The Sitcom Mission 2011 Page 34

Quote: Mikey Jackson @ March 5 2011, 6:39 PM GMT

Probably got fed up with the vast amount of numpties sending in rubbish.
Plus Channel 4 don't actually make their own stuff.

It's not really a case of the best. It's a case of which agents or prodcos will like YOUR scripts.
You need to research these companies first. Most will tell you on their websites what kind of genres they want.

Also, if writers have worked really hard at finding contacts in the industry and getting those doors open, they're hardly going to share that info.

There are a few prodcos who accept unsolicited scripts. Seek and ye shall find.

View original

Cheers for the feed back Mikey. Hopefully I find the right path for my scripts.

Quote: jack martin @ March 5 2011, 7:17 PM GMT

Cheers for the feed back Mikey. Hopefully I'll find the right path for my scripts.

View original

Is it just two people reading 1100 odd scripts? That's quite an ask.

Definitely a case of first 10 pages then.

And also immediately chucking out the sort of script Simon posted before, where it's indicated EVERY LINE who they're speaking to, and a weird way of describing the action.

I doubt they'll even read ten pages. Three at most.

And they didn't wait until the deadline was up before they started hurling scripts over their shoulders towards the dumpsters.....

A whole lot of trees shall have perished for nought.

Quote: Jinky @ March 5 2011, 11:56 PM GMT

And they didn't wait until the deadline was up before they started hurling scripts over their shoulders towards the dumpsters.....

View original

I expect it's like a job application sift. Obviously it would be nice to think that recruiters pore over every line of every CV but when selecting 32 from 1800 that is probably not realistic.

Presumably there will be some submissions that are so far from being acceptable a skim through would allow rejection. For those, I guess you can reject early on the basis that if that was the best you got you'd prefer not to run the show, everything else submitted early and looked at will, I guess end up in a 'maybe' or 'contender' pile. The relative proportions are what will determine how long they take.

My own guess is a lot of good stuff may well have turned up late this time due to people who have a bit of a track record and some contacts not initially wanting to submit their good stuff to what amounted to a showcase, but changing their minds once a commission is at stake. That's why I wonder if March 14th is still viable.

If I had to read them I'd just select the first 32 good ones and forget the rest.

Quote: chipolata @ March 6 2011, 12:23 PM GMT

If I had to read them I'd just select the first 32 good ones and forget the rest.

View original

They might need more than 1800 entries for that though!

when are the results up?

Mid March?

Quote: Marc P @ March 6 2011, 1:05 PM GMT

They might need more than 1800 entries for that though!

View original

it is said that only 10% of scripts, [or should that be 2%?] are ever any good, so with my reckoning only 180 will sort of be considered/sifted through for the selection of the 32

At the moment I'm just deleting the really terrible scripts so that I can spend more time with the decent stuff.

Most scripts reject themselves because they are either:

Not funny.

Have no 'legs' and are really just an extended sketch.

Have no ambition (it's almost as if they were never meant to be any good).

Or they are a blatant knock off of something else-often Skins or Inbetweeners.

I must admit I don't read to the end of the awful ones. That would be like waiting for the credits of Coming of Age before deciding whether it was any good or not.

To add to what Si said (and we'll be blogging about this in the next 24 hours):

I'd say the standard was overall better than previous years. Certainly some great premises.

There's a huge mass of 'OK' sitcoms to read here - not terrible, not brilliant, not offensive, not distinctive - just OK.

I'll keep reading until I have a reason not to.

Reasons not to: generic or boring characters. Characters who just sit around talking about stuff that happened in the past. Nothing actually happening. Unbelievable situations or a lack of truth in character or story.

Themes this year: flatshare sitcoms because X has lost their job and has had to move in with parents/brother/sister etc (there's a lot of economic downturn based material)

Whatever you're thinking, someone else is thinking it too: we have (at least) two post-zombie apocalypse sitcoms and (at least) two set in the future human zoo sitcoms where the humans are the exhibit.

This year's shitegiste? Wheelchairs. Loads and loads of incredibly unfunny wheelchair jokes and 'reveals'.

I guess mine's in the deleted items box then! (by that, I do have kind of generic characters, but the past is only referenced a couple of times).

Though thankfully mine doesn't have the wheelchair 'Shitegeist' thing.

Quote: simon wright @ March 6 2011, 5:06 PM GMT

I must admit I don't read to the end of the awful ones. That would be like waiting for the credits of Coming of Age before deciding whether it was any good or not.

View original

But...but....the last 4 pages of my sitcom had 16 different call-backs to earlier events in the script. It was like Harry Hill when he was funny and you'd have died laughing if you had stuck with it!

(Not really.....I wrote about two Yorkshiremen and two Yorkshirewomen, all in wheelchairs, remembering their bleak, but funny, upbringings. Looks like I screwed up big time here......)