R asks:
I’ve read the feedback on all the online sites, BL, Inktip, ISA, et all, and found none of them seem to be worth the money or effort. So, in your humble opinion, for someone not located in California, what is the best way to approach an agent, manger or producer? Send a logline only? A logline and synopsis? Hold their children hostage? Threaten to send them back if they don’t read it?
If you don't have feet on the ground in LA, then I'd first try reaching out through any connections you might have through your college's alumni network. The next thing I'd do is research managers and (assuming your script is low budget enough) smaller producers who might accept queries.
And if I struck out there, I'd probably use the Black List.
It used to be a bad idea to approach managers and producers via email but that's more accepted now. I say do email or snail mail. The key is to keep it brief. Introduce yourself succintly. Don't ramble. Don't give any more information than is absolutely necessary. If there's a reason why you might be of interest to them, say it here, but don't take more than two sentences or so to get there. (Example: "I used to be an analyst for the CIA covert ops division, and I've brought some of that experience to my spy thriller spec.")
Don't send a synopsis. Keep it to a logline. I wouldn't go into more than a three-sentence description of the story. Hook them, intrigue them and don't overwhelm them with details. The people you are reaching out to get a LOT of emails a day so if they click on an unsolicited email that's five dense paragraphs long, they WILL skip it.
Take it from someone who just went through his inbox and by-passed a number of emails from readers telling their life stories. Brevity is your friend. (And in the case of the long emails I was getting, many of them asked things outside the scope of this site, or asked questions that we've answered a number of times before here.)
Queries tend to have a low success rate, but if you're not in LA, that's one of the few options available to you.
n asks:
I've been following your blog and youtube/twitter channel for a while. Always appreciate the frank advice you give, and would like your quick opinion on something.
I heard an interview with Corey Mandell who said that since it's difficult to judge when your screenplay is "ready" (and most screenplays aren't anywhere near the level they should be), it's helpful to pay a few studio readers to give professional coverage "off the books" so you don't burn any bridges if it receives multiple passes.
Do you recommend this approach? How many readers would be enough? How much would be a fair amount in a situation like this?
I would not pay more than $150 for standard studio coverage from a reader. As longtime readers know, for cases like that, I always refer people to Amanda Pendolino. She knows her stuff and she's got the work history that ensures she'll be looking at it the way the "first filters" at all agencies and production companies would.
I've talked about coverage services before, and that includes what to look for in a reputable coverage service, and how much feedback you should get before you know you're ready.
Eventually, after you've written several scripts and read many, many more, you'll get better at judging the quality of your own work, though it's rare to become fully objective.
Showing posts with label coverage services. Show all posts
Showing posts with label coverage services. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Monday, July 29, 2013
"If a coverage service likes my script, how can I capitalize on that?"
John emailed:
I received feedback from a screenplay reader service that rated my script a "Consider" and gave me a great review along with some good notes. I emailed them, thanking them for the coverage and asked whether or not I could name drop them and their review in my query emails. My script is a coming-of-age drama that doesn't have high-concept hook and my thinking was any kind of positive review could only help.
The response I got was as follows: "I wouldn't mention the Consider, nor would I mention a Recommend. Our opinion means nothing to agents and producers."
My question: if my script gets positive feedback from a (reliable) script reader with the industry credits it claims to have, can I use it to solicit my script? Otherwise, what's the point?
What is the point indeed? You just hit on the reason why so many people advise against paying someone for coverage. In most cases a positive review will mean very little as far as opening the doors. At least with most coverage services, I'd never spend the money on the hope that a positive review will somehow get you read somewhere. Most of the time, I'd suggest using those services only as a barometer of how good your work is relative to all the other amateurs out there.
Your reader is right in that their opinion probably won't open many doors. There aren't many coverage services that have a strong enough reputation to make a real pro interested in something that service liked. The Black List is one of the few that does. If you get an 8 or higher on the Black List, I bet you'll get some read requests when you mention that fact in a query.
Since that was a quick one, let's get in one more question. This one comes from Annette:
I hope you would be willing to answer a quick question about written dialog. I have a redneck character who speaks like this: "Yer gonna hafta read somethin' here"
Do you have an opinion on writing like that or would it be better to write in the action, a character who talks like a redneck and let the actor mold his voice?
Either alternative is acceptable. I think the trick to writing dialect is not overdoing it. Sometimes it helps the read to have the dialogue written that way. However, you can't go too far overboard in writing out the speech phonetically. I read one script with a Scottish brogue and the writer seemed determined to give every syllable a thick accent. The result was I had to read each line of dialogue carefully, often sounding it out before I could make sense of what was said.
That's a case of the accent working against the script. It forced too much effort on my part and kept breaking the flow of the story. The result was not a very good read. The plot was rather weak too, but it certainly wasn't helped by the presentation.
So go with whatever flows best. As you point out, the actor can always add the accent later themselves.
I received feedback from a screenplay reader service that rated my script a "Consider" and gave me a great review along with some good notes. I emailed them, thanking them for the coverage and asked whether or not I could name drop them and their review in my query emails. My script is a coming-of-age drama that doesn't have high-concept hook and my thinking was any kind of positive review could only help.
The response I got was as follows: "I wouldn't mention the Consider, nor would I mention a Recommend. Our opinion means nothing to agents and producers."
My question: if my script gets positive feedback from a (reliable) script reader with the industry credits it claims to have, can I use it to solicit my script? Otherwise, what's the point?
What is the point indeed? You just hit on the reason why so many people advise against paying someone for coverage. In most cases a positive review will mean very little as far as opening the doors. At least with most coverage services, I'd never spend the money on the hope that a positive review will somehow get you read somewhere. Most of the time, I'd suggest using those services only as a barometer of how good your work is relative to all the other amateurs out there.
Your reader is right in that their opinion probably won't open many doors. There aren't many coverage services that have a strong enough reputation to make a real pro interested in something that service liked. The Black List is one of the few that does. If you get an 8 or higher on the Black List, I bet you'll get some read requests when you mention that fact in a query.
Since that was a quick one, let's get in one more question. This one comes from Annette:
I hope you would be willing to answer a quick question about written dialog. I have a redneck character who speaks like this: "Yer gonna hafta read somethin' here"
Do you have an opinion on writing like that or would it be better to write in the action, a character who talks like a redneck and let the actor mold his voice?
Either alternative is acceptable. I think the trick to writing dialect is not overdoing it. Sometimes it helps the read to have the dialogue written that way. However, you can't go too far overboard in writing out the speech phonetically. I read one script with a Scottish brogue and the writer seemed determined to give every syllable a thick accent. The result was I had to read each line of dialogue carefully, often sounding it out before I could make sense of what was said.
That's a case of the accent working against the script. It forced too much effort on my part and kept breaking the flow of the story. The result was not a very good read. The plot was rather weak too, but it certainly wasn't helped by the presentation.
So go with whatever flows best. As you point out, the actor can always add the accent later themselves.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Webshow: "I wrote it, now what do I do with it? Part 3 - Coverage services."
It's not uncommon for me to get a question along the lines of, "I wrote it, now what do I do with it?" It's a good question, and one with no easy answers. So don't think of this continuing series AS those easy answers. There are merely points to ponder. This week, I talk about what sorts of things you should look for in a reputable coverage service.
Monday, October 15, 2012
Why every aspiring writer should be excited about Black List 3.0
I'll say this for Franklin Leonard, he doesn't do anything small.
The Black List creator has just announced a new feature to the Black List website, dubbed Black List 3.0. Just last week, membership to the Black List website was made free for all industry pros. Currently the site has a tracking board of sorts, where those industry pros are able to rate scripts that are listed within the database. (The scripts themselves are not stored, just the identifying information like title, writer, representation, attachments and so on.)
But the big move has come this week. Starting soon, non-pros will be able to pay a fee to make their scripts available on the Black List site. For an additional fee, the script can be covered by trusted industry readers, who will then evaluate and rate the script. Thus, if I upload my spec BIG ROOSTERS & SOAKED KITTENS and pay both fees, the following will happen:
First, a Black List approved reader will read the entire script and rate it according to the sites metrics. As expected the coverage will also detail the genre/s and most likely the budget of the script. Then, that information will be made available in the database for as long as I pay the monthly fee.
(And let's be realistic, the fees are necessary if any industry readers worth their salt are going to take their time to read these submissions. It's just simple economics - if you want quality gatekeepers, they're going to need to have some compensation for their time.)
So let's say the Black List writer really liked my low-to-mid budget comedy and gave it a score that averaged out to 8.5 out of 10. Every member who searches for a script with those parameters will have access to my script, my coverage and my contact information. So for the price of a late submission to a prestigious contest, I could end up with a script request from a major company or two. Or ten.
And here's where the real brilliance of Mr. Leonard's scheme comes in. The Black List is a brand that everyone in town knows. It is perhaps the most coveted insider list and it's spawned more than a few imitators. People trust the Black List... and Mr. Leonard just made access to the site completely free for them. At present, I'm told there are over 1,100 industry pros signed up as members.
I don't care how many tracking boards most development people are already signed up for. If something like this is free, they're gonna sign up for it, if only to have the inside track on the next Black List. By doing this, it practically guarantees that The Black List will have a higher quality of clientele than something like InkTip.
Granted, InkTip is a little cheaper at $60 for six months, but there all you're posting is the logline. At BL 3.0, there's a gatekeeper there who's going to play town crier for anything worth while.
This also solves the problem with Triggerstreet. Over there, users can post their scripts for free... but they're only being read and rated by other community members. Thus, there's less of a chance those readers will have the same discerning tastes as readers who work within the industry and in a worst case scenario, it could be the blind leading the blind.
