<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: We Pass</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 21:57:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-38052</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2009 08:08:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-38052</guid>
		<description>I also read for a small nothing of a company. I managed to go through over 200 scripts from new writers trying to break in. 195 of them were just plain bad, of the 195, at least 100 were terrible, unreadable beyond 10 pages. of the 200, I passed on 195, over one hundred of them I never read past 10 pages, 30 of them lost me by page 4 and I read about 45 of them in their entirity. I don&#039;t feel ashamed about any of the passes and if a red flag appeared, then I looked more diligently for flaws in the script and usually found them. I have read for writers, for free, and have recieved some really bad emails from writers that felt I was off my rocker, and wanted to know how I could judge a script without reading the whole thing. I never did tell them that I couldn;t read the whole thing because it was almost painful to read such garbage. Anon is right on, and so is Unk.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also read for a small nothing of a company. I managed to go through over 200 scripts from new writers trying to break in. 195 of them were just plain bad, of the 195, at least 100 were terrible, unreadable beyond 10 pages. of the 200, I passed on 195, over one hundred of them I never read past 10 pages, 30 of them lost me by page 4 and I read about 45 of them in their entirity. I don&#8217;t feel ashamed about any of the passes and if a red flag appeared, then I looked more diligently for flaws in the script and usually found them. I have read for writers, for free, and have recieved some really bad emails from writers that felt I was off my rocker, and wanted to know how I could judge a script without reading the whole thing. I never did tell them that I couldn;t read the whole thing because it was almost painful to read such garbage. Anon is right on, and so is Unk.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mizdaice</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37772</link>
		<dc:creator>mizdaice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 23:42:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37772</guid>
		<description>Unk et al:

Tip o&#039; the hat to all!   Great stuff and lots of it too.  

A superb site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unk et al:</p>
<p>Tip o&#8217; the hat to all!   Great stuff and lots of it too.  </p>
<p>A superb site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ronjlilek</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37739</link>
		<dc:creator>ronjlilek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37739</guid>
		<description>Unk-
This is GREAT stuff.  Thanks.  

Others-
Unk is giving us insights into the realities of the industry.  It ain&#039;t always pretty; life ain&#039;t fair; read and learn.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unk-<br />
This is GREAT stuff.  Thanks.  </p>
<p>Others-<br />
Unk is giving us insights into the realities of the industry.  It ain&#8217;t always pretty; life ain&#8217;t fair; read and learn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: km</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37538</link>
		<dc:creator>km</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 23:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37538</guid>
		<description>I cannot believe how cut throat and shallow development departments are, granted I understand the work load and willingness to cheat for money, but man to simply piss on other peoples hard work they may have spent years making is just so unbelievably sadistic.

I think one of the major problems may be the bitterness of readers, I mean to an extent. In all honesty is a reader going to get more money if he/she finds that one script that just blows them away? No. So what is keeping them from just shit canning all the scripts and making up gibberish coverage? Or even out of jealousy. It may not be the case all the time but between this, Will Akers jib-jab, and the probability of writers handing over their scripts to the wrong type of development company, why not just make your own goddamn movie and deal with the distribution and financing?
I mean 99% of all the good scripts I&#039;ve read are written in collaboration between a director and a writer, almost none of them follow the &#039;formulas &amp; structure&#039; I read about to the T.
Almost all directors (good directors anyhow) know the 1 minute per page is bullshit, a 160 page script can be 90-98 minutes long, and a 50 page script can be 2 hours. Perfect example of this is The Good, The Bad &amp; The Ugly, the Mexican standoff action is 3 lines long, that&#039;s a 15minutes fucking sequence.

INT. DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT READING ROOM - DAY
A reader, JOHN, small, frail, white skin, blue eyes and unshaven holds his coffee cup with his dirty fingernails with his left hand, in the right hand is a script.

John&#039;s intern, GARY, enters the room with the coffee kettle.

                   GARY
            How&#039;s your coffee John?

A man kicks down the door wearing nothing but a jockstrap on his head welding a shotgun -- he shoots them both in the fucking head.

THE END.

