Franklin Leonard

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by finalact4 View Post
    it's a good approach. i've learned not to leave it on the site. even with being in the top lists, your return is maybe a single download every month or so, and you never know who that person is.
    So inform the dummy -- how much does that cost per script with 2 paid reviews for a month?

    (sure it's on this thread somewhere and on the site, but i'm fat and lazy)

    Leave a comment:


  • figment
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by Strangerthanfiction
    No, that's not how it goes. A script needs two very high scores on the Nicholls to get a third read. Only the high end of the top 20% were read three times this year. I made the top 20% but only got two reads.
    I'm not sure this is correct, Strangerthanfiction -- I had a extremely positive read for the first read and the the next one was so-so, but I still got a third read (made the top 15 percent).

    I think if there's a notable discrepancy between the score of the first and second read you get a third read? And then they take the averages of all three reads to see if you move on?

    Leave a comment:

  • finalact4
    Member

  • finalact4
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    Bono, I don't host scripts on the site permanently. When I complete a script (and have had it evaluated by a few trusted people), I put it up on the site, buy two evaluations, and host it for a month. If I get less than an 8 score, I suspend hosting. Again, your lack of understanding of how the site can be used makes you less qualified than you think to make judgments about how people use it.



    You're a funny guy, Bono, but right now you're beginning to sound like a broken record.

    You said that "you don't need the BL to break in." Saying that is as meaningless as saying "you don't need contests to break in" or "you don't need queries to break in." NO ONE knows what will be the thing that helps them break in, which is why most people try a variety of methods.

    I'm not sticking with the BL out of "fear." I'm sticking with it because trying several different options will increase my odds of something happening. If you can't understand that simple logic, I can't really help you.

    Seriously - the only one that needs to "let go" of something is you needing to let go of trying to tell other adults on here how to spend their money. I like you, man, but the condescension's not a good look.
    it's a good approach. i've learned not to leave it on the site. even with being in the top lists, your return is maybe a single download every month or so, and you never know who that person is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    Bono, I don't host scripts on the site permanently. When I complete a script (and have had it evaluated by a few trusted people), I put it up on the site, buy two evaluations, and host it for a month. If I get less than an 8 score, I suspend hosting. Again, your lack of understanding of how the site can be used makes you less qualified than you think to make judgments about how people use it.



    You're a funny guy, Bono, but right now you're beginning to sound like a broken record.

    You said that "you don't need the BL to break in." Saying that is as meaningless as saying "you don't need contests to break in" or "you don't need queries to break in." NO ONE knows what will be the thing that helps them break in, which is why most people try a variety of methods.

    I'm not sticking with the BL out of "fear." I'm sticking with it because trying several different options will increase my odds of something happening. If you can't understand that simple logic, I can't really help you.

    Seriously - the only one that needs to "let go" of something is you needing to let go of trying to tell other adults on here how to spend their money. I like you, man, but the condescension's not a good look.
    Oh yeah, you love me... Are you the bagel guy? (NYC joke for us)

    Listen to me, the old man. I was just trying to help you work out what I thought you were saying with your 50 posts in this thread that I need to let go of with my 10 posts...

    You seem to be a truth teller. I was just treating you the way you would treat me if I was saying, I use Service X and yada yada...

    If you think I'm a broken record, have you read -- um EVERYONE ELSE ON THIS BOARD?

    I did it this way. I was considering posting for the next 10 weeks the same exact post just to drive you mad, but I'm mature now...

    Leave a comment:

  • docgonzo
    Member

  • docgonzo
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Someone posted the Verve Coverage Guide on r/screenwriting the other day and it mentions the BL specifically in regard to how the go about covering scripts.

    The Blacklist is a company that monitors unrepresented writers with unsolicited materials. Generally, the material is not strong enough to be considered for representation but, sometimes, there is an excellent screenplay or writer waiting to be discovered. More often than not, these submissions are a pass. If so, you will probably know within the first 30 or 40 pages.

    So while they are getting subs from the BL, they're looking at them with a jaundiced eye. The implication is pretty clear: aside from a rare exception, they don't see BL scripts as being ready for primetime. If that's the prevailing attitude at a mid-tier agency that is more writer-friendly than most, it's not hard to imagine how CAA or WME might feel.

    Leave a comment:

  • UpandComing
    Member

  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by Bono View Post
    I'm simply saying -- why don't you try not to use the service for 6 months -- it cost monthly to host a script right?
    Bono, I don't host scripts on the site permanently. When I complete a script (and have had it evaluated by a few trusted people), I put it up on the site, buy two evaluations, and host it for a month. If I get less than an 8 score, I suspend hosting. Again, your lack of understanding of how the site can be used makes you less qualified than you think to make judgments about how people use it.

