Quote: Marc P @ February 13 2009, 7:32 PM GMTAre you a campanologist then Dolly?
Are you saying I'm a bit John Inman? 
Is the BBC the be all and end all? Page 4
Quote: hotzappa11 @ February 13 2009, 11:50 AM GMTThat was Caroline Leddy, right?
I can't possibly comment... (for once)
Quote: Dolly Dagger @ February 13 2009, 7:37 PM GMTAre you saying I'm a bit John Inman?
I don't know are you free?!
Quote: Marc P @ February 13 2009, 7:47 PM GMTI don't know are you free?!
No. I'm very expensive.
Quote: Lord Meldrum @ February 12 2009, 11:00 AM GMT
How many of you send stuff to the BBC? Is it the first place you send a script once completed? In my mind I always think that the BBC is where it's at, but am starting to think that you're best off trying elsewhere before you even think about contacting the BBC.
Of course, the BBC isn't the be all and end all - but for the foreeseable future it will continue to be the first place I consider sending my scripts to.
I've sent three scripts to them so far. The first one I sent to an individual, who quite rightly rejected it on a number of grounds, but was also very helpful.
The second was better received, but the person I sent it to (who offered a couple of pages of feedback and suggested I rewrite and send it back to him) then left the BBC. A common occurrence from what I've read on these forums.
The third script I received back from The Writers' Room just last week. After trying to make the switch from comedy (my first two scripts) to drama, this script came back suggesting there was a "clash of genres", and in hindsight the reader is absolutely on the button. She pointed out all the 'strong' elements of the script (interestingly, all the things I got wrong in my first two scripts - topic, exposition, story arc, unrealistic dialogue), and hit me with a couple of problems I feel far less worried about.
I'm now in the process of rewriting the script I sent to them, and as they don't generally allow you to re-submit the same script to The Writers' Room, I'll send a much-improved draft elsewhere.
In summary, the feedback I've been given has been invaluable and has made me, I think, a much better writer. For that reason, I will continue sending my scripts to the BBC first off - providing I think it would suit their audience. Some things wouldn't.
I think for those still learning the craft, it's a good place to start.
Just read back through this thread and have to say I disagree with Marc P's comment that, "some people sugar coat the rejection, but in the end there is no such thing as a good rejection". If the rejection is accompanied by valuable feedback, how can that be considered a bad thing?
Quote: Rustle T Davis @ February 13 2009, 8:00 PM GMTJust read back through this thread and have to say I disagree with Marc P's comment that, "some people sugar coat the rejection, but in the end there is no such thing as a good rejection". If the rejection is accompanied by valuable feedback, how can that be considered a bad thing?
You didn't have to say that! What was the valuable feedback that you got?
Undermined!
(That's sort of the writers' version of 'Owned!', I suppose)
Dan
Quote: Marc P @ February 13 2009, 11:01 PM GMTYou didn't have to say that!
It may be a rejection, but the reader points out the weaknesses in my script and confirms the improvements I've made since my last one. To me personally, that's valuable.
A few snippets:
"(name of script) is a confidently written drama with a commercial sensibility and a topically relevant theme. "The script demonstrate a sound sense of visual grammar with concise, pacy storytelling and commendable attention to detail. "The dialogue itself is convincingly naturalistic".
The previous two scripts I sent in received comments suggesting:
a) not commercial enough b) the narative stalls c) the story doesn't flow c) the dialogue is heavy and unnatuarlistic. Complete opposites.
The negative comments suggest my two female characters are two dimensional - serious and intelligent and her ditsy best friend. I don't see this as a major problem because if you watch most comedies or rom/coms you'll find these very characters time and time again. As this script was meant to be a drama, I can see where the reader is coming from. The characters don't sit right in drama.
They also say, "too many of the key story elements feel familiar. "The predominant tone is reminiscent of a romantic comedy and sits uncomfortably alongside the darker, more thriller elements of the script. "...the main problem is the uncomfortbale clash of genres".