There, a &#039;who done it&#039;, little coverage, 6 8ths of a page, all the action on the first page, keeps your attention, we&#039;ll get Michael Bay to direct it, he&#039;ll change the intern to some sort of CGI alien that speaks like Morgan Freeman -- $500mil.

BAM! HOLLYWOOD.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I cannot believe how cut throat and shallow development departments are, granted I understand the work load and willingness to cheat for money, but man to simply piss on other peoples hard work they may have spent years making is just so unbelievably sadistic.</p>
<p>I think one of the major problems may be the bitterness of readers, I mean to an extent. In all honesty is a reader going to get more money if he/she finds that one script that just blows them away? No. So what is keeping them from just shit canning all the scripts and making up gibberish coverage? Or even out of jealousy. It may not be the case all the time but between this, Will Akers jib-jab, and the probability of writers handing over their scripts to the wrong type of development company, why not just make your own goddamn movie and deal with the distribution and financing?<br />
I mean 99% of all the good scripts I&#8217;ve read are written in collaboration between a director and a writer, almost none of them follow the &#8216;formulas &amp; structure&#8217; I read about to the T.<br />
Almost all directors (good directors anyhow) know the 1 minute per page is bullshit, a 160 page script can be 90-98 minutes long, and a 50 page script can be 2 hours. Perfect example of this is The Good, The Bad &amp; The Ugly, the Mexican standoff action is 3 lines long, that&#8217;s a 15minutes fucking sequence.</p>
<p>INT. DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT READING ROOM &#8211; DAY<br />
A reader, JOHN, small, frail, white skin, blue eyes and unshaven holds his coffee cup with his dirty fingernails with his left hand, in the right hand is a script.</p>
<p>John&#8217;s intern, GARY, enters the room with the coffee kettle.</p>
<p>                   GARY<br />
            How&#8217;s your coffee John?</p>
<p>A man kicks down the door wearing nothing but a jockstrap on his head welding a shotgun &#8212; he shoots them both in the fucking head.</p>
<p>THE END.</p>
<p>There, a &#8216;who done it&#8217;, little coverage, 6 8ths of a page, all the action on the first page, keeps your attention, we&#8217;ll get Michael Bay to direct it, he&#8217;ll change the intern to some sort of CGI alien that speaks like Morgan Freeman &#8212; $500mil.</p>
<p>BAM! HOLLYWOOD.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric M</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37525</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:42:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37525</guid>
		<description>Yes.  Should be required reading for anyone thinking about writing a screenplay.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes.  Should be required reading for anyone thinking about writing a screenplay.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Moviequill</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37511</link>
		<dc:creator>Moviequill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 14:21:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37511</guid>
		<description>Another wonderful list that should be printed out and taped to the monitor</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another wonderful list that should be printed out and taped to the monitor</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leBeau</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37463</link>
		<dc:creator>leBeau</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:35:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37463</guid>
		<description>I have yet to see a spec that got produced and didnt break some of these rules. These aren&#039;t rules but things that stand out if the whole script is boring and bad. You cant use these rules categorically.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have yet to see a spec that got produced and didnt break some of these rules. These aren&#8217;t rules but things that stand out if the whole script is boring and bad. You cant use these rules categorically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mr A</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37400</link>
		<dc:creator>Mr A</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 01:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37400</guid>
		<description>Susan,

You&#039;re right in most of the scripts I&#039;ve read.  There has been the occasion to read indie scripts where the director was also the writer, so he was lucky to be afforded such pleasures.

Unk,

Understood.  I&#039;ll keep my angles and shots out for now.  

To both, thanks!  Much appreciated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Susan,</p>
<p>You&#8217;re right in most of the scripts I&#8217;ve read.  There has been the occasion to read indie scripts where the director was also the writer, so he was lucky to be afforded such pleasures.</p>
<p>Unk,</p>
<p>Understood.  I&#8217;ll keep my angles and shots out for now.  </p>
<p>To both, thanks!  Much appreciated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unk</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37399</link>
		<dc:creator>Unk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 01:19:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37399</guid>
		<description>Mr. A,

As Susan said... The majority of the time when a reader reads these things in the script, they rarely finish reading unless it&#039;s one hell of a story.

