Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

    My wife pointed out what someone (Jeff I think?) said above, that maybe the bar is just higher. Sure, maybe. But something just doesn't seem right, and having listened to the ScriptNotes podcast where this is discussed, I wonder... Part of why people either (a) pay readers more or (b) have them right full coverage/ indepth notes is that they are then ensured to at least pretend to read the full script - are these readers doing so? We don't know.

    THEN AGAIN he also said out of 240 or so readers they narrowed it down to 40 - right? So maybe these readers are just amazing and used to reading some super-high quality material. That may be it, perhaps, but the stories we've read here don't seem to point that direction...

    I hope it's the latter? But if it's not, either the Blcklst is going to have to revamp soon or everyone will catch on... OR we will see another Amazon Studios, where some stupid-junk scripts (Sorry if you are on here and you won - no offense, but really, your scripts weren't good) won and now everyone knows Amazon Studios was a joke. (BTW - I heard they partnered with the WGA now and may not be as big a joke for long?)
    www.JustinSloanAuthor.com

    http://www.CreativeWritingCareer.com
    http://www.MilitaryVeteransinCreativeCareers.com

    Twitter: @JustinMSloan

    Want a free book?

    Comment


    • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

      I think it's more helpful to stay focused on the question of why so many apparently otherwise well-regarded scripts are getting such dreadful scores, rather than worrying about other, allegedly less deserving, scripts getting higher ones. There's no need to make this a writer vs. writer sort of thing. If other people are getting good scores that are going to help them promote their scripts and make industry connections, good for them. That's what I was hoping for, too.
      Patrick Sweeney

      Comment


      • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

        Hmm, well now I don't feel so bad about my 5/10

        Maybe these script doctoring people don't really help you that much? I've only tried the slamdance one, it was ok, but not enough to make me change anything. Not worth the price. The logline and synopsis was terrible.

        As far as blacklist, I thought I got a fair shake in the written eval. No misspellings anyway. I already knew where I'd take a hit, since my script isn't exactly Hollywood. Too indifferent of a main character, not enough at stake, too much poking fun at religion which scares producers away. The advice given would certainly hollywood it up a bit, make it more "movie" like. I am considering it, I get it. Too many other scripts to work on now though.

        Comment


        • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

          If this service is to find the very best out of the best and the standards are higher than even the most discerning contest, that's GREAT. But...

          If these are bad readers, or even worse, not even reading and just skimming readers. That's very unprofessional and terrible for TBL cache.

          But there is a huge difference between college and pro's.

          And taste is subjective. I wouldn't get too pissed.

          Comment


          • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

            Originally posted by Paul Striver
            Some things are subjective, but some things are just obviously wrong.

            Andrew/Mechanic gave a certain script a "consider" and rated it one of the 10 best scripts he'd read that year, AND that script was optioned by a producer and developed by a director, AND was written by a guy who has won first place in Austin, a guy who has been writing films and doing fairly well on the festival circuit for over a decade.

            The Black List reader rated that script with 1's and 2's. The dialogue is a 1? A 1 on a scale of 10? That means the reader thinks it's literally the worst dialogue imaginable. The plot is a 1? The characters are a 2? The overall rating is a 1 -- meaning, again, the reader thinks this script is among the very worst scripts EVER. As in, it's impossible to write a script any worse than this one.

            I'm sorry, that's simply not legit. That reader is an idiot and should be fired.

            Franklin's reputation will fall every day he lets that kind of crap continue, not just because the reader was obviously poorly vetted, but because it subverts the whole purpose of the enterprise when a good script is given a rating of 1 -- how long until the site's professional members realize that the ratings are complete crap and the site's recommendations can't be trusted?
            Normally I would call people out for whining about low scores, but if all of the above is true, then I agree -- that reader needs to be canned.

