FEEDBACK

I had an experience at Zoetrope, which I’ll explain further on. First, I’d like to set it up.

When I first joined Zoetrope, I realized the reviewers I got were inexperienced writers, who were no help. They just rambled on to reach their two hundred-word minimums, so they could get the four required reviews they needed to post their own script.

By the time I realized this, I only had a few days left before my script’s time on the site was up. Desperate, I zipped a zmail over to an experience writer and made an offer to exchange reviews. He agreed. His feedback was very helpful, as mine was for him.

Now, I keep a list of the top reviewers, those who score a rating of 4.5 and higher. Each month, Zoetrope post the names of the top reviewers. So far, my list has the names of about fifty members. At any given time, about five to ten of these members will have a screenplay that’s live on the site.

Okay, that gets us to the meat of this post. I sent off a zmail to five of those members, who have scripts that are live. I told them I’m an experience writer, who knows how to give an exhaustive and insightful critique. That I’m available to analyze their script, if they’re available to review mine, when I post it in December.

Four members replied yes, and one member asked for a logline and how many pages. I’ve been on other Internet workshops in the past, where I’ve received this type of request before... and it bugs me.

I rather receive, “No, I’m not available.” Then, “Yes, I’m available, but I’m picky.” Now, I know what you’re going to say, “That member is smart to ask.” My feeling is a workshop is where members are supposed to help each other to improve their work.

Some of you will say, “Maybe a member would feel they lack certain strengths in a particular genre or story to give valid feedback.”

-- Nonsense. I’ve heard this excuse before too. If you’re a competent, experience writer, you should be able to identify problems in any genre or story. Problems such as: structure, plot holes, boring or unnecessary scenes, underdeveloped characters, over/underwritten scenes, dialogue, and descriptions, etc.

If someone gave me a story about gay men to review, should I say, “I’m not able to critique this, because I’m not gay. I feel, not being familiar with that subject, I won’t be able to point out problems and offer suggestions that would improve your story.” Nonsense.

Like you don’t have to be an expert in the comedy genre to review comedies, because of the reasons I’ve stated earlier. Also, you’ll know if it’s funny or not, by if it makes you laugh.

Same with the Horror genre, if it spooks and scares you, it works.

My feeling, for a workshop to function, as a member, you must be subjective enough to handle many different genres and stories. To be successful in a workshop environment, you must develop relationships with other experience writers.

The point I’m trying to get across to the aspiring writer is that before you send your script out to the professionals in the business, feedback is crucial... crucial... crucial. Did I mention it’s crucial?

To achieve this, offer to critique another writer’s script, which, if done correctly, will consist of multiple pages of feedback.

Don’t be picky, or you might end up like the woman who asked me for my logline and page count, no reviews.

Uhhhh.....

Are you saying that we should post on AZ or not?

I, for one, stopped going there because i found a closer network of folks (many who are regular posters of this site) who provide feedback. I always found the AZ concept, while noble, quite flawed. There's almost a tacit agreement, I think, that the hardcore AZers give each other good ratings and such.

I might be wrong. But I've not gone back in four months since I found out that I put much more time into it than I got back.

I know it's frustrating when you can't get all the reads you want. But right now I'm looking at it from the point of view of the people who wanted to see the logline first. Those people, highly-rated reviewers, get asked to review a whole lot of scripts, and most of them are an unpleasant chore to read. We all have some scripts we are required to read for various reasons. For instance, I belong to a couple live, in-person writers' groups where everybody has to read everything another member submits, regardless of genre. On Zoetrope, those top rewiewers you want to get to have done their required reviews, and probably many more above and beyond the call of duty. Under the rules of that organization, they've earned the right to spare themselves some reading they have reason to believe they're not going to like, because they don't like the genre, or because the writer didn't know how to choose an inviting concept.

When you pay somebody, they have to read your script, like the idea or not. But when you're trying to get a favor read, just like when you're trying to get an agent or prodco read, you have to convince them that your script is going to be a positive experience and not an excruciating one. That's why choosing a good concept and writing a good logline are so important. It makes all the difference in whether or not people who have a choice in the matter will choose to read your script.

Hey, Blue:

I was just giving advice on the importance of quality feedback and how to develop relationships to obtain it.

It sounds like you already have develop relationships, where you won’t need workshops like AZ.

For those who do, the best way to get it is by what I described above.

I’ve found the members who are on the top reviewer’s list, were able to identify problems and give sound advice to fix it. Almost on the same level as a professional analyst that you would pay 500 dollars for.

Joan:

I’m just pointing out, these top reviewers would like to get 3-5 thorough reviews of their scripts also. To get that, they would have to review another experience writer’s script. Unless they accept an offer from someone, who says they got the experience to give it to them, they might end up with insufficient feedback.