Stew,

That&#039;s actually why I read everything that comes across our desks... I&#039;m not a reader but having come from a spec background and still writing specs, I too am aware of the READER... LOL.

Highly aware.

You pose a good question but the reality is that there are simply TOO MANY SCRIPTS coming across everyone&#039;s desk and in my humble opinion, not ENOUGH readers see their job as FINDING a great spec for their boss. In reality, many readers are given an agenda... To pass or recommend a spec. I&#039;ve heard of many specs that were NOT well written but the readers were told to give it a recommend. Happens all the time.

But the reality REALLY is that most of these scripts simply do not pass muster. They&#039;re crap. Please make note that I&#039;m talking specs from unknown screenwriters.

The biggest problem from just what I have seen with my own eyes is derivation and cliché. In other words, we&#039;ve already seen it and it wasn&#039;t that great the first time we saw it so why would we want to see it again?

I am certain that a few great specs get passed over or not even read which is why the spec screenwriter needs to keep submitting assuming his or her spec is written at the professional level.

If not... Whew. You might actually be shooting your own foot because if your script is fairly bad, your name can often get passed around and if it does, then more than likely, the pass you receive simply means it wasn&#039;t even read by anyone because they already know about you.

On top of that... The reason the studios keep making remakes and sequels is because of the built-in fan base. As appalling as it might be, their little model of movie making works.

But my feeling on that is that it works more because of the current ticket-buying demographic who, let&#039;s face facts... Are tantamount to Pavlov&#039;s dogs.

Unk</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. A,</p>
<p>As Susan said&#8230; The majority of the time when a reader reads these things in the script, they rarely finish reading unless it&#8217;s one hell of a story.</p>
<p>Stew,</p>
<p>That&#8217;s actually why I read everything that comes across our desks&#8230; I&#8217;m not a reader but having come from a spec background and still writing specs, I too am aware of the READER&#8230; LOL.</p>
<p>Highly aware.</p>
<p>You pose a good question but the reality is that there are simply TOO MANY SCRIPTS coming across everyone&#8217;s desk and in my humble opinion, not ENOUGH readers see their job as FINDING a great spec for their boss. In reality, many readers are given an agenda&#8230; To pass or recommend a spec. I&#8217;ve heard of many specs that were NOT well written but the readers were told to give it a recommend. Happens all the time.</p>
<p>But the reality REALLY is that most of these scripts simply do not pass muster. They&#8217;re crap. Please make note that I&#8217;m talking specs from unknown screenwriters.</p>
<p>The biggest problem from just what I have seen with my own eyes is derivation and cliché. In other words, we&#8217;ve already seen it and it wasn&#8217;t that great the first time we saw it so why would we want to see it again?</p>
<p>I am certain that a few great specs get passed over or not even read which is why the spec screenwriter needs to keep submitting assuming his or her spec is written at the professional level.</p>
<p>If not&#8230; Whew. You might actually be shooting your own foot because if your script is fairly bad, your name can often get passed around and if it does, then more than likely, the pass you receive simply means it wasn&#8217;t even read by anyone because they already know about you.</p>
<p>On top of that&#8230; The reason the studios keep making remakes and sequels is because of the built-in fan base. As appalling as it might be, their little model of movie making works.</p>
<p>But my feeling on that is that it works more because of the current ticket-buying demographic who, let&#8217;s face facts&#8230; Are tantamount to Pavlov&#8217;s dogs.</p>
<p>Unk</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan P.</title>
		<link>http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/comment-page-3/#comment-37398</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:31:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unknownscreenwriter.com/we-pass/screenwriting/tips/2009/02/17/#comment-37398</guid>
		<description>Mr A - it sounds like you are used to see shooting scripts where, of course, camera directions and so on exist - and are intended to.

Sometimes we newcomers can tend to confuse spec expectation with shooting scripts which is why I guess readers, such as Unk&#039;s guest, try and underscore these basic issues so often. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr A &#8211; it sounds like you are used to see shooting scripts where, of course, camera directions and so on exist &#8211; and are intended to.</p>
<p>Sometimes we newcomers can tend to confuse spec expectation with shooting scripts which is why I guess readers, such as Unk&#8217;s guest, try and underscore these basic issues so often. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