            I'm sure there will be some glitches and bugs in the first few months of the New Blacklist, so I think the best everyone can do is hope that Franklin and co will get those sorted out as quickly as possible. If it were me, I'd read the scripts with the more extreme reviews (especially if the writers were coming to me with a case like the above) so that I could decide whether or not the readers deserved future employment.
            QUESTICLES -- It's about balls on a mission.

            Comment


            • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

              Like at any large company, there should be an independent review board. Right now, writers can rate the reviews and I assume the reader, and I assume this is to evaluate the BL's readers' employment. This is a great option, but some sort of investigative arm would add some muscle to it. The Black List internal affairs dept.

              Comment


              • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                Franklin said himself BL 3.0 was a site dedicated to finding the absolute best scripts out there.

                Maybe a 1 or 2 just means: "I'm sorry, but your script isn't the next Inception, I can't help you. Now please remove your mediocrity from our site -- I've given it a 1 out of 10 to speed along the removal process."

                By removing 98% of scripts (which are bad/average/good) the database would (in theory) be left with only Inceptions.
                I'm never wrong. Reality is just stubborn.

                Comment


                • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                  Mge457 says, "Jeff, you vetted both Andrew and Amanda with an uncalculated spec under a false name. Any chance you would consider doing that again here?-

                  -- This is unnecessary. RGF already vetted it with his submission.

                  Scoring ones, even for a newbie, is ridicules. There would have to be no plot at all. It's obvious that the readers weren't vetted and trained as well as they should have been. Maybe because of time and volume issues some people who don't know what they're doing got in as readers.

                  I suggest for Franklin to implement a quality control check for the readers. That is to go over (ongoing) a sample of the reviews that have been given out by reviewers, both high and low scores, and check to see if the reader knows what he's doing. If not, remove them.

                  I like the idea of the Black List, though the reviews not jiving with past feedback from pros and contests advancements is troubling. Also, I'm not too keen about the $25 monthly fee.

                  I suggest to reward excellence, such as, if a script is in the top whatever, the writer gets a free month; if a script is in the top whatever, the writer gets 3 months for $25, etc. The scripts that don't make the cut pays $25 monthly.

                  I believe this is a nice incentive and reward. And trust me, Franklin won't have to worry about losing any money from this. There would still be a lot of delusional writers paying the $25 monthly fee.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                    Originally posted by Paul Striver
                    That's crazy. Please get in touch with Franklin Leonard and ask him directly WTF that's all about. I know Mechanic's evaluations are fairly tough, so if he gave it a consider and ranked it as one of his 10 best, there's no way it should get 1's and 2's. Not to mention it's been optioned and been in development? The whole thing is ridiculous.

                    That goes for the other writers who've posted here about well-regarded scripts getting 1's and 2's.

                    I wouldn't take it without demanding an explanation. More importantly, I want to hear Franklin's explanation for how his readers can be that out-to-lunch.

                    Why should writers submit scripts to this when it sounds like a large percentage of their readers are mentally disturbed dikheads with axes to grind? Is it just luck of the draw whether you get a sane competent reader or a complete idiot? If you happen to draw a psychopath who gives you a terrible rating solely because of the abuse he suffered in childhood, does that rating mean your ability to make use of the Black List service is forever foreclosed?

                    The service is pretty much worthless unless Franklin can get the reader situation straightened out.
                    I had a similar experience. Submitted what I feel to be my best script, a second rounder in this year's Austin. Reader went on and on about all the msp in script - I spell checked again, and found maybe three in the entire script, except for those that were flagged by spell check in the parts of a Shakespeare play, that were included as part of the script. In other words, the reader was blaming me for Shakespeare's spelling :>0

                    Rated 4 or 5 in most categories. Seemed a very ad hoc, sketchy, and (see above) uneducated review. Had three other downloads of script before receiving review, but those downloads have not resulted in any reviews, yet. Have not made the results of review public (Good Lord, why would I!?). Haven't taken my script off site yet ... being stubborn, I did pay for a month's stay, did I not? Also, curious if the other three downloads will result in any more reviews.