    Originally posted by Bono View Post
    I'm simply trying to say, from what I read on this thread, you should know that you don't need the BL to break in. Simple as that.

    What success have you personally had from it? I assumed this whole time from your past posts you were repped and doing great? You seemed tuned into the industry. But now I read these as you're afraid to let go out of fear...
    You're a funny guy, Bono, but right now you're beginning to sound like a broken record.

    You said that "you don't need the BL to break in." Saying that is as meaningless as saying "you don't need contests to break in" or "you don't need queries to break in." NO ONE knows what will be the thing that helps them break in, which is why most people try a variety of methods.

    I'm not sticking with the BL out of "fear." I'm sticking with it because trying several different options will increase my odds of something happening. If you can't understand that simple logic, I can't really help you.

    Seriously - the only one that needs to "let go" of something is you needing to let go of trying to tell other adults on here how to spend their money. I like you, man, but the condescension's not a good look.

    Leave a comment:

  • nguyensquared
    User

  • nguyensquared
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by finalact4 View Post
    let me restate, yes subjectivity is a reality. i disagree about the "simply reads scripts," as that is not what the paid reader is hired to do, to just read the script like they do a novel on vacation. they are paid to give their expert, experienced, professional, and as objective as possible evaluation of the work in question. the are supposed to attempt to remove personal biases and prejudices.

    agreed, a script can have many diverging scores. most do to some degree.

    and we all know that contests have similar problems with reader inconsistency, that's why Nicholl, i believe it is, has a back up, if there's a high and low consideration it gets read by a third. i'm pretty sure that's how it goes, though i've not entered it.
    Yes, it's true that professional script readers have duties that go beyond just a casual reader. But the point I'm making is that the "response" part of their job is 95% of the time accurate. It's just like when you or anyone picks up a book anywhere - you know if it's emotionally engaging you or not. If the writer is writing in strong conflict, if the stakes are meaningful, if the context is clear and engaging, if the story escalates constantly and organically, it will get successful coverage.

    The difficulty is when something in the script isn't working, because the presumably vetted reader must now intellectualize the reason why it didn't work. And if they are professional studio readers as the Black List claims, they are experienced in articulating the reason why the script didn't work. But even if their reasons may diverge, their emotional response to the work is for the most part (but not always) spot on.

    Neil Gaiman once said that 95% of the responses you get from a work of art is accurate. But 95% of the suggestions you get on how to fix what isn't working in that art is inaccurate.

    Leave a comment:

  • finalact4
    Member

  • finalact4
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by nguyensquared View Post
    There's much truth to this. A reader simply reads scripts, the way any of us read a book or blog post - if it's engaging us on all levels, the script will get good coverage. It's when a script isn't working for whatever reason that the notes become divergent.
    let me restate, yes subjectivity is a reality. i disagree about the "simply reads scripts," as that is not what the paid reader is hired to do, to just read the script like they do a novel on vacation. they are paid to give their expert, experienced, professional, and as objective as possible evaluation of the work in question. the are supposed to attempt to remove personal biases and prejudices.

    agreed, a script can have many diverging scores. most do to some degree.

    and we all know that contests have similar problems with reader inconsistency, that's why Nicholl, i believe it is, has a back up, if there's a high and low consideration it gets read by a third. i'm pretty sure that's how it goes, though i've not entered it.
    finalact4
    Member
    Last edited by finalact4; 09-13-2019, 07:44 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by nguyensquared View Post
    There's much truth to this. A reader simply reads scripts, the way any of us read a book or blog post - if it's engaging us on all levels, the script will get good coverage. It's when a script isn't working for whatever reason that the notes become divergent.
    Also readers are different of course. A 40 year old doing it for 20 years will have seen more writing than the high school kid. So the person who has done the job longer will give a script a 5 and the newbie might give it an 8. Because to them this is an amazing script based on what they've read.

    I know for sure I wouldn't give the same scores I gave (I've read in past) to old scripts. I've learned a lot more what a great script looks like.

    I remember when my first scripts got trashed -- and I'm like but how can they think that when I it was so hard and it looks like the CLERKS script to me -- takes you years to realize how right they were....

    So consider that too. The person on the other side might be reading their 10000th script or their 10.... and that can play a huge part.

    Also genre, etc. I'm a comedy guy so I would prefer to read that genre, but also I'm more critical because it's my genre... you know? Other read and it laugh at jokes I think are stupid that I wrote...

