Nicholl 2009

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • citybrave
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Will hard copy entries still be allowed? And I'm sure this has been covered somewhere, but are writing teams (of two) permitted to enter?

    Leave a comment:


  • slsla
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    thanks for the update Greg, I'll keep checking back...

    Leave a comment:

  • gregbeal
    Member

  • gregbeal
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by slsla View Post
    Hi Greg....I just checked the web site, and it said you are not currently accepting electronic script submissions...Is that expected to change before the 5-1 deadline?
    thanks!
    From earlier in the thread:

    Originally posted by gregbeal View Post
    Actually, the Nicholl online process will allow uploads of PDF scripts in 2009.

    And the online application code has been rewritten so we're fairly confident that entrants won't face the crashing problems that they encountered over the past three years.

    We're in the midst of proofing the site pages and our Web folks have a little more tweaking to go. We had hoped to have it up this week but obviously missed that goal. If all goes smoothly, we're anticipating having it up late next week.
    Our application and IT folks have run into a problem involving the server configuration. Once that is figured out and we do some testing, the application will be good to go. Hoping for next week now.

    Leave a comment:


  • slsla
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Hi Greg....I just checked the web site, and it said you are not currently accepting electronic script submissions...Is that expected to change before the 5-1 deadline?
    thanks!

    Leave a comment:

  • LateNightWriter
    Member

  • LateNightWriter
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by acquaformosa View Post
    So I guess some people do a better job of self-analysis and self-critique of their work. As for abuse of the system. Heck, I've paid my money and in return, I receive the service that I've paid for -- the privilege and opportunity to participate in perhaps the most reputable screenwriting contest in the land. It all seems fair and equitable to me, including whatever script submittal limitations are deemed appropriate. It's their contest.
    Exactly. I've submitted multiple screenplays the past few years, and made the Semifinals with four different screenplays. Often the same script that dinked out in year one cracked through in year two. Just as often the script I considered "least likely to..." was the one that made the semi's. Ya never know.

    The Nicholl is the best game in town. Nothing comes close. If Greg wants to limit multiple submissions, that's his choice and he's certainly entitled to do it. I'm just glad that I had the privilege in the past to enter whatever scripts I felt were ready for Nicholl scrutiny, and I will continue to enter until I either crack the finals or become ineligible (oh happy day!!!).

    Late Night Writer

    Leave a comment:


  • Erehwon
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Hey, I got no problem with the limitation. I've entered scripts that I thought were winners, and they went nowhere, and the opposite's happened, too, where a script I wrote in like a month went to the semi's.

    And I've also certainly done my part to support the Nicholl, for like the last 8-9 years, lol!

    Leave a comment:

  • acquaformosa
    Regular

  • acquaformosa
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by Erehwon View Post
    It's an abuse of the system if, say, writers are throwing every script they have at the Nicholl, in a desperate attempt that ONE of them will stick.
    Having thrown more than a few scripts into the system, it never seemed like an act of desperation to me. More likely, general confusion over how readers might respond to different types of material.

    Look, I've written scripts where I didn't have a great feeling about them -- and then one of them ends up as a Nicholl Finalist. And I've written scripts where I start practicing my Oscar speech and wondering when I should quit my day job -- and they go nowhere.

    So I guess some people do a better job of self-analysis and self-critique of their work. As for abuse of the system. Heck, I've paid my money and in return, I receive the service that I've paid for -- the privilege and opportunity to participate in perhaps the most reputable screenwriting contest in the land. It all seems fair and equitable to me, including whatever script submittal limitations are deemed appropriate. It's their contest.

    Leave a comment:

  • TheBrothersLanglais
    New User

  • TheBrothersLanglais
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by Erehwon View Post
    It's an abuse of the system if, say, writers are throwing every script they have at the Nicholl, in a desperate attempt that ONE of them will stick.
    Coulda swore that was the system.

    Leave a comment:


  • Erehwon
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by LauriD View Post
    I don't think that's a valid assumption at all. Some people write lots of bad scripts, others write lots of good scripts.

    Lawrence Kasdan (The Big Chill, Body Heat, etc.) wrote 6 scripts in 7 years (and for all I know, submitted them all to the Nicholl...) before he ever sold one.

    Many people on this board have stories about how a script advanced some years but not others. Writing well is the main thing, but the taste of the readers is also a factor, so it helps to have scripts that appeal to various tastes.

    If it wasn't for this new rule, I'd have 4 scripts in competition this year (including two former semi-fi's) and would be cranking away on # 5 in hopes of having another ticket in the barrel by May 1. I don't see how that's an abuse of the system...

