What ever happened to critique? Page 7

Quote: Lee @ July 28 2012, 1:02 AM BST

Remember that Aaron has to code these forums himself. He hasn't used a template. He created this from scratch (I believe). So any suggestions of rewriting code are less likely to pass.

How would this suggestion be controlled? How do you separate this restriction from the other forums?

View original

I think I'd already proved that I'd not thought that through when I argued both sides of the argument!

Maybe the lack of traffic in Critique lately has just been down to bad timing and will pick up of it's own accord soon anyway. I think the responses to this thread have been very positive in themselves.

Quote: Overlay @ July 27 2012, 6:38 PM BST

Enter. Please.

I like the skit comp. One skit a week is about my pace at present

View original

Yeah, the skit comp is good fun. Been too busy recently to write much of anything though, so even one skit a week has been tricky.

YES I have a good idea but feel worried- silly- I will give it a go!

Hello. Interesting discussion, and thanks to Lee for representing BCG. Just to clear up a couple of things first...

Quote: David Bussell @ July 26 2012, 11:00 PM BST

I hadn't realised that Critique was hidden from non-members.

View original

As JohnnyD kindly pointed out, it's not. If you logout you'll still see it where it always is.

You do need to tick you're a writer in your profile though to see critique (and other writing-related) posts on the 'Active Threads' page. The reason being, in the 'golden years' (if people want to call it that), Critique totally dominated the Active Threads page to an extend that non-writers couldn't see any other forums on that page. So the 'tick box' was deemed a simple solution to keep both parties happy.

Quote: Overlay @ July 27 2012, 8:48 AM BST

What was the idea behind splitting up Showcase and critique?

View original

Showcase was introduced for people who just wanted to show off what they'd done. i.e. finished products, things that it is too late to offer advice on changing. This new forum solved two problems... a) it became a 'home' for all the self-made YouTube etc links, which were previously posted in the broadcast TV forums; and b) ended the situation were people would post their pride-and-joy in critique (as that was the only forum available to them then) only to be torn to shreds. Not everyone can handle the truth... so there's the soft option :-)

Showcase was also meant to be a place for TV commissioners to easily drop in on and find some good stuff... but sadly (and not much we can do about this) the quality of comedy is very variable in there still.

I appreciate it's probably slightly confusing, particularly because you can still comment on Showcase threads. But, yes, the idea is only to comment on a Showcase thread if you like it. Critique meanwhile is about improving things, so negative feedback is fine.

now well hardly anyone posts

I'm not sure what the answer to this is. I suspect it's a 'spiral' - people aren't getting great/enough feedback, so they don't post again, so people check it less, so people post less, etc etc...

My personal theory is that we need to get back to a stage where the feedback given on is always constructive, useful and supportive. Even if something is shit, don't just say that - point out where it could be improved.

That could happen if the regulars (who set an example to newbies trying to work out what is acceptable / expected) can stick to that ethos.

More caption competitions, writing challenges and such like would obviously be helpful for encouraging people to get involved again too.

Quote: Ben @ July 27 2012, 9:55 PM BST

The arrival of the BCG sketch podcast will, of course, liven up Critique in an instant. In 2022.

View original

Did you not get the memo Ben? It's now going to be in 2040

It is still a plan and we are working hard to move BCG forward - the 'Make It' area has sort of half popped-up now, for example, at last... but everything takes ages. I still have another job to try and fit in too.

In the meantime Live From Kirrin Island seems to be doing a fine job indeed. In fact, if it continues to progress at this rate maybe it'd be silly to launch the BCG podcast project, even when we are ready (the only major difference being that the BCG podcast would have well-known-ish actors in it).

Er... yeah... that's all I wanted to say I think.

Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads?

Oh yeah, they fell out and don't speak anymore.

Quote: Mark @ July 28 2012, 3:12 PM BST

Hello. Interesting discussion, and thanks to Lee for representing BCG. Just to clear up a couple of things first...

View original

I thought we were all BCG?

People putting stuff in Critique with a 'Is this funny?' are time-wasters.

If you need assurances that you are funny then you really aren't cut out for this lark.

People asking for technical help are more interesting, even if it's just an 'Any idea what the punchline should be?'

That is all.

Yes, breaking down a script and rebuilding it piece by piece is much more satisfying way to give critique and feedback. But you have got to have the time and effort to do that. And when people are posting throw away offerings it doesn't make it very appealing. I am very guilty of this.

Quote: Lee @ July 28 2012, 10:12 PM BST

.../ to give critique and feedback./../you have got to have the time and effort to do that. And when people are posting throw away offerings it doesn't make it very appealing.

View original

Maybe it should be made clear to people that they should state up front if they didn't put any effort into writing their work, so that respondents don't need to put effort into critiquing it. So often they try to defend their shit with the too-cool-for-school "I didn't even try," leading to pages of fruitless argument.

Quote: sootyj @ July 27 2012, 7:17 PM BST

I mean the loss of guys like Bussell and Henman is really noticable.

You put up a skit or sitcom and you could get some really weapons grade feedback.

View original

That's very nice of you to say but I'll still post occasionally. I put something up a few months ago and got a little feedback on it in fact. I haven't been writing much in the way of one-off sketches these days so haven't had a lot to offer critique, but every now and then I'll knock out something I'm not sure of and offer it up to the hive-mind.

Quote: Ben @ July 27 2012, 7:05 PM BST

Without Critique I'd never have worked with Kevin Eldon. For that reason, it will always have a special place in my heart.