    Leave a comment:

  • finalact4
    Member

  • finalact4
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by JoeNYC View Post
    What I said... was in reaction to your strong statement in the highlighted quote.

    You say the "3" score was just an example. Okay, nevertheless, my post is still valid if you are only able to get past thinking that this is all about YOU and think of the other writers who had a hard time in the past about a low score, where they support their right to being upset by saying my peers reviewed it, said it was great, it advanced in big screenplay competitions, etc.
    no, joe, that is not what i said. you missed the point, again. the point was the disparity between the 9 and the 3 not the 3 in and of itself. if i get all 3s that's fine. that's not what i'm disputing.

    My post was not directed just at finalact4. It was directed at all the members of Done Deal who have entered this thread to get my point across, which is the following:

    Just because a writer's script was scored a "3," when there was evidence to the contrary that it should not have been, doesn't necessarily mean the reviewer was not component, or that there are flaws and weaknesses in the criteria of scoring with the Black List system.

    The writer must take the matter of "subjectivity" into account.

    Franklin says The Black List readers are professional industry readers and that they were vetted. Is it possible for a few clunkers to sneak through? Yes. If you feel you're score wasn't valid, point it out to the Black List so they could investigate, but don't automatically assume it was because the reviewer was not component, or the reviewing criteria is at fault.
    and i would say, joe, don't automatically assume you know what a writer has and has not done to point out concerns to the black list, because i do. i have. and the reason i'm speaking about it is because i want tbl to provide the best services possible, and so do they.

    i don't want an 8 if it's undeserved. because that doesn't help me or help any industry pros. i want the 8 because someone believes i deserve it.

    perhaps my post was too nuanced, but if there are people giving out 3s and 8s, one of those numbers is either over inflated or deflated. i'm talking about the huge gap between high and low scores. because for the most part, diverging scores are 2 steps, not 5.

    when a reader tells the writer to start the story in a PLACE, and the story does start in that PLACE, there is a problem with that reader. if a reader tells a writer in one paragraph that the writer needs to develop a specific character more, that's one thing, it's a completely different situation when the SAME reader then tells the writer in the next paragraph that they need to get rid of the secondary character-- i had a reader directly contradict themselves four times in one review. so yeah, i had a problem with that review.

    or when a reader blatantly mischaracterizes a script altogether citing it's too similar to XXXX movie when there are literally no similarities. or citing that the title could be a problem because another script that isn't even in production might have the same title? seriously? in the weaknesses section which means they took points away because of the title. a writer cannot allow statements that are factually untrue or irrelevant to remain attached to their script because someone's going to read it and say, wtf? this isn't anything like that.

    another writer had an 8 and a 3 and the comment was about the time travel in the first 10 pages, when the time travel element wasn't introduced until the third act. that's confusing for a writer, and errors like that invalidate the review altogether.

    they get characters wrong, the get page counts wrong, they can't compose a sensical logline, they can have issues forming coherent sentences or thoughts, showing they've rushed... or they mention that something happened in the screenplay that never happened. they can condescend the writing in a childish or petty manner which is hardly considered "professional."

    and with all that said, there are still great readers that are really good at what they do. they compose clear thoughts and identify the strengths and weaknesses well. they show that they understand the writer's intent, understand the characters and give strong advice as how to further develop the script with the writer's intent in mind. for me, i'd rather wait a month or two to get that reader to read my script. seriously i would. on some sites you can request a specific person, they provide bios and experience history.

    if a writer's work receives four 3s and one 8, there's a good chance the 8 is the review that needs to be reconsidered. it works both ways. some scripts are polarizing, for sure. but there should, in general, be a clustering of assessments, which does happen a lot on tbl. you can see that on a previous post.

    what works well on the black list is consensus... four 7s, three 8s, one 9. but not everyone can afford to pay for 8 reviews at $75 a pop and the two to three months of hosting while you wait for reviews.

    but that the reality. that's what works. so if you receive your 8s out of the gate you're golden because you'll receive offers of FREE reviews... and then you'll need to consider, do i take them up on it and risk some weird aberration?

    if you have an 8 and a 3, guess what? you can't make the top lists. if you have two 8s and a 3 you still can't get on the top lists where your script is visible. and that'll cost you north of $250. at that point you have two choices, market your scripts around the 8s or pay for more reviews and hope you get more 8s or 7s.

    i share that with you, so that when you put skunkman up and pay for 4 - 8 reviews. it might help you consider your next steps. it could go well, but it could go wonky, too.

    wishing you all good fortune.
    FA4

    finalact4
    Member
    Last edited by finalact4; 09-13-2019, 07:36 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • nguyensquared
    User

  • nguyensquared
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by Bono View Post
    To sum up -- sometimes your script sucks and you don't want to pay to hear it. So maybe that low score is more in line with the truth than the high score. Either way it's subjective.

