Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

    First I want to take a moment to say I am not complaining about the Blacklist. From my experience, I would like to know how I can improve and get better. I want to be a screenwriter and I with that goal in mind, I must do all I can to hone my craft.

    I thought using the coverage report from the Blacklist would help me better learn what I was doing right and what I was doing wrong. I've read reviews of others and their readers gave really good feedback on how to improve their scripts. I don't think I received that and I'm confused as to what steps to take.

    My review was a 4/10 for my comedy script.
    Genre:
    Comedy, Romantic Comedy, Sex Comedy

    Logline:
    As RANDOLPH and REBECCA prepare for their upcoming wedding, Randolph’s ex-fiancĂ© CLAIR comes back into the picture- and she wants him back.

    Strengths:
    The funniest parts in the script involve Randolph’s dubious career as a relationship guru, writing books that ostensibly help single men find women to marry them. Jacob points out that Randolph cannot truly be writing from a first-hand perspective, having never been married himself, and from what little we can discern of Randolph’s advice, it seems more catered to shallow sexual pursuits than long-lasting relationships. This is best illustrated by Aldo, Randolph’s biggest fan and the funniest character in the script. Aldo is so focused on the cruder sexual elements of the book he even throws Randolph off. Jacob is perhaps the most sympathetic character. He understands his brother and all he’s going through and offers him some sound advice- even if Randolph is less than willing to take it.
    Weaknesses:
    “Getting To I Do” has a thin plot that centers around a character we can never really like. Randolph is a disingenuous, foolish character who gets let off the hook far too easily. It’s understandable that he’s reluctant to tell Rebecca about Clair, but after a certain point his dishonesty is inexcusable. Letting Clair come into his house after she has made it painfully clear she wants to have sex with him is just inviting trouble. Clair seems unwilling to listen, but Rebecca is reasonable enough, so this is a plot that could be resolved easily if Randolph was simply forward enough to have an open conversation. The implication that Randolph still may have some feelings for Clair makes him even harder to like in this situation. The script does not treat its female very charitably. Rebecca is sympathetic but oblivious, and Clair and Annabelle are sex-crazed caricatures with little purpose besides pursuing Randolph. The crude humor is hit or miss. There is at least one conversation about sex toys too many, with the same joke repeated with less success. Giving Randolph’s mother and grandmother dirty mouths is an overused joke that doesn’t get too many laughs here.

    Prospects:
    “Getting To I Do” is funny, and it might be more successful if the focus were more on Randolph’s career. As is though, there's not much of a high concept here, and an audience might find certain elements and characters off-putting.
    Pages:
    91


    I've read that if you disagree you should write an email. So I did and gave good points.



    • Randolph is a disingenuous, foolish character who gets let off the hook far too easily.(In farce comedy, characters are suppose to be gullible. Gomer Pile was, and he always got away with it )
    • It’s understandable that he’s reluctant to tell Rebecca about Clair, but after a certain point his dishonesty is inexcusable.( Which builds the tension and leads to the climax. Men are dumb. They think they can solve everything on their own. Like asking directions.)
    • so this is a plot that could be resolved easily if Randolph was simply forward enough to have an open conversation. (In a comedy? This is what makes comedies funny. when the situation they are in is easily solvable to everyone but them.)
    • The implication that Randolph still may have some feelings for Clair makes him even harder to like in this situation (Seems the reader might be suffering from personal issues with this topic. Again it a male driven story, We don't think like women. If Randolph did not still have feelings for Clair then what would his struggle be.)
    • The script does not treat its female very charitably. Rebecca is sympathetic but oblivious, and Clair and Annabelle are sex-crazed caricatures with little purpose besides pursuing Randolph.(I can bet a million that the reader is a woman. No offense but this is a dead give away. Again, its not personal, it's comedy. The women are suppose to be that way.)
    • The crude humor is hit or miss. There is at least one conversation about sex toys too many, with the same joke repeated with less success. Giving Randolph’s mother and grandmother dirty mouths is an overused joke that doesn’t get too many laughs here. (I understand if the reader didn't find humor in some of my jokes. What is a farce comedy without crude humor. Comedy is subjective. What makes one person laugh may not make the next Furthermore, the two sex toy jokes actually are meant to piggyback off one another..)
    • “Getting To I Do” is funny, and it might be more successful if the focus were more on Randolph’s career. (Thank you for the advice, but the story is not about his career. It is about his struggle of getting to the altar and being a married man.)
    • Strengths: The funniest parts in the script involve Randolph’s dubious career as a relationship guru, writing books that ostensibly help single men find women to marry them. Jacob points out that Randolph cannot truly be writing from a first-hand perspective, having never been married himself, and from what little we can discern of Randolph’s advice, it seems more catered to shallow sexual pursuits than long-lasting relationships. This is best illustrated by Aldo, Randolph’s biggest fan and the funniest character in the script. Aldo is so focused on the cruder sexual elements of the book he even throws Randolph off. Jacob is perhaps the most sympathetic character. He understands his brother and all he’s going through and offers him some sound advice- even if Randolph is less than willing to take it.( This entire paragraph reads like it belongs in the synopsis section than the strengths. In the prospect section, it say the script is funny. That is a strength. It should read Getting to I do is a funny script.The funniest parts in the script involve Randolph’s dubious career as a relationship guru....)