View original

I feel the same way. Like I say above, I may not post in it too much but I still enjoy dropping in from time to time if I think I can be of help. It might be a breeding ground for the nut-jobs, the hyper-sensitive and the downright rude but it's still a valuable resource when it's used correctly.

Quote: Jinky @ July 28 2012, 10:03 PM BST

People putting stuff in Critique with a 'Is this funny?' are time-wasters.

If you need assurances that you are funny then you really aren't cut out for this lark.

People asking for technical help are more interesting, even if it's just an 'Any idea what the punchline should be?'

That is all.

View original

I can't say I agree there. Even the best comedians and writers only have a limited idea of what's funny before it plays in front of an audience. Instincts improve as you gain experience and become more proficient but it's still a crapshoot. I think it's extremely helpful sometimes (particularly with short-form comedy, like sketches) to put your hands up and say "Is this funny or is it just in my head?".

To me it's the person who can't write the punchline to their own joke that shows signs of perhaps not being comedy-brained. That said, with a little help getting off the starting blocks and some serious dedication, they could always develop.

Quote: Lee @ July 28 2012, 10:12 PM BST

And when people are posting throw away offerings it doesn't make it very appealing.

View original

I'm with you on that one. For me, unless I can see an application for the material I won't bother replying.

There are pieces in critique that are neither one thing nor the other. Some are too bizarre/expensive/offensive to ever be filmed and screened, so me giving them feedback as though they're sketches seems redundant. To me, a sketch written in the traditional style (action, characters, dialogue etc) is a blueprint for something that's meant to be shot. If it's unfilmable then it's not really a sketch. That's not to say it can't be funny, it's just a pointless artifact, especially when there are ways it could be re-purposed and turned into a real thing, ie a comic strip, animation etc.

Quote: David Bussell @ July 29 2012, 9:00 AM BST

There are pieces in critique that are neither one thing nor the other. Some are too bizarre/expensive/offensive to ever be filmed and screened, so me giving them feedback as though they're sketches seems redundant. To me, a sketch written in the traditional style (action, characters, dialogue etc) is a blueprint for something that's meant to be shot. If it's unfilmable then it's not really a sketch. That's not to say it can't be funny, it's just a pointless artifact, especially when there are ways it could be re-purposed and turned into a real thing, ie a comic strip, animation etc.

View original

Not sure if I agree with you. Alot of my stuff is written without the intention of it being filned.

That's not to say it's not serious or without effort. Most of the time I'm experimenting with techniques and I want to see how they work. I'm building a match stick model, before I build the cathedral.

I mean I'm still kicking around the Grumpy Executioners, because as people point out I haven't got the hang of giving the contrasting characters in a short sketch.

And some of my unfilmables are being filmed (watch this space), they just needed a little tweeking.

Quote: sootyj @ July 29 2012, 10:06 AM BST

Not sure if I agree with you. Alot of my stuff is written without the intention of it being filned.

That's not to say it's not serious or without effort. Most of the time I'm experimenting with techniques and I want to see how they work. I'm building a match stick model, before I build the cathedral.

I mean I'm still kicking around the Grumpy Executioners, because as people point out I haven't got the hang of giving the contrasting characters in a short sketch.

And some of my unfilmables are being filmed (watch this space), they just needed a little tweeking.

View original

I should clarify that I'm not saying everything in critique needs to be filmed. That said, if it's not meant to be filmed I like to see it made clear what the format is meant to be. Personally I'm not interested in reading something that has zero application. It's not worth critiquing because it can never be what it's meant to be. I don't read a sketch for the fun of it - I watch a sketch if I want to laugh. Looking at sketch on the page is like peering under the hood of a car - it might be interesting to see the polish of the engine but it's all for nothing if you never get to drive the thing.

I just don't get it. There are so many ways to get good at writing and end up with a real product into the bargain. I see so many sketches in Critique that could be a real thing if only they were presented as an animation or worked up into comic strip or even written as prose. Why not think in those terms rather than making all these half-things?

Yeah, I agree with David. I've often wondered why people are putting such unfilmable or completely alienating ideas up in Critique. A lot of things in there could work as comic strips, but people format them as filmed sketches. It gets a little confusing and you think "What's the point of commenting?".

The Live from Kirrin Island podcast and Newsjack series do bring life to Critique, but the moment they finish Critique is dead again.

As I stated earlier, I think some type of competition with a decent payoff - such as industry comment - is one way to keep the Critique flame burning and engender some community. How we get this industry person on board, I'm not sure.

Alternatively, I remember back in 2009 there was a short lived 'team sketch' competition. I think the rules were along the lines of:

* Everyone is split into two teams
* A subject is set
* Member 1 of the team writes a sketch
* Member 2 of the team takes this sketch and edits where necessary
* Member 3 of the team takes this sketch and edits etc
* The finished sketches are then voted for by the illuminati of BCG

As a long-time reader and infrequent poster (I'd say a two year gap between posts qualifies) I'm one of those bastard lurkers. I'd say the main reason I personally don't post that often is that things tend to move so fast here. It's not uncommon for posts to have moved on several pages between my visits so I tend to think any opinion I contribute is more me throwing a brick through the window of a meeting before hastily retreating than a genuine interaction.

That being said in the past few weeks I've started writing in a more consistent manner, and then after reading this thread I'm going to try and make more of an effort to engage in a consistent manner.

So, hello again, I guess

Time to start a pool on how long it lasts

Bricks through windows are legitimate communications