And then there's Amazon Studios. Look, you all know what I think of the site by now. I think Black List 3.0 totally demolishes Amazon in every fashion. Sure, Amazon was also free... but at the cost of giving them a temporary exclusive option and the right to buy the script for a predetermined price. Plus, does anyone think Amazon's actually going to get a feature film released?
With the Black List, you're getting your material in front of people who've actually made real movies before - not dilettantes who were fixated on producing test films. You own the script, you (or your representation) has full ability to negotiate the sale. The Black List doesn't gloom onto your work at all. They don't option it, they don't attach themselves as producers. Their involvement goes only as far as making the introduction possible. (They're basically going "Oprah, Uma. Uma, Oprah.")
And let's talk contests and fellowships. As we've talked about before, most contests are probably going to run you between $40-$75. In most of those cases, that's just the fee to enter. You rarely get coverage or anything else. We've also mentioned that there are few contests that are really strong at jump-starting careers. It's my supposition that you'll probably have access to more real industry insiders through The Black List than through most contest submissions. Even if the cost for a month of posting is a little more than a contest submission, the potential benefit far outweighs that.
And then let's not forget the coverage/scouting services that evaluate your script and promise to pass it to their contacts if it's deemed good enough. Coverage from ScriptShark will run you $149. Script Pipeline charges $350. And then there's a lone reader out there who's currently charging $1000 a read. (The cherry on top of that is that he also is trying to be a manager and a producer. No one should ever have to pay either of those sorts of professionals for a read, as that's stepping into some very murky ethical territory.)
So if you're one of the people who would pay to enter a contest, or who would pay those huge fees just for coverage and the barest promise of "access," you should be jumping for joy about Black List 3.0. It seems like a good idea on it's own, but when you put it in context with all the other "breaking into Hollywood" services there are, this has the potential to be a clear winner.
It's basically a Voltron of everything good about Triggerstreet, InkTip, Amazon Studios and most contests, with very little of the most derided aspects of those services.
I saw a lot of negativity about this venture last month when details started leaking out on Deadline. That disappoints me for a lot of reasons, chiefly because I think this is unquestionably one of the best opportunities to come along for aspiring writers in a long time. I see a lot of potential here and a lot of opportunity. But opportunism? No, I don't feel that at all.
I don't know Franklin well. I've only met him a couple of times and have mostly communicated now and then via email and Twitter. I can say that he's struck me as an incredibly intelligent and above board professional and I'm truly convinced he has the best of intentions with this site.
But I know that there will be a lot of questions about this, so I've reached out to Franklin Leonard and I'll be posting an EXCLUSIVE video interview with him tomorrow! (That's right - that means the creator of the Black List is going to submit to questioning by a puppet!) Spread the word and come back tomorrow to see me interrogate Franklin about Black List 3.0
Related:
Go Into The Story: New Black List Feature for aspiring writers
Amanda Pendolino: The Black List Launches services for aspiring writers
The What, How, and Why of the Black List: The Long Answer by Franklin Leonard
Screenwriter Geoff LaTulippe with "My Thoughts on the Black List Project"
The Black List creator has just announced a new feature to the Black List website, dubbed Black List 3.0. Just last week, membership to the Black List website was made free for all industry pros. Currently the site has a tracking board of sorts, where those industry pros are able to rate scripts that are listed within the database. (The scripts themselves are not stored, just the identifying information like title, writer, representation, attachments and so on.)
But the big move has come this week. Starting soon, non-pros will be able to pay a fee to make their scripts available on the Black List site. For an additional fee, the script can be covered by trusted industry readers, who will then evaluate and rate the script. Thus, if I upload my spec BIG ROOSTERS & SOAKED KITTENS and pay both fees, the following will happen:
First, a Black List approved reader will read the entire script and rate it according to the sites metrics. As expected the coverage will also detail the genre/s and most likely the budget of the script. Then, that information will be made available in the database for as long as I pay the monthly fee.
(And let's be realistic, the fees are necessary if any industry readers worth their salt are going to take their time to read these submissions. It's just simple economics - if you want quality gatekeepers, they're going to need to have some compensation for their time.)
So let's say the Black List writer really liked my low-to-mid budget comedy and gave it a score that averaged out to 8.5 out of 10. Every member who searches for a script with those parameters will have access to my script, my coverage and my contact information. So for the price of a late submission to a prestigious contest, I could end up with a script request from a major company or two. Or ten.
And here's where the real brilliance of Mr. Leonard's scheme comes in. The Black List is a brand that everyone in town knows. It is perhaps the most coveted insider list and it's spawned more than a few imitators. People trust the Black List... and Mr. Leonard just made access to the site completely free for them. At present, I'm told there are over 1,100 industry pros signed up as members.
I don't care how many tracking boards most development people are already signed up for. If something like this is free, they're gonna sign up for it, if only to have the inside track on the next Black List. By doing this, it practically guarantees that The Black List will have a higher quality of clientele than something like InkTip.
Granted, InkTip is a little cheaper at $60 for six months, but there all you're posting is the logline. At BL 3.0, there's a gatekeeper there who's going to play town crier for anything worth while.
This also solves the problem with Triggerstreet. Over there, users can post their scripts for free... but they're only being read and rated by other community members. Thus, there's less of a chance those readers will have the same discerning tastes as readers who work within the industry and in a worst case scenario, it could be the blind leading the blind.
And then there's Amazon Studios. Look, you all know what I think of the site by now. I think Black List 3.0 totally demolishes Amazon in every fashion. Sure, Amazon was also free... but at the cost of giving them a temporary exclusive option and the right to buy the script for a predetermined price. Plus, does anyone think Amazon's actually going to get a feature film released?
With the Black List, you're getting your material in front of people who've actually made real movies before - not dilettantes who were fixated on producing test films. You own the script, you (or your representation) has full ability to negotiate the sale. The Black List doesn't gloom onto your work at all. They don't option it, they don't attach themselves as producers. Their involvement goes only as far as making the introduction possible. (They're basically going "Oprah, Uma. Uma, Oprah.")
And let's talk contests and fellowships. As we've talked about before, most contests are probably going to run you between $40-$75. In most of those cases, that's just the fee to enter. You rarely get coverage or anything else. We've also mentioned that there are few contests that are really strong at jump-starting careers. It's my supposition that you'll probably have access to more real industry insiders through The Black List than through most contest submissions. Even if the cost for a month of posting is a little more than a contest submission, the potential benefit far outweighs that.
And then let's not forget the coverage/scouting services that evaluate your script and promise to pass it to their contacts if it's deemed good enough. Coverage from ScriptShark will run you $149. Script Pipeline charges $350. And then there's a lone reader out there who's currently charging $1000 a read. (The cherry on top of that is that he also is trying to be a manager and a producer. No one should ever have to pay either of those sorts of professionals for a read, as that's stepping into some very murky ethical territory.)
So if you're one of the people who would pay to enter a contest, or who would pay those huge fees just for coverage and the barest promise of "access," you should be jumping for joy about Black List 3.0. It seems like a good idea on it's own, but when you put it in context with all the other "breaking into Hollywood" services there are, this has the potential to be a clear winner.
It's basically a Voltron of everything good about Triggerstreet, InkTip, Amazon Studios and most contests, with very little of the most derided aspects of those services.
I saw a lot of negativity about this venture last month when details started leaking out on Deadline. That disappoints me for a lot of reasons, chiefly because I think this is unquestionably one of the best opportunities to come along for aspiring writers in a long time. I see a lot of potential here and a lot of opportunity. But opportunism? No, I don't feel that at all.
I don't know Franklin well. I've only met him a couple of times and have mostly communicated now and then via email and Twitter. I can say that he's struck me as an incredibly intelligent and above board professional and I'm truly convinced he has the best of intentions with this site.
But I know that there will be a lot of questions about this, so I've reached out to Franklin Leonard and I'll be posting an EXCLUSIVE video interview with him tomorrow! (That's right - that means the creator of the Black List is going to submit to questioning by a puppet!) Spread the word and come back tomorrow to see me interrogate Franklin about Black List 3.0
Related:
Go Into The Story: New Black List Feature for aspiring writers
Amanda Pendolino: The Black List Launches services for aspiring writers
The What, How, and Why of the Black List: The Long Answer by Franklin Leonard
Screenwriter Geoff LaTulippe with "My Thoughts on the Black List Project"
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Why Scott Myers's "The Quest" might be the best thing to happen to aspiring writers in a long time
I've written this blog for over three years now and one of the more frequent email questions I get is: "What are your rates?" On one hand I appreciate that by-and-large, people recognize that my time is valuable and I'm not interested in reading their scripts purely out of the goodness of my heart.
But on the other hand, it makes me aware of how eager people are to plunk down cash for the opinion of a self-proclaimed (and at least in my case, anonymous) expert. Though that's seemed odd to me, I know that some other readers out there are quite reputable people. I always refer those willing to pay for notes to Amanda Pendolino, for example. I've gotten notes from Amanda, and have corresponded with her enough that I have no reservations about her motives and professionalism.
Unfortunately, not everyone is like Amanda. The web is full of unscrupulous consultants and services. I don't have time to check up on all of them. I can offer a few rules of thumb to avoid the most unsavory of the bunch.
If someone charges you $75 to "evaluate" your logline and/or query, they're probably taking advantage of you.
If' you're stupid enough to pay good money - say $75 - for a "brainstorming session," you might lack the hardware necessary for such an interface.
And if you are being asked to pay $500 or more for a few pages of notes, you're wasting your money. I don't care who this person is or what connections they claim to have - NO ONE'S notes are worth that much. High rates like that are indefensible to the point of taking advantage of a writer's desperation and naivete.
Services like this stay in business because it's hard breaking into the industry. Usually, the more expensive the service, the more they're taking advantage of you. Many of you reading this blog are so far outside the industry that it might seem like a good deal to plunk down a few weeks pay on the slim hope you can penetrate the Fort Knox that is Hollywood. That saddens me because I wish there was more I was in a position to do to help. Instead, all I can say is "If it seems too good to be true, it probably is."