    This is a farce comedy and not a romantic comedy. Farce is defined as a comic dramatic piece that uses highly improbable situations, stereotyped characters, extravagant exaggeration. Based on the readers notes I can assume that the script was read with the idea that the script was meant to be realistic love story like Maid in Manhattan. This is a farce comedy script. The way the reader describes my script is actually the way the way it is suppose to be. I am happy that the ready understood all that I was trying to do with this script.. But unfortunately they misunderstood the genre of my script.

    The Blacklist did not agree with me.. So how do I improve my script, because using this readers coverage to do a rewrite would be plagiarism.



    If you would like to read the script, it's open to all....

    A. Kross
    http://visionarymindofakross.blogspot.com/ (my self funded low budgets)

  • #2
    Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

    I wouldn't use BL as coverage. Go with one of great readers here to get in depth coverage and evaluation. I'd suggest ScriptGal, or Screenplay Mechanic, but there are several other great ones as well.

    Also the simple fact of the matter is not everyone is going to feel the same way about your script. Nor get the tone. Your job as a writer is to convey that the best way possible. If they didn't pick up on its farcical nature, maybe look at your opening, is there a way you can convey that more clearly?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

      I obviously haven't read the script, but I don't see anything wrong with the review.

      It seems like the reader actually READ the script and has highlighted problematic elements. There's nothing more you can want from a read. Even a paid one.

      I would be sympathetic if the notes asked plot questions that were clearly answered, or mistook character names, or displayed other "reader laziness" notes. But all of your counter-complaints are "The reader didn't 'get' it" or "Other movies have gotten away with that" or "The reader is obviously a woman" (Just so you know, I'm a guy, but I do believe that when women are 2/3 of the leads in your script, they should be well-rounded. Even in a farce.)

      Out of curiosity, did you generate the log line, or did the reader generate the log line? If it was the reader, do you agree with it?

      I ask because the log line strikes me as thin. It doesn't read as farce, and it doesn't strike me as a story that has enough plot to sustain itself without some contrivances (which the reader points out). I feel all the reader comments can be distilled into - "It's funny, but there's just not enough going on here."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

        Originally posted by Bunker View Post

        Out of curiosity, did you generate the log line, or did the reader generate the log line? If it was the reader, do you agree with it?

        I ask because the log line strikes me as thin. It doesn't read as farce, and it doesn't strike me as a story that has enough plot to sustain itself without some contrivances (which the reader points out). I feel all the reader comments can be distilled into - "It's funny, but there's just not enough going on here."

        No I didn't write that. Funny you mentioned that. I was a bit annoyed how that was written.

        I wrote
        Male driven, farce comedy with a romantic twist in the vein of Jason Bateman meets Bridesmaids. A mid thirties self-help romance author yearns to be a married man. When he finally finds the perfect woman to marry, he soon finds his journey to I do hindered by an obstacle that he just can't seem to get rid of.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

          Originally posted by Bunker View Post
          I feel all the reader comments can be distilled into - "It's funny, but there's just not enough going on here."