In hindsight, I agree with the negative comments the reader has made. More importantly, thanks to something else they pointed out, I know how to put it right.
I started out writing the script as a romantic comedy, but part way through I decided to turn my male character into an evil psycho. Big mistake. I should have stuck with what I know I'm good at. Before I received the feedback, I had already started rewriting the script as a rom/com - just as I had originally intended, because I knew something was wrong with this 'drama'. The feedback confirms what I already knew on some level - but as a relative beginner, I 'needed' that confirmation. I needed to know that I can trust my own judgement and this feedback confirmed that, as well as pointing out other things I 'hadn't' noticed like the character problem.
I'm sure there are 'bad' readers but on the whole, I think the readers at the BBC are very knowledgeable.
I'd be the first to admit the only true way to learn the craft of writing is to write... and then write some more. I've been doing that. But any signs that I'm headed in the right direction are a bonus.
Well I still say there is no such thing as a good rejection. However good it is it is still bad. They are basically saying no - and at the Writersroom you are not allowed to resubmit something once it has been rejected by them. But it is certainly true to say there are less bad rejections and if you can take encouragement from the positive comments then it's a good thing. So you are right there is value to be taken sometimes from rejection.
The best thing to do about rejection is to make them very sorry about it one day.
Quote: Dolly Dagger @ February 13 2009, 7:57 PM GMTNo. I'm very expensive.
Get a room you two!
Quote: sootyj @ February 13 2009, 3:32 PM GMTOn the BBC pitching site they seem to prefer being pitched to by prodcos. So your sitcom maybe produced by the BBC after you sold it to a prodco (many of whom are easier to access)
Thanks. I guess that's the way to go- prodcos first. I suppose the same with the sketch show, too.
Quote: chipolata @ February 13 2009, 3:50 PM GMTWas it in hieroglyphics?
It might as well have been. The reader only wanted me to change the whole core around which the story was built. To hack it to pieces until there was a collection of severed limbs, but no body.
But I think in someways the reader enjoyed my story I think she liked it until characters started dying. But I said right upfront that it was a horror/comedy.
So what can you do? Just move on. But it was baffling feedback. It's a pity that it didn't get read by a fan of the horror genre. Because that would be who would be watching the film 
Quote: Marc P @ February 14 2009, 11:38 AM GMTWell I still say there is no such thing as a good rejection. However good it is it is still bad. They are basically saying no - and at the Writersroom you are not allowed to resubmit something once it has been rejected by them. But it is certainly true to say there are less bad rejections and if you can take encouragement from the positive comments then it's a good thing. So you are right there is value to be taken sometimes from rejection.
Yeah, I can see where you're coming from Marc. You're not a glass half empty person are you?
I choose to view a rejection not as an indicator that I've failed as a writer but that I haven't quite got it right yet. When I read the letter, the feeling of complete despair lasted for about five minutes (damn, I even shed few silent tears), until I read it through again and realised that everything the reader had said 'was' actually spot on.
I think writers learn to 'feel' when they're getting it right, but gaining that confidence in your abilities takes years of experience and initially getting things wrong.
In my view, rejection is only bad if you don't make sure you improve because of it. *cue signature*
Quote: Rustle T Davis @ February 14 2009, 4:22 PM GMTYeah, I can see where you're coming from Marc. You're not a glass half empty person are you?
In my view, rejection is only bad if you don't make sure you improve because of it. *cue signature*
Actually I see myself as a kind of it doesn't matter if the glass is half full or half empty it still needs filling kind of guy!
My original comment was really trying to give the original poster a positive spin really, i.e the old Kipling chestnut about treating the two imposters the same. Self motivation is the best kind, but I agree that a drop of encouragement here and there is like a small glug of water on a long walk through the desert - just might help you make the journey.
It is worth bearing in mind as well, that it is not a science and the people judging your work are sometimes not really qualified so to to do from the lowest to the highest level.
Onwards and upwards.