With one exception.
Scott Myers has been wrestling with some of the same questions I've faced. The difference between us is that he did something about it. For a while now, he's offered Screenwriting Master Class, a series of classes that range in cost from $95 to $495. For some of you, that might be a lot of money to part with.
Yesterday, his blog carried this announcement.
[I have considered] How to create an alternate route into Hollywood for aspiring screenwriters, especially those of you who are outsiders [no industry connections]. I was a complete outsider to the movie business when I broke in, so my sensitivity to this issue is real and longstanding. Moreover it seems like every day I interface with someone who, lacking connections in Hollywood, expresses frustration about not knowing how to go about getting their foot in the door.
I have kicked around a lot of ideas over the last year, then a few months ago, I hit on something that struck me as being either brilliant — or totally nuts.
I did due diligence and consulted with many people inside the industry as well as writers who have taken classes with me, and every single one of them thought it was a great idea.
So next Monday, I will be announcing Go Into The Story: The Quest.
Bottom line: I will be looking to work with up to four writers in a 24-week Screenwriting Master Class intensive in which they will learn my comprehensive theoretical approach to the craft, then put that knowledge to use prepping and writing a full-length screenplay.
The cost? Nothing.
That’s right, a 6-month deep immersion in screenwriting theory and scriptwriting workshop where you end up with an original screenplay with me as your mentor for the entire process, and you don’t have to spend even a dime.
And if at the end of the process you have written a great script… you will have direct access to industry insiders.
I think this is brilliant. This is Scott putting his money where his mouth is. He believes in his method so much that he'll put it out there for free to four people. It's the antithesis of a lot of the scammers out there - total transparency AND generosity.
This is a great opportunity - in fact, it might be the best opportunity for amateurs that I've seen in a long time. In a worst case scenario, you emerge from this with a very comprehensive education in screenwriting. The connections are merely a bonus. This is your chance to work with one of the best mentors in the business and have motivation to finish a screenplay.
Usually, I make it a point not to strongly endorse any product or service I wouldn't use myself. Because of that, my conscience is clear when I say that anyone reading this blog who's serious about being a writer should submit themselves for consideration as one of Scott's Fortunate Four. If I wasn't personally acquainted with Scott, I'd be spending the next several days getting my submission ready.
I hate the word "guru." I hate gurus who are in it either for self-aggrandizement, or who come up with bizarre and cockamamie theories of writing solely to sell you on a writing seminar or book. I wince when (well-meaning) people call me a "guru."
Scott's not a guru - he's a mentor. And a damn good one at that. He's long been a great supporter of this blog and I consider him one of the most decent people I've "met" during my time in L.A. (And Scott, the next time you're in town, we WILL have to meet face-to-face finally.) He created these programs not for himself - but for you. The altruism and commitment he's shown towards aspiring writers has no equal.
Even if you can't get his services for free, maybe you can consider taking that money you were ready to throw at me (or the opportunists I lambasted earlier) and make an investment in your education and screenwriting future by enrolling in Screenwriting Master Class.
But for now, work on making a kickass case for why you should be the one to get all that at no charge.
But on the other hand, it makes me aware of how eager people are to plunk down cash for the opinion of a self-proclaimed (and at least in my case, anonymous) expert. Though that's seemed odd to me, I know that some other readers out there are quite reputable people. I always refer those willing to pay for notes to Amanda Pendolino, for example. I've gotten notes from Amanda, and have corresponded with her enough that I have no reservations about her motives and professionalism.
Unfortunately, not everyone is like Amanda. The web is full of unscrupulous consultants and services. I don't have time to check up on all of them. I can offer a few rules of thumb to avoid the most unsavory of the bunch.
If someone charges you $75 to "evaluate" your logline and/or query, they're probably taking advantage of you.
If' you're stupid enough to pay good money - say $75 - for a "brainstorming session," you might lack the hardware necessary for such an interface.
And if you are being asked to pay $500 or more for a few pages of notes, you're wasting your money. I don't care who this person is or what connections they claim to have - NO ONE'S notes are worth that much. High rates like that are indefensible to the point of taking advantage of a writer's desperation and naivete.
Services like this stay in business because it's hard breaking into the industry. Usually, the more expensive the service, the more they're taking advantage of you. Many of you reading this blog are so far outside the industry that it might seem like a good deal to plunk down a few weeks pay on the slim hope you can penetrate the Fort Knox that is Hollywood. That saddens me because I wish there was more I was in a position to do to help. Instead, all I can say is "If it seems too good to be true, it probably is."
With one exception.
Scott Myers has been wrestling with some of the same questions I've faced. The difference between us is that he did something about it. For a while now, he's offered Screenwriting Master Class, a series of classes that range in cost from $95 to $495. For some of you, that might be a lot of money to part with.
Yesterday, his blog carried this announcement.
[I have considered] How to create an alternate route into Hollywood for aspiring screenwriters, especially those of you who are outsiders [no industry connections]. I was a complete outsider to the movie business when I broke in, so my sensitivity to this issue is real and longstanding. Moreover it seems like every day I interface with someone who, lacking connections in Hollywood, expresses frustration about not knowing how to go about getting their foot in the door.
I have kicked around a lot of ideas over the last year, then a few months ago, I hit on something that struck me as being either brilliant — or totally nuts.
I did due diligence and consulted with many people inside the industry as well as writers who have taken classes with me, and every single one of them thought it was a great idea.
So next Monday, I will be announcing Go Into The Story: The Quest.
Bottom line: I will be looking to work with up to four writers in a 24-week Screenwriting Master Class intensive in which they will learn my comprehensive theoretical approach to the craft, then put that knowledge to use prepping and writing a full-length screenplay.
The cost? Nothing.
That’s right, a 6-month deep immersion in screenwriting theory and scriptwriting workshop where you end up with an original screenplay with me as your mentor for the entire process, and you don’t have to spend even a dime.
And if at the end of the process you have written a great script… you will have direct access to industry insiders.
I think this is brilliant. This is Scott putting his money where his mouth is. He believes in his method so much that he'll put it out there for free to four people. It's the antithesis of a lot of the scammers out there - total transparency AND generosity.
This is a great opportunity - in fact, it might be the best opportunity for amateurs that I've seen in a long time. In a worst case scenario, you emerge from this with a very comprehensive education in screenwriting. The connections are merely a bonus. This is your chance to work with one of the best mentors in the business and have motivation to finish a screenplay.
Usually, I make it a point not to strongly endorse any product or service I wouldn't use myself. Because of that, my conscience is clear when I say that anyone reading this blog who's serious about being a writer should submit themselves for consideration as one of Scott's Fortunate Four. If I wasn't personally acquainted with Scott, I'd be spending the next several days getting my submission ready.
I hate the word "guru." I hate gurus who are in it either for self-aggrandizement, or who come up with bizarre and cockamamie theories of writing solely to sell you on a writing seminar or book. I wince when (well-meaning) people call me a "guru."
Scott's not a guru - he's a mentor. And a damn good one at that. He's long been a great supporter of this blog and I consider him one of the most decent people I've "met" during my time in L.A. (And Scott, the next time you're in town, we WILL have to meet face-to-face finally.) He created these programs not for himself - but for you. The altruism and commitment he's shown towards aspiring writers has no equal.
Even if you can't get his services for free, maybe you can consider taking that money you were ready to throw at me (or the opportunists I lambasted earlier) and make an investment in your education and screenwriting future by enrolling in Screenwriting Master Class.
But for now, work on making a kickass case for why you should be the one to get all that at no charge.
Monday, February 27, 2012
"Which coverage service can get my material into the hands of producers?"
A reader named Mike sent me a question that I've gotten in one form or another over the last few months:
Of all the script coverage services, which would you recommend that would include a referral to producers, after of course receiving positive coverage. I've read of a few but which do you recommend?
As I've said before, there are some perfectly good reasons to pay a consultant to do coverage on your script. However, I don't really have enough experience with those services that I feel comfortable saying, "Yes, give all your money to Company ______."
If it was me, I'd look at the referral as a bonus - nothing more. Some of those services tout all their many connections, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Most of those sites should have some kind of "Success Story" section. A quick glance at ScriptPimp's site reveals that they have had a few six-figure sales and a couple produced projects, in addition to the usual boasting about finding their clients representation. In looking at ScriptShark's site, there are several listings from the past year alone about their clients finding representation, though I don't see any recent sales.
But here's where your own instincts have to come in. I wouldn't look to these companies to get you a sale. Look at the agents, managers and producers they seem to be associated with, and then do your own due diligence on those people. Are the producers the kind of people who would respond to your material? What can you find out about those reps? Are they strong sellers or are they small-time?
Remember, getting representation is a step, but it's only the beginning of the journey. Even a great agent can only do so much. They can open doors, but your material has to be strong enough to advance further. Plenty of people get an agent or a manager and then spend years trying to get a sale.
The consulting services primarily exist to give feedback. Anything beyond that is gravy and I think that's the attitude you have to take when evaluating them. We all want to sell our material, looking to these services from the perspective of "which one will make that sale happen?" is a little like wondering which type of canvas you should buy so your painting ends up in the Louvre.
Of all the script coverage services, which would you recommend that would include a referral to producers, after of course receiving positive coverage. I've read of a few but which do you recommend?
As I've said before, there are some perfectly good reasons to pay a consultant to do coverage on your script. However, I don't really have enough experience with those services that I feel comfortable saying, "Yes, give all your money to Company ______."
If it was me, I'd look at the referral as a bonus - nothing more. Some of those services tout all their many connections, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Most of those sites should have some kind of "Success Story" section. A quick glance at ScriptPimp's site reveals that they have had a few six-figure sales and a couple produced projects, in addition to the usual boasting about finding their clients representation. In looking at ScriptShark's site, there are several listings from the past year alone about their clients finding representation, though I don't see any recent sales.