          I can respect this as a coverage critic. It says something specific and not vague like the reader didn't want to hurt my feelings.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

            Again, I'm not complaining about the Blacklist. But let's be clear, readers are not perfect. I was once a reader at a production company in LA. I quit because I hated the idea that I was crushing someone's dream whenever I passed on a script. It crushed me because I was a writer and I knew the anticipation they were feeling waiting for my results.

            I remember discussing my feelings with another reader at a different production company, the person, who was also a writer, informed me that they didn't care about rejecting scripts. In fact, whenever they saw "we see" in a script, they immediately knew it was a rejection. All I could think was if i didn't want this coffee so bad, I would accidentally spill it on you...

            My point is this, many of us find ourselves stressed and depressed because of the words of a reader. They make mistakes. They get it wrong. As a reader, writer, director at that time, I always read scripts not by whats written on the page, but by the imagery playing in my mind as I read it. It's not a book. It's a movie.. So I picture it as such.

            I never gave my opinion on how I think the script should be written, nor did I judge writer's characters. I gave my opinion on whether the movie playing in my head was entertaining or did I find holes in the story that makes the movie inaccurate and incomplete. Can this script perform in the marketplace and will it make my boss money, if so, potentially how much (I have a M.S in Business. I saw things differently when reading scripts)

            The problem with some readers is they take their job as a reviewer or a writing critic. The readers job is more so aligned with that of a Venture Capitalist Associate. You don't just look at what's there. You look at the overall picture of the script. Is this or can this be a movie. Not I don't like the character or I don't like that they speak this way

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

              Originally posted by illuzin View Post
              I can bet a million that the reader is a woman. No offense...
              Too late.

              Honestly, it's hard to figure out what exactly you're looking for from this post. You say the reader "misunderstood the genre of my script," but how can that possibly be the case if they "understood all that I was trying to do with this script"? If you strongly disagree (correctly, for all we know) with every single negative note, then why are you asking for ways to implement suggestions you don't believe in?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                Originally posted by Staircaseghost View Post
                Too late.

                Honestly, it's hard to figure out what exactly you're looking for from this post. You say the reader "misunderstood the genre of my script," but how can that possibly be the case if they "understood all that I was trying to do with this script"? If you strongly disagree (correctly, for all we know) with every single negative note, then why are you asking for ways to implement suggestions you don't believe in?

                I say that because the reader labeled it a romantic comedy/ sex comedy. It's just a comedy. But what the readers called the charecters are what makes them funny. Its not an accident. She called my charecters what they are supposed to be. But if you are reading the script as a romantic comedy then my script becomes horrible because my script is exaggrated for jokes and there is crude language.

                Now if you read the script as a comedy then you get it and better judge it based on whether it is funny and can compete against other comedies in the marketplace, even with some changes..

                Imagine if you thought you were reading a script written as a drama but you thought it was a comedy. That's my only point.. Was just seeking feedback..

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                  Personally, I think you're looking at this the wrong way. You are trying to justify why the review is wrong when it's not wrong. It's an opinion and you can either set aside your personal feelings and try to understand what the reader might be really saying are your weaknesses and rewrite it, or you can give up and move onto another script. Those really are your choices.

                  Unless the reader stated the character's name incorrectly or described the story inaccurately-- something that might suggest they didn't really read it fully, then I think there's nothing wrong with the evaluation.

                  Comedy can be tough and can hit various readers in different ways.

                  Same is true with other genres. The way women are depicted, violence, subject matter.

                  If you want another opinion and the BL doesn't agree with you, then pay for another review and then you'll have another point of view. If you get a 7, that's one thing, but if you get another 4-5, then it seems to me it's possible you have more work to do.

                  I also disagree that the Black List isn't a good place to get an evaluation of your spec. Aside from a reader getting my main character wrong and another issue on an evaluation that the BL agreed to toss out, I felt that the additional evaluations of my spec were strong. I didn't necessarily agree with everything, but I did take the evaluations under close consideration and you know what?

                  I rewrote it-- hit it hard, and resubmitted it. The next evaluation was three 8s and two 9s. And now I have a better understanding of how much more work it needed because it is a ton better (I mean seriously better) than it was when it got a 7 and a 6. And it wasn't a page one rewrite or anything like that, it was a matter of strengthening specific elements. Character. Dialogue (9). And there were a few comments that seemed to align, so although addressing the notes weren't always easy, I didn't stop until I found the right solution.

