Nicholl 2015...

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by carcar View Post
    No, you don't think it is. But it's obviously touched a huge chord, so I can't be so dismissive of it.

    I don't think the Kardashians are worthy of my personal attention, but I'd be an idiot if I didn't recognize they have a lot of social impact.
    Its result was dramatic, yes, but I seriously doubt, from the nature of the original comment, that Rachel expected it would generate this level of attention when she posted it.

    Leave a comment:


  • carcar
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    No, you don't think it is. But it's obviously touched a huge chord, so I can't be so dismissive of it.

    I don't think the Kardashians are worthy of my personal attention, but I'd be an idiot if I didn't recognize they have a lot of social impact.
    Last edited by carcar; 08-26-2015, 09:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • UpandComing
    Member

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by opie View Post
    Yes, the combination of going public both on FB and in the media is a dramatic move that most rational people wouldn't do before first reaching out privately to program leadership. Unless, of course, this person had a particular agenda where private resolution wasn't of value.


    Attempting to make this go viral for personal exposure, obviously.
    I beg to differ. Today's generation is taking their thoughts directly to social media. People share these days. There's nothing dramatic about it, and it doesn't necessarily signify an attempt to "go viral". It's just a reflection of changing times.

    The Mashable thing was a step further, but I see it as a response to the Nicholl Facebook rep's very defensive and insincere comment -- which interestingly enough, hasn't been deemed worthy of criticism by most of the Rachel critics here.

    Leave a comment:

  • boudiccarules
    User

  • boudiccarules
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by opie View Post
    Yes, the combination of going public both on FB and in the media is a dramatic move that most rational people wouldn't do before first reaching out privately to program leadership. Unless, of course, this person had a particular agenda where private resolution wasn't of value.


    Attempting to make this go viral for personal exposure, obviously.
    +1

    "Guerrilla Marketing" is about taking the consumer by surprise, make an indelible impression and create copious amounts of social buzz.

    Leave a comment:


  • bjamin
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    people get offended over the stupidest ****.

    Leave a comment:


  • opie
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    You call highlighting a problematic comment on Nicholl's Facebook page "the bazooka option"?
    Yes, the combination of going public both on FB and in the media is a dramatic move that most rational people wouldn't do before first reaching out privately to program leadership. Unless, of course, this person had a particular agenda where private resolution wasn't of value.

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    And what is this "public agenda" you speak of?
    Attempting to make this go viral for personal exposure, obviously.

    Leave a comment:


  • carcar
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Oh, I have faith in the Nicholl. 17000 reader comments, one creepy one. The Nicholl can handle it. As they have done.

    Leave a comment:


  • carcar
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    It is obviously is an incident, though. It is a thing. Other writers are on that page complaining about their comments, nobody's talking about that...

    Leave a comment:

  • UpandComing
    Member

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by carcar View Post
    I just hope this doesn't overbalance and result in a bunch of vapid, toothless, empty praise, where every member of the class gets a gold star and a certificate for completion, and God forbid you should criticize a poorly written script.

    She had a legit complaint about a single comment. It doesn't invalidate every negative comment any reader makes about every script.
    Trust me, the Nicholl is too big, too smart, and too established of an organization to resort to a 180-degree change such as this. It will simply remind its readers to remain professional and move on.

    Leave a comment:

  • Margie Kaptanoglu
    Regular

  • Margie Kaptanoglu
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by carcar View Post
    I just hope this doesn't overbalance and result in a bunch of vapid, toothless, empty praise, where every member of the class gets a gold star and a certificate for completion, and God forbid you should criticize a poorly written script.

    She had a legit complaint about a single comment. It doesn't invalidate every negative comment any reader makes about every script.
    It's possible to write a very detailed, in-depth criticism without a hint of mockery. I do it all the time.

    Criticism and mockery are two different things.

    Leave a comment:

  • UpandComing
    Member

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by DarkKnight(OfTheSoul)
    We aren't though. This whole incident isn't an incident. It's not a thing.

    A high school kid telling me to **** myself on the street is inappropriate too, but I'm not going to report him to the principal. You I'm guessing are the type of person who would. The world is full of all kinds of folks.
    If I asked that kid to give me a screenplay review, and paid him, and then he told me to **** myself, then yes, I would report it to the principal

    Leave a comment:


  • carcar
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    I just hope this doesn't overbalance and result in a bunch of vapid, toothless, empty praise, where every member of the class gets a gold star and a certificate for completion, and God forbid you should criticize a poorly written script.

    She had a legit complaint about a single comment. It doesn't invalidate every negative comment any reader makes about every script.

    Leave a comment:

  • UpandComing
    Member

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by DarkKnight(OfTheSoul)
    I'm going to make my own assumption -- based off this first line of the review: "It's great to see a group of four women friends take on the sophistication level of THE HANGOVER."

    The reviewer is female, let's call her "Janice". She's 50 and this kind of script isn't her genre. She's disappointed that the women in the script are, in her opinion, stooping to the level of raunchy, gross-out comedy, and, weary after reading a few too many scenes where objects are stuck in butts (allegedly this occurs in the opening scene)
    It doesn't matter if the reviewer was female or male. Doesn't change the nature of the comments. And it doesn't matter if she was "weary". That's a lame excuse (and no excuse) for the tone of the comments.

    Originally posted by DarkKnight(OfTheSoul)
    she, perhaps inappropriately -- I'll give you that, decides to write her review in a tone that might match said screenplay.
    Glad to see we're in agreement.

    Leave a comment:


  • carcar
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    It was the porn comment that got the slap. She never said anything about the characters being characterized as slutty. Her original FB comment was measured and mild, especially compared to some that have come since.

    If the reviewer had framed the comment in a slightly different way, as in the characterizations were as thin as the ones in porn, that would have been a different and justifiable criticism. It was the little tag that they 'seem kinda hot on the page' on top of the porn comment that turned it into the creepiness. Like you'd be getting your script back with the pages stuck together.

    It wasn't a funny comment, but I can see reader fatigue coming into play here. Still, the reader and the respondent on FB need to own it, which at least as far as the ultimate Nicholl response is concerned, they seem to have done.

    Leave a comment:

  • UpandComing
    Member

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Nicholl 2015...

    Originally posted by Margie Kaptanoglu View Post
    From start to finish, the tone of the review is sarcastic and demeaning. That first sentence is sarcasm. Then we have "...quite the reveal,- "...not that that is saying a lot,- "not a helluva lot of insight,- "Got it,- "When it is drunk, which it is often, this script might believe...,- and then the final sentence.

    The point is not that the script was criticized, it's the tone of the criticism. The reviewer is actively mocking the script. It's completely unprofessional, and it's very surprising to me that Nicholl's FB rep did not immediately pick up on this tone instead of trying to defend the review. To insist that the author give the title, as if that somehow justified this mocking tone, is appalling. To say that a positive score justifies the tone is also appalling.

    I'm glad to see that Nicholl quickly came to their senses and apologized. It's clearly a great organization in most respects. But I do think they should be looking carefully at other reviews written by this reader before deciding whether to keep him/her on. The reader needs to be heavily schooled in tone and respect.
    This.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X