Of course, if they have developed relationships at AZ and don’t need to line up component reviewers, they could afford to be picky. But my guess is some who have an attitude about it, and are picky, are going to end up with no reviews.

I've been on AZ for two years. I've reviewed over a hundred scripts, although a half dozen or so were informally by email. In the beginning my reviews weren't good. I skimmed and I hurried, but as much out of lack of experience and fear of sounding like an idiot as anything. I got better at reviewing as I improved my writing. I have also gotten some worthless reviews--but if I get one thing that stands out for me, I count it as a winner, even if the rest the review is horseshit.

I have a number of people who read me regularly and I assure you I haven't had the good (or bad?) fortune of them pasting high scores on scripts that didn't merit it. The people who work me over the hardest are the ones I encourage to read me again, and I try to read them. A half dozen people or so writers have received more than two reviews from me. The rest the reviews I've done are a mishmash of new writers or repeats who've requested me to take a look.

I've gotten choosier because I learn less from the bad scripts than I used to. Yes, I wade through some even though they're painful because there's a promise I see or an idea I enjoy even if the execution is bad. And sometimes I read the bio or see the person's posts on the boards and want to be supportive. But by and large, I look and think carefully before I review. Why?

Because every review is a commitment of 4-5 hours of my time. As my writing has improved, I learn less from the bad scripts and want to spend more time reading the pros. It's like playing tennis. You don't mind playing with a complete beginner sometimes, but it's not very stimulating once you're at an advanced level. So you do a few good turns, remembering you were there once. But you also look for people a couple swings ahead of you so you can be challenged while you review.

There's nothing nefarious about most people there. They're looking to get feedback and improve their writing. Like life, some people take their commitments more seriously. But nobody owes anybody and nobody's entitled. Any review given conscientiously--even short or inexperienced--should be received graciously. Make like AA. Take what you like and leave the rest.

Always give twice what you expect. If you receive half what you hope for, you'll be light years ahead.

And if AZ doesn't meet your needs, so be it. It's one option. Not the only door.

Joe's advice is good. I used to use Zoe. But it was WAY too time consuming. (Sorry I sent you there, Blue.)

IMHO, the only way to get something out of it, is to get to know the better writers, like Joe said. I was fortunate enough to attend a conference where I met a lot of the writers face to face. We still keep in touch and review each other's work.

HOWEVER, I have found certain writers right here at DD to be much more helpful.

Janea

Janea, don't apologize...in fact, your feedback of my initial rough script was the basis of my first rewrite.

I just got lucky, i suppose, because i ran into lots of folks since then who have been very supportive and helpful in my development process.

on AZ, i just didn't get very candid feedback. however, i do agree that it is helpful if you get back what you put in and...if you don't know many people who can provide you feedback, a good source to get initial reaction.

Joe,
You try to do WAY TO MUCH mindreading, which is bad for your mental health. You presume to know why this person asked for the logline and length. You presume to know counter-arguments to your post. Maybe this person is competent AND experienced and just doesn't want to review certain genres or long stories. Who are you to tell them what they should want? The critique police? If you are good (as apparently this person was based on her scores), you get to pick and choose.

I'm available and I'm picky.

And on a different subject, it looks like there really are some producers trolling the water at AZ.

From moviebytes ezine vol. 5, number 23:

Bruce Meade has been a member of Francis Ford
Coppola’s American Zoetrope "Virtual Studio"
workshop since June 22, 2000. In August 2001, his
original comedy feature, "In A Nutshell," was
optioned by Custom Productions due to exposure on
the Zoetrope web site.

RayGivler, you missed the point to what I was saying to the experience writers out there. I’ll repeat it again, and this time I'll try to be more clearer.

Feedback is crucial, before you send your script out to the professionals in the business. You need to develop relationships with other experience writers to get valid feedback. One way to do that would be to make contact with other experience writers and offer to exchange reviews.

Those top reviewers are aspiring writers just like you and me, who also need feedback for their stories.

If I have my story posted on AZ, because I need feedback, and I was contacted by someone, who said, “I’m an experience writer, who knows how to give an exhaustive and insightful critique, are you interested in swapping reviews?”

My answer would be, “Hell yes!” Just like the 5 out of the six, who jumped at this offer when I contacted them.

Now, for the 6th member, who asked for a logline and page count. This tells me she’s picky, which means she’s not someone worth developing a relationship with. If everything meets her criteria, then she might bless you with her review. You don’t want to establish relationships with writers you can’t count on. It’s a waste of time and effort.

The point I’m trying to make to the aspiring writers is what to do and not to do, in order to develop a relationship with another writer.

Oh, by the way, the 5 reviewers that I lined up to review my story, already have 3-6 reviews on their own stories.

The 6th member, who was picky, has 0 reviews for her story.