    However, I think great scripts won't get low scores. I think they will get reaction of all great scripts. People are so excited, they can't wait to tell the world.

    Most of the scripts people write are bad. Some are okay. Some are good. Few are great. So the reviews for bad, okay and good can be all over the place. Great rises to the top....
    There's much truth to this. A reader simply reads scripts, the way any of us read a book or blog post - if it's engaging us on all levels, the script will get good coverage. It's when a script isn't working for whatever reason that the notes become divergent.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    I need a job. Maybe I should become a BL reader to make this all go full circle into hell...

    Leave a comment:


  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by JoeNYC View Post
    What I said... was in reaction to your strong statement in the highlighted quote.

    You say the "3" score was just an example. Okay, nevertheless, my post is still valid if you are only able to get past thinking that this is all about YOU and think of the other writers who had a hard time in the past about a low score, where they support their right to being upset by saying my peers reviewed it, said it was great, it advanced in big screenplay competitions, etc.

    My post was not directed just at finalact4. It was directed at all the members of Done Deal who have entered this thread to get my point across, which is the following:

    Just because a writer's script was scored a "3," when there was evidence to the contrary that it should not have been, doesn't necessarily mean the reviewer was not component, or that there are flaws and weaknesses in the criteria of scoring with the Black List system.

    The writer must take the matter of "subjectivity" into account.

    Franklin says The Black List readers are professional industry readers and that they were vetted. Is it possible for a few clunkers to sneak through? Yes. If you feel you're score wasn't valid, point it out to the Black List so they could investigate, but don't automatically assume it was because the reviewer was not component, or the reviewing criteria is at fault.
    To sum up -- sometimes your script sucks and you don't want to pay to hear it. So maybe that low score is more in line with the truth than the high score. Either way it's subjective.

    However, I think great scripts won't get low scores. I think they will get reaction of all great scripts. People are so excited, they can't wait to tell the world.

    Most of the scripts people write are bad. Some are okay. Some are good. Few are great. So the reviews for bad, okay and good can be all over the place. Great rises to the top....

    Leave a comment:


  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    It's not that I think you can't offer your opinion. It's that I think that you are less likely to understand what BL customers perceive as its benefits unless you have.

    I still think you don't understand my position. I like many aspects of the service. I like that it only takes 2-3 weeks to get feedback. I like that if you manage to get a high enough score, it gets sent out to a membership of thousands. I like that besides the cost, there is a low barrier to entry.

    Just because I am unhappy with certain aspects of the service, does not mean I am unhappy with the service as a whole. It's possible to criticize a service and still consider it worth a try overall.



    This only makes it more clear to me that you are not very familiar with the BL's outcomes. There have been at least a dozen articles published in the trades about people who have received options, studio deals, or representation through the site. That doesn't include comments on forums by writers mentioning their personal successes with the site.
    I almost want to use the service now, so I can do well in it, then come back here and still say you should leave it! Ha.

    Dude, if this makes you happy, please keep doing it. I understand your points.

    I'm simply trying to say, from what I read on this thread, you should know that you don't need the BL to break in. Simple as that.

    What success have you personally had from it? I assumed this whole time from your past posts you were repped and doing great? You seemed tuned into the industry. But now I read these as you're afraid to let go out of fear...

    I'm simply saying -- why don't you try not to use the service for 6 months -- it cost monthly to host a script right? I just went to the site and that's what I saw. Save the money, keep writing, doing everything else, and seeing if anything changes for the better or worse.

    Because I keep reading your posts and others here -- and I read them as "I like this service, but but but but but..." and I'm like PLEASE STOP USING IT. But you and others won't stop. And I swear I'm thinking it's like any addiction. If I stop using this service, then I might miss an opportunity. I don't see this -- because isn't the same script up there? Wouldn't the success happen right away not 2 years of hosting the same script?

    I don't get it. You're right. I'm just listening to what you're saying and I think you're taking both sides of this. I'm just trying to help you and others not be afraid to walk away...

    I'm not here trying to get everyone not to use this service -- I'm just trying to understand why the hell you still are, man. That's it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bono
    replied
    Re: Franklin Leonard

    Originally posted by barh View Post
    Why doesn't Franklin Leonard post here anymore?
    Well we answered this question from the first post, didn't we?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X