningful discussion, more than happy to accommodate such a discussion in private, message me, would love to discuss the merits of a three act structure - do not presume you know my parameters, you have no inkling - I have had many successes re reviews, but that's not something I wish to highlight here, I've already been called boastful and arrogant, don't need the pettiness - I can't prevent that, people are so quick to judge, but that's another story - I would prefer not to have these discussions in public, please message me, this thread is not about me, there are more important issues to consider.

Chanel: What is my net gain for posting my screenplays at Stage 32? If someone wants to read a script, synopsis or sample, I am happy to accommodate. Thus far, I've only had one person ask me for work here. On Inktip, where producers are looking for work, I've had several scripts downloaded, read and a few optioned. I'd also be happy to reciprocate with other writers.

Hello Phillip, you already provide a logline, synopsis and screenplay on InkTip - the producer doesn't ask your permission to read it, or for you to please provide it, it's already up there and they have access to your work, unless things have changed since I was in there last - so why wouldn't you do the same here? Download a logline, synopsis and screenplay, the odds of being read certainly increase dramatically as opposed to waiting for someone to knock on your door - BUT, if you're not comfortable with that scenario, fine, don't, stay as you are, leave it all to InkTip - it's called CHOICE, and we all have, it, my friend - good luck on InkTip, not a bad site.

I do offer loglines here and state that scripts are available on request. Any producers out there want to read one? Let me know. Thanks for your counsel.

Actually, Chanel, I have to disagree with you on InkTip. One doesn't HAVE to post the screenplay. I only posted loglines and synopses at most there, and I'd receive requests to read the script if they liked the logline/synopsis enough. Got two paid options through InkTip that way.

I stand corrected, Edward, I seem to recollect my script was up, didn't realise it was an option, well done on your success with InkTip.