But here's where your own instincts have to come in. I wouldn't look to these companies to get you a sale. Look at the agents, managers and producers they seem to be associated with, and then do your own due diligence on those people. Are the producers the kind of people who would respond to your material? What can you find out about those reps? Are they strong sellers or are they small-time?
Remember, getting representation is a step, but it's only the beginning of the journey. Even a great agent can only do so much. They can open doors, but your material has to be strong enough to advance further. Plenty of people get an agent or a manager and then spend years trying to get a sale.
The consulting services primarily exist to give feedback. Anything beyond that is gravy and I think that's the attitude you have to take when evaluating them. We all want to sell our material, looking to these services from the perspective of "which one will make that sale happen?" is a little like wondering which type of canvas you should buy so your painting ends up in the Louvre.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Reader question - How much feedback should I get before I know I'm ready?
Becka asks me:
How much and what kind of feedback and coverage should I get for my scripts before I try to get an agent?
So far I've just been in a local class, entered a small contest where they give you a summary of 20 readers' notes, and I am soon getting some extended coverage on another script. I can only afford a couple more basic coverage services and a contest or two over the next few months- how should I get the most for my money and start rackin' up the feedback on my first few scripts and treatments?
Well, there's quantity of coverage and then there's quality of coverage. 50 reviews from amateurs not much more experienced than you is worth less than two or three reviews from experienced writers and readers.
Let's take this piece-by-piece. The contest - how professional is it? Who are these "20 readers?" What are their credentials? Are the people running the contest employed in Hollywood or is this one of those regional film festival screenplay competitions?
I don't mean to say that someone not currently inside the system can't give cogent notes, but on average, you're going to get more effective feedback from someone close to "the show." It's quite possible that this festival recruited its readers via postings on Craigslist or EntertainmentCareers.net. They could be interns at small management companies, fresh off the bus.
I don't know if I put a lot of faith in contest feedback. I've covered the topic of coverage services a few times, but this is probably a good time to reiterate the basics.
For me personally, the instances where I would pay for coverage are rare, owing largely to the fact that I live in Los Angeles and there is no shortage of close friends I can ask to read my script who are either writers or work in the industry. The last spec I wrote, I vetted through about 15 people who I trusted and it didn't cost me a dime. I got a lot of useful feedback, as well as some notes I just decided I was going to ignore. Now, obviously if you live in Iowa and don't know any other screenwriters or anyone who's ever read a screenplay, then you might benefit from the services of a professional reader.
So my advice would be to be selective in choosing your reader. Check out screenwriting boards to get recommendations for readers. As with any business, I'm sure every reader and company will have some good feedback and some bad feedback. Check out their websites, decide if their prices are fair, investigate their connections and see if you can find any testimonials from previous clients. Some of the better services have very insightful and knowledgeable readers, while others might pay the readers pennies, which probably won't inspire them to read your script too carefully. So if you're going to buy coverage based solely on what's cheapest, you'll probably get what you pay for.
When I covered this topic before, I got some good responses endorsing Scott The Reader including this from a reader named Christina:
"[Scott] charges $60 and will give me notes sometimes in 24 hours. He's good - his notes, years later, end up being on the right track even if i can't see it when I first get them back. What I like most about him is utter professionalism. He never dips into arrogance or snarkiness the way some readers can. (Like myself!) He just tells you what he sees with a rational, level-headed voice. He does a lot of production company coverage, I think.
I don't know him personally, but some of my LA friends know him as a real person and report he's a nice guy. I kinda like not knowing him. That way he's not biased by my sunny, outgoing personality.
I've also gotten some strong feedback on Script Shark. It's worth pointing out that Script Shark is a little more expensive than Scott the Reader, starting at $175 for standard coverage. It's also worth pointing out that at least one Shark reader (AH) hangs out over on the Done Deal Pro message boards and has gotten a lot of positive feedback from readers there. His site is The Screenplay Mechanic, and his rates start at $95 for one page of notes and $119 for studio style coverage. I've never used him, but his customers seem to be satisfied, if the Done Deal feedback is anything to go on.
Also, I once traded scripts with Amanda the Aspiring Writer and was very pleased with the results. She knows her stuff, having been an agency assistant, where part of the job was to do coverage regularly. She charges $110 for feature coverage.
If I was to pay for coverage, those four places would probably be where I would start. In my web searching for reviews, I've come across a strong number of good reviews vs. any bad reviews. And in the grand scheme of things, the prices don't seem that unreasonable, especially when all of those readers seem to be above board.
How much feedback you need to get probably depends on the reaction to your first few submissions. Do people seem to feel that you're ready? Are they captivated by your concept, drawn in by your characters? Do they think that this is an idea that people want to see? If you get a couple middling reactions, I'd take that as a sign to do some significant reworking before I sent it out to anyone else.
I wouldn't query any agents until you start getting very enthusiastic responses from people who know what they're talking about. It's not enough to get polite encouragement. You should be getting reactions on the order of "This is a VERY strong sample! I couldn't put it down. I tried to find things wrong with it and I came up empty!" Reactions like "This isn't really my thing, but I'm sure someone will like it" aren't what you should be looking for.
I'll make the following predictions - someone will pop in to suggest Triggerstreet.com as an option. Someone else will pop in to offer the opinion that Triggerstreet is a cesspool of amateurs and that most of what you'll find there amounts to the blind leading the blind. Then someone will take offense to that and defend it as a good screenwriting community that can help beginners develop their skills.
Pretty much all of those are right.
Not having read your script, I can't tell you when you're ready. All I can say is that patience is a virtue. Don't be overeager to query. Agents get a lot of queries each week and it's very easy to ignore a query that doesn't grab them right away. It's even easier to pass on a middling or so-so script. Don't query with anything less than a script that's going to knock their socks off.
If you've got the informed opinion of industry pros that this script is ready, then go to it. If all the feedback advises caution and redevelopment, I'd pump the brakes.
How much and what kind of feedback and coverage should I get for my scripts before I try to get an agent?
So far I've just been in a local class, entered a small contest where they give you a summary of 20 readers' notes, and I am soon getting some extended coverage on another script. I can only afford a couple more basic coverage services and a contest or two over the next few months- how should I get the most for my money and start rackin' up the feedback on my first few scripts and treatments?
Well, there's quantity of coverage and then there's quality of coverage. 50 reviews from amateurs not much more experienced than you is worth less than two or three reviews from experienced writers and readers.
Let's take this piece-by-piece. The contest - how professional is it? Who are these "20 readers?" What are their credentials? Are the people running the contest employed in Hollywood or is this one of those regional film festival screenplay competitions?
I don't mean to say that someone not currently inside the system can't give cogent notes, but on average, you're going to get more effective feedback from someone close to "the show." It's quite possible that this festival recruited its readers via postings on Craigslist or EntertainmentCareers.net. They could be interns at small management companies, fresh off the bus.
I don't know if I put a lot of faith in contest feedback. I've covered the topic of coverage services a few times, but this is probably a good time to reiterate the basics.
For me personally, the instances where I would pay for coverage are rare, owing largely to the fact that I live in Los Angeles and there is no shortage of close friends I can ask to read my script who are either writers or work in the industry. The last spec I wrote, I vetted through about 15 people who I trusted and it didn't cost me a dime. I got a lot of useful feedback, as well as some notes I just decided I was going to ignore. Now, obviously if you live in Iowa and don't know any other screenwriters or anyone who's ever read a screenplay, then you might benefit from the services of a professional reader.
So my advice would be to be selective in choosing your reader. Check out screenwriting boards to get recommendations for readers. As with any business, I'm sure every reader and company will have some good feedback and some bad feedback. Check out their websites, decide if their prices are fair, investigate their connections and see if you can find any testimonials from previous clients. Some of the better services have very insightful and knowledgeable readers, while others might pay the readers pennies, which probably won't inspire them to read your script too carefully. So if you're going to buy coverage based solely on what's cheapest, you'll probably get what you pay for.
When I covered this topic before, I got some good responses endorsing Scott The Reader including this from a reader named Christina:
"[Scott] charges $60 and will give me notes sometimes in 24 hours. He's good - his notes, years later, end up being on the right track even if i can't see it when I first get them back. What I like most about him is utter professionalism. He never dips into arrogance or snarkiness the way some readers can. (Like myself!) He just tells you what he sees with a rational, level-headed voice. He does a lot of production company coverage, I think.
I don't know him personally, but some of my LA friends know him as a real person and report he's a nice guy. I kinda like not knowing him. That way he's not biased by my sunny, outgoing personality.
I've also gotten some strong feedback on Script Shark. It's worth pointing out that Script Shark is a little more expensive than Scott the Reader, starting at $175 for standard coverage. It's also worth pointing out that at least one Shark reader (AH) hangs out over on the Done Deal Pro message boards and has gotten a lot of positive feedback from readers there. His site is The Screenplay Mechanic, and his rates start at $95 for one page of notes and $119 for studio style coverage. I've never used him, but his customers seem to be satisfied, if the Done Deal feedback is anything to go on.
Also, I once traded scripts with Amanda the Aspiring Writer and was very pleased with the results. She knows her stuff, having been an agency assistant, where part of the job was to do coverage regularly. She charges $110 for feature coverage.
If I was to pay for coverage, those four places would probably be where I would start. In my web searching for reviews, I've come across a strong number of good reviews vs. any bad reviews. And in the grand scheme of things, the prices don't seem that unreasonable, especially when all of those readers seem to be above board.
How much feedback you need to get probably depends on the reaction to your first few submissions. Do people seem to feel that you're ready? Are they captivated by your concept, drawn in by your characters? Do they think that this is an idea that people want to see? If you get a couple middling reactions, I'd take that as a sign to do some significant reworking before I sent it out to anyone else.
