Congrats to the final 8. It would be great to see the eventual performances/clips on You-Tube or something similar (with the consent of all those involved of course).
The Sitcom Mission 2011 Page 117
#### Hi Simon, Declan and fellow scripters.
I've just got back from a Bank Holiday break to find the MP3 recording awaiting me. Wow! If anyone is thinking of having a reading done, I would really recommend it. The opportunity to have a recording of your script acted out and critiqued has to be a really worthwhile investment.
There's 45 minutes of recording on the MP3 disc so instead of sending one episode, I sent two in for reading because they were already written and I thought it helped to give a better sense of how the characters interacted with each other. Each episode was acted aloud, timed and the length relayed back - the first one came in at spot on as fifteen minutes while the other was five minutes too short because I had underestimated the speed of rapport between the character dialogues (something I'll be more aware of next time) The actors were really good, especially the young woman who portrayed her character exactly as I had envisaged her to be.
After the readings, the actors and director then spent a good twenty minutes discussing the scripts in detail between themselves. Their feedback was invaluable. They each talked about how they found their character came over in my writing, where they thought the character was going in each episode and how it might be improved upon. I learned so much from their opinions and suggestions, and will definitely use these in my future writing.#######
.............................................................
great write-up Susie and exactly my views. Mine got slaughtered, rightly so, and I understand where I am going wrong, mainly my humour is still in the 70s 
so as I am probably stuck in that time warp, I'll give up but I am so glad I opted for a CD of my work
Quote: Declan @ May 1 2011, 10:05 AM BSTReally glad that the feedback so far is positive on the CDs. I'll send feedback forms out today to people to give us further details.
And there's still (a lot of) spaces on our Introduction to Sitcom Writing workshop this Saturday May 7 in Central London. Go on, treat yourself (and us!). Grab a couple of mates and it's a tad over £30 each.
https://www.comedy.co.uk/sitcom_mission/workshops/2/
Cheers, Declan
I came back from holiday to find my CD sitting in the pile of post. The reading and the feedback are both brilliant. This is a great service and it has really helped me see how I can move forward with my writing. Thank you x
Hi all
Just agreed the running order for the live shows:
June 6
Psyched Richard Smith
Eye Captain Matthew Comras
Character/Sketch Cariad Lloyd + 1 other TBC
Improv group: Austentatious
Edinburgh preview: Jigsaw
June 13
The Museum of Things Rich Heap
In The Meantime Ciaran Murtagh and Andrew Jones
Character/Sketch Gemma Whelan
June 20
Builders Des Henderson and Mike McCahon
The Regulators Falko Rademacher
June 27
The Box Russell Obeney
What Next? Abigail Dooley Emma Edwards
More details to be added shortly.
Cheers, Declan
Thanks Declan 
A quick question- in terms of the journey from script to stage, how do we work alongside the director? Do we get to see or have any input on rehearsals for example?
Rich
Quote: richiemoomoo @ May 6 2011, 12:51 PM BSTThanks Declan
A quick question- in terms of the journey from script to stage, how do we work alongside the director? Do we get to see or have any input on rehearsals for example?
Rich
Tricky one, this. On the one hand we're very keen to broker a relationship between director and writer, but we need to avoid a situation where the director feels usurped by an over-enthusiastic writer with too many notes, or one where the writer feels ignored.
So much depends on the personalities and working methods of the people involved that it's impossible to give an honest blanket answer.
Simon
A tricky one indeed. I can imagine the many awkward situations that could arise- enough for a sitcom in itself (though I think 'Episodes' has already worn that T-shirt). When do you assign directors?
But only the writer knows how it should be acted out/said
And yet people persist in putting on Shakespeare's plays 
Quote: andyblacksheep @ May 6 2011, 6:59 PM BSTAnd yet people persist in putting on Shakespeare's plays
And probably don't even border on what Shakespeare intended. Then again, he's not here to say but todays' writers are, so should have a big input into how their work should be interpreted
Quote: bushbaby @ May 6 2011, 6:28 PM BSTBut only the writer knows how it should be acted out/said
We had a situation where a (very inexperienced) writer grabbed me after seeing his sitcom performed. He wanted one actor recast.
Because he was inexperienced he hadn't considered what recasting would actually mean:
Paying to hire rehearsal rooms to rehearse the new actor in. Not popular with us for financial reasons.
The existing cast having to take even more time off work to rehearse the new actor in. Not popular with the cast for financial reasons.
He could see only part of the whole ('I want another actor'). It's the director's job (and mine and Declan's) to see all of it.
Quote: bushbaby @ May 6 2011, 6:28 PM BSTBut only the writer knows how it should be acted out/said
Nah, that's not true. I was in a short play years back which I'd co-written with the other actor. The director gave us a note on a line, and we both knew it didn't match the intention we'd had when writing it... it was actually better.
Actors aren't stupid. By and large they'll deliver the lines right. Things can get missed, so it's useful if the author is there. But by and large they should shut the hell up unless it's properly ruinous for whole scenes. The director has a shot at making the version he can see in his head, he's no chance of making the version the author sees.
Though in general, I do think writing which needs the writer to interpret it is usually bad writing. It should live on the page.
Quote: bushbaby @ May 6 2011, 6:28 PM BSTBut only the writer knows how it should be acted out/said
It depends on what sort of writer you are. You could come up with a great line, but if it doesn't fit how the actor plays the part, it should be adapted in my opinion. The actor is ultimately the highest point in how it is acted (as long as the director/writer/etc. don't disagree.) As the writer is working on the page, they are at a disadvantage in knowing how it should be acted out.
Quote: Griff @ May 7 2011, 11:00 AM BSTSo yes, writers shouldn't get in the way, and shouldn't give notes directly to actors, and should keep their gobs shut during rehearsals. But remember it's the writers who are on the line in this competition. They, not the actors and directors, are the ones who stand to win or lose a career-making prize. Keeping them out of the loop during the development seems to go against the whole point of the project. Apart from anything else, it's an invaluable opportunity for writers who might not have seen the rehearsal process before to learn a great deal. And if there's a scene that isn't working, the rewriting of it is going to come a lot easier if the writer can see the problems first hand.
That's quite true, and I do think it's right that in any developmental process the writer really should be there. Though I still disagree with Bushbaby's sentiment! Good writers and directors are more than capable of spotting how lines should be done.
It is slightly beholden on the organisers to provide decent actors and directors. That's what sounds like it failed you last time.
You're right, keep stum unless asked to rewrite.I have just spent a week on set filming a pilot, my co wiriter and I were there for the entire process from initial read through,rehearsal, filming and the showcase performance. Trust the director and cast and let them lift it and that's exactly what they did.