Quote: Marc P @ March 23 2011, 11:21 AM GMTHi Sarah,
If you are reading this why not put your entry up in the critique section, and you may get some encouraging reviews. A few people have done so and in the main it has been a positive thing.
I'm going to edit my script and then I might be brave and put it up there for you all to have a bit of a read :-)
I think Declan should put one of his scripts up there - I'm sure he said he'd do that in one of his forum posts a few weeks ago...
Quote: Griff @ March 23 2011, 11:22 AM GMTMaybe rather than informing a fixed number outside the long list, Simon and Declan could also list a "We were also impressed by..." list of writers listing those "nearly made it" scripts that they really had to agonise over, whether that's 2 or 20 or 200.
This is feasible. Putting over a thousand scripts in order of preference would put me in a home.
Obviously it's your choice but why edit it? If you're after feedback as to why it might not have made the grade wouldn't it be better to post it unmolested?
Quote: Griff @ March 23 2011, 12:11 PM GMTI saw one of Declan's scripts (I think it was called Singing The Blues but memory fades) at a sitcom event a few years ago and much as it pains me to say so it was very good.
That wouldn't stop people ripping it to shreds in a fit of post rejection pique though, surely?
Not sure I'd want to see if I made the 200. If I didn't it'd be another slap in the chops and if I did I'd be like 'Fantastic! I'm through to the top 200, so...oh. Nothing.'
Still, put the list up and I'll be over there like a shot! :-)
Quote: Griff @ March 23 2011, 12:18 PM GMTNonsense. Writers like nothing more than to celebrate the success of their competitors.
Absolutely!
Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ March 19 2011, 12:59 PM GMTI remained perplexed as to how to get so much info into 15 minutes and retain the humour?
I think people are getting hung up on the fact that we present short sitcoms. They're not that short; sitcoms in America are 22 minutes long with 8 mins of commercials. That's just 7 minutes longer than we're asking for.
The good ones make you laugh on page one (two tops). The less successful ones are where the writer feels that s/he has to establish characters/relationships/back stories etc before being funny.
Think of your own experience when channel hopping or watching the pilot of a new sitcom. Do you wait 15 minutes before deciding whether something is funny or not?
In my head I only finished above those rubbish examples Simon/Declan posted earlier in the thread, so I've sort of accepted I'm not in the top 200.
I'd definitely like to see a list of the other 168. In no particular order, I'd have just liked to have seen who did relatively okay!
Then maybe I'm just saying this because I very well doubt I'm in that 200, so wouldn't be disappointed to see that my name isn't on there.
Quote: Griff @ March 23 2011, 11:42 AM GMTWell I'm only through for another couple of weeks after which I will have to stop saying "Don't you know who I am?" to waiters and doormen.
.
or start saying..'Do you know who I was?' 
Quote: simon wright @ March 23 2011, 12:08 PM GMTThis is feasible. Putting over a thousand scripts in order of preference would put me in a home.
Judging by your photo I thought you were already in one!
*sniggers*
Quote: sarahbean @ March 23 2011, 12:05 PM GMTI'm going to edit my script and then I might be brave and put it up there for you all to have a bit of a read :-)
I think Declan should put one of his scripts up there - I'm sure he said he'd do that in one of his forum posts a few weeks ago...
Well done. 
I don't think there's anything to be gained from publishing the long list. It's sort of meaningless.
Look at the 10% thing for the Laughing Stock thing. People are already getting that out of perspective when there's still things to prove.
You either win these things or have them made or you don't. If you don't, go back and make them better.
Quote: Griff @ March 23 2011, 4:49 PM GMTI think you're coming at that from the perspective of an experienced successful writer though, for whom what you say is absolutely true. But if you're a new starter, a bit of encouragement that you were on the right track is quite a boost and costs nothing. (And you're probably better off than the longlisters, who have to slog away at two extra episodes before getting their hearts stamped on by Simon and Declan's jackboots...)
To be honest, that's probably true to a degree... And I've been very lucky with getting strong encouragement quite a few times to keep me going.
But there's other issues. My worry is that it could dismay people outside the group a little too much, given that it's only an subjective opinion (not making top 32 is easier to live with than not being worth thinking about at all). And that doesn't necessarily mean that the writer can't do anything (my first scripts bombed in competitions). Yes, it'll encourage the 200 or 168 rather... but it could totally stymie someone who isn't there. And I also reckon it could instil a degree of complacency in people who haven't quite earned it.
Other issues are that scripts may have been discounted for things that are specific to this competition (stageability for example) rather than lack of funnies.
I think it's probably better to have some faith in your own abilities and assume that you were 33rd. And write a better script next time. Keep doing that and eventually you'll make the short list.
No disrespect to anybody but if your ego is that fragile that you need to know you were 183rd in a sitcom writing competition that has the sort of weird format that would work against shows like Peep Show or The Office then you migh want to think of another dream. Move on to your next project or opportunity.
Quote: Griff @ March 23 2011, 5:56 PM GMTI don't think listing 183 writers is a good idea. But acknowledging good submissions by a handful who didn't make the longlist but genuinely impressed wouldn't hurt. You're very spiky today chip.
Today? Spikiness is my USP until I decide to bring the Avatar Slappers back.