I wouldn't query any agents until you start getting very enthusiastic responses from people who know what they're talking about. It's not enough to get polite encouragement. You should be getting reactions on the order of "This is a VERY strong sample! I couldn't put it down. I tried to find things wrong with it and I came up empty!" Reactions like "This isn't really my thing, but I'm sure someone will like it" aren't what you should be looking for.
I'll make the following predictions - someone will pop in to suggest Triggerstreet.com as an option. Someone else will pop in to offer the opinion that Triggerstreet is a cesspool of amateurs and that most of what you'll find there amounts to the blind leading the blind. Then someone will take offense to that and defend it as a good screenwriting community that can help beginners develop their skills.
Pretty much all of those are right.
Not having read your script, I can't tell you when you're ready. All I can say is that patience is a virtue. Don't be overeager to query. Agents get a lot of queries each week and it's very easy to ignore a query that doesn't grab them right away. It's even easier to pass on a middling or so-so script. Don't query with anything less than a script that's going to knock their socks off.
If you've got the informed opinion of industry pros that this script is ready, then go to it. If all the feedback advises caution and redevelopment, I'd pump the brakes.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Become a script reader for just $500!
As those who follow me on Twitter probably saw, last week I sort of mocked the idea of paying $500 to take a correspondence course in script reading so that YOU TOO can live the glamorous life of working at home as a script reader. I feel like I probably owe you all a longer explanation of my position.
First, as I said back when I attacked the idea of paying someone $75 a shot to evaluate a logline or a query letter, your money is your money. Spend it how you wish. Hopefully most of my readers are smart enough not to be taken in by such schemes. Now, there might be some who take exception to my calling a reader correspondence course a "scheme" so let me unpack that a bit.
I ask you, student in reader correspondence course - after you get your "degree" in script reading, what are you going to do with it?
Oh! You're going to hold yourself up as an expert and charge other newbies for your "insider" insights. Here's the problem with that, bub, you're not an insider.
There are plenty of people out there who work freelance as script readers and many of them have credentials that qualify them to offer advice as to not only what makes a good script, but what is received by agents, producers and studios.
Take Amanda the Aspiring Writer for example. She offers services that are fairly priced, but more importantly, she worked for a couple of years as an agency assistant. She's been on the inside. She knows that low budget character dramas aren't hot specs, she's seen the subtle reasons why some period pieces become hot specs and others are relegated to the PASS bin on sight. She knows the difference between the kind of material that gets talent excited and the stuff that may have little more than an interesting premise.
More than that, she's been exposed to professional level writing. There is a vast difference between the best scripts on Triggerstreet and the most average writing you'll see come from most agencies. If you've worked in this business professionally, you'll have a better idea of how high the bar is set. You'll know what "average" competence looks like and that's something you can't learn long distance via e-mail.
And to charge customers for your advice on how to clear that bar when you probably haven't even gotten close enough to describe that bar is utterly, utterly deceitful. If your resume does not include at least one production company, agency or management company, you're not a real reader. You have no more business telling people how to write than my dentist's receptionist has drilling my teeth.
I'm willing to grant exceptions for people like Carson Reeves, who has read so many scripts in the course of his blog that he's more or less made his bones. Plus, if you read Carson's reviews and find him to be knowledgeable and insightful, I certainly wouldn't blame you for wanting to pay for his insight. There's also the fact that most of his reviews do include some element of analyzing why the spec might have been well-received in the industry. As far as I understand, Carson's a complete outsider, but he's certainly got a large enough portfolio for one to make their own judgements as to his skill. Paying Joe Nobody with no experience and little more than the training of another reader is quite a different story, though.
I would pay Amanda the Aspiring TV Writer twice as much to read my script as I would someone who merely learned the ropes by proxy and has never set foot into a development executives office, who never had to go through a large slush pile and find the few gems in a pile of garbage.
This is why you'll find the most reputable coverage services insist that their readers have read professionally for actual businesses in the industry. The ones to shy away from have zero standards for their readers beyond completing their own training. If this was just about being a writing teacher maybe that would be okay. But when someone pays for coverage on their screenplay, which they are trying to sell, there's an expectation that the person giving the advice has some authority on how to make it palpable to industry eyes.
So in my eyes, that's why this sort of reader instruction course is worthless. I wouldn't give a dime to any reader who's only experience was one of these courses. $500 buys a lot of coverage from Amanda, or Carson, or the Screenplay Mechanic, or ScriptShark. And if I offered such a service, you'd certainly be able to get a lot of coverage from me for that price too. That's all I'm saying.
First, as I said back when I attacked the idea of paying someone $75 a shot to evaluate a logline or a query letter, your money is your money. Spend it how you wish. Hopefully most of my readers are smart enough not to be taken in by such schemes. Now, there might be some who take exception to my calling a reader correspondence course a "scheme" so let me unpack that a bit.
I ask you, student in reader correspondence course - after you get your "degree" in script reading, what are you going to do with it?
Oh! You're going to hold yourself up as an expert and charge other newbies for your "insider" insights. Here's the problem with that, bub, you're not an insider.
There are plenty of people out there who work freelance as script readers and many of them have credentials that qualify them to offer advice as to not only what makes a good script, but what is received by agents, producers and studios.
Take Amanda the Aspiring Writer for example. She offers services that are fairly priced, but more importantly, she worked for a couple of years as an agency assistant. She's been on the inside. She knows that low budget character dramas aren't hot specs, she's seen the subtle reasons why some period pieces become hot specs and others are relegated to the PASS bin on sight. She knows the difference between the kind of material that gets talent excited and the stuff that may have little more than an interesting premise.
More than that, she's been exposed to professional level writing. There is a vast difference between the best scripts on Triggerstreet and the most average writing you'll see come from most agencies. If you've worked in this business professionally, you'll have a better idea of how high the bar is set. You'll know what "average" competence looks like and that's something you can't learn long distance via e-mail.
And to charge customers for your advice on how to clear that bar when you probably haven't even gotten close enough to describe that bar is utterly, utterly deceitful. If your resume does not include at least one production company, agency or management company, you're not a real reader. You have no more business telling people how to write than my dentist's receptionist has drilling my teeth.
I'm willing to grant exceptions for people like Carson Reeves, who has read so many scripts in the course of his blog that he's more or less made his bones. Plus, if you read Carson's reviews and find him to be knowledgeable and insightful, I certainly wouldn't blame you for wanting to pay for his insight. There's also the fact that most of his reviews do include some element of analyzing why the spec might have been well-received in the industry. As far as I understand, Carson's a complete outsider, but he's certainly got a large enough portfolio for one to make their own judgements as to his skill. Paying Joe Nobody with no experience and little more than the training of another reader is quite a different story, though.
I would pay Amanda the Aspiring TV Writer twice as much to read my script as I would someone who merely learned the ropes by proxy and has never set foot into a development executives office, who never had to go through a large slush pile and find the few gems in a pile of garbage.
This is why you'll find the most reputable coverage services insist that their readers have read professionally for actual businesses in the industry. The ones to shy away from have zero standards for their readers beyond completing their own training. If this was just about being a writing teacher maybe that would be okay. But when someone pays for coverage on their screenplay, which they are trying to sell, there's an expectation that the person giving the advice has some authority on how to make it palpable to industry eyes.
So in my eyes, that's why this sort of reader instruction course is worthless. I wouldn't give a dime to any reader who's only experience was one of these courses. $500 buys a lot of coverage from Amanda, or Carson, or the Screenplay Mechanic, or ScriptShark. And if I offered such a service, you'd certainly be able to get a lot of coverage from me for that price too. That's all I'm saying.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
What kind of idiot pays $75 each to have their query and logline evaluated?
I was checking out the Done Deal Pro boards recently when I came across a posting that mentioned a blogger whom the poster had met at a pitch seminar. The post mentioned some advice that seemed interesting and provided a link to that blogger's site, so I decided to check it out. I always enjoy finding new blogs and pointing out new points of interest for my readers.
After checking out the site I decided not to link to this person, or name them for reasons that will probably become clear in a moment. As it turns out, this individual was not just a blogger, but their site mainly operates as a coverage service. I don't take issue with that. As I've said before, there are plenty of rational reasons to pay someone to critique your script. I urge people looking to purchase some services to do their research and truly examine what they hope to get out of the experience, but I see nothing wrong with it.
Screenplay consultants have often been painted as unscrupulous jackals who prey on hopes and dreams of aspiring writers. I think that it's unfair to tar all such consultants with that brush. Surely there are a more than a few services that are a waste of money, but I'm led to believe there are more than a few that are above board as well.
This is why I was so dismayed when I looked at this blogger's services and saw the following:
"Query Letter Formatting/Writing/Editing - $75."
Are you fucking kidding me?
Look, your money is yours to burn. If you want to spend $200 or $600 for studio-style coverage, who am I to judge? But $75 to read a query letter and help write another one is nothing short of outrageous.
As it happens, I wanted to compare this individual's prices to one of the more reputable screenplay consultants out there. I went back to the earlier post and decided to check it against The Script Department, and guess what? For a mere $75, The Script Department offers a "Query Letter Review." Yep, they'll read it and tell you if it's any good. $75 for what probably amounts to five - no, I'll be generous - TEN minutes of work. Considering how blind queries rarely work, that's only slightly more effective than just burning the money outright.
It gets better. For another $75 bucks they'll review your logline too. Yeah, so for a grand total, you can have professional readers look at less than a page of writing and give you a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. That's almost as stupid as paying thousands of dollars to someone who's never actually written a screenplay so that they can teach you how to write!