                  I also used extensive notes from a writing team with which I swap reads.

                  You don't have to agree with someone's opinion, but you'd be wise, I think, to carefully and humbly consider that they might have a point. It's truly one of the best lessons a writer can learn, it's also one of the hardest.

                  I've paid hundreds of dollars on script consultants, I paid other writers, too. But the very best notes I've received are either from other writers that I respect where we swap scripts, or the Black List.

                  Believe me, I didn't like getting a 6 and a 7, but I can tell you that when I got this last review-- it made my ****ing day.

                  It's posted on the home page of my website if you'd like to read it. www.lisamolusis.com I am proud of it. But I also know, that the next rewrite will make it better still. Of course, I won't rewrite unless someone wants to pay me for it.

                  I will also add, that mentioning the black score has seemed to help with queries.

                  Best,
                  FA4
                  "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                    Wow. I've read some whiny posts about the Blacklist, but this one takes the cake.

                    •Randolph is a disingenuous, foolish character who gets let off the hook far too easily.(In farce comedy, characters are suppose to be gullible. Gomer Pile was, and he always got away with it )

                    There is a big difference between being a disingenuous, foolish character, and Gomer Pile. Plus the fact that Gomer Pile is about as far from a farce character as you can get, so I'm going to say the reader is probably more on the nose than you are.

                    •It’s understandable that he’s reluctant to tell Rebecca about Clair, but after a certain point his dishonesty is inexcusable.( Which builds the tension and leads to the climax. Men are dumb. They think they can solve everything on their own. Like asking directions.)

                    "Men are dumb?" That's your rationale for your main character's motivation? Even the reader was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but "after a certain point" it's no longer acceptable.

                    •The script does not treat its female very charitably. Rebecca is sympathetic but oblivious, and Clair and Annabelle are sex-crazed caricatures with little purpose besides pursuing Randolph.(I can bet a million that the reader is a woman. No offense but this is a dead give away. Again, its not personal, it's comedy. The women are suppose to be that way.)

                    No offense, but you come off as a huge jackass here. "Oh, the reader doesn't like my female characters, so she must be a woman that doesn't get guys." Even in a comedy, your goal should be to create believable people. You don't even argue that they're sex-crazed caricatures. You just say "that's the way they're supposed to be."

                    •The crude humor is hit or miss. There is at least one conversation about sex toys too many, with the same joke repeated with less success. Giving Randolph’s mother and grandmother dirty mouths is an overused joke that doesn’t get too many laughs here. (I understand if the reader didn't find humor in some of my jokes. What is a farce comedy without crude humor. Comedy is subjective. What makes one person laugh may not make the next Furthermore, the two sex toy jokes actually are meant to piggyback off one another..)

                    "The two sex toy jokes actually are meant to piggyback off one another." Well, apparently the didn't. In your mind, this might be a brilliant call back, but to the reader, it came off as another dumb sex toy joke. Again, it's your responsibility to make the jokes work. Not the reader.

                    • “Getting To I Do” is funny, and it might be more successful if the focus were more on Randolph’s career. (Thank you for the advice, but the story is not about his career. It is about his struggle of getting to the altar and being a married man.)

                    Well, then you better make that story about getting to the altar way more interesting because apparently, it is not. Again, not the reader's fault. The writer's.

                    •Strengths: The funniest parts in the script involve Randolph’s dubious career as a relationship guru, writing books that ostensibly help single men find women to marry them. Jacob points out that Randolph cannot truly be writing from a first-hand perspective, having never been married himself, and from what little we can discern of Randolph’s advice, it seems more catered to shallow sexual pursuits than long-lasting relationships. This is best illustrated by Aldo, Randolph’s biggest fan and the funniest character in the script. Aldo is so focused on the cruder sexual elements of the book he even throws Randolph off. Jacob is perhaps the most sympathetic character. He understands his brother and all he’s going through and offers him some sound advice- even if Randolph is less than willing to take it.( This entire paragraph reads like it belongs in the synopsis section than the strengths. In the prospect section, it say the script is funny. That is a strength. It should read Getting to I do is a funny script.The funniest parts in the script involve Randolph’s dubious career as a relationship guru....)