                    Also gave the reviewer a "1" out of 10 for their "efforts". Seemed a fair assessment, in my opinion.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                      Originally posted by Paul Striver
                      Some things are subjective, but some things are just obviously wrong.

                      Andrew/Mechanic gave a certain script a "consider" and rated it one of the 10 best scripts he'd read that year, AND that script was optioned by a producer and developed by a director, AND was written by a guy who has won first place in Austin, a guy who has been writing films and doing fairly well on the festival circuit for over a decade.

                      The Black List reader rated that script with 1's and 2's. The dialogue is a 1? A 1 on a scale of 10? That means the reader thinks it's literally the worst dialogue imaginable. The plot is a 1? The characters are a 2? The overall rating is a 1 -- meaning, again, the reader thinks this script is among the very worst scripts EVER. As in, it's impossible to write a script any worse than this one.

                      I'm sorry, that's simply not legit. That reader is an idiot and should be fired.

                      Franklin's reputation will fall every day he lets that kind of crap continue, not just because the reader was obviously poorly vetted, but because it subverts the whole purpose of the enterprise when a good script is given a rating of 1 -- how long until the site's professional members realize that the ratings are complete crap and the site's recommendations can't be trusted?
                      I agree wholeheartedly.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                        Originally posted by mge457 View Post
                        Jeff, you vetted both Andrew and Amanda with an uncirculated spec under a false name. Any chance you would consider doing that again here? I think it would be a great way to test the system.
                        Interesting idea, but I don't know how you test a group of anonymous readers that you're assigned to randomly.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                          Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                          Interesting idea, but I don't know how you test a group of anonymous readers that you're assigned to randomly.
                          Send me $25/month for the next 6 months, plus an extra $50 at the start, plus another $150 for 3 additional reads (that 4 reads, total), plus a 15% commission as your ad-hoc manager (Now with Even More Hoc), and I'll work all that out for you.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                            Just caught up on some of the other writers' scores. Wow. It doesn't bode well for BL3.0 when scripts which have received high grades from respected readers, and did well at contests, come up with 1s and 2s.

                            Perhaps there was too much focus on developing their a-la Netflix algorithm and not enough time trying to resolve the issues of contests (I still think this is contest-like in nature): the subjectivity of unnamed readers who respond to a gig cattle call.

                            The anonymous nature of everyone who reads these scripts is an issue for me. For example, Script Gal and Script Mechanic are compelled to do a great job because their reputation depends on it. Ditto for studio/prodco readers - their employment depends on accurate evaluations. If they pass on a script that another studio ends up making big BO with, their employer notices.

                            But here it appears anyone -- from an unidentified reader who gets a cut of the $50 (I'm sure they don't get it all), to anyone with a membership (or who's boss has a membership?) -- can pass on your script without being held accountable. When there's no quality control about the accuracy of those evaluations it's yet another lottery-like affair. You're stuck with the luck of the reader draw.

                            And here's why the reader's compensation and cut of the $50 concerns me. Most people tend to do a job on par with what they're paid. When you feel like you're being exploited by the person paying you, there's a tendency to cut corners - as in not read the whole script or simply skim -- and you feel justified in doing so. Even if you lose the gig you don't care, you were making so little it's no great loss. (Not to mention this online era has, in my opinion, spawned huge potential for cheating in general because who's going to know? Who's going to hold your feet to the fire? No one.)

                            So what happens now? Do the complaints fix it? Or, do we then end up with a situation where, to stop the exodus of writers canceling memberships, all scripts are suddenly scored higher? That's the same quality control problem in reverse.
                            Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                            Comment


                            • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                              I think I've figured out what the blacklist '3.0' is a reference to...
                              It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

                              Comment


                              • Re: Black List founder Franklin Leonard answers your questions about the Black List

                                First off, the Black List website looks like it was designed by interns.

                                It's prehistoric, it's not user friendly. It seems like it was designed by someone with limited funds, who now should have the funds to upgrade it.

                                Secondly, if I get ones, prepare to lock down another thread Emily.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X