I'll be blunt. Any writer who's so desperate for that kind of validation that they'll pay $75 to get it isn't ready to play in this game. There are tens, if not hundred of books that can help you craft a sharp query letter and a strong logline. Honestly, if you've read more than one of those books and you still can't distill your script into a strong logline then chances are your story isn't that good. As for query letters, just Googling "How to write a Query Letter" will probably lead you to more than enough sites that can walk you through the process and provide examples of strong query letters.
Coverage on a script is one thing. It gives you a fresh pair of eyes and probably would even offer a few suggestions on how to improve weaknesses in the material. But "query reviews" and "logline evaluations" - particularly at those prices - might not be a scam, but they're a colossal waste of money.
For about five minutes I considered setting up a PayPal account and offering both services for $10. Truth is, I felt sleazy even taking that much money and I figured that most of my readers would be smart enough not to spend money on them anyway. Still, the sheer greed on display there couldn't help but motivate this editorial.
It's your money. Spend it however you wish, but please spend it wisely.
After checking out the site I decided not to link to this person, or name them for reasons that will probably become clear in a moment. As it turns out, this individual was not just a blogger, but their site mainly operates as a coverage service. I don't take issue with that. As I've said before, there are plenty of rational reasons to pay someone to critique your script. I urge people looking to purchase some services to do their research and truly examine what they hope to get out of the experience, but I see nothing wrong with it.
Screenplay consultants have often been painted as unscrupulous jackals who prey on hopes and dreams of aspiring writers. I think that it's unfair to tar all such consultants with that brush. Surely there are a more than a few services that are a waste of money, but I'm led to believe there are more than a few that are above board as well.
This is why I was so dismayed when I looked at this blogger's services and saw the following:
"Query Letter Formatting/Writing/Editing - $75."
Are you fucking kidding me?
Look, your money is yours to burn. If you want to spend $200 or $600 for studio-style coverage, who am I to judge? But $75 to read a query letter and help write another one is nothing short of outrageous.
As it happens, I wanted to compare this individual's prices to one of the more reputable screenplay consultants out there. I went back to the earlier post and decided to check it against The Script Department, and guess what? For a mere $75, The Script Department offers a "Query Letter Review." Yep, they'll read it and tell you if it's any good. $75 for what probably amounts to five - no, I'll be generous - TEN minutes of work. Considering how blind queries rarely work, that's only slightly more effective than just burning the money outright.
It gets better. For another $75 bucks they'll review your logline too. Yeah, so for a grand total, you can have professional readers look at less than a page of writing and give you a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. That's almost as stupid as paying thousands of dollars to someone who's never actually written a screenplay so that they can teach you how to write!
I'll be blunt. Any writer who's so desperate for that kind of validation that they'll pay $75 to get it isn't ready to play in this game. There are tens, if not hundred of books that can help you craft a sharp query letter and a strong logline. Honestly, if you've read more than one of those books and you still can't distill your script into a strong logline then chances are your story isn't that good. As for query letters, just Googling "How to write a Query Letter" will probably lead you to more than enough sites that can walk you through the process and provide examples of strong query letters.
Coverage on a script is one thing. It gives you a fresh pair of eyes and probably would even offer a few suggestions on how to improve weaknesses in the material. But "query reviews" and "logline evaluations" - particularly at those prices - might not be a scam, but they're a colossal waste of money.
For about five minutes I considered setting up a PayPal account and offering both services for $10. Truth is, I felt sleazy even taking that much money and I figured that most of my readers would be smart enough not to spend money on them anyway. Still, the sheer greed on display there couldn't help but motivate this editorial.
It's your money. Spend it however you wish, but please spend it wisely.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Coverage scams
I got an email from Benjamin last week:
Got a situation with a coverage provider who I paid already, but he does not return emails? He said he was going to have the coverage Sunday. But nothing so far and no replies. And he emailed me last week begging to cover my scripts?????
But he works for one the biggest contest around. Any advice?
Let me just make sure I'm hearing this right. A guy you don't know emailed you and said, "Hey, I'd love to read your scripts and do coverage on them if you just pay me $100 a script!" You sent him the payment and now he's not returning your emails.
I think you got taken.
What was the benefit to you in paying money for him telling you what he thinks? I don't criticize the decision to pay a script consultant, as I've covered that topic before, but I always encourage writers to do their research on the people they pay for their opinions. You say he works for one of the biggest contests around, yet I still don't see how that really helps you. Contests can help you get discovered, but only if you're a finalist.
Always check the credentials of the people you hire to do coverage on your scripts. Ask on other screenwriting boards and do some Googling to make sure that the person is legitimately connected to the agencies they claim. Never pay money to someone whom you haven't vetted, and always consider "How will this benefit me?" For example, if you were to pay me for notes, you could expect that the benefit is that I've been reading for almost seven years, I have a fair amount of knowledge about what makes a screenplay good and marketable, and I can tell you how your writing stacks up relative to what is being sold and represented those days. I might not be able to pass it on to people above me, but I can at least help you improve it.
What were you looking for in sending your script to this reader? Validation? Constructive notes? The hope that he'd use his contest connections to get you an agent? This whole scenario sounds shady for me from word one - when you say that he contacted you. That's almost on the level of responding to a phone solicitation or a spam email.
Let's say some agent or manager reads this blog and emails me with an invitation to read one of my specs. It would be extremely bad form for them to say, "Hey, if you pay $100 for coverage, I'll take a look at it." A reputable person who requests your script won't then insist that you pay a coverage fee.
Having someone who works for a contest read your script MIGHT help - but only if they can pass it on to someone else. True, they could tell you how your script stacks up to other submissions and suggest ways to improve it but why does this person's opinion matter enough that you're willing to pay for it?
I'm not saying you shouldn't pay someone for coverage - but buyer beware. If you don't know much about the person you sent your script to, then how do you know they won't rip you off?
There might not be anything you can do about it this time, but be more careful in the future.
Got a situation with a coverage provider who I paid already, but he does not return emails? He said he was going to have the coverage Sunday. But nothing so far and no replies. And he emailed me last week begging to cover my scripts?????
But he works for one the biggest contest around. Any advice?
Let me just make sure I'm hearing this right. A guy you don't know emailed you and said, "Hey, I'd love to read your scripts and do coverage on them if you just pay me $100 a script!" You sent him the payment and now he's not returning your emails.
I think you got taken.
What was the benefit to you in paying money for him telling you what he thinks? I don't criticize the decision to pay a script consultant, as I've covered that topic before, but I always encourage writers to do their research on the people they pay for their opinions. You say he works for one of the biggest contests around, yet I still don't see how that really helps you. Contests can help you get discovered, but only if you're a finalist.
Always check the credentials of the people you hire to do coverage on your scripts. Ask on other screenwriting boards and do some Googling to make sure that the person is legitimately connected to the agencies they claim. Never pay money to someone whom you haven't vetted, and always consider "How will this benefit me?" For example, if you were to pay me for notes, you could expect that the benefit is that I've been reading for almost seven years, I have a fair amount of knowledge about what makes a screenplay good and marketable, and I can tell you how your writing stacks up relative to what is being sold and represented those days. I might not be able to pass it on to people above me, but I can at least help you improve it.
What were you looking for in sending your script to this reader? Validation? Constructive notes? The hope that he'd use his contest connections to get you an agent? This whole scenario sounds shady for me from word one - when you say that he contacted you. That's almost on the level of responding to a phone solicitation or a spam email.
Let's say some agent or manager reads this blog and emails me with an invitation to read one of my specs. It would be extremely bad form for them to say, "Hey, if you pay $100 for coverage, I'll take a look at it." A reputable person who requests your script won't then insist that you pay a coverage fee.
Having someone who works for a contest read your script MIGHT help - but only if they can pass it on to someone else. True, they could tell you how your script stacks up to other submissions and suggest ways to improve it but why does this person's opinion matter enough that you're willing to pay for it?
I'm not saying you shouldn't pay someone for coverage - but buyer beware. If you don't know much about the person you sent your script to, then how do you know they won't rip you off?
There might not be anything you can do about it this time, but be more careful in the future.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Reader questions: Day 1
I'll start off with these questions from Kevin and Kerri, because I get them so many times a week that I really should start an FAQ just to answer them:
Will you read my fucking screenplay?
Nope, sorry.
How much do you charge for coverage?
I don't. Sorry guys, but I don't offer coverage services at this time. Maybe I'll get around to it down the line, but right now I'm a little busy with my regular work and my own writing. There are a few hurdles I'll still have to clear, not limited to working out some kind of legal release form as well as working out some way to accept payment anonymously.
Jen writes in to ask:
Just wondering if you have any books you'd recommend for learning the ins and outs of script coverage? I'm an aspiring TV writer and think it would be helpful to learn more about how readers break down a script and what they tend to look for during the coverage process.
I hate to say this, but I learned more from coverage simply by getting my hands on some samples and diving in with both feet. I'm sure there are books out there with examples, but that's not how I picked it up. Anyone have any suggestions for Jen?
It helps to read a lot of movie reviews, particularly from reviewers who get you to really look beneath the surface of the movies you see. For me, it was reading a lot of Roger Ebert's reviews and columns that really helped. There were also a lot of TV review blogs I read regularly in college. All of that got my inner critic in the habit if breaking down a story.
But the basic format of coverage tends to be: one paragraph intro/overview, one paragraph on plot/concept/structure and one paragraph on characters and character arcs, followed by a conclusion. Four paragraphs, one page.
Purpletrex asked a trio of questions:
Do scripts longer than 120 pages automatically get thrown in the trash?
No... but in most cases they probably start out with one strike against them unless you're a "known" quantity.
Also, what is the "acceptable" number of pages in a spec these days.
Depends on the genre. Comedy definitely hovers somewhere around 100-105 pages. Action is more likely to be 105-115. Horror is usually anywhere from 95-105. Drama's probably somewhere around 105-110. As much as the screenwriting books say that 120 is the typical length, the "average" industry script probably falls between 105-115 pages. I'd say that 95% of the "pro" scripts I read fall in the 105-115 range.