                    It isn't they synopsis because the reader is listing the things he or she enjoyed. Randolph's job. Randolph's biggest fan. Jacob. These are all things that the reader liked. They were strong. But you seemed too focused on how this "woman" reader didn't get your "farce." Based off this review, I think you might even be mistaken about what a farce is. There's nothing in here about misunderstandings or mistaken identities. You say "this isn't a romantic/sex comedy" but the whole plot is GETTING MARRIED and it's obviously FILLED WITH SEX JOKES.

                    Stop trying to fight the reader and start listening.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                      Originally posted by finalact4 View Post
                      Personally, I think you're looking at this the wrong way. You are trying to justify why the review is wrong when it's not wrong. It's an opinion and you can either set aside your personal feelings and try to understand what the reader might be really saying are your weaknesses and rewrite it, or you can give up and move onto another script. Those really are your choices.
                      +1000

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                        Originally posted by illuzin View Post
                        I can bet a million that the reader is a woman. No offense but this is a dead give away.
                        Good thing you didn't.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                          Originally posted by Staircaseghost View Post
                          Originally posted by illuzin View Post
                          I can bet a million that the reader is a woman. No offense...
                          Too late.

                          Honestly, it's hard to figure out what exactly you're looking for from this post. You say the reader "misunderstood the genre of my script," but how can that possibly be the case if they "understood all that I was trying to do with this script"? If you strongly disagree (correctly, for all we know) with every single negative note, then why are you asking for ways to implement suggestions you don't believe in?
                          You missed "Again it a male driven story, We don't think like women." Which I'm assuming is a 'royal we' type of situation? Not sure.

                          Anyway, it sounds to me like you don't agree with this reader's opinions about your script, illuzin, but the actual observations all seem fairly accurate to you. Which, I mean, that's going to happen. You can just decide whether these opinions have any merit, or you can throw them out. Up to you.

                          Part of the value in this kind of feedback, in my opinion, is to see whether the things I've written are actually landing with other people or not. If you've sent this to 6 other people and none of them have noticed the problems this reader did or they all knew immediately that it's a farce when this reader didn't, then it's probably an anomaly. Otherwise, maybe consider whether your jokes or genre or whatever are actually working the way they're supposed to.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                            Slightly off-topic: Can we just get a single, maybe stickied, thread for all Black List review feedback? Or maybe a thread for all Black List content, period?

                            Three of the threads on the first page of this category are about reviews, while another is the Q&A that vaguely serves as a general Black List thread.

                            Back on-topic: The part of any coverage you should be most grateful for is the weaknesses section. (EDIT: This really applies to notes more than coverage, but most people conflate the two nowadays.) That's where you'll find growth. Whenever I see a writer send me coverage with the weakness section littered with in-line excuses (or worse, conveniently missing), it's a sign that they're looking for validation.

                            Another sign is when people seem to have no criticism of a coverage sample's strengths, but plenty for the weaknesses. It's as though the reader is suddenly capable when talking about what's good.

                            People on this forum who have used my services know that I'm likely to give half a page of strengths and over three pages of weaknesses and concerns. The better the script, the greater the scrutiny.

                            The good writers are happy for that. It's fertile land to them. I don't expect them to agree with or revise in response to every weakness I point out. They don't need to. I'm not the God of Script Notes and they know that.

                            To be clear: I'm not expressing any opinion on the Black List or this review itself. This is an issue that is fundamental to the growth of any writer.
                            Last edited by TitanCreed; 04-16-2015, 11:27 AM.
                            ****

                            I am a critic first and a writer second.

                            I have a background in development and currently provide low-cost coverage.

                            More info here: www.FourStarNotes.com

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Not Another F'in Blacklist Post

                              Without reading the script, that seems like a pretty decent review.

                              If the Blacklist readers have any faults, its that they're sometimes too generous with praise of underdone scripts.

                              I totally agree that the jilted ex-fiance coming to reclaim her man-plot is too thin for a feature, and that further development of the fraudulent / incompetent love guru-angle might be part of the solution.

                              At the end of the day, what does it matter if you get a 3, 4, 5 or 6? The bottom line is - not good enough.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X