Quote: Harri @ 10th April 2016, 6:13 PM BSTwould it be weird at this point to change the name of my sitcom even if I already sent the first draft?
No.
The Sitcom Mission 2016 Page 4
Hi, should the script be written with a set number of actors available should it be read at the showcase? Bit confused whether should write as normal for TV or specifically for stage with restricted actors/locations/props etc
Quote: PauloHuntero @ 12th April 2016, 9:00 PM BSTHi, should the script be written with a set number of actors available should it be read at the showcase? Bit confused whether should write as normal for TV or specifically for stage with restricted actors/locations/props etc
Hi Paulo
Just write it for TV (if that's your medium of choice). It's a table reading and a narrator will read out scene directions. Just remember that it's best to concentrate on your central characters because we want to see how they react under pressure.
My quibble or query about a feedback system would be 'How rigidly do you stick to your system or your rules?' Do you go with this over everything else because surely the same rule applies to all in the interests of fairness. Or overlook a flaw or two in the odd promising script that hasn't been improved via your feedback system?
The scenario that concerns me - you read two scripts sent in on the final day, script A has been through the feedback system and has been amended exactly as advised. It's very polished and follows all the rules on structuring, dialogue etc. Perfect length. It's also quite amusing.
You then read script B and can't stop laughing at it. You read it again when you've stopped crying and start seeing formal errors, and it overruns a bit and is flabby and wordy. It has much funnier characters and funnier dialogue than script A but it hasn't followed your golden rules on this or that because it didn't get feedback.
You have one place left on your shortlist to fill. Which one do you choose? Cue tension building music.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 16th April 2016, 10:06 AM BSTMy quibble or query about a feedback system would be 'How rigidly do you stick to your system or your rules?' Do you go with this over everything else because surely the same rule applies to all in the interests of fairness. Or overlook a flaw or two in the odd promising script that hasn't been improved via your feedback system?
The scenario that concerns me - you read two scripts sent in on the final day, script A has been through the feedback system and has been amended exactly as advised. It's very polished and follows all the rules on structuring, dialogue etc. Perfect length. It's also quite amusing.
You then read script B and can't stop laughing at it. You read it again when you've stopped crying and start seeing formal errors, and it overruns a bit and is flabby and wordy. It has much funnier characters and funnier dialogue than script A but it hasn't followed your golden rules on this or that because it didn't get feedback.
You have one place left on your shortlist to fill. Which one do you choose? Cue tension building music.
We'll be taking everything on its potential. The entry that is submitted on May 15 is just the starting point of where we want to be, whether it's been through our feedback process or not.
As each of last year's finalists and one of the long listed have testified, there'll be a lot of development work for those we choose to continue to work with. That's our USP and where we add most value.
Looking at last year's long list:
1 took Silver entry
1 took Silver Bullet entry
1 came through our City Academy Level 2 course
2 took Bronze entry
3 took Regular entry
Hope that helps.
And I'm sorry but I'm going to pick bones with some of those blogs with their cut and dried rules all written in a very sure and certain manner. Trouble is some of it is plain wrong as evidenced by glancing at a script or two from our most celebrated sitcom writers yet, Galton & Simpson.
The overwhelming preference here for short snappy dialogue aiming for the punch line is ridiculously narrow in scope, given so many great sitcoms broke this so called golden rule. (It's never been a golden rule, it's bollocks. Great monologue is great monologue and if it fits the character, use it). All your advice is catering for just ONE type of sitcom style, not the broad range we have had. So, what if your main character is a Hancock, Harold Steptoe, Rigsby, Terry Collier, Rab Nesbitt, Arthur Strong or any other of the many verbose sitcom leads central to their sitcom? It'll be bye bye sitcom if you send it here!
I'm sorry but a lot of these 'experts' just don't know their sitcom as well they think, but way more annoyingly are far too sure that only one style fits. Has to be right because they've read it in all the other guide books. It's all a sad symptom of the modern craze for self help and guide books and if everyone followed it to the letter they'd be producing the same narrow style of sitcom. Oh, guess what's happening in sitcomland.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 16th April 2016, 1:46 PM BSTAnd I'm sorry but I'm going to pick bones with some of those blogs with their cut and dried rules all written in a very sure and certain manner. Trouble is some of it is plain wrong as evidenced by glancing at a script or two from our most celebrated sitcom writers yet, Galton & Simpson.
The overwhelming preference here for short snappy dialogue aiming for the punch line is ridiculously narrow in scope, given so many great sitcoms broke this so called golden rule. (It's never been a golden rule, it's bollocks. Great monologue is great monologue and if it fits the character, use it). All your advice is catering for just ONE type of sitcom style, not the broad range we have had. So, what if your main character is a Hancock, Harold Steptoe, Rigsby, Terry Collier, Rab Nesbitt, Arthur Strong or any other of the many verbose sitcom leads central to their sitcom? It'll be bye bye sitcom if you send it here!
I'm sorry but a lot of these 'experts' just don't know their sitcom as well they think, but way more annoyingly are far too sure that only one style fits. Has to be right because they've read it in all the other guide books. It's all a sad symptom of the modern craze for self help and guide books and if everyone followed it to the letter they'd be producing the same narrow style of sitcom. Oh, guess what's happening in sitcomland.
That's ok, we're really happy if you want to disagree with us.
We have a catholic taste in sitcoms and believe in 'tools, not rules'. We don't believe in a one-size-fits-all philosophy but we do recognise that there are conventions in sitcom that can be both adhered to and played with. We love it when people play with them just as much as when people play inside them.
One of our long listed entries stuck out in our minds last year because the author gave her central character a brilliant monologue which was so good I printed it out and put it up in my office.
I was going to rephrase both posts but you're quick off the mark today, must've had your Vimto. But as you know I'm verbose and slow to edit. I'm also rude.
Very good answers to both though, thank you. Bah! 
hi just a quick question here - the recommended length for submissions is 15 minutes. Does that inevitably mean 15 pages (in standard screenplay format, say) or what is best way to approach this -- maybe reading outloud with a timer?
thanks
Quote: RodM @ 19th April 2016, 9:04 PM BSThi just a quick question here - the recommended length for submissions is 15 minutes. Does that inevitably mean 15 pages (in standard screenplay format, say) or what is best way to approach this -- maybe reading outloud with a timer?
thanks
Hi Rod
You've answered your own question - read it out and time it.
Cheers, Declan
Declan, do you answer every question, no matter how obvious or repetitious?
Evidently not!
Quote: beaky @ 20th April 2016, 5:30 PM BSTEvidently not!
Yes.
In that case, can I ask my questions again? 
Quote: Mikey Jackson @ 21st April 2016, 10:08 PM BSTIn that case, can I ask my questions again?
Apologies to anyone waiting for Silver or Silver Bullet feedback. This is why.