Has any spec longer than 120 pages ever made been bumped up the ladder?
I'm sure it happens, but statistically speaking I'd bet the odds of making it up the ladder go down the longer the script gets. If you're over 120 pages, there had better not be a single scene that feels too long or self-indulgent. Believe me, there's always something you can cut.
More answers later this week, and if you've got a question, please send it in.
Will you read my fucking screenplay?
Nope, sorry.
How much do you charge for coverage?
I don't. Sorry guys, but I don't offer coverage services at this time. Maybe I'll get around to it down the line, but right now I'm a little busy with my regular work and my own writing. There are a few hurdles I'll still have to clear, not limited to working out some kind of legal release form as well as working out some way to accept payment anonymously.
Jen writes in to ask:
Just wondering if you have any books you'd recommend for learning the ins and outs of script coverage? I'm an aspiring TV writer and think it would be helpful to learn more about how readers break down a script and what they tend to look for during the coverage process.
I hate to say this, but I learned more from coverage simply by getting my hands on some samples and diving in with both feet. I'm sure there are books out there with examples, but that's not how I picked it up. Anyone have any suggestions for Jen?
It helps to read a lot of movie reviews, particularly from reviewers who get you to really look beneath the surface of the movies you see. For me, it was reading a lot of Roger Ebert's reviews and columns that really helped. There were also a lot of TV review blogs I read regularly in college. All of that got my inner critic in the habit if breaking down a story.
But the basic format of coverage tends to be: one paragraph intro/overview, one paragraph on plot/concept/structure and one paragraph on characters and character arcs, followed by a conclusion. Four paragraphs, one page.
Purpletrex asked a trio of questions:
Do scripts longer than 120 pages automatically get thrown in the trash?
No... but in most cases they probably start out with one strike against them unless you're a "known" quantity.
Also, what is the "acceptable" number of pages in a spec these days.
Depends on the genre. Comedy definitely hovers somewhere around 100-105 pages. Action is more likely to be 105-115. Horror is usually anywhere from 95-105. Drama's probably somewhere around 105-110. As much as the screenwriting books say that 120 is the typical length, the "average" industry script probably falls between 105-115 pages. I'd say that 95% of the "pro" scripts I read fall in the 105-115 range.
Has any spec longer than 120 pages ever made been bumped up the ladder?
I'm sure it happens, but statistically speaking I'd bet the odds of making it up the ladder go down the longer the script gets. If you're over 120 pages, there had better not be a single scene that feels too long or self-indulgent. Believe me, there's always something you can cut.
More answers later this week, and if you've got a question, please send it in.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Where do these terrible scripts come from?
Josh sent me a question via email last week:
Please help reconcile these two thoughts, seemingly at odds:
1. You (and all script readers) frequently gripe about the horrible shit you've had to read set in non-Courier fonts, riddled with typos, and bogged down by trite cliches, exclamation points, song playlists, lengthy descriptions of the ingenue's cleavage, and so many other red flags.
2. It's virtually impossible to get an unrepresented script onto your desk.
Therefore, by law of modus tollens, are these affronts to screenwriting being delivered by managers and agents? How and why does this happen? How does my screenplay, unrepresented but otherwise respectable, land on a gatekeeper's desk?
First, good question, Josh. When I first started working as a reader, I had plenty of days where I thought to myself, "How did this manage to squeak through the system to the point where I have to read this drek?" I'll try to explain the most common reasons a really amateurish spec can get to someone reading for an agency or production company.
Favors. Yeah, you knew this was coming. The Development VP's college roommate's kid just wrote an "awesome" sci-fi adventure; or maybe that junior agent at International Creative Artists Agents for the Performing Arts has a friend who persuaded him to submit his script. Either way, you're the one stuck reading it. I'd probably guess that 3 out of 5 times, when a reader complains about bad formatting in a spec, this is the cause.
Queries. It's rare, but it happens every now and then that a query from a newbie might find the right executive or agent at the right moment. Maybe the writer knew how to pitch the script but not to write it - and if you're the poor bastard reading for agent or executive, you'll find that out really fast.
I'd also group the Slush Pile in with these, as there may be some smaller agents and managers who will accept anything so long as it comes with a release form. (Whether those managers are at all useful to one's career is another matter.) The Slush Pile is a curious entity. At times it's unclear just where all these scripts came from, or why we're wasting resources on reading them. My own theory is that bad scripts often mate and spawn in there.
Contests. If you're reading for a smaller agency or management company, it's possible that your bosses will either sponsor a screenplay contest, or at least work out a deal where they read the Top 10 scripts from said contest. A lot of these contests, quite frankly, aren't that good. The quality of submission is often as poor as anything you'll find on the slush pile.
Now, you might be thinking "Yeah, but aren't the readers supposed to weed out the bad ones?" It doesn't always work that way. My first internship was with such a company and they had the INTERNS doing the reading. People almost as inexperienced as the writers were making the call as to what made it to the final rounds. You'll also often see internet ads seeking contest readers, and often, their criteria for those readers might be lax. Usually, the less they pay, the worse you can count on the readers to be. I've seen some places advertise that they pay the readers $20-$30 a script for coverage. That's close to slave wages for readers - and so a lot of good readers don't apply. Thus, you're left with people who might not know what to look for. The same thing goes for peer review contests, like the late, lamented Project Greenlight.
Also, when I read for Big Deal Agency, they requested the Top Ten Finalists from a competition that I'd describe as a mid-level contest. I read at least four of those and a lot of them were as weakly written as material I'd seen back in screenwriting classes, and they included a generous helping of Our Favorite Mistakes.
Readers working for script consulting companies, like the ones mentioned here, probably see a lot of scripts that treat script formatting like Ned Beatty in Deliverance. (Too old a reference? Then assume I said, "like Zed treats Ving Rhames in Pulp Fiction." If that's not clear enough, then I can't help you.)
And though it's rare to find major formatting issues in scripts sent out by agents and managers, I've seen it happen. There are a lot of bottom-of-the-barrel agencies out there, and if my experience when reading for a producer who loved horror is anything to go by, they lack a critical eye towards the material and sometimes the formatting of said material. You might not find mechanical formatting errors in these scripts, but you'll find damn near everything else - including long descriptions of cleavage, song selections, and all our other favorite red flags. Sad as it is to say, there are some agents who just don't care.
I hope this answers your question, Josh.
Please help reconcile these two thoughts, seemingly at odds:
1. You (and all script readers) frequently gripe about the horrible shit you've had to read set in non-Courier fonts, riddled with typos, and bogged down by trite cliches, exclamation points, song playlists, lengthy descriptions of the ingenue's cleavage, and so many other red flags.
2. It's virtually impossible to get an unrepresented script onto your desk.
Therefore, by law of modus tollens, are these affronts to screenwriting being delivered by managers and agents? How and why does this happen? How does my screenplay, unrepresented but otherwise respectable, land on a gatekeeper's desk?
First, good question, Josh. When I first started working as a reader, I had plenty of days where I thought to myself, "How did this manage to squeak through the system to the point where I have to read this drek?" I'll try to explain the most common reasons a really amateurish spec can get to someone reading for an agency or production company.
Favors. Yeah, you knew this was coming. The Development VP's college roommate's kid just wrote an "awesome" sci-fi adventure; or maybe that junior agent at International Creative Artists Agents for the Performing Arts has a friend who persuaded him to submit his script. Either way, you're the one stuck reading it. I'd probably guess that 3 out of 5 times, when a reader complains about bad formatting in a spec, this is the cause.
Queries. It's rare, but it happens every now and then that a query from a newbie might find the right executive or agent at the right moment. Maybe the writer knew how to pitch the script but not to write it - and if you're the poor bastard reading for agent or executive, you'll find that out really fast.
I'd also group the Slush Pile in with these, as there may be some smaller agents and managers who will accept anything so long as it comes with a release form. (Whether those managers are at all useful to one's career is another matter.) The Slush Pile is a curious entity. At times it's unclear just where all these scripts came from, or why we're wasting resources on reading them. My own theory is that bad scripts often mate and spawn in there.
Contests. If you're reading for a smaller agency or management company, it's possible that your bosses will either sponsor a screenplay contest, or at least work out a deal where they read the Top 10 scripts from said contest. A lot of these contests, quite frankly, aren't that good. The quality of submission is often as poor as anything you'll find on the slush pile.
Now, you might be thinking "Yeah, but aren't the readers supposed to weed out the bad ones?" It doesn't always work that way. My first internship was with such a company and they had the INTERNS doing the reading. People almost as inexperienced as the writers were making the call as to what made it to the final rounds. You'll also often see internet ads seeking contest readers, and often, their criteria for those readers might be lax. Usually, the less they pay, the worse you can count on the readers to be. I've seen some places advertise that they pay the readers $20-$30 a script for coverage. That's close to slave wages for readers - and so a lot of good readers don't apply. Thus, you're left with people who might not know what to look for. The same thing goes for peer review contests, like the late, lamented Project Greenlight.
Also, when I read for Big Deal Agency, they requested the Top Ten Finalists from a competition that I'd describe as a mid-level contest. I read at least four of those and a lot of them were as weakly written as material I'd seen back in screenwriting classes, and they included a generous helping of Our Favorite Mistakes.
Readers working for script consulting companies, like the ones mentioned here, probably see a lot of scripts that treat script formatting like Ned Beatty in Deliverance. (Too old a reference? Then assume I said, "like Zed treats Ving Rhames in Pulp Fiction." If that's not clear enough, then I can't help you.)