    I think that allowing relatively unlimited entries (maybe 10 max?) encourages people to keep writing and trying new styles and genres.

    However, I can also understand wanting to give each script a fresh set of eyes.... Maybe in this economy it will be easier to recruit more readers?

    LauriD
    It's an abuse of the system if, say, writers are throwing every script they have at the Nicholl, in a desperate attempt that ONE of them will stick. Why not just focus on your best work, polish that (or those three or four), and go with that? And I don't see the connection between allowing people to enter 10 scripts somehow keeps them writing. What should keep you writing, I would think, is your drive and love of writing, not in whether you do well in a contest.

    And I really don't think your Kasdan example plays out, at least the way you wrote it. He wrote 6 scripts in 7 years. Lots of guys do that before they ever sell anything. How does that have to do with entering a kajillion scripts in the Nicholl?

    Leave a comment:


  • LauriD
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by Erehwon View Post
    Honestly? I think that if you're entering 5+ scripts (100!!?!?!) then the chances of them being ALL sh!t are VERY high. People who enter, say... 5+ scripts are probably pretty desperate to win. How confident can you be, if you throw every damn script at the wall, hoping one will stick, instead of focusing on your BEST work, and submitting that?

    I don't think that's a valid assumption at all. Some people write lots of bad scripts, others write lots of good scripts.

    Lawrence Kasdan (The Big Chill, Body Heat, etc.) wrote 6 scripts in 7 years (and for all I know, submitted them all to the Nicholl...) before he ever sold one.

    Many people on this board have stories about how a script advanced some years but not others. Writing well is the main thing, but the taste of the readers is also a factor, so it helps to have scripts that appeal to various tastes.

    If it wasn't for this new rule, I'd have 4 scripts in competition this year (including two former semi-fi's) and would be cranking away on # 5 in hopes of having another ticket in the barrel by May 1. I don't see how that's an abuse of the system...

    I think that allowing relatively unlimited entries (maybe 10 max?) encourages people to keep writing and trying new styles and genres.

    However, I can also understand wanting to give each script a fresh set of eyes.... Maybe in this economy it will be easier to recruit more readers?

    LauriD

    Leave a comment:

  • EJ Pennypacker
    Member

  • EJ Pennypacker
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Given the strenght of the contest (and low cost), you'd be a fool not to send in the max. amount and see how they play out.

    EJ

    Leave a comment:


  • Erehwon
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    I hear ya. Hey, I've entered two at a time, usually.

    Leave a comment:

  • acquaformosa
    Regular

  • acquaformosa
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by Erehwon View Post
    Honestly? I think that if you're entering 5+ scripts (100!!?!?!) then the chances of them being ALL sh!t are VERY high.
    You must be right. I think I entered four during one particular year and none of them advanced. Still, I saw merit in each one, but then I've been delusional about my talent for a long time.

    For example, I'm planning to submit three scripts this year - two new spec scripts and another one that I recently rewrote after watching a live reading and gathering considerable feedback.

    I can't help it. I think they're all worthy enough to compete with the best and the brightest.

    Leave a comment:


  • Erehwon
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Honestly? I think that if you're entering 5+ scripts (100!!?!?!) then the chances of them being ALL sh!t are VERY high. People who enter, say... 5+ scripts are probably pretty desperate to win. How confident can you be, if you throw every damn script at the wall, hoping one will stick, instead of focusing on your BEST work, and submitting that?

    Leave a comment:

  • lordmanji
    Member

  • lordmanji
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2009

    Originally posted by gregbeal View Post
    For a number of years, some writers have entered from four to ten (or even more) scripts every year. During one of the years in which we had the $20 early entry fee, one entrant submitted over 100 scripts.

    Originally, our policy was not to have readers read any writer they had read before. Over time, we had to reduce that to not to read any script they had read previously. The multiple entries over many years makes this policy increasingly difficult to follow. Reducing the repeat entries should allow this policy to continue.

    With their multiple entries, some writers seemed to be attempting to game the process to give themselves an advantage over other writers. This is not fair to the vast majority of entrants.

    Time and resources are limited, and the three-script limit will help. While adding the limit will probably only reduce our total entries by a hundred or so scripts, any reduction is helpful, given the amount of time it takes to handle and judge thousands of scripts.

    We think having a three script limit will not affect the Nicholl Fellowships' goal of identifing and encouraging talented writers.

    To answer the other question, three scripts is three scripts, whether submitted by a solo entrant, a team or any combination.
    any number on how many of those 5+ and over script submitters were semifinalists or better?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X