And though it's rare to find major formatting issues in scripts sent out by agents and managers, I've seen it happen. There are a lot of bottom-of-the-barrel agencies out there, and if my experience when reading for a producer who loved horror is anything to go by, they lack a critical eye towards the material and sometimes the formatting of said material. You might not find mechanical formatting errors in these scripts, but you'll find damn near everything else - including long descriptions of cleavage, song selections, and all our other favorite red flags. Sad as it is to say, there are some agents who just don't care.
I hope this answers your question, Josh.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Have you ever paid for it? (Coverage, that is)
Jeff writes in with a question:
In his book, "Breakfast with Sharks," Michael Lent suggests getting coverage for your spec script from on of the big agencies by simply calling them up, and asking for a list of freelance readers while posing as a producer. So I did this. It didn't work. One agency said to email their story department while the rest simply said they don't give out this information. I emailed the story department and offered $75 for coverage of my script. Any thoughts on this?
Coincidentally, I recently read that book and found myself wondering if that scheme would work. I guess they're wise to that trick. I also know there are people who think it's a big scam to pay for coverage of any kind. One of the first executives I read for once gave me the advice to "Never pay anyone to read your script." Now, I'm pretty sure he meant to apply that to unscrupulous agents and managers who charge a "reading fee." That usually IS a scam.
However, there are perfectly sane reasons for paying someone to read your script, and I assume you want coverage on your spec so you can get a sense of how an industry reader would react to the material. Judging by the number of emails I get each week asking me if I offer such a service, there are a lot of aspiring writers out there who want to know what an "insider" would make of their script, as well as get any suggestions for improvement from someone in a position to pass scripts on to the next level. That makes a lot of sense to me.
For me personally, the instances where I would pay for coverage are rare, owing largely to the fact that I live in Los Angeles and there is no shortage of close friends I can ask to read my script who are either writers or work in the industry. The last spec I wrote, I vetted through about 15 people who I trusted and it didn't cost me a dime. I got a lot of useful feedback, as well as some notes I just decided I was going to ignore. Now, obviously if you live in Iowa and don't know any other screenwriters or anyone who's ever read a screenplay, then you might benefit from the services of a professional reader.
So my advice would be to be selective in choosing your reader. Check out screenwriting boards to get recommendations for readers. As with any business, I'm sure every reader and company will have some good feedback and some bad feedback. Check out their websites, decide if their prices are fair, investigate their connections and see if you can find any testimonials from previous clients. Some of the better services have very insightful and knowledgeable readers, while others might pay the readers pennies, which probably won't inspire them to read your script too carefully. So if you're going to buy coverage based solely on what's cheapest, you'll probably get what you pay for.
I put the call out on Twitter yesterday to see if anyone had purchased these services before and got a few responses. Christina emailed me with an endorcement of Scott The Reader:
"[Scott] charges $60 and will give me notes sometimes in 24 hours. He's good - his notes, years later, end up being on the right track even if i can't see it when I first get them back. What I like most about him is utter professionalism. He never dips into arrogance or snarkiness the way some readers can. (Like myself!) He just tells you what he sees with a rational, level-headed voice. He does a lot of production company coverage, I think.
I don't know him personally, but some of my LA friends know him as a real person and report he's a nice guy. I kinda like not knowing him. That way he's not biased by my sunny, outgoing personality.
(That was a joke, btw. I am outgoing but cynical.)
I've paid $200 for another lady - okay, but not so much better than the $60 guy.
I applied for Film Independent's screenwriting lab year. The fee was $75. I didn't realize I'd get exhaustive coverage back - totally worth the application fee.
Gerry wrote in to say:
"I've used Script Shark twice, once with their reaction pack coverage which has three (or four or five) readers give notes on the same draft of the script. It's interesting to see the different takes on the script. There was a fair amount of consensus on the strong points in my writing, and some dissension on the weak ones. A few readers were a little nitpickier than the others, but overall the points they made were good ones. If something got pointed out by more than one of them, I really gave that part of the script a second look and more often than not, their comments helped me figure a way to fix it.
Their readers are anonymous, but you can request specific ones and read their bios on their website. It says they make sure their readers have read for at least two major companies before working for them, so at least you know you're not getting someone right off the bus. For what it's worth, I had good experiences with DS, RD, AM, and RB. A few were a little sharper than others, but I didn't feel ripped off at all."
It's worth pointing out that Script Shark is a little more expensive than Scott the Reader, starting at $155 for standard coverage. It's also worth pointing out that at least one Shark reader (AH) hangs out over on the Done Deal Pro message boards and has gotten a lot of positive feedback from readers there. His site is The Screenplay Mechanic, and his rates start at $75 for standard coverage. I've never used him, but his customers seem to be satisfied, if the Done Deal feedback is anything to go on.
[UPDATE - I am redacting comments I made endorsing a service and an individual whom I would no longer support. I don't like "revising" the post like this, but I'm not comfortable with someone coming across the archives for the first time and submitting to a service that no longer meets my standards.]
If I was to pay for coverage, those four places would probably be where I would start. In my web searching for reviews, I've come across a strong number of good reviews vs. any bad reviews. And in the grand scheme of things, the prices don't seem that unreasonable.
Anyone out there got any glowing endorsements or horror stories to add to the mix? And are you guys really that interested in paying for notes from me?
In his book, "Breakfast with Sharks," Michael Lent suggests getting coverage for your spec script from on of the big agencies by simply calling them up, and asking for a list of freelance readers while posing as a producer. So I did this. It didn't work. One agency said to email their story department while the rest simply said they don't give out this information. I emailed the story department and offered $75 for coverage of my script. Any thoughts on this?
Coincidentally, I recently read that book and found myself wondering if that scheme would work. I guess they're wise to that trick. I also know there are people who think it's a big scam to pay for coverage of any kind. One of the first executives I read for once gave me the advice to "Never pay anyone to read your script." Now, I'm pretty sure he meant to apply that to unscrupulous agents and managers who charge a "reading fee." That usually IS a scam.
However, there are perfectly sane reasons for paying someone to read your script, and I assume you want coverage on your spec so you can get a sense of how an industry reader would react to the material. Judging by the number of emails I get each week asking me if I offer such a service, there are a lot of aspiring writers out there who want to know what an "insider" would make of their script, as well as get any suggestions for improvement from someone in a position to pass scripts on to the next level. That makes a lot of sense to me.
For me personally, the instances where I would pay for coverage are rare, owing largely to the fact that I live in Los Angeles and there is no shortage of close friends I can ask to read my script who are either writers or work in the industry. The last spec I wrote, I vetted through about 15 people who I trusted and it didn't cost me a dime. I got a lot of useful feedback, as well as some notes I just decided I was going to ignore. Now, obviously if you live in Iowa and don't know any other screenwriters or anyone who's ever read a screenplay, then you might benefit from the services of a professional reader.
So my advice would be to be selective in choosing your reader. Check out screenwriting boards to get recommendations for readers. As with any business, I'm sure every reader and company will have some good feedback and some bad feedback. Check out their websites, decide if their prices are fair, investigate their connections and see if you can find any testimonials from previous clients. Some of the better services have very insightful and knowledgeable readers, while others might pay the readers pennies, which probably won't inspire them to read your script too carefully. So if you're going to buy coverage based solely on what's cheapest, you'll probably get what you pay for.
I put the call out on Twitter yesterday to see if anyone had purchased these services before and got a few responses. Christina emailed me with an endorcement of Scott The Reader:
"[Scott] charges $60 and will give me notes sometimes in 24 hours. He's good - his notes, years later, end up being on the right track even if i can't see it when I first get them back. What I like most about him is utter professionalism. He never dips into arrogance or snarkiness the way some readers can. (Like myself!) He just tells you what he sees with a rational, level-headed voice. He does a lot of production company coverage, I think.
I don't know him personally, but some of my LA friends know him as a real person and report he's a nice guy. I kinda like not knowing him. That way he's not biased by my sunny, outgoing personality.
(That was a joke, btw. I am outgoing but cynical.)
I've paid $200 for another lady - okay, but not so much better than the $60 guy.
I applied for Film Independent's screenwriting lab year. The fee was $75. I didn't realize I'd get exhaustive coverage back - totally worth the application fee.
Gerry wrote in to say:
"I've used Script Shark twice, once with their reaction pack coverage which has three (or four or five) readers give notes on the same draft of the script. It's interesting to see the different takes on the script. There was a fair amount of consensus on the strong points in my writing, and some dissension on the weak ones. A few readers were a little nitpickier than the others, but overall the points they made were good ones. If something got pointed out by more than one of them, I really gave that part of the script a second look and more often than not, their comments helped me figure a way to fix it.
Their readers are anonymous, but you can request specific ones and read their bios on their website. It says they make sure their readers have read for at least two major companies before working for them, so at least you know you're not getting someone right off the bus. For what it's worth, I had good experiences with DS, RD, AM, and RB. A few were a little sharper than others, but I didn't feel ripped off at all."
It's worth pointing out that Script Shark is a little more expensive than Scott the Reader, starting at $155 for standard coverage. It's also worth pointing out that at least one Shark reader (AH) hangs out over on the Done Deal Pro message boards and has gotten a lot of positive feedback from readers there. His site is The Screenplay Mechanic, and his rates start at $75 for standard coverage. I've never used him, but his customers seem to be satisfied, if the Done Deal feedback is anything to go on.
[UPDATE - I am redacting comments I made endorsing a service and an individual whom I would no longer support. I don't like "revising" the post like this, but I'm not comfortable with someone coming across the archives for the first time and submitting to a service that no longer meets my standards.]
If I was to pay for coverage, those four places would probably be where I would start. In my web searching for reviews, I've come across a strong number of good reviews vs. any bad reviews. And in the grand scheme of things, the prices don't seem that unreasonable.
Anyone out there got any glowing endorsements or horror stories to add to the mix? And are you guys really that interested in